Why Productivity Isn't a One-Size-Fits-All

For me, productivity has always been a double-edged sword:

The myth of ‘universal productivity’

Social media often touts optimal solutions to the problem of productivity. In addition to the typical ‘buy my course’ types, there are actually some useful channels. They usually present a technique and talk about how enriching it has been for their lives.

That may be true, but does it apply to everyone?

Between ‘time blocking’, the ‘Pomodoro Technique’, ‘task prioritisation’, and ‘taking frequent breaks’, you can find everything. There is an endless list of hundreds of these techniques. I don't want to deny that they can be helpful in principle.

But one key factor is almost always overlooked: people are individuals: what works for one person may paralyse another.

How different brains work

Apps, methods, and even institutions often ignore this point. Not everyone is the same; productivity is individual. It is understandable that with over eight billion people, it is impossible to cater to everyone's needs. But with a rapid increase in mental illness and neurodivergent diagnoses, one has to wonder why, apart from mental health apps, hardly anyone is seriously addressing this issue.

For many, a lecture, homework, or project work is not a big problem, especially when it comes to concentration. For people with mental illness or neurodivergence, however, the situation is often very different. Even if it sometimes appears otherwise from the outside, these people are not lazy. They simply struggle with different conditions. It is not that they do not want to, but that they often cannot.

Many productivity apps and methods therefore do not work for those who need them most. Motivational messages such as ‘Break is over. Get back to being productive.’ or ‘Session is over. Start your next one right away.’ may seem encouraging to some, but to others they are simply demotivating.

What ‘functional productivity’ really means

Functional productivity does not mean doing more, but doing the right thing at the right time. It is about paying attention to your own needs and promoting sustainability, not just speed. A productive session can, and should, include breaks. Functional productivity adapts to your needs, not the other way around. As paradoxical as it may sound, doing nothing is often more productive than forced work. Productivity is individual: what works for you may not work for others, and vice versa. Motivation does not always come from discipline, but often from meaning, interest, or genuine curiosity.

Conclusion

I believe that productivity is often misunderstood and misapplied at present. Extreme standards are set by institutions that target optimal groups rather than individuals. Productivity apps and methods should focus more on mental health. For many people, simply feeling heard and understood means a lot; others need support in other areas.

I am convinced that every person is capable of productive excellence under the right conditions, but it takes time and often outside help to recognise and understand these conditions.

Support such as short daily check-ins, an individual energy assessment of tasks, fewer toxic ‘motivational messages’, or simply recommending breaks could make a big difference for many. Of course, this is easier said than done, but even small gestures could have a big impact, especially in productivity apps, and contribute to a healthier, less toxic productivity culture.

Ultimately, it's not about being more productive than others, but about working in harmony with yourself. If we start to think about productivity in more human terms, it can once again become what it should be – a tool, not a benchmark.