What Is Multitasking? The Real Cost of Switching Between Tasks
Published:
Last Updated:
Category: Campaign Management
Published:
Last Updated:
Category: Campaign Management
Authors: Shusaku Yosa
You have been running several things at once, and yet at the end of the day none of them has moved. Multitasking is called inefficient because every switch between tasks carries a cost you cannot see. This article sets out what that cost consists of, and how to reduce it.
Running several pieces of work in parallel.
But people cannot think about two things at the same time. What actually happens is not parallel work but rapid switching. Even when you are writing a document while watching email, you are alternating your attention between them.
That distinction matters. Once you see it as switching, the reason things slow down becomes explainable.
Changing tasks produces three things.
Returning to an interrupted task means re-establishing where you had got to.
Reopening the file, retracing what you were thinking last time. None of that is the work itself.
Just after switching, the previous task is still in your head.
This is strongest when the previous task was left unfinished. You work on the next thing while the last one keeps pulling at your attention.
Finding files, opening tools, reading back through past messages.
A few minutes each time, but switch dozens of times a day and it becomes a quantity you cannot ignore.
Not every task carries the same cost.
It is highest for work that requires holding information in your head. Developing a plan, writing, analysing numbers. Interrupt these and what you had assembled falls apart.
Conversely, work with a settled procedure and no thinking required loses little when interrupted.
That difference gives you a split: block out time for the thinking work, and fit the mechanical work into the gaps.
Eliminating multitasking entirely is not realistic.
In work where waiting occurs, switching moves the whole thing forward. Waiting on ad review, on a client's reply, on someone's feedback. If you cannot move to something else when blocked, that time disappears.
The problem is switching when there is no wait — when you could keep going but another item pulls you away.
When you switch because of a wait, leave one line about where you were.
Noting what you were about to do next shortens the recall time when you come back.
Even without reducing what you carry, you can reduce how often you switch.
Email replies, checking, entering numbers. Rather than handling these as they arrive, group them into two or three points in the day.
Consecutive tasks of the same kind carry a smaller switching cost.
Thinking work in the morning, meetings and checking in the afternoon.
It never divides perfectly, but securing even one block for the work that needs concentration changes things.
Many switches are not ones you chose.
Every notification moves your attention, and breaks your train of thought once even if you do not read it. For time that needs concentration, turning notifications off is the reliable move.
Individual discipline does not solve all of it.
Where requests arrive through scattered channels, switching happens however well you organise yourself. Email, chat, in person, in meetings. The more entry points, the more interruptions.
Consolidate requests into one channel and let anything non-urgent accumulate there. That rule alone reduces the number of switches across the whole team.
Putting a limit on how many things you hold at once reduces the opportunities to switch.
Three is the guide. Past that, you spend time simply keeping track of where each one stands.
When a fourth arrives, either finish one or park it untouched. Making that call alone speeds up the whole.
Some people switch more smoothly than others. But they are not reducing the cost to zero. Even for them, an environment that allows concentration produces more.
Do not turn them down — say when you will deal with them. Replying "I'll look this afternoon" is enough for most people to wait. Picking something up immediately and accepting it are different things.
Advancing everything a little delays everything. Finishing one at a time completes more of them. In particular, if something is holding other people up, clear that one first.
Thirty minutes between meetings cannot be used for thinking work, because subtracting the switching cost leaves almost nothing. See whether you can negotiate to group the meetings and create a continuous block.
Reducing switches requires seeing how many things you currently hold. When campaigns are managed in separate places, it is easy to underestimate your own load.
Xtrategy manages campaign schedules alongside budget and KPIs on a single screen. With everything in flight visible at once, you can see when you are over the limit.
Start by counting how many times you switched tasks in a day. It will be more than you think.
Find more of our articles on Google
A beginner's guide to to-do lists and how they differ from task lists. Covers a five-step way to use one, examples of cl...
What a Gantt chart is and the elements it is made of, with a four-step way to read one. Covers how it differs from a WBS...
The basics of project management, built around the three things you trade off and the two main ways of working. Covers s...
