The bad news is that this suggests the remaining 55% is wasted time, cost or capacity! In a quality-sensitive environment, you could apply quality as a fourth factor, which would reduce the effectiveness even further.
The good news is that
a) you can now identify areas with potential opportunity and
b) even small improvements will contribute significant results.
Just improving utilisation to say 80% will raise the effective performance to 48% – a vital 6.66% productivity improvement, with no increase in effort or method!
Raising each factor by 5 points really starts to have a huge impact on the effective performance. (It becomes 54.4% effective, so a 20.9% improvement – dramatic or what?!)
This hasn’t assumed that people need to work particularly faster to dramatically improve effective performance and productivity.
This view on the potential for productivity improvement illustrates why productivity isn’t about working harder, it’s about working smarter. And it starts to clarify the reality of Time and Motion: less movement, less time = improved productivity.