The Definition of Productivity

People commonly understand productivity as a variety of things in a variety of fields. In a business that has closest relations to it, productivity is understood in various ways according to which aspect is studied. (According to the newest report, there are about twenty business-related definitions of productivity!)

The Concepts of Productivity

Most of the concepts have a relation to productivity between input and output to the systems studied. Productivity contains variables as well as other inter-relations within the group to which it belong(machinery systems, factory, office etc).

Also it is considered as the stimulus-response model in which inputs cause outputs. Generally, for the purposes of simplicity, we can understand it as the output divided by the input. But there is still something confusing on the point of this view.

In most fields, productivity is understood as “clearly the relationship between the resources which come to an organization system for a specified time period and the outputs which are generated with the resources generated for the same time period”.

The Variables of Productivity

In factories, for instance, productivity measures which are related to input factors (capital, labor, etc) are insufficient and at times could be misleading.

Input factors may not be studied while being isolated by themselves. Generally productivity improvement in a field is at the expense of the others. In addition, labor as a factor of input may be present in all stages. Moreover, management resources (another necessary factor of input) is not considered in these measures.

But the remaining of these concepts consider productivity as the relationship of input and output related to a system of production. This means that there are organizations working as physical systems with many variables as well as other inter-relations within.

The Objectives of Productivity

Experts Vrat and Sardina said that the people who will carry out measurements of productivity must have three objectives.

Firstly, potential improvements should be identified. Secondly, decisions should be made for reallocating resources. And lastly, it must present how the pre-set goals were determined.

Financial and Performance Productivity

There are some differences between two factors. Based the number of outputs produced, we can calculate performance productivity.

For instance: Company A produces 200 product units in a week, and the next week they are able to reach 220 units. That means the performance productivity has increased by 10%.

In comparison to performance productivity, financial productivity can be grouped by the value of output. Suppose Company X produces 200 product units in the one week as well as the next. And the selling price have raised from 1.00 dollar to 1.10 dollars per unit. Financial productivity has increased by 10%, however there is no increase in performance productivity.

This is sometimes misleading, too. In case the company sells products in 220 item at 1.10 dollars each, and the next week the price has fallen by 9.1%, the sale is still 220 dollars.

From a standpoint of finance, there is not any change even if there are some changes of performance point. (They produce extra 20 items)

So What the Definition of Productivity is?

Until now, managers are not able to determine what the measurements, improvements and definition of productivity. They also cannot define the measurement, improvement, concepts of performance as well.

What a Lawyer Must Prove to Win a Product Liability Case

Thousands of injuries occur each year in the United States from defective or dangerous products. Victims of dangerous defective products have legal protection under product liability laws throughout the country. These laws govern the legal rules that determine who can be held liable for the defect or danger to consumers.

In general, products sold to the public are required to meet common expectations of consumers. When those products have an unexpected defect, common expectations of consumers are not met.

More than one party could be held liable for injuries that occur from consumer use of a defective product. This includes all sellers that are part of the distribution chain for making the product. Parties that are potentially liable for a defective product include the manufacturer, parts supplier, wholesaler and the retail store from which the product was purchased by the consumer.

The type of defect will determine who is responsible for a liability claim. All of the specifics related to a product liability case may differ among states. However, there are certain elements that a lawyer must prove to win a product liability case for his or her client. These elements include:

  • Injury and/or loss was caused by the product
  • Product was defective
  • Manufacturer’s error led to flaw in product
  • Manufacturer failed to warn consumers about potential dangers
  • Product was used correctly

Product Caused Injury and/or Loss

An actual injury or loss is a crucial element for a lawyer in proving a product liability claim. Specifically, the injury or loss must be a direct result of the product’s defect. In some cases, demonstrating the link between an injury and product defect is straightforward. In other cases, proving that the defect caused the injury or loss is not so easy.

For instance, a client was injured in a car accident while driving a vehicle prone to flipping over. If there is evidence that the client was speeding when the accident occurred, the manufacturer could argue that reckless driving – not the design of the vehicle – caused the accident.

However, a client could suffer third-degree burns when a brand new electric tea kettle explodes because of a hairline crack. The client did nothing out of the ordinary while using the tea kettle and could have a strong injury claim.

Product is Flawed Due to Manufacturer’s Error

In addition to proving that the product caused an injury or loss, the lawyer must also prove that the same product is defective. For some cases, the defect could be the result of a problem at the manufacturing plant. For others, the defect is within the product design, which means that the entire product line is dangerous for consumer use.

A lawyer might have a harder time proving that there was a flaw in the product design. The most likely scenario is demonstrating that an unreasonable design created the danger. However, a product that has potential danger is not automatically a judgment against the manufacturer or supplier when an injury occurs.

There are times when designing a product in a cost-effective or reasonable way is not feasible. Consider the potential dangers of vehicle air bags. While they can cause serious injury to a driver or passenger, they can also save lives in certain collisions. Car manufacturers would argue that when alternative outcomes are considered, air bags are not unreasonably dangerous.

Manufacturer Failed to Warn Consumers of Potential Dangers

Typically, a lawyer might have a better chance at proving an injury or loss occurred from a defective design when the average consumer is not aware of the dangerous quality. A ruling in such cases may depend on whether the manufacturer failed to warn consumers of the potential dangers. The manufacturer or supplier must show that instructions and warnings were reasonably sufficient.

In this case, a client might suffer third-degree burns from an electric tea kettle because the steam valve is concealed by some part of the product design. An average consumer would expect to find a visible spout from where steam is released. Instead, the steam valve is placed in an inconspicuous area, which strengthens a defective design claim.

Proving defective design is problematic if the tea kettle included bright red stickers printed with the word “caution” and the user manual included warnings about the steam valve position. The legal question now becomes whether the warnings were adequate.

Injured Client Used Product Correctly

Generally, the lawyer’s client must use the product correctly; that is, the way the manufacturer intended the product to be used. Continuing with the tea kettle example, an example would be if the explosion occurs when used to heat water for an outdoor kinds’ pool is not the intended use.

If the kettle explodes and causes burns, the lawyer may not be able to prove manufacturer liability. The manufacturer is not required to make the tea kettle safe for use with an outdoor pool.

However, this does not mean that use of every product must conform to the manufacturer’s specifications. The key is proving whether the average consumer would or would not use the product in the same manner as the client. If so, the lawyer has met the reasonable expectation of use requirement.

Winning a product liability case involves deciphering often complex circumstances and establishing a good legal theory. A lawyer who is knowledgeable of product liability law and the litigation process will craft a strategy to prove the case. An immediate investigation into the facts surrounding the case could expose obvious defective issues. Further, expert testimony is often essential in proving that a defective design caused an injury and/or loss.