I picked up The Myth of Multitasking: How “Doing It All” Gets Nothing Done by Dave Crenshaw on a recommendation from a colleague. It’s a nice quick read, and covers some familiar ground for people who talk about multitasking and the sorry effects of high work-in-process (WIP) for people and their businesses.
The book is setup as a business novel, where the main character is an “efficiency and time management” expert, working with an executive who has tried a number of times to get herself together and keeps sliding back to the old ways of working. The expert goes through the familiar process of defining multitasking (“switchtasking”) and expanding on just how much damage it can do to one’s ability to get things done. This should sound familiar to anyone who works in this arena: switching from one thing to another to another without getting anything done makes everything take longer due to the need to re-engage with the work when you come back to it. And there is a higher likelihood of mistakes and rework when operating this way. Replicate that around a company, and you have lots of very busy people who get very little done.
I liked how Crenshaw is working with an executive - not only might the executive benefit from less multitasking, but her entire team - the entire company even - will gain from her setting an example and expectation of a way of working that is different. And finding ways to eliminate or reduce multitasking for her was going to have knock-on effects throughout the organization.
One of the common frustrations that I have with discussions of multitasking is that they often make it sound like a simple solution is to “stop multitasking.” But that isn’t something to do - what should people do, so that they are less likely to multitask? This book came with some specific recommendations for this executive, given the way that multitasking arises in her life. If the book were working in a different context, the specific suggestions might be different.
I particularly liked the example of frequent interruptions by her staff and employees, who have “a quick question” any time they find her free. These quick questions always derailed the manager, and it wasn’t obvious how to eliminate this big source of multitasking. The story asked the question of why they operate this way (and why the executive allows it): they never know when the boss is going to be available, so they hover and pounce when it looks like she has a free second. The solution is to create reliable space and time for people to resolve questions and issues that need her attention. For staff, this is likely regular 1-on-1 time. For others in the organization, it is focused “office hours” where she could pay attention to them and their challenges. (I missed the other aspect of this conversation: why do they need to come to the executive at all; what prevents them from being able to resolve these questions themselves?)
Another example of a solution applies to just about everyone. When you are doing something, focus on that one thing until it is finished. If you are meeting with a colleague, leave the phone (and computer) off to the side; if you are enjoying family time, enjoy that. Focus. Pay attention. It seemed like this element in the book - that of fractured attention - was just as important as the traditional discussion of multitasking around fractured work. It certainly does similar amount of damage.
One thing that this book didn’t touch upon was the damage that multitasking (and high work-in-process in general) does to the flow of work around an organization. When everything is piled up everywhere, people feel like they have no choice but to multitask. This is relevant in organizations that do a lot of project work. The suggestions in the book will help with this aspect as well - it is just coming at multitasking from a different perspective.
The book wraps with a “several months later” chapter that suggests how well things have gone, now that the executive has implemented the ideas outlined in the book for herself and introduced them to her organization. Along with the personal benefits, there are hints that these efforts have positive impacts on interpersonal relationships as well as business relationships with customers and suppliers. I can confirm results on all of these fronts as well.
Find ways to reduce the need to multitask. In some cases it’s obvious why it is happening. In other cases it may take some digging to understand what causes the situation to arise. Eliminate that underlying cause, and you will go a long way to improving the situation: less distraction - less multitasking - higher quality - shorter turnaround time - better relationships.
And really, getting more of the right things done.