Less Is More: The Case for ‘Slow Productivity’ at Work
Kanebridge News
    HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $1,622,098 (+0.71%)       Melbourne $981,832 (-2.09%)       Brisbane $1,013,340 (-4.79%)       Adelaide $896,637 (+0.78%)       Perth $903,142 (+1.62%)       Hobart $735,716 (-0.79%)       Darwin $675,685 (-1.24%)       Canberra $972,155 (+0.42%)       National $1,049,225 (-0.40%)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING PRICES AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $759,302 (+0.34%)       Melbourne $499,445 (+0.32%)       Brisbane $599,093 (-1.20%)       Adelaide $476,655 (+3.47%)       Perth $470,566 (-0.17%)       Hobart $509,944 (+1.17%)       Darwin $371,905 (-0.35%)       Canberra $475,100 (+0.41%)       National $542,432 (+0.34%)                HOUSES FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 10,955 (+356)       Melbourne 15,624 (+2,213)       Brisbane 8,222 (+1,548)       Adelaide 2,183 (+305)       Perth 5,974 (+540)       Hobart 1,113 (+77)       Darwin 281 (-8)       Canberra 1,025 (+339)       National 45,377 (+5,370)                UNITS FOR SALE AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 9,327 (+197)       Melbourne 8,761 (+154)       Brisbane 1,718 (-9)       Adelaide 407 (+8)       Perth 1,445 (-1)       Hobart 176 (+1)       Darwin 371 (+3)       Canberra 1,046 (+14)       National 23,251 (+367)                HOUSE MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $800 ($0)       Melbourne $610 ($0)       Brisbane $640 ($0)       Adelaide $600 (-$20)       Perth $660 (-$10)       Hobart $550 ($0)       Darwin $725 (+$5)       Canberra $670 (-$5)       National $665 (-$3)                UNIT MEDIAN ASKING RENTS AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney $750 ($0)       Melbourne $580 ($0)       Brisbane $620 ($0)       Adelaide $500 ($0)       Perth $620 (+$10)       Hobart $450 (+$10)       Darwin $580 (-$18)       Canberra $550 ($0)       National $593 (-$)                HOUSES FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 5,773 (-32)       Melbourne 6,547 (-53)       Brisbane 4,240 (-118)       Adelaide 1,353 (-76)       Perth 2,378 (-31)       Hobart 293 (-33)       Darwin 88 (+2)       Canberra 533 (-18)       National 21,205 (-359)                UNITS FOR RENT AND WEEKLY CHANGE     Sydney 10,090 (-221)       Melbourne 6,439 (-13)       Brisbane 2,285 (-27)       Adelaide 374 (-4)       Perth 671 (-47)       Hobart 120 (+1)       Darwin 160 (-3)       Canberra 799 (-17)       National 20,938 (-331)                HOUSE ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 2.56% (↓)     Melbourne 3.23% (↑)      Brisbane 3.28% (↑)        Adelaide 3.48% (↓)       Perth 3.80% (↓)     Hobart 3.89% (↑)      Darwin 5.58% (↑)        Canberra 3.58% (↓)       National 3.30% (↓)            UNIT ANNUAL GROSS YIELDS AND TREND         Sydney 5.14% (↓)       Melbourne 6.04% (↓)     Brisbane 5.38% (↑)        Adelaide 5.45% (↓)     Perth 6.85% (↑)      Hobart 4.59% (↑)        Darwin 8.11% (↓)       Canberra 6.02% (↓)       National 5.69% (↓)            HOUSE RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.8% (↑)      Melbourne 0.7% (↑)      Brisbane 0.7% (↑)      Adelaide 0.4% (↑)      Perth 0.4% (↑)      Hobart 0.9% (↑)      Darwin 0.8% (↑)      Canberra 1.0% (↑)      National 0.7% (↑)             UNIT RENTAL VACANCY RATES AND TREND       Sydney 0.9% (↑)      Melbourne 1.1% (↑)      Brisbane 1.0% (↑)      Adelaide 0.5% (↑)      Perth 0.5% (↑)      Hobart 1.4% (↑)      Darwin 1.7% (↑)      Canberra 1.4% (↑)      National 1.1% (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL HOUSES AND TREND       Sydney 31.2 (↑)      Melbourne 33.5 (↑)      Brisbane 32.9 (↑)      Adelaide 25.4 (↑)      Perth 35.6 (↑)      Hobart 37.5 (↑)        Darwin 42.9 (↓)     Canberra 33.5 (↑)      National 34.0 (↑)             AVERAGE DAYS TO SELL UNITS AND TREND       Sydney 32.1 (↑)      Melbourne 34.5 (↑)      Brisbane 30.3 (↑)        Adelaide 25.0 (↓)     Perth 35.5 (↑)      Hobart 33.6 (↑)      Darwin 43.2 (↑)      Canberra 40.8 (↑)      National 34.4 (↑)            
Share Button

