Management
Consider the rise and joy of unitasking
Diana Varma
When we try to multitask all we’re doing is becoming less efficient
Take a second to put down your phone and take a break from
anything you’re currently working on. Really, do it. I dare you.
You’re about to experience the joys of unitasking. trying to accomplish both tasks at once, your focus is dimin-
ished and a task that once took you perhaps 30 seconds to
complete took much, much longer.
What is unitasking? Unitasking is the simple art of doing one
thing at a time. It’s the opposite of multitasking. It’s making the
choice to focus on a single activity without concern for what’s
happening outside that activity. It’s about removing distractions
and the accompanying stress. Deep Work
In an effort to be authentic—and to show you that I, too, have
not yet earned my unitasking black belt—I’ll admit that I began
writing this piece in a fragmented working environment with
lots of open tabs, putting it down when something more press-
ing came along. I even wrote some of it on my smartphone, in
my parked car with my toddler asleep in the backseat. Neither
of these environments seemed appropriate for writing about
this topic (nor for my sanity). Therefore, in order to practice
what I preach, rest assured that I am now sitting at a desk with
my computer, a couple of relevant books, and a glass of water.
Already I feel calmer, more focused, and ready to work. Let the
unitasking begin.
The myth of multitasking
It’s often thought that doing two or more tasks simultaneously
is not only possible, but also more efficient. Talking on the
phone and typing an email. Reading content in two browsers
at the same time. Surfing the net in a meeting. Think again.
According to Psychology Today contributor, Nancy K. Napier,
our brain cannot take on two tasks simultaneously; instead our
brain switches quickly from one task to another. There is a start/
stop process each time we switch from one task to the next,
so multitasking may be more appropriately called switch-
tasking. Napier argues that this leads to inefficiencies, mistakes,
and unnecessarily saps us of energy. Neuroscientist Daniel
Levinson agrees and explains that the attention-shifting pro-
cess needs an energy source. He explains that the
neurochemical switch that makes multitasking possible uses
up finite nutrient resources in the brain. Try this quick-and-easy
test to demonstrate that we’re really not very good at accom-
plishing two tasks at once.
1. Draw 2 horizontal lines on a sheet of paper.
2. On the first line write ‘I am a great multitasker’
3. On the second line write the numbers 1 through 20
This probably took you a relatively short time to complete, but
try this test again switching between the two lines (start on the
first line with ‘I’ and then the second line with ‘1’ and back to
the first line with ‘a’ and the second line with ‘2’ and so on). By
@graphicarts
One of the problems that multitasking creates is a fragmented,
interrupted workflow that isn’t conducive to higher-order think-
ing. Many of us try to multitask the busywork that we’re bogged
down with for much of the day, but trying to get all of the busy-
work done means that we’re not leaving enough time for the
really important, productive, and satisfying work.
In 2016, Cal Newport wrote Deep Work: Rules For Focused
Success in a Distracted World. In the book, Newport defines
deep work as “professional activities performed in a state of
distraction-free concentration that push your cognitive capabil-
ities to their limit. These efforts create new value, improve your
skills, and are hard to replicate.” Newport argues that know-
ledge workers’ access to network tools, such as email,
messaging platforms, and social media sites, is the primary
reason for the lack of deep work. It’s the ease of access across
devices that we have near us 24/7 that Newport believes has
turned our attention from sizable chunks into slivers. And he’s
not the only one. Published in the Computers in Human Behav-
ior journal, computing professor Stoney Brooks conducted a
test with business students whereby they were asked to watch
a 15-minute video while sitting in front of a computer with tabs
to popular social media sites open. When tested on the video’s
content, the students who used the sites less often performed
better than those who used them more often during the
15-minute video. Brooks concludes: “Inefficiencies in task per-
formance can result from the time spent on the interruption
and the challenge in mentally returning to the primary task.”
To rephrase: more time spent unitasking and avoiding unneces-
sary interruptions, can result in greater efficiency overall.
Distractions, distractions, distractions
Our brains are hard-wired to crave new information, even if it
comes in the form of something as mundane as an email. The
fact that a new email has arrived is enough to send our dopa-
mine levels up, up, up. The dings on our phones and our
reactions to them are reminiscent of the groundbreaking clas-
sical conditioning research conducted by Ivan Pavlov. Ring a
bell to demonstrate the promise of food and even when the
food is removed, dogs will still salivate when they hear the
sound. And we, highly-connected, multitasking, fast-forward
humanoids salivate at the promise of new information.
Furthermore, It should come as no surprise that handling a
GRAPHIC ARTS MAGAZINE | October 2018 | 15