Multitasking

When everything feels urgent, nothing truly receives our full attention.

The day starts with a task in mind: finishing a presentation, preparing for a meeting, analysing a problem, or making progress on a project that requires a significant amount of focused attention.

We open our computer and, a few minutes later, an email arrives.

We quickly reply and return to the task we had planned.

Some time later, a message appears on Teams: it is a simple question, so we reply to that too. We return to what we were doing, but then a meeting notification pops up - the meeting starts in five minutes. We join the meeting while discreetly checking our inbox. When it ends, we return to the initial task - or at least try to.

Because, by then, we no longer remember exactly where we were.

This is an increasingly common scenario for many people in their day-to-day work.

Technology has made it possible to work faster and more collaboratively. But it has also created a new expectation: that we are always available to respond.

We live in a permanently connected professional environment, where communication happens in real time and where we have access to an ever-growing number of tools, platforms and channels through which we can receive information, requests and updates.

We have more tools to organise our work, but also more stimuli competing for our attention. We have immediate access to information, but we are constantly interrupted by it. We can communicate with someone within seconds, but that ease can mean that we spend the entire day reacting to what is happening instead of consistently moving forward with what we actually need to accomplish.

The idea seems simple: do several things at once so that we can get more done.

But are we really doing several things at the same time?

Multitasking or Constant Context Switching?

When we try to perform several tasks simultaneously, we tend to think that we are being more efficient. After all, if we can reply to an email while waiting for a file to load, check a message during a meeting, or make progress on a task while answering a call, it seems like we are making better use of our time.

The problem arises when tasks require attention and reasoning.

In reality, there is an important difference between doing several things at the same time and rapidly switching between different tasks.

When an activity requires attention, reasoning or decision-making, our focus cannot simply disappear from one task and appear in another without consequences. When we interrupt what we are doing to reply to a message, check a notification or deal with a request, we are shifting the focus of our attention.

And when we return to the initial task, we need to recover the context.

• Where was I? 

• What was I trying to solve?

• What was the next step?

• What information had I already analysed?

• What was still left to do?
  

It is precisely this succession of small changes that can make a working day much more fragmented than it seems.

A two-minute interruption does not necessarily mean that only two minutes have been lost. The real impact may lie in the time and effort required to regain the level of concentration that existed before the interruption.

The Invisible Cost of Context Switching

Imagine that we are preparing a proposal and, halfway through, we receive a message asking for relatively simple information. We stop, look for the answer, send it and return to the proposal.

At first glance, we have only lost a few minutes.

But our attention has already shifted.

We need to reread what we were writing, remember the reasoning we were developing and understand exactly where we left off. If another message or notification appears in the meantime, the process repeats itself.

Throughout the day, these small changes accumulate.

That is why we can finish a working day feeling that we have been constantly busy, without having managed to dedicate enough time to the tasks that required greater concentration.

The problem is not necessarily the amount of work.

It is the fragmentation of the work.

And this distinction is important. Because when we only evaluate the number of tasks completed, we may feel productive. But if we look at the quality of the work, our ability to solve complex problems or the actual progress of important projects, the picture may be different.

The True Cost of an Interruption

Not all interruptions are negative.

Work does not happen in a completely predictable environment, and there are situations in which interrupting a task is necessary. A critical client issue, an urgent decision, a situation that is blocking someone else, or a change in priorities may justify an immediate shift in focus.

The goal should not be to eliminate all interruptions.

It should be to understand which ones are genuinely necessary and which have simply become part of our work habits.

Because today there are countless ways for us to be interrupted.

A notification appearing on the screen. An incoming email. A Teams message. A “Do you have a minute?”. A call that could have been avoided. A meeting scheduled to discuss something that could have been handled asynchronously. An update that we feel the need to check immediately.

Each of these situations may seem too small to have an impact.

But the problem lies precisely in their frequency.

An occasional interruption is unlikely to define our day. Dozens of small interruptions spread across several hours can completely change the way we work.

And there is an even less visible dimension: anticipating the interruption.

When we know that we can be interrupted at any moment, we may start working differently. Instead of truly immersing ourselves in a task, we keep part of our attention available for whatever might come next.

We are working, but we are also waiting for the next thing.

The “It’s Just a Quick Thing” Culture

Few expressions represent this reality as well as:

• “It’s just a quick thing.”

A quick question. A quick call. A quick reply. A quick meeting.

The problem is that the duration of an interruption does not necessarily correspond to its true cost.

A question may take two minutes to answer, but interrupt a task that required an hour of concentration. A thirty-minute meeting may only take up half an hour in the calendar, but completely break a period of work that was being used to develop an idea or solve a problem.

And the more fragmented the calendar becomes, the harder it is to find periods that are long enough to work without interruptions.

This is how some tasks end up being constantly postponed.

Not because they are unimportant.

But because they are precisely the ones that require more concentration and therefore struggle to find space in a day filled with small requests.

