The Illusion of Progress: Why Doing More Doesn’t Always Mean Achieving Better Outcomes

In an era of relentless productivity, the modern workplace often confuses motion with progress. Organisations, teams, and individuals frequently measure success by the volume of tasks completed rather than the value of outcomes achieved. This fundamental misalignment is not just a business challenge, it is a psychological and philosophical dilemma that has persisted for centuries.

The Greek philosopher Seneca once wrote, “If one does not know to which port one is sailing, no wind is favourable.” This wisdom underscores a truth that remains relevant today: Without clarity of purpose, action becomes directionless. In the world of business and leadership, it is easy to fall into the Drucker trap of doing things right (management) rather than doing the right things (leadership and strategy), an error that leads to organisational drift and cognitive overload rather than meaningful progress. In addition, note Goodhart's law, "When a measure becomes a target it ceases to be a good measure," because people tend to optimise for that goal, demonstrating Drucker's "What gets measured gets managed," in a more critical light.

The Productivity Trap of Effort as a Substitute for Strategy Fulfilment

From a psychological standpoint, human beings are wired to seek tangible measures of success, our brain rewards is for this quite easily it seems. Behavioural economist Daniel Kahneman describes a cognitive bias called substitution bias, in which we unconsciously replace a difficult question with an easier one. Instead of asking, “Are we making meaningful progress?” organisations often ask, “Are we busy?” a far simpler question to answer. Couple this with his 'Prospect Theory' where we may avoid change and opportunity gains because of loss aversion and we can build resistance to real progress quite quickly.

Our bias manifests in various ways:

• Marketing teams execute campaigns that generate clicks but fail to convert customers.
• Sales teams chase deals that look good on paper, or easy to win, but don’t align with strategic goals or profitability.
• Leadership fills calendars with meetings, panels, and other engagements without assessing their actual impact and neglecting the tough choices of strategic decision making.

The underlying problem is that we often measure effort rather than effectiveness, but who wants an A for effort and a D for effectiveness? In psychology, this tendency is linked to the Zeigarnik effect, which explains why unfinished tasks consume our mental energy. We experience a sense of satisfaction from completing tasks, even when those tasks are of little strategic importance. The modern workplace capitalises on this by fostering busyness culture, where productivity is defined by activity rather than achievement. A more recent demonstration of this is seen in presentee-ism now being demanded in back to the office initiatives, rightly or wrongly. However, do not forget that organisational politics always exist too, so beware of your perceived merit of an activity versus that of others.

Motion is not necessarily progress.

‍A hamster on a wheel is busy, but it’s not going anywhere. ‍

And sometimes that is the right thing to do even if you cannot see it.

Strategic Clarity and The Art of Doing Less, but Better

The antidote to this cycle is strategic clarity, understanding choices and deliberately focusing on what truly matters. Psychologist Edwin Locke’s goal-setting theory (1990) emphasises that high performance is driven by specific, challenging goals rather than vague, general efforts. The most effective leaders do not merely set objectives; they ensure that every action aligns with a broader vision. What is yours?

Consider these fundamental guiding questions:

1. What is our ultimate objective? (Clarity of purpose and vision, and how this might feel emotionally)
2. What actions contribute directly to this goal? (Strategic focus, does it make the boat go faster)
3. What activities provide little or no value? (Eliminating distractions, think drag or poor rudder control)
4. How do we measure success beyond just effort? (Outcome-based evaluation and things that provide true intrinsic motivation)

Philosophically, this approach aligns with the Pareto Principle (the 80/20 rule), which suggests that 80% of outcomes come from 20% of efforts or outputs. The trick is to direct outputs effectively. The challenge for modern organisations is identifying and amplifying those critical 20% activities while eliminating the noise, and also allowing some slack.

This principle is particularly evident in product development. Many tech companies once pursued feature-heavy designs, believing that more functionality equaled more value. However, research in cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1988) reveals that excessive complexity can overwhelm users, reducing adoption. Today, leading companies prioritise simplicity and usability, a principle famously echoed by Steve Jobs: “Innovation is saying no to a thousand things.”

The Paradox of Leadership: When Visibility Overshadows Value

Leaders, too, are susceptible to the illusion of productivity. In an effort to demonstrate influence, many prioritise visibility, networking and attending conferences, engaging in media coverage, and chasing personal recognition. While these activities can have merit, they may become vanity metrics, measurable but meaningless. Critically evaluate actions agains the same four criteria to find a balance and understand the cost:

What is our ultimate objective?

What actions contribute directly to this goal?

What activities provide little or no value?

How do we measure success beyond just effort?

The ancient Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu offers a counterintuitive perspective: ‍

“When the best leader’s work is done, the people say: we did it ourselves.”

The most effective leaders are those who create systems of alignment rather than micromanage output. True influence lies not in constant motion but in intentional presence, focusing on what truly moves the needle. And this may indeed be attendance at a conference to be on the pedestal and be seen too.

Conclusion: The Wisdom of Intentional Action

To break free from the illusion of progress, the best organisations shift from activity-based work to outcome-based thinking. This may e more pertinent today as the pendulum on work from home swings back to a return to the office approach. Outcome approaches requires discipline, self-awareness, and a willingness to challenge deeply ingrained habits. However, our products or services are not necessarily outcomes in themselves. Outcomes and value are assessed by customers, which may be built on our outputs or value propositions. We may never truly understand the value gained by someone else from what we do, and yet we can catch a glimpse as we engage more fully.

A useful mental model for this shift is first-principles thinking, popularised by Aristotle and later championed by innovators. Instead of building strategies based on precedent, this approach encourages breaking problems down to their fundamental truths and reconstructing solutions from the ground up. For an example from my other work, in martial arts and self defence classes, this can be seen in fundamentals of structure, footwork and balance combining to create an opportunity for action.

Ultimately, less is more, when less is done with purpose. A principle of minimum movement can be faster and more economical. The most successful individuals and organisations are not necessarily those who do the most, but those who focus relentlessly on the essential.

‍True progress is not necessarily measured by how much movement, but by your optimal course heading and direction.

So the next time you find yourself overwhelmed with tasks, ask yourself: Am I just moving? Or am I moving in the right direction? And if necessary make an effective and optimised Course Correction with intent.

‍