When physician and advanced practice provider (APP) productivity is steady, things just run smoother. Access is easier to manage, clinic days end closer to “on time,” charge capture is more predictable, and you spend less of your week in reactive triage.

When productivity slips, the ripple effects show up quickly: longer waits for appointments, more last-minute schedule reshuffling, heavier in-basket loads, and rising pressure on the front desk, clinical support, and coding teams.

A core challenge for practice leaders is that “productivity” isn’t one universal measure. Work RVUs (wRVUs) remain the most common yardstick because they help quantify output while accounting for visit complexity. But many organizations also track total encounters (direct clinician-to-patient interactions across settings, including tele-visits and e-visits), collections, and selected access or quality indicators.

The key is consistency: productivity goals work best when everyone is clear on the measure, the time frame, and what the target is.

However you track it, our March 3, 2026, MGMA Stat poll gives us an early pulse on where groups landed in 2025 — and a preview, perhaps, of what may surface in late spring when the MGMA DataDive Provider Compensation launches. In this week’s poll, 60% of medical groups reported their physician and advanced practice provider (APP) productivity in 2025 was on target (37%) or exceeded (23%) goals/expectations, compared to 40% that were below. The poll had 200 applicable responses.

Compared to a similar February 2025 poll, the results suggest more organizations struggled to hit goals in 2025. In that poll, 69% of medical group leaders said 2024 productivity was on target (45%) or exceeded goals (24%), while 30% reported productivity below expectations.

What practices say influenced performance most

Among respondents who reported exceeding productivity expectations in 2025, the most common themes were additional support paired with tighter operations. Many pointed to AI-enabled tools — including AI scribes, AI scheduling, and documentation assistance — alongside workflow improvements and template optimization. Practices also frequently cited expanded clinic availability and added staffing, including scribes and support staff. Beyond those headline themes, several respondents credited open panels, increased patient demand, coding and CDI improvements, incentive redesign, and (in a few cases) extended hours. A small number noted unique motivators, such as quality-related bonus dollars, as part of what helped clinicians surpass productivity goals.

Those comments align with the themes highlighted in the 2025 Provider Compensation and Productivity summary data report, which connected strong productivity performance to stronger scheduling practices, expanded capacity (staff, clinicians, hours), and targeted technology use such as AI tools, telehealth and virtual scribes. The report also noted that many practices credited improvements in centralized scheduling and online patient scheduling.

Respondents who reported productivity was on target (but not above goals) described a similar set of drivers, just with less acceleration. Many cited scribe or AI support, additional staff, and new or expanded service lines as the main reasons they stayed on track. Others pointed to smaller but meaningful operational changes: template or scheduling adjustments, expanded clinic hours, and workflow improvements. A few mentioned better data visibility or refinements to wRVU tracking or productivity models. Some simply reported steady patient flow, or that no major changes occurred during the year.

Seasonality and sustainability also matter when interpreting these results. Late winter can feel slower in some markets, but many practices see volumes climb quickly in spring and summer, often stretching staffing capacity. Sustaining productivity over the course of a year means balancing access and throughput with the realities of turnover risk, workload creep, and the need to protect staff satisfaction.

For organizations reporting productivity below goals, responses suggest the issues were typically operational and capacity-related rather than about clinician effort alone. Many pointed to limited provider availability driven by vacations, time off, burnout, turnover, and recruiting gaps. Others cited staffing shortages and schedule design problems — including template constraints or access limitations that reduced patient throughput. Some respondents also described demand-side or patient-driven headwinds, such as lower patient volumes, last-minute cancellations and no-shows, financial barriers affecting patient follow-through, or shifts in how patients seek care.

Additional barriers included documentation burden and EHR friction (including system transitions), inadequate clinic space, declining reimbursements, and operational misalignment — such as scheduling blocks that reduced capacity without clear rationale, or leadership and governance challenges that made it harder to respond quickly when volumes or staffing changed.

Opportunities to protect productivity

Below are six areas that consistently matter for physician and APP productivity.

1. Make your productivity goal measurable and operational

Define what “on target” means in your practice. If you set goals in wRVUs, track wRVUs per encounter and code mix. If you set goals in encounters, track cycle time, visit type distribution, and no-show rate. If you set goals in collections, pair it with clean-claim rate, charge lag, and payer mix.

MGMA’s data shows how easily productivity signals can diverge. In physician-owned practices, median total encounters rose for primary care physicians (+7.81%) and nonsurgical specialists (+20.52%) from 2023 to 2024 even as median wRVUs fell (-10.19% and -7.73%). That pattern pushes leaders to ask the right follow-up questions: Is visit complexity changing? Is documentation supporting coding? Are more lower-intensity services filling the schedule?

2. Make scheduling a system, not a scramble

High-performing practices tend to run scheduling with clear ownership and standard work:

• Template governance (who can change them, when, and how changes are communicated)
• Standard visit types and slot lengths
• Hold/release rules for urgent and procedure capacity
• Daily huddles to pre-empt bottlenecks (rooming coverage, add-ons, double books)
• Online scheduling rules that prevent mismatched visit types and wrong-provider bookings.

3. Reduce documentation friction and protect coding accuracy

If your clinicians are finishing notes late at night, it can become a retention risk. More practices are prioritizing team-based and technology-assisted documentation workflows that reduce after-hour charting.

Coding accuracy belongs in this discussion. In some specialties, encounter growth has not always translated into wRVU growth, raising questions about service mix or documentation gaps. If you see that pattern in your own data, build a short action plan: focused coding education, targeted audits, and documentation templates that support correct E/M and procedure capture.

4. Rebalance the work across the care team

Productivity improves when the right work lands with the right role at the right time. Operationally, this often includes:

• Pre-visit planning and “visit readiness” checks (orders pended, outside records, patient agenda)
• Standing orders and protocol-driven tasks for MAs and nurses
• Standard rooming and close-out workflows
• Clear in-basket coverage rules so clinical time is protected

5. Optimize APP capacity intentionally

APPs are playing a larger role in care delivery, and the MGMA data shows notable APP productivity strength. In physician-owned practices, APP median total encounters increased 39.33% and median wRVUs increased 21.86% from 2023 to 2024.

Tracking APP productivity and benchmarking against similar ownership types is important. While APPs in physician-owned groups showed markedly higher collections (+124.53%), encounters (+81.95%), and wRVUs (+65.74%) in 2024 compared to hospital-owned groups, APP roles in independent practice are designed more around panel management and for services to be billed directly. Meanwhile, APPs in system-owned practices often have productivity measures/attribution shifted away, making it important to understand the relevant variables in finding appropriate benchmarks for productivity and compensation.   

Administrators should ensure APP templates, patient assignment rules, and clinical protocols align with what’s expected of APPs to deliver. Clarify supervision workflows so they support care without creating hidden friction for physicians. Clear definitions of APP roles support improved productivity.

6. Build sustainability into your plan

A short-term productivity gain that increases burnout creates a long-term problem. Find the appropriate ways to measure and monitor clinician experience and adjust workloads when necessary. AI tools, scheduling adjustments, inbox coverage during leave, and realistic productivity targets are all part of a balanced plan.

The bottom line for 2026

Monitoring volume, CPT code mix, payer mix, and visit complexity alongside traditional measures gives you a solid view of productivity. Expanding your benchmarking view beyond a single metric can support smarter staffing decisions, clearer compensation alignment, and steadier performance across the year.

Improving that understanding sets a foundation to build systems that allow physicians and APPs to do their work efficiently, consistently, and sustainably. When you do that, the conversation around productivity feels less like pushing people harder and more about realizing shared goals.