It's Not Really Multitasking, Is It?

Often when you've had a chance to sleep on it, some remark you've made the day before seems incorrect (that's the polite word) or maybe just dumb.

Yesterday I suggested that "multitasking" would be OK if you're working to help people become better while also working toward an objective was an exception to the rule against trying to do two things at once. That's not what I intended, I see in retrospect.

In fact, it's better to say you should look for ways to achieve two ends at the same time with the same, single action. By helping others improve, you get work done - through them, with them and even on your own as you model for them how they could approach things. It's a way of working and thinking about work that ultimately produces better results in every situation.

It really isn't a "multitask" because you're not stopping to help them and then stopping that to go back to work, you are doing both together, sometimes working alongside them on a problem, sometimes on your own, but with the objective that your work will help them move forward in some way.

Of course, we can't avoid distractions. They happen all day long inevitably. But we can avoid distracting ourselves by attempting multiple tasks at the same time. Everyone gets caught up in the sense of urgency and the layering on of one new demand on top of the last.

We have to catch our breath sometimes and say stop the roller coaster, let me sort out what to work on first, second and third and then do those in that order… without trying to do every task simultaneously. If the goals of every task include how this improves things for people as well as achieves results, we're on the right track. If we can't see how, we need to rethink our approach to it until we find a better strategy for it.