Is the economic concept of productivity different from the intuitive understanding of productivity.

A Quick search suggests:

"Productivity is a measure of economic performance that compares the amount of goods and services produced (output) with the amount of inputs used to produce those goods and services."

"Inputs are any resources used to create goods and services.

Examples of inputs include labor (workers’ time), fuel, materials, buildings, and equipment."

So, if fuel gets more expensive at the same rate as the value of output, productivity won't go up. Is it also true that inexpensive goods reduce productivity? So 100 pencils worth $1 each has the same economic output as 200 pencils 10 years later worth $.50 each?

I imagine the answer is something like "it's complicated"

With the tech drawdown, been seeing more and more analysis on if software and tech has really increased productivity in the US. Anecdotally, it seems obvious that software has made our work way easier, but perhaps we are not doing anything "productive" with the time we've saved?

There is no way email hasn't improved US productivity. So much more efficient than the old system.