Comments on: An argument against multi-tasking

By: Unlinks | UnYourself

Unlinks | UnYourself — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 11:33:17 +0000

[...] Do you really need to multi-task? from Unclutterer (The answer is no, focus!) [...]

By: Kim

Kim — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 13:53:03 +0000

One thing many people forget is that people are not cookie cutters. What works for one person doesn’t work for another. In education we look at the various learning styles that people have and use. There are those that can multi-task and infact work better when they multi-task. Others stink at it and can’t do it. google learning styles if you aren’t familiar with them. It makes for interesting reading.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 22:42:09 +0000

Wouldn’t mono-tasking be the same as Uni-tasking? Gasp.

By: Ed Svoboda

Ed Svoboda — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:08:35 +0000

When at all possible I try to focus on just one thing and do just one thing. Just because my mind can think about four to six things at once doesn’t mean that this is effective.

Sometimes what I will do is have a couple of tasks going at the same time but I only work at one of them at a time. Task switching can be a boon to productivity if you are engaged in certain tasks that have periods of things happening behind the scenes that don’t require your attention.

By: chrispian

chrispian — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 15:44:16 +0000

Multi-Tasking isn’t really even possible. It’s not like you can write code AND draw something in photoshop at the same time. You can Task-Switch, but you can’t do both at once.

What people generally mean by multi-tasking is that they are splitting their time and focus between several projects at once. They may feel like they are doing more, but they are probably doing less due to lack of focus on one task.

I don’t mind task-switching when I’m working on low-level stuff (checking email, rss, twitter, music, etc.) or watching tv while folding clothes or hitting the treadmill. Some days I spend all day task-switching. Others I spend all day on one coding project or design project. Every job has different requirements on my attention.

By: Josephine

Josephine — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 21:16:54 +0000

I need to clarify what I meant when I wrote “unfortunately” multi-tasking is viewed as a good thing. Granted, multi-tasking is quite useful as long as it’s not disruptive or rude (IM while on the phone, BlackBerry while in a meeting). My point is that you won’t see a job listing where the ability to mono-task is listed as desirable. I happen to do well with both multi- and mono-tasking (although once I hit 43, my short-term memory began to diminish), but in my experience mono-tasking is a rarity. Years ago I was working in a medical school when a doctor walked in to ask me a question (mind you, I never dealt with emergencies). I was engrossed in the task at hand that I did not hear him. Eventually, he got my attention but marveled at my intense concentration.

By: Shelly

Shelly — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:09:13 +0000

Laura,
I have never heard of “kinetic learners” but that is very interesting. I find it _much_ easier to listen in meetings if I’m doodling away. I also have a hard time sitting through movies without doing something at the same time, which is why I often crochet (and I used to do this during lectures as well). Perhaps I am a kinetic learner? I thought it was just mild ADD and I needed a bit of extra stimulation. Maybe there is a correlation between ADDers and kinetic learners??

By: Laura

Laura — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 15:40:05 +0000

A lot of these comments also highlight a difference in learning styles – kinetic learners absorb info better while they’re moving – hence listening to a lecture while knitting helps them ‘hear better’.

I am not of this ilk. My husband actually has to remind me, ‘put that down, I want to talk to you’ because I can’t even do mindless things (like unload the dishwasher) and hold a conversation at the same time.

Despite that, I am very able to manage multiple projects at work – it’s just that some times is mono’tasking time.

Great discussion.

By: Mary

Mary — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 14:42:55 +0000

I appreciate Shelly’s comments and feel like she is making some very good points!

My annual performance review includes rating my ability to be able to be flexible and to adapt to ever changing priorities. I often have to monitor a system as it is going into production while working on a current project and responding to problems as they occur.

Note this is not the same thing to me as constantly checking a Blackberry during a professional or a personal conversation. If someone needs to talk to me while I’m monitoring a system at work, I explain what’s going on and give them the option of trying to converse or postponing our conversation for a better time. It all works out and the people I deal with like working with me.

By: Fran

Fran — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:41:19 +0000

YES. I find this conversation very helpful. I have so many tasks running all the time that I don’t even enjoy it when I get something finished!…too many other things left to do to enjoy the accomplishment.

And while we’re on the subject, how do we teach our kids this value? I find that most teens are texting so much that they have no time for ‘face to face’ interaction. Not only is this ineffective, but rude and compulsive.