Less Is More: The Case for ‘Slow Productivity’ at Work

We’re thinking about productivity at work all wrong, Cal Newport says. But how do we tell the boss that?

By RACHEL FEINTZEIG
Tue, Apr 30, 2024 9:11amGrey Clock 4 min

You’re oh so busy. You’re on Slack and email and back-to-back Zoom calls , sometimes all at once . Are you actually getting real work done?

Cal Newport doesn’t think so.

“It’s like, wait a second, none of this mattered,” says the Georgetown University computer science professor and crusader for focus in a distracted age.

Newport, 41, says we can accomplish more by shedding the overload. He calls his solution “slow productivity”—and has a book by the same name —a way for high achievers to say yes to fewer things, do them better and even slack off in strategic doses. Top-notch quality is the goal, and frenetic activity the enemy.

This, he told me, is the thing that can save our jobs from AI and layoffs, and even make shareholders happy.

I had questions. Can we really be less is more at work, or have we grown addicted to constantly crossing endless tasks off our to-do lists? What will our bosses think?

After all, so many of us yearn for a burnout cure-all that will preserve our high-achiever status, and this isn’t the first you-can-have-it-all proposition we’ve heard. Champions of the four-day workweek promise we can ditch an entire workday just by working smarter. Remote-work die-hards swear it’s a win for employers and employees. Few dreams are more seductive than bidding goodbye to hustle culture, while still reaping the benefits of said hustle.

Newport acknowledges that saying no to preserve our productivity can be a delicate act. He knows that entrepreneurs have more flexibility, but says those of us who answer to managers can carve this out too. We might even find we have more power and value to our employers.

“You should take that value out for a little bit of a spin,” he suggests. He offers some pointers.

Less is more

The way we work now is a “serious economic drag,” Newport says. Knowledge workers have devolved into a form of productivity that’s more about the vibes—stressed!—than actually making money for the company. Data from Microsoft finds that lots of us spend the equivalent of two workdays a week on meetings and email alone.

One mistake we make, Newport says, is taking on too many projects, then getting bogged down in the administrative overload—talking about the work, coordinating with others—that each requires. Work becomes a string of planning meetings, waiting on someone from another department to give us a go-ahead.

Newport recommends giving priority to a couple projects, then bumping the others to a waiting list in order of importance. Make that list public, say, in a Google doc you share with bosses and colleagues.

“When workloads are obfuscated behind black boxes, it’s just people throwing stuff at each other, it’s very dangerous to say no,” Newport says.

If someone comes to you with more work, have them consider where it should go on your list, Newport says.

When you do say yes, double the estimated timelines you set to complete a project. That’s how long it’ll take to do it well, he says. And try what he calls a “one for you, one for me strategy.” Every time you book an hour-long meeting, block an hour for independent work on your calendar.

