When someone says workers need to be more productive, it can sound like a polite way of asking them to run faster. Economists mean something more specific: how much output is produced for each hour worked.
Imagine two bakeries selling the same number of loaves. One has a modern oven, a sensible layout and flour delivered on time. The other has an old oven and spends the morning looking for ingredients. If both employ the same number of people but the first makes more bread, its output per hour is higher. The tools and organisation mattered; effort alone does not explain it.
Productivity gains can create room for higher wages, lower prices or greater profits. They do not guarantee any one outcome. How the gains are shared depends on competition, bargaining power, investment and policy. The measure is imperfect, too: a better service may not show up neatly in output statistics, and a quarterly figure can swing when hours and output move at different speeds.
When a firm buys machinery or software, ask not only how much it spent: did the investment help people make something better, faster or with less waste? And did employees share in the value created? That is the difference between buying technology and becoming more productive.