This is really old news, but worth repeating. Studies [see some references below] dating many years back have repeatedly shown that human multitasking results in slower performance, lower productivity, more mistakes and less retained memory about what was done. This doesn’t mean it’s about to stop. In fact, I warrant that we’ve come (gone?) too far. If you’re even remotely technologically ‘hooked in’, think about what you do on a daily basis that can be considered multitasking. Driving while listening to the radio and/or talking on the phone (preferrably with a headset!), watching TV while surfing the Web or checking e-mail, or at work where you’re on the computer, the phone and thinking about the other 2 or 3 tasks that you need to finish ASAP.

While it is necessary for computers to multitask (for example, the CPU does that when it runs multiple applications at once), Joel Spolsky explains here how multitasking means that on average it takes longer for processes to complete when multitasked as opposed to sequentially.

Companies are yet to widely acknowledge this ‘flaw’ in our makeup and adjust accordingly. I for one, don’t think I could do without multitasking at work. As someone in IT, I think it comes with the territory. For example, let’s say I’m patching a machine that could take at least 30 mins or more. I’m hardly going to sit there staring at the progress bar while twiddling my thumbs, and 99% of the time, I’ll be off doing something(s) else. Add to that the fact that I’m constantly interrupted by users with problems and/or further requests that are invariable ‘urgent’ (they’re never urgent; they just don’t plan well). Of course, this is probably the reason why I feel my brain is fried at the end of the day.

Setting myself goals outside of work (like writing this blog), means that the multitasking bug is just part and parcel of my everyday existence. Right now, as I write this, I’m listening to a podcast and trying very hard to swat away my other thoughts about all of the other things I need to do.

There are 2 ways to define multitasking – performing multiple tasks simultaneously or near to it, or switching from one task to the next before completing one or the other. While I’ve hinted mainly at performing tasks concurrently, switching tasks – even though you’re only performing one at any given time – can be just as detrimental in all ways mentioned above. Why? Because it takes time to effectively switch from one task to the next, or just to get spun up effectively on 1 task. Even at work, if I view a project as requiring a fair amount of brain power and planning, I reserve at least a couple of hours, because it takes at least 15 minutes (some say as much as an hour) to become properly immersed in the subject before you start making progress on it. There’s no question about that in my mind.

Hmm… I wonder if sitting in a completely white empty room with just a keyboard, mouse and monitor would make me more productive. Of course, the screen would have to be devoid of all other icons and windows not pertaining to what I’m currently working on. Who knows? I may have just accidentally predicted a future work environment. So the next time you decide to multitask, jot some time estimates down before and after the fact, and ask yourself if you’re really being more productive.

References:
Joel Spolsky’s article, Human Task Switches Considered Harmful
NY Times
Wall Street Journal
CIO Magazine