Analysis: What Everyone Needs to Know to Be More Productive

Student A

Southern New Hampshire University

ENG 130: Foundations of Written Communication

Professor A

January 1, 2023
 2

Part One: Analysis of a Written Work for a First Audience

[The annotations from the Module 5 assignment have been included here again.]

By 2030 [The historical/cultural context is identified here. This sets the article in the

current time (historical context), with the forward projection of potential technological

impacts (cultural context).], entire knowledge industries might be overtaken by AI workers

[The overview of the topic is indicated here.], replacing people who had worked on data or

analysis; fast food and restaurant fry cooks and cashiers and even wait staff might be replaced by

robotic or self-service technologies; unemployment might reach crisis levels. People who look to

this sort of future want to improve their chances at surviving [Audience and purpose are

identified here, with another look at cultural context.], and they work harder, becoming part

of productivity culture. As they dedicate themselves more and more to their careers, they might

neglect their families and personal growth, and that can lead to depression and other issues. In

her article “What Everyone Needs to Know to Be More Productive,” Dana Rousmaniere

addresses these issues by focusing on workers who feel they are competing with AI,

technologies, and each other and want to be more productive in order to be more competitive in

the workplace and as earners. [The audience is restated, with further detail.] She evaluates a

range of productivity tips and shares the best, and most popular, productivity tips as well as

popular tips that are not as useful. [This is a secondary look at purpose and leads up to the

core idea. This also indicates the genre, which is a blend of evaluation and argument, with

the writing choices being the productivity tips that are identified and ranked for their

value.] Rousmaniere argues [The genre is again indicated.] for a balance between productivity

and downtime, emphasizing the value of productivity and ways to be a productive worker, but

although she emphasizes the importance of work–life balance, she does not offer as many ways
 3

to truly take a break and improve the personal side of life to create that balance. [This final

sentence is the thesis statement, which was developed in Module 4. This also reflects the

core idea and provides an overview of the three key points. Note on the introduction: Many

of the critical elements from the rubric (such as audience, purpose, etc.) are integrated into

the introductory paragraph. It isn’t necessary to develop separate paragraphs for these

elements. Instead, aim to discuss them in the lead-up to the thesis statement, and use the

body paragraphs of the essay to develop the three key points that are identified in the

thesis.]

Even though Rousmaniere argues for a balance between productivity and downtime, she

still emphasizes the value of productivity and ways to be a productive worker. [The first key

point, as indicated in the thesis statement, is expanded to become the topic sentence of this

paragraph.] Nine of the 13 paragraphs in her essay focus directly on how to be productive. [A

detail from the text is highlighted here.] The productivity paragraphs offer advice including

discovering one’s cognitive style so they can “align [their] work strategies with [their] cognitive

style,” getting organized, using productivity apps, and taking “ownership of your time”

(Rousmaniere, 2015, p. 3). [A relevant quote from the text is included as supporting evidence

for the first key point.] What she mentions as a priority early and late in the essay is not a

priority in the body paragraphs where she instead conducts a study of popular productivity

culture hacks, leaving balance by the wayside.

Like many business writers, Rousmaniere emphasizes the importance of work–life

balance but does not offer many options for taking a break. In a few paragraphs, she does offer

options for balance, including in the final paragraph, where she advises readers to focus “less on

work” and “committing to less” so they can return to work with “renewed energy and focus”
 4

(Rousmaniere, 2015, p. 4). Otherwise, even when she advises workers to say no to extra tasks,

she does so in the service of committing more effectively on fewer tasks. Even resting is

something she advises solely so workers can renew themselves for work. Taking a break is given

lip service, and the promised work–life balance is still elusive.

Once workers feel free to take a break and try to balance their lives, they might need tools

to improve the personal side of life to create that balance, but Rousmaniere does not offer much

guidance in that direction. In the productivity apps paragraph, for instance, she emphasizes a list

of apps to help people be their “most productive,” but none on how to relax, regroup, or even

create moments of calm or exercise while at work. Even her advice on the “way [people] speak

to [themselves]” is focused on anonymous second-person “You can do this” instead of positive

self-talk or ways to focus on anything but work and achieving “surprisingly good results”

(Rousmaniere, 2015, p. 4) All of the guidance is focused on workplace productivity and a

productivity mindset, and no tools for personal growth or relaxation are included.

Like many articles, this one emphasizes what is best for the workplace and not for the

worker. Even though it provides many useful tools and examples, it only mentions work–life

balance as a goal, one it assumes workers can manage on their own since no help is provided. It

could be that Rousmaniere’s argument is correct, and workers need not fear losing their jobs if

only they become productive enough. If workers have less to fear, they can better balance work

and life demands, and productivity can become a way to simply be better rather than the only

way to survive. If that becomes the case, the productivity industry and productivity culture will

need to give way to the wellness industry and a lifestyle balance culture. Companies, workers,

and workers’ families might be better as a result.

