Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 114

Slowing productivity and its impact on investors

Paul Krugman, a professor of economics at Princeton University, famously pointed out a couple of decades ago, “Productivity isn’t everything, but in the long run it is almost everything. A country’s ability to improve its standard of living over time depends almost entirely on its ability to raise its output per worker.”

Alas, productivity growth has been slowing in most countries. In the US and Australia, at least, the slowing began before the global financial crisis hit in 2008. Investors need to be aware of what’s happening to productivity and how this will affect future investment returns and the affordability of tax-payer funded pensions.

Productivity measures the ratio of the output of goods and services to the inputs of labour and capital that go into producing those goods and services.

There are two main measures of productivity. Labour productivity shows the output of goods and services per hour worked. Some part of the increases in the productivity of labour come about because of additions to the capital stock; when that’s been allowed for, we have what’s called multi-factor productivity or total-factor productivity. It shows the contribution to GDP growth from influences such as technical innovation, skills, competition, better management, increased scale, and the shift of labour and capital to more productive industries and firms.

The slowing in productivity growth

In Australia, productivity surged in the 1990s: labour productivity increased, on average, by 2.2% a year, and by 25% over the decade. That followed the big economic reforms of the Hawke-Keating government in the 1980s and our quick adoption of new information technologies (even though we were seen at the time as an ‘old economy’).

In the first decade of this century, labour productivity growth slowed to an annual average of 1.5%. In the financial year ending soon, growth in productivity looks likely to be about zero, even though there’s a boost in productivity in the resources sector as new mines are completed, existing ones are upgraded and production ramps up.

Australian governments have made few productivity-enhancing economic reforms in recent years, and the Rudd-Gillard changes to industrial relations reduced the flexibility of the labour market relative to the legacy of the Hawke-Keating years. And the easy-to-obtain gains for productivity from the revolution in information technology are now in place.

In other countries, too, productivity growth has slowed. John Fernald is a staffer in the US central bank and a guru on productivity. He points out that “the exceptional boost to (US) productivity growth from information technology in the late 1990s and early 2000s has vanished during the past decade. Although there is considerable uncertainty, a relatively slow pace is the best guess for the future.”

One of his graphs is reproduced below. The blue line shows the cumulative growth in total-factor productivity in the US since 1973 and the red line shows this adjusted for the capacity utilisation rate, to eliminate the effects on productivity from cyclical swings in the US economy including from the financial crisis. The US productivity slowdown began almost two years before the US went into recession.

The Bank of England recently reported that, “Despite robust output growth in the past few years, productivity growth has remained subdued with the increases in output having been met mainly through an increase in total hours worked”.

The impact of a slowdown in productivity growth

Below-par growth in productivity, if it continues, will be bad news for the economy and will hurt investors. The rates of increase in average real wages and in profits would be constrained. Governments would find it even harder to generate the tax receipts to pay for the future costs of ageing populations (the Intergenerational Report assumes, heroically in my view, that productivity growth will average 1.5% a year for the next 40 years).

Also, a slowing in productivity growth raises the risks of inflation. Perversely, slowing growth in productivity does help job creation in the short term. Currently, each of the US, UK and Australia is creating more jobs for every percentage point increase in GDP than if productivity growth were stronger.

The dissenters’ views

There are respected economists and investment strategists (including Martin Feldstein who chaired the US Council of Economic Advisers under Ron Reagan, and Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs) who point to the difficulties of measuring productivity. They argue that the much-vaunted weakness in productivity growth is a statistical myth.

In their view, the usual measures of productivity growth prepared by government statisticians understate growth in GDP (and in productivity) and fail to incorporate the dramatic gains in the quality of products and services, particularly the use of software and digital content.

Professor Feldstein writes: “…consider the higher price of a day of hospital care. How much of that higher price reflects improved diagnosis and more effective treatment? And what about valuing all the improved electronic forms of communication and entertainment that fill the daily lives of most people? In short, there is no way to know how much of each measured price increase reflects quality improvements and how much is pure price increase.”