Be the one to trust

It’s a foreign and bracing approach for those of us who reflexively say yes to work requests. Newport’s philosophy requires transparency and confidence. Instead of “let me see how fast I can turn that around!”, try, “This request will take six hours. I’ll have that time in three weeks.”

This could be heresy at some companies. The trick is in the delivery, he says. Never make it seem like work tasks are a burden you shouldn’t have to face. Instead, stress that you’re trying to be as effective as you can for the team and the company. Be positive, and deliver on the timelines you promise. You’ll be seen as someone who’s organised and on top of your game.

We think bosses want someone who’s always accessible—fast to respond, fast to jump into action, Newport says. But what bosses really want is to know that a project they hand you will get done.

Bite-size shirking

Quiet quitting permanently is a bad idea, Newport says, but a little bit is good.

Don’t feel guilty, he adds. You’re working under a new, better system. We weren’t meant to work all out , every day, without seasonal shifts and pauses.

Pick a time—say, the month of July—to slow down. Don’t volunteer for extra work. Don’t offer Mondays as a possibility for meetings. Take on an easier project for cover.

He also recommends taking yourself out to a monthly movie during the workday. Say it’s a personal appointment, and enjoy the sense of control and creativity it brings.

You don’t have to nail a manifesto to the wall, he adds, or try to change the whole company culture. Instead, quietly carve out change for yourself.

Coming into your power

The catch: You have to be really good at the part of your job that matters. And you have to get big stuff done. Remember, this is about being a happier high performer, not slacking.

“There’s no hiding,” Newport says.

I suspect this terrifies a lot of people. They’ve gotten good at being always on and typing up yet another meeting agenda. Tackling a major project or goal is often harder, and comes without a guarantee that you’re going to nail it.

Scary or not, real work is becoming imperative. AI is coming for the rote parts of our jobs. Leaders are sussing out the “nonsense” projects and roles in their ranks as they cut jobs, Newport says. No boss wants to be left with a team of people who are aces at responding to emails.

Mastering a valuable skill puts you in control. Newport writes of people who leave corporate America behind and move where they want , working remotely as contractors, charging wild fees for fewer hours of work. The more you shed the work that doesn’t matter, and spend that time getting better at the stuff that does, the more leeway you’ll get.

“The marketplace doesn’t care about your personal interest in slowing down,” Newport writes. “If you want more control over your schedule, you need something to offer in return.”

Figure that puzzle out, and you might just be able to have it all—high achievement, and your sanity.



MOST POPULAR
11 ACRES ROAD, KELLYVILLE, NSW

This stylish family home combines a classic palette and finishes with a flexible floorplan

35 North Street Windsor

Just 55 minutes from Sydney, make this your creative getaway located in the majestic Hawkesbury region.

Related Stories
Money
Why Berkshire Hathaway Might Stop Selling Bank of America Stock Once It Reaches This Number
By ANDREW BARY 07/09/2024
Money
China’s Troubles Are Hitting Home for U.S. Companies
By RESHMA KAPADIA 05/09/2024
Lifestyle
Australian Economy Posts Weakest Growth Since Early 1990s
By JAMES GLYNN 04/09/2024
Why Berkshire Hathaway Might Stop Selling Bank of America Stock Once It Reaches This Number

When will Berkshire Hathaway stop selling Bank of America stock?

By ANDREW BARY
Sat, Sep 7, 2024 3 min

Berkshire began liquidating its big stake in the banking company in mid-July—and has already unloaded about 15% of its interest. The selling has been fairly aggressive and has totaled about $6 billion. (Berkshire still holds 883 million shares, an 11.3% interest worth $35 billion based on its most recent filing on Aug. 30.)

The selling has prompted speculation about when CEO Warren Buffett, who oversees Berkshire’s $300 billion equity portfolio, will stop. The sales have depressed Bank of America stock, which has underperformed peers since Berkshire began its sell program. The stock closed down 0.9% Thursday at $40.14.

