Context Switching
We live in an era where wending our way through the daily deluge of digital distractions has become synonymous with how knowledge workers function. When pulses, pings and pop-ups jockey for our attention and task-switching (also known as context-switching) typifies the way we’ve come to work, it’s a wonder our already drunk-monkey minds are capable of completing any of the things we’ve begun. Let alone complete them thoughtfully, and with quality.
We have a tendency to shift from one unfinished task to another without any correlation between them. Spilling your attention all over the place and calling it multitasking neither works for you, nor for your team’s efficiency. The problem with context switching at work is that we are unable to stay focused on a particular task entirely. In addition to that, it reflects on our performance and overall productivity.
Task-switching begets more task-switching - not completion. This is often attributed to “the Zeigarnik Effect. A phenomenon in which information and tasks left incomplete don’t leave our minds. Instead, we dwell on those incomplete tasks, and those intrusive thoughts render us vulnerable to distractions.
The energy that consumes - the metabolism task-switching requires - drains our cognitive capacity, causing frustration, burnout, impeding focus, and inviting error and rework, preventing us from realizing our optimal potential. When we task-switch we break our flow state. And you can’t achieve flow without a healthy constraint.
Now, where was I? Anyone who has found themselves asking this question while reading the same page over and over upon returning from a distraction knows there is seldom a seamless transition when shifting gears, especially when dealing with high-cognitive tasks that are dissimilar in size and/or type.
As is evidenced by the proliferation of scholarship in cognitive science, neuro performance, and the growing sub-field of “interruption science,” task-switching has reached epic proportions in the 21st Century workplace, the negative effects of which can not be overstated. Unfortunately, the impacts of this executive function are often underestimated. It’s like my grandmother used to say: “Just because you can do it, doesn’t mean you should do it.”
In an ideal world there won’t be any task-switching but here in reality it is inevitable. Also, it is harmful to our concentration. With that being said, you need to evaluate when you tend to switch context and look for opportunities to reduce it by sorting your priorities.
The Science behind Instant Gratification
Instant gratification refers to receiving less but immediate benefits instead of waiting for better ones in the future. We live in times when we can get almost everything we want anytime and anywhere we want it. As a result, we become more impatient and distracted. Moreover, our ability to stay focused on a big project in the long term is doomed.
A great example of instant and delayed gratification is the well-known Marshmallow Experiment. In the 1960s the psychologist Walter Mischel conducted a study on childhood self-control. He gave the children a choice - eat one marshmallow now or wait and get two later. Turns out more kids than adults can resist the instant gratification urge. In a follow-up study, it is reported that the children who waited for the second marshmallow had better self-control when they became adults.