How to create work that escapes the curse of "efficiency"
I'm Fujita, and I'm in charge of concept design management.
Today, I'd like to think a little about "efficiency," something that's inherent in any job.
When tasked with improving the workplace environment, the word "efficiency" naturally comes up. This is because, given the need to achieve results within limited space and budget, reducing waste is often considered a prerequisite.
The planning process often begins with easily understandable elements such as layout and traffic flow. Seating arrangements and traffic flow are easy to visualize and explain in terms of reduced travel distance and time.
At NOMURA Co.,Ltd., we frequently receive inquiries on the theme of "how to improve efficiency." However, we often encounter cases where the content of those words remains vague, yet the discussions are progressing without a clear understanding of what that means.
But what exactly does "efficiency" mean in the first place?
"Efficiency" as an indicator
Discussions about the workplace generally assume an increase in work efficiency. However, the term is often used without a clear definition of what constitutes increased efficiency. In some cases, it's understood simply as "reducing waste."
On the other hand, management doesn't necessarily see things the same way.
Business leaders are grappling with management challenges such as how to transform their organizations and how to create new value. What is needed is not improvement that is merely an extension of the past, but a complete transformation of the organization and innovation.
Despite this, why does the discussion tend to be pulled towards "efficiency"?
Efficiency is an easy-to-understand and explain metric. It can be shown numerically, and agreement is easy to reach. As a result, efficiency, which should be a means to an end, is often treated as an end in itself.
Efficiency improvements that "should be made"
That discrepancy becomes apparent in concrete ways on the ground.
For example, a design might be based on the premise of "efficiency," resulting in the creation of movable furniture and spaces that anticipate layout changes. However, furniture with casters, designed for easy movement, is often rarely moved in reality, and layout changes may not become a permanent part of the operation.
As a result, only the "supposedly efficient state" remains. A space is created based on unused functions, and the design becomes unrelated to its original value.
What kind of "efficiency improvements" should we really implement?
What we should consider here is not the rejection of efficiency itself. The idea of reducing waste is necessary, but that alone will not achieve the original goal.
What we really need to consider is, "What aspects should we make more efficient?" We need to consider not just easily identifiable "efficiency" metrics like workflow and work time, but the entire process of creating value.
Furthermore, true workplace efficiency can be defined as a design that fosters new ideas and collaborations, leading to performance improvements such as innovation and value creation. This is something we always keep in mind when we are involved in workplace design.
If we are solely focused on "efficiency" through reduction and shortening processes, it may be very inefficient. Ideally, we should also consider the value that efficiency creates and the processes involved.
The workplace is the foundation that supports value creation.
Space influences how we work and the relationships we have. The way it's designed also changes what emerges from it.
The goal is not to increase efficiency, but to create value.
When viewed from that perspective, the role of the workplace also appears differently.