By: Dee

Dee — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 13:15:46 +0000

Ok – lots to absorb here! As an ADDer whose prized for my multi-tasking abilities at work I can see how one would think that multi-tasking in some senses is actually unproductive. . ie, too many things going on = less attention to one task and less efficiency. I actually had a funny experience, I went on meds for my ADD and the change was EXTREMELY noticeable to my boss in terms of my turn around ability. Productivity went down the toilet! It was so embarrassing to have to tell my boss that medication was playing a roll in my inability to multi-task. After some experimentation I found that meds help me at home where monotasking for organizational purposes are key and then I go sans meds at work to enable me to work at high speed. I do not have hyperactivity – just your run of the mill ADD. That said, I am an organized multi-tasker at work. I have learned to uber organize files, references, projects so that if I succumb to the feeling of needing to switch tasks I have “filler” work that I can then go to which is waiting for my attention. . .being a writer, big and small projects are constantly interuppted by IM, e-mail, co-workers, urgent projects that pop up, etc. but having a natural gift for multi-tasking enables me to stay on top of everything if I keep my organized system in place. So in some ways, multi-taskers that have ADD are actually on top of the heap when it comes to productivity and the ability to meet deadlines and push out work. I realized long ago that the difference between multi-tasking at work and multi-tasking at home is that my work productivity is not burdened by the emotional “clutter” that I experience at home – which is why mono-tasking is key for me when I am doing anything productive at home if that makes sense to anyone.

By: Nxqd3051990

Nxqd3051990 — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 09:18:25 +0000

I myself honestly tell that I sometimes multitask but not with high-focus needed action. But I know if i do one task at a time, it’ll be much faster and better. I try to avoid multitask AMAP

By: Fernando Imperator

Fernando Imperator — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 04:41:16 +0000

Well, after reading some articles about mono-tasking specially from Leo (Zen Habits), I’ve been practicing it for a couple weeks. I strated doing it in the things I have pleasure doing. For example, I had the habit of having breakfest while checking my e-mails, now I have the breakfest first, enjoy the food completely and save a little bit of orange juice to drink reading e-mails. The sensation is really different.

I do listen to my iPod most part of the time I’m not communicating or reading, but is important to not let it come first over your friends and family. Once you are talking with somebody, take those earphones off, it shows respect and openness.

About resetting the objects after finishing one task at a time, this is totally true.

By: Anne

Anne — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 03:52:18 +0000

I really enjoy multi-tasking, but manly so I can get it all done for a mono-non task. Getting it done quickly and effectively in order to enjoy something else.
Example my house clean, dinner prepped, kids homework done, and an afternoon with out pondering what needs to be done, so one of my kids can sit next to me and tell me about thier day. I multi-task so I can mono focus on my family,

By: Shalom

Shalom — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:42:32 +0000

Multi-tasking is highly overrated. But it IS good to keep lists around, so you don’t forget the other things you need to get to . . . eventually.

By: Greta Dobe

Greta Dobe — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:19:43 +0000

I quit multitasking a long time. . .hold on. . .email incoming.

By: Shelly

Shelly — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 01:41:57 +0000

Yes, hyperfocus is great! Now if only it could be turned off and on with a switch…

By: Erin Doland

Erin Doland — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 01:22:44 +0000

@Eve — That’s not always the case. Many people with AADD and ADHD have the ability to hyperfocus.

By: Shelly

Shelly — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:42:34 +0000

Mark,
That is a terrible example because no value is added by multitasking. You’re right, there is downtime involved in switching tasks, but _good_ multi-taskers have very minimal downtime.

Surgery is a good example of where multi-tasking is valuable. A surgeon has to be able to interpret a variety of signals and, in the event of a problem, be able to act very quickly on it. If they had to pause and think before getting out the defibrillators it would be bad news for the patient.

I also find fault with your computer example. Multi-tasking doesn’t mean running parallel processes in the brain like a computer can. It doesn’t mean thinking about two things at once – it just means having several tasks in progress at once and being able to quickly switch between them.

By: Mark - Productivity501

Mark - Productivity501 — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:17:52 +0000

Multitasking sometimes is considered “good” because that is how computers work. However, computers are designed so very little time is lost between switching tasks. That isn’t usually true for humans. If someone claims to be a great multi tasker here is an easy test. Give them two sheets of paper. Each sheet of paper has three multiplication problems all consisting of 3 digit numbers. Have them work through the problems one piece of paper one at a time. Have them work through the problems on another piece of paper while multitasking between problems–do one calculation and then move to the next problem and do one calculation, etc.

The second method will take far longer. That is the downside of multitasking.