Inside News
Nationline
Washington
World
Politics
Opinion
Columnists
Snapshot
Science
States
Weird news
Search
Newspaper
Archives
Our site
Resources
Index
Feedback
What's hot
About us
Jobs at USA
TODAY
|
03/08/98- Updated 11:40 PM ET
Where productivity can take us
By Lester C. Thurow
America has regained its technological leadership. Both California
and Massachusetts have more venture capital invested in new enterprises
in a year than any single European country. Listen to the boasting!
Virtual reality and cyberspace are here. Watch the spectacular
show and tells!
The World Wide Web, cloning, laptops with the speed of yesterday's
mainframes.
The spectacular follows the spectacular. Count the fortunes created!
Even correcting for inflation, more billionaires have been generated
in the past 10 years than in any other decade. In fact, the honor
of the world's wealthiest man has come back to America in the
form of Bill Gates - a knowledge worker. Another honor, Time
magazine's "Man of the Year," went to the president
of Intel, Andy Grove.
You'd think humankind must be living through its greatest technological
decade ever.
Or are we?
If one studies productivity statistics, where technical changes
are officially measured, the past 10 years have been the worst
decade in American history.
Productivity has grown at 0.8% per year - just one-fourth the
rate of the 1960s.
Still, any month with good statistics is greeted as if the Messiah
had arrived, as if it were the long-awaited turnaround. But each
good month gets followed by a string of bad months. Long-run trends
only get worse. Never have improvements in our ability to produce
new or better products grown more slowly. And it is happening
all around the developed world. The size of the downturns differs,
but productivity has slowed dramatically.
So, which is true? The boast and what we feel and see? Or what
we measure?
That truth gap has led those who lead with their senses to maintain
that something must be wrong with the productivity statistics.
They don't know what is wrong, but there must be something wrong.
The statistics just could not be right!
Those who lead with their heads want to know where these unspecified
and unmeasured productivity improvements are. They want proof
that these unmeasured improvements could be large enough to close
the gap between what we see and what we measure.
Thus far, no one has been able to give them the proof. Those who
try maintain that big improvements in services must go unmeasured.
To some extent, they are right. There clearly are unmeasured improvements
in services. The benefit of being able to get money out of the
bank 24 hours per day and 365 days per year, for example, has
never been factored into the productivity statistics.
Our statistical procedures were established when services were
a small fraction of total output, not the 70% they are today,
and they focus on manufacturing, mining and agriculture. Most
improvements in service productivity are measurable, but they
cost money and, as a country, we have not been willing to spend
money on better statistics.
At one level, the answer is simple. If we want to know where we
really are, we are going to have to spend the money to build the
right economic global-positioning system. There is no alternative
to collecting good statistics. But thus far we would prefer to
argue about what is true rather than spend the money to find out
what is true.
Partly we don't make the efforts necessary to get better statistics
because there is a possibility that we will find a lot of negative
productivity growth in the service sector and end up with even
lower productivity growth rates.In the last two decades, life
expectancy, for example, is up 4% while spending on health care
is up more than 500%.Higher productivity in auto manufacturing
may be offset by greater congestion on the highways and more time
spent getting to work if we measured the services actually delivered
by cars.
We are now hiring almost one million private security guards.
Most of them did not exist 25 years ago. What is the objective
evidence that they cut crime rates? All of those baggage inspectors
did not used to exist at our airports. They dramatically raise
the hours of work necessary to generate a mile of air travel.
Put simply - and bluntly -it is not obvious that better measures
of service productivity would eliminate the productivity slowdown.
In thinking about our paradox, it is well to remember that there
is no conflict between creativity and chaos. Think of all of those
great Russian writers in the last half of the 19th century - Tolstoy,
Turgenev, Dostoyevski, Gogol, Chekov, Pushkin. Their genius flourished
even as their society was collapsing. Chaos can be fun and exciting.
Chaos can be a spur to invention and creativity. But chaos doesn't
lead to productivity growth. All of the security personnel at
our airports are a reflection of chaos. Auto congestion is a form
of chaos. If a society wants productivity growth, it needs the
right mix of order and the room to do new things that chaos creates.
When it comes to that bottom line, which economists like myself
love to talk about, there is a genuine mystery.
No one, including this economist, has a solution to the puzzle
that commands widespread assent.
Who murdered productivity growth? It is a mystery story whose
ending has yet to be written. Lester C. Thurow is a professor
of economics and former dean of MIT's Sloan School of Management.
He is also a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.
To comment
If you would like to comment on editorials, columns or other
topics in USA TODAY, or on any subjects important to you: Send
e-mail for letters to the editor only to editor@usatoday.com.
Please include address and daytime phone numbers so letters may
be verified. Letters and articles submitted to USA TODAY may be
published or distributed in print, electronic or other forms.
Front page,
News,
Sports,
Money,
Life,
Weather,
Marketplace
©COPYRIGHT 1998
USA TODAY,
a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
|