Part Two: Analysis of a Written Work for a Second Audience

Identify a New Audience

The audience for the second draft is the management staff overseeing the work of the

employees. [The new audience is clearly identified here.] They are probably worrying about

how to both motivate and encourage them so that they keep working and don’t quit. [The

audience needs and situation are indicated in this sentence.] I will change the language to

include what managers can do to motivate and encourage their staff but still include some fear-

based language. [The change in writing style and with how it will be adapted for audience

are identified here.]

Second Version of the Paper

By 2030, entire knowledge industries might be overtaken by AI workers, replacing

people who had worked on data or analysis; fast food and restaurant fry cooks and cashiers and

even wait staff might be replaced by robotic or self-service technologies; unemployment might

reach crisis levels. People who will manage workers moving into this sort of future need to

acknowledge the workers’ fears about their chances at surviving in the workforce, and managers

need to address those fears rather than driving their employees to think living by the rules of

productivity culture is their only chance at future employment. [The writing conventions are

indicated with the change in writing needs to adapt to audience. As this second draft is

focused on management instead of employees, the shift highlights the expectations and

responsibilities of leadership to support workers as workplace changes increasingly occur.]

As workers dedicate themselves more and more to their careers, they might neglect their families

and personal growth, and managers need to ensure that employees have an opportunity for work–

life balance. [Again, writing conventions are shown here with the change in audience and

how this impacts the analysis. For example, a specific responsibility of management (i.e.,
 6

recognizing the need for the work-life balance of employees) is identified.] In her article

“What Everyone Needs to Know to Be More Productive,” Dana Rousmaniere addresses these

issues by focusing on workers who feel they are competing with AI, technologies, and each other

and want to be more productive in order to be more competitive in the workplace and as earners.

She evaluates a range of productivity tips and shares the best and most popular productivity tips

as well as popular tips that are not as useful. Rousmaniere argues for a balance between

productivity and downtime, emphasizing the value of productivity and ways to be a productive

worker, but although she emphasizes the importance of work–life balance, she does not offer as

many ways to truly take a break and improve the personal side of life to create that balance.

Even though Rousmaniere argues for a balance between productivity and downtime, she

still emphasizes the value of productivity and ways to be a productive worker. Nine of the 13

paragraphs in her essay focus directly on how to be productive. The productivity paragraphs

offer advice including discovering one’s cognitive style so they can “align [their] work strategies

with [their] cognitive style,” getting organized, using productivity apps, and taking “ownership

of your time” (Rousmaniere, 2015, p. 3). What she mentions as a priority early and late in the

essay is not a priority in the body paragraphs, where she instead conducts a study of popular

productivity culture hacks, leaving balance by the wayside.

Like many business writers, Rousmaniere emphasizes the importance of work–life

balance but does not offer many options for taking a break. In a few paragraphs, she does offer

options for balance, including in the final paragraph, where she advises readers to focus “less on

work” and “committing to less” so they can return to work with “renewed energy and focus”

(Rousmaniere, 2015, p. 4). Otherwise, even when she advises workers to say no to extra tasks,

she does so in the service of committing more effectively to fewer tasks. Even resting is
 7

something she advises solely so workers can renew themselves for work. Taking a break is given

lip service, and the promised work–life balance is still elusive.

Once workers feel free to take a break and try to balance their lives, they might need tools

to improve the personal side of life to create that balance, but Rousmaniere does not offer much

guidance in that direction. In the productivity apps paragraph, for instance, she emphasizes a list

of apps to help people be their “most productive,” but none on how to relax, regroup, or even

create moments of calm or exercise while at work. Even her advice on the “way [people] speak

to [themselves]” is focused on anonymous second-person “You can do this” instead of positive

self-talk or ways to focus on anything but work and achieving “surprisingly good results”

(Rousmaniere, 2015, p. 4). All of the guidance is focused on workplace productivity and a

productivity mindset, and no tools for personal growth or relaxation are included.

Like many articles, this one emphasizes what is best for the workplace and not for the

worker. Even though it provides many useful tools and examples, it only mentions work–life

balance as a goal, one it assumes workers can manage on their own because no help is provided.

It could be that Rousmaniere’s argument is correct, and workers need not fear job loss as long as

they become productive enough. Managers play a critical role in reducing that fear and

reassuring their staff. [The conclusion reiterates the change in audience and how this has

been reflected in the analysis. The first version highlighted the concerns from AI that

impact employees, while this version identifies the specific role of management to facilitate

support opportunities for employees.] If workers have less to fear, they can better balance

work and life demands, and productivity can become a way to simply be better rather than the

only way to survive. If that becomes the case, the productivity industry and productivity culture

will need to give way to the wellness industry and a lifestyle balance culture. Manager and
 8

leadership training could include a focus on these new priorities. Companies, workers, and

workers’ families might be better as a result.

Reference

Rousmaniere, D. (2015). What everyone needs to know to be more productive. Harvard

Business Review Digital Articles, 2–5.