{"id":8270,"date":"2015-02-26T20:05:50","date_gmt":"2015-02-27T01:05:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/round-lake.dustinice.workers.dev:443\/https\/jamesclear-com.uar9g7bv-liquidwebsites.com\/?p=8270"},"modified":"2020-02-03T20:30:21","modified_gmt":"2020-02-04T01:30:21","slug":"multitasking-myth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/round-lake.dustinice.workers.dev:443\/https\/jamesclear.com\/multitasking-myth","title":{"rendered":"The Myth of Multitasking: Why Fewer Priorities Leads to Better Work"},"content":{"rendered":"

The word priority<\/em> didn't always mean what it does today.<\/p>\n

In his best-selling book, Essentialism<\/a> (audiobook<\/a>), Greg McKeown explains the surprising history of the word and how its meaning has shifted over time.
\n<\/p>\n

“The word priority came into the English language in the 1400s. It was singular. It meant the very first or prior thing. It stayed singular for the next five hundred years.<\/em><\/p>\n

Only in the 1900s did we pluralize the term and start talking about priorities. Illogically, we reasoned that by changing the word we could bend reality. Somehow we would now be able to have multiple “first” things.<\/em><\/p>\n

People and companies routinely try to do just that. One leader told me of this experience in a company that talked of “Pri-1, Pri-2, Pri-3, Pri-4, and Pri-5.” This gave the impression of many things being the priority but actually meant nothing was.”<\/em><\/p>\n

\u2013<\/em>Greg McKeown, Essentialism<\/a><\/p>\n

The Myth of Multitasking<\/h2>\n

Yes, we are capable of doing two things at the same time. It is possible, for example, to watch TV while cooking dinner or to answer an email while talking on the phone.<\/p>\n

What is impossible, however, is concentrating<\/em> on two tasks at once. Multitasking forces your brain to switch back and forth very quickly from one task to another.<\/p>\n

This wouldn't be a big deal if the human brain could transition seamlessly from one job to the next, but it can't. Multitasking forces you to pay a mental price each time you interrupt one task and jump to another. In psychology terms, this mental price is called the switching cost.<\/p>\n

Switching cost is the disruption in performance that we experience when we switch our attention from one task to another. A 2003 study<\/a> published in the International Journal of Information Management found that the typical person checks email once every five minutes and that, on average, it takes 64 seconds to resume the previous task after checking your email.<\/p>\n

In other words, because of email alone, we typically waste one out of every six minutes.<\/p>\n

\"The
The myth of multitasking is that it will make you more effective. In reality, remarkable focus is what makes the difference. (Image inspired by Jessica Hagy<\/a>.)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

While we\u2019re on the subject, the word multitasking<\/em> first appeared in 1965 IBM report talking about the capabilities of its latest computer. 1<\/a><\/p>\n

That\u2019s right, it wasn\u2019t until the 1960s that anyone could even claim to be good at multitasking. Today, people wear the word like a badge of honor as if it is better to be busy with all the things than to be great at one thing.<\/p>\n

Finding Your Anchor Task<\/h2>\n

Doing more things does not drive faster or better results. Doing better things drives better results. Even more accurately, doing one thing as best you can drives better results.<\/p>\n

Mastery requires focus and consistency<\/a>.<\/p>\n

I haven't mastered the art of focus and concentration yet, but I'm working on it. One of the major improvements I've made recently is to assign one (and only one) priority to each work day. Although I plan to complete other tasks during the day, my priority task is the one non-negotiable thing that must get done.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s what my current weekly schedule looks like…<\/p>\n