In Mr Hatzius’ view, rapid technological change means that productivity growth is being underestimated by “a meaningful amount” – thus there’s even less inflation than official figures show. He concludes that “if true inflation is even lower than measured inflation – and especially if this gap is bigger than it has been historically – the case for keeping (US) monetary policy accommodative strengthens further.”

A balanced assessment

It’s all very well to acknowledge the big effects on the quality and content of many of the products and services available to us that result from rapidly changing technology. But when it comes to what most people see as their real incomes, or to measuring inflation, or to considering the extent to which there’s slack in the overall economy, we need to be cautious in how much additional ‘value’ is put on the never-ending developments in or from technology.

And in long-term projections, such as the 40 years ahead considered by the Intergenerational Report, an assumption of average growth of 1.5% a year seems far too optimistic.

An understanding of what’s happening to productivity will be of special importance to central banks in coming years as they seek to set monetary policy accurately according to ‘true’ economic conditions.


Don Stammer chairs QV Equities, is a director of IPE and is an adviser to the Third Link Growth Fund and Altius Asset Management. The views expressed are his alone. An earlier version of this paper was published in The Australian.



Is 5G all hype or real investable opportunity?

Blockchain revolutionises the cyberworld

Asia: bull or bear in the Year of the Goat


Most viewed in recent weeks

A tonic for turbulent times: my nine tips for investing

Investing is often portrayed as unapproachably complex. Can it be distilled into nine tips? An economist with 35 years of experience through numerous market cycles and events has given it a shot.

Rival standard for savings and incomes in retirement

A new standard argues the majority of Australians will never achieve the ASFA 'comfortable' level of retirement savings and it amounts to 'fearmongering' by vested interests. If comfortable is aspirational, so be it.

Dalio v Marks is common sense v uncommon sense

Billionaire fund manager standoff: Ray Dalio thinks investing is common sense and markets are simple, while Howard Marks says complex and convoluted 'second-level' thinking is needed for superior returns.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 467

Fund manager reports for last financial year are drifting into client mailboxes, and many of the results are disappointing. With some funds giving back their 2021 gains, why did they not reduce their exposure to hot stocks when faced with rising inflation and rates?

  • 21 July 2022

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 466 with weekend update

Heard the word, cakeism? As in, 'having your cake and eating it too'. The Reserve Bank wants to simultaneously fight inflation by taking away spending power, while not driving the economy into a recession. If you want to help, stop buying stuff.

  • 14 July 2022

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 465 with weekend update

Many thanks for the thousands of revealing comments in our survey on retirement experiences. We discuss the full results. And with the ASX200 down 10%, the US S&P500 off 20% and bond prices tanking, each investor faces the new financial year deciding whether to sit, sell or invest more.

  • 7 July 2022

Latest Updates


The paradox of investment cycles

Now we're captivated by inflation and higher rates but only a year ago, investors were certain of the supremacy of US companies, the benign nature of inflation and the remoteness of tighter monetary policy.


Reporting Season will show cost control and pricing power

Companies have been slow to update guidance and we have yet to see the impact of inflation expectations in earnings and outlooks. Companies need to insulate costs from inflation while enjoying an uptick in revenue.


The early signals for August company earnings

Weaker share prices may have already discounted some bad news, but cost inflation is creating wide divergences inside and across sectors. Early results show some companies are strong enough to resist sector falls.


The compelling 20-year flight of SYD into private hands

In 2002, the share price of the company that became Sydney Airport (SYD) hit 80 cents from the $2 IPO price. After 20 years of astute investment driving revenue increases, it sold to private hands for $8.75 in 2022.

Investment strategies

Ethical investing responding to some short-term challenges

There are significant differences in the sector weightings of an ethical fund versus an index, and while this has caused some short-term headwinds recently, the tailwinds are expected to blow over the long term.

Investment strategies

If you are new to investing, avoid these 10 common mistakes

Many new investors make common mistakes while learning about markets. Losses are inevitable. Newbies should read more and develop a long-term focus while avoiding big mistakes and not aiming to be brilliant.

Investment strategies

RMBS today: rising rate-linked income with capital preservation

Lenders use Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities to finance mortgages and RMBS are available to retail investors through fund structures. They come with many layers of protection beyond movements in house prices. 



© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.