The most demanding work often ends up being left for “later”.

After the meeting. After replying to the emails. After dealing with that request. After solving that issue.

And when this happens repeatedly throughout the day, the most demanding work ends up being pushed into whatever time is left: between meetings, at the end of the day or, very often, outside working hours.

Being Busy Does Not Mean Moving Forward

There is an important difference between activity and progress.

We can spend an entire day replying to emails, attending meetings, answering questions and dealing with small requests and still end the day feeling that what we really needed to accomplish remains undone.

This happens because many important tasks require continuity.

Thinking about a problem, designing a solution, analysing information, writing, creating or planning requires uninterrupted time.

All of this is work.

But not all work has the same impact.

Some tasks keep operations running. Others allow projects to move forward, solve complex problems, create new solutions or make important decisions.

When our day is constantly interrupted, there is a risk that we spend too much time reacting and too little time building.

And this is perhaps one of the most interesting consequences of multitasking: it is not necessarily the volume of work that decreases. It is our ability to reserve time for the work that demands the most from us.

All these activities require mental space. And mental space is not the same as free space in the calendar.

We may have an hour available between two meetings and still be unable to use it effectively if we know that, at any moment, we may be interrupted.

The Role of Technology: Solution or Part of the Problem?

Technology has made work faster, more connected and more collaborative. Communication tools, management platforms, automation and artificial intelligence make it possible to reduce repetitive tasks and facilitate access to information.

But the same technology can also create an environment of permanent availability.

Each tool potentially adds another channel through which someone can contact us. And each channel can become a new source of interruption.

Therefore, the question is not whether we should use less technology.

It is whether we can use it more consciously.

Not everything requires an immediate response. Not every message needs to interrupt the work being done. Not every meeting needs to happen in real time.

Technology can help us work better when it is used to reduce friction, automate tasks and organise information, rather than simply increasing the speed at which we react to everything that happens.

From Multitasking to Closing the Loose Ends

If multitasking fragments our attention, it can also leave things unfinished. A question remains unanswered, a decision is postponed, a doubt is left unresolved or a task is interrupted before it is properly closed. Individually, these situations may seem insignificant, but over time they can accumulate and create what we have previously described as “loose ends”.

In our article Loose Ends in Software, we explored how small unresolved issues can accumulate and eventually become more difficult to manage. The same principle applies to the way we organise our daily work. The more fragmented our attention becomes, the easier it is for things to remain unclear, unfinished or simply forgotten.

The objective is not to eliminate communication or make everyone work independently. Quite the opposite. Good collaboration requires communication. The challenge is to make that communication more intentional: knowing what needs an immediate response, what can wait, what should be discussed, and what needs to be clearly closed.

In this sense, reducing multitasking and reducing loose ends are closely connected. When we protect people's attention, we create better conditions to complete work properly. And when we clarify questions, decisions and responsibilities, we reduce the number of things that come back later as new interruptions.

Ultimately, productivity is not only about doing more things. It is also about creating the conditions to finish the right things, with the right level of attention, while leaving fewer loose ends behind.

The Importance of Creating Space for Focused Work

Reducing interruptions does not mean working in isolation, stopping collaboration or ignoring requests from colleagues.

It means creating the conditions for different types of work to coexist.

Some practices can help:

• Set aside periods of the day for tasks that require concentration;
• Turn off notifications during these periods;
• Set specific times to check and respond to emails;
• Use asynchronous tools when an immediate response is not necessary;
• Question whether a meeting is actually necessary and whether it needs to happen in real time;
• Clearly define what should be treated as urgent;
• Avoid turning every message into a request for immediate action;
• Group similar tasks whenever possible;
• Create periods when being unavailable for a while is acceptable.
  

But there is a fundamental question: this responsibility cannot be solely individual.

We cannot ask people to concentrate while creating work environments that reward permanent availability.

Organisations have an important role in how work is structured. The number of meetings, the communication channels used, the way priorities are defined and even expectations regarding response times directly influence teams’ ability to concentrate.

Creating a culture of focus does not mean communicating less.

It means communicating better.

Fewer Interruptions - More Attention

In an increasingly digital and connected working environment, attention has become a particularly valuable resource.

We cannot eliminate all interruptions. And we should not try to.

There will always be unexpected situations. There will be problems that need to be solved immediately. There will be clients, colleagues and projects that require quick responses.

The goal is not to create an interruption-free environment.

It is to avoid treating everything as an interruption.

Because when everything is urgent, it becomes difficult to distinguish what truly deserves our attention.

Perhaps that is why productivity in the modern workplace should not be measured solely by the number of tasks completed or by how quickly we respond.

It can also be measured by our ability to make time to think, concentrate, solve problems and see through the things that truly matter.

Ultimately, the challenge is not to be able to do more things at the same time.

It is to understand what deserves our attention - and protect it.