It’s possible that Berkshire will stop selling when the stake drops to 700 million shares. Taxes and history would be the reasons why.

Berkshire accumulated its Bank of America stake in two stages—and at vastly different prices. Berkshire’s initial stake came in 2017 , when it swapped $5 billion of Bank of America preferred stock for 700 million shares of common stock via warrants it received as part of the original preferred investment in 2011.

Berkshire got a sweet deal in that 2011 transaction. At the time, Bank of America was looking for a Buffett imprimatur—and the bank’s stock price was weak and under $10 a share.

Berkshire paid about $7 a share for that initial stake of 700 million common shares. The rest of the Berkshire stake, more than 300 million shares, was mostly purchased in 2018 at around $30 a share.

With Bank of America stock currently trading around $40, Berkshire faces a high tax burden from selling shares from the original stake of 700 million shares, given the low cost basis, and a much lighter tax hit from unloading the rest. Berkshire is subject to corporate taxes—an estimated 25% including local taxes—on gains on any sales of stock. The tax bite is stark.

Berkshire might own $2 to $3 a share in taxes on sales of high-cost stock and $8 a share on low-cost stock purchased for $7 a share.

New York tax expert Robert Willens says corporations, like individuals, can specify the particular lots when they sell stock with multiple cost levels.

“If stock is held in the custody of a broker, an adequate identification is made if the taxpayer specifies to the broker having custody of the stock the particular stock to be sold and, within a reasonable time thereafter, confirmation of such specification is set forth in a written document from the broker,” Willens told Barron’s in an email.

He assumes that Berkshire will identify the high-cost Bank of America stock for the recent sales to minimize its tax liability.

If sellers don’t specify, they generally are subject to “first in, first out,” or FIFO, accounting, meaning that the stock bought first would be subject to any tax on gains.

Buffett tends to be tax-averse—and that may prompt him to keep the original stake of 700 million shares. He could also mull any loyalty he may feel toward Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan , whom Buffett has praised in the past.

Another reason for Berkshire to hold Bank of America is that it’s the company’s only big equity holding among traditional banks after selling shares of U.S. Bancorp , Bank of New York Mellon , JPMorgan Chase , and Wells Fargo in recent years.

Buffett, however, often eliminates stock holdings after he begins selling them down, as he did with the other bank stocks. Berkshire does retain a smaller stake of about $3 billion in Citigroup.

There could be a new filing on sales of Bank of America stock by Berkshire on Thursday evening. It has been three business days since the last one.

Berkshire must file within two business days of any sales of Bank of America stock since it owns more than 10%. The conglomerate will need to get its stake under about 777 million shares, about 100 million below the current level, before it can avoid the two-day filing rule.

It should be said that taxes haven’t deterred Buffett from selling over half of Berkshire’s stake in Apple this year—an estimated $85 billion or more of stock. Barron’s has estimated that Berkshire may owe $15 billion on the bulk of the sales that occurred in the second quarter.

Berkshire now holds 400 million shares of Apple and Barron’s has argued that Buffett may be finished reducing the Apple stake at that round number, which is the same number of shares that Berkshire has held in Coca-Cola for more than two decades.

Buffett may like round numbers—and 700 million could be just the right figure for Bank of America.

MOST POPULAR
11 ACRES ROAD, KELLYVILLE, NSW

This stylish family home combines a classic palette and finishes with a flexible floorplan

35 North Street Windsor

Just 55 minutes from Sydney, make this your creative getaway located in the majestic Hawkesbury region.

Related Stories
Property
Winter property market warms up as buyers and sellers come out to play
By Bronwyn Allen 23/08/2024
Lifestyle
A Travel Plan for Couples Who Don’t Agree on How to Travel
By Dawn Gilbertson 17/07/2024
Lifestyle
Celebrations Big and Small Are Getting Longer and More Extravagant for the Rich
By SHIVANI VORA 21/06/2024
0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop