Search results

Few words in modern society have become as positively charged as the word innovation. Of course, premodern societies were also innovative in their way. Still, technology, ideas, and organizational forms have changed over time, and it is only in modern society that innovation has become almost mandatory; that is to say, ranked uppermost in society's value system. “Be innovative!” has become an imperative in modern society.

To be innovative is increasingly considered an imperative in modern society. The motto seems to be “the more, the better,” which is echoed in writings about phenomena such as “disruptive technologies” (Christensen, 1997), “disruptive innovations” (Christensen & Raynor, 2003), or radical innovation (Stringer, 2000; Leifer et al., 2000). Such phenomena are typically held up against “anti-innovative” phenomena, for example, “disruptive” is contrasted with “continuous,” and “radical” is contrasted with “incremental.” Distinctions drawn between being more or less innovative derive in part from studies that are based on stable causal factors that explain why some organizations happen to be more innovative than others.

The purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive survey of workplace productivity key performance indicators (KPIs) used in the office context. Academic literature from the past 10 years has been systematically reviewed and contextualized through a series of expert interviews.

The authors present a systematic review of the literature to identify KPIs and methods of workplace productivity measurement, complemented by insights semi-structured interviews to inform a framework for a benchmarking tool. In total, 513 papers published since 2007 were considered, of which 98 full-length papers were reviewed, and 20 were found to provide significant insight and are summarized herein.

Currently, no consensus exists on a single KPI suitable for measuring workplace productivity in an office environment, although qualitative questionnaires are more widely adopted than quantitative tools. The diversity of KPIs used in published studies indicates that a multidimensional approach would be the most appropriate for knowledge-worker productivity measurement. Expert interviews further highlighted a shift from infrequent, detailed evaluation to frequent, simplified reporting across human resource functions and this context is important for future tool development.

This paper provides a summary of significant work on workplace productivity measurement and KPI development over the past 10 years. This follows up on the comprehensive review by B. Haynes (2007a), providing an updated perspective on research in this field with additional insights from expert interviews.