Location Germany Requires Productivity

06.07.2026

5 min read

The location debate revolves around energy prices, taxes, bureaucracy, and the shortage of skilled workers. Christian Uhl, CEO of enthus GmbH, argues in this guest commentary why the strongest lever for the Mittelstand lies in its own engine room: productivity.

Key Takeaways

Location costs dominate the debate. The productivity question often remains too quiet, although it is decided directly within the company.
Three levers lie in-house. IT architecture, routine automation, and pragmatically calculated AI can deliver impact without waiting for reforms.
Digitalization is leadership work. It belongs in the executive suite because it is a productivity decision.

Hardly any economic policy debate is currently being conducted as reliably as the one about Germany as a business location. Energy prices, tax burden, bureaucracy, shortage of skilled workers: The diagnosis is surprisingly unanimous across all camps. The ifo Institute expects growth of around 0.8 percent for 2026. KPMG titles its current location report “Between High Reform Pressure and a Strong Foundation.” The finding is correct.

Something else concerns me: Almost everything we are talking about lies outside the sphere of influence of the individual company. Energy costs, tax rates, approval procedures: These are framework conditions set in Berlin and Brussels. The location debate thereby implicitly turns the Mittelstand into a bystander waiting for change.

That is the most expensive stance one can take right now.

Why the Location Debate Turns the Mittelstand into Bystanders

What is productivity modernization? Productivity modernization means organizing existing work so that the same teams can create more value. In the Mittelstand, this mainly involves clear IT architecture, less manual routine, better data utilization, and AI processes with measurable results.

Competitiveness has two sides. One is the cost side. It is in fact predominantly determined externally. The other is the productivity side. And that lies almost entirely within the company’s own walls.

Germany has a cost problem. At the same time, it has a productivity problem. Operational performance per working hour has stagnated for years. No law solves this part of the equation. Every organization must tackle it itself. This is precisely where the lever lies that the Mittelstand holds in its own hands. It is in no coalition agreement because it lies in the engine room of companies.

In our Mittelstand projects, we see three areas where this lever becomes concrete. No one has to wait for a reform for that.

Three In-House Productivity Levers

First: Architecture instead of patchwork. In many Mittelstand companies, IT has grown over twenty years. Layer upon layer, each solution sensible in itself, the whole a brake. Every island solution costs operations, every interface costs maintenance, every special case costs speed. A consolidated, modern architecture is not a tech gimmick. It is the most direct form of cost reduction that a company can decide for itself. And this applies not only to IT.

Second: Automation of routine. According to Bitkom, the German labor market lacks around 109,000 IT specialists. The trend is rising. In this situation, continuing to have routine processes handled by people who are needed more urgently elsewhere wastes twice: productivity and scarce talent. Automation is not a rationalization program against the workforce here. It keeps tasks running that would otherwise remain undone.

Third: AI pragmatic, not as a veneer. The economic impact of AI in the Mittelstand arises through a few, clearly calculated use cases with measurable results. The question is not whether one “does” AI. It is which specific process will become measurably faster or cheaper tomorrow.

I do not want to be misunderstood. Lower energy costs and less bureaucracy are right and necessary. In 2026, several things are moving here, from relief on grid fees to the federal government’s investment offensive. In my view, the investment climate is better than the mood.

But that is precisely why a sober look is worthwhile: Public investment programs first reach infrastructure, large industry, and selected technology fields. Through funds, they occasionally also reach individual Mittelstand investments. Everyday productivity modernization of the broad base, however, is not allocated. It is either lifted or left on the table.

Digitalization as a Productivity Question

For this to succeed, a shift is needed that has less to do with technology than with leadership: Digitalization must be treated as a productivity question by the executive management. It must not remain stuck as a procurement topic for the IT department. As long as the modernization of one’s own value creation is booked as a cost item and not as what it is, the lever remains unused: the most effective location reform available.

The location debate will continue. It should. But while we argue about the conditions set by others, it is worth asking a question of one’s own house: Who in our organization is actually responsible for productivity, not just the next tool?

Anyone who has no clear answer to that does not have their biggest location problem in Berlin. They have overlooked it.

Christian Uhl is CEO of enthus GmbH. The company supports Mittelstand companies, healthcare facilities, and public organizations with architecture, automation, and the economic use of AI.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is productivity so important in the location debate?

Costs like energy prices or taxes are politically influenced. Productivity, on the other hand, arises within the company itself, for example through clear processes, modern architecture, and automation.

What role does AI play for the Mittelstand?

AI delivers economic impact when it is tied to specific processes. What matters is a measurable result, for example shorter cycle times or lower process costs.

Who should be responsible for productivity modernization?

It belongs in the executive management. IT can implement it, but prioritization, investment logic, and the target vision are leadership tasks.