Unless you’ve been on another planet, you know that ‘double jobbing’ – the practice of politicians holding on to two jobs at once – is big news in the UK and Northern Ireland.  We’ve been told that double jobbing is ‘on borrowed time’ as far as NI is concerned.  This is after threats of pay cuts and forced resignations for those who don’t quit this bad habit.

I was interviewed on Tuesday of this week outside Stormont by the cordial Gareth Gordon and his team of professionals.  Our meetup was quite funny.  As I wandered in to the hallway and scanned around looking for someone who might resemble a BBC correspondent, I overhead a man say,

“Great start.  The time management consultant is late!”

I wasn’t actually, thanks Gareth, but we had a good laugh over Gareth’s embarrassed protestations of innocence.

That’s right, they wanted a professional opinion of the double jobbing furore.  Usually I don’t mix NI politics with business but I made an exception in this case as (a) it wasn’t party political, and (b) I do have strong feelings on the matter.  As I stood outside in the rain and the wind – we weren’t allowed to do the interview inside because I’m not a member of our political elite – I tried to make the point that multi-jobbing requires multi-tasking on a grand scale, and multi-tasking is a myth.  That’s right, it’s impossible, even for women.  How so?  Glad you asked!

• Multi-tasking is unscientific – What’s really going on is a rapid toggling or ‘mental gear shifting’ among tasks rather than simultaneous processing, the latter being impossible for the human brain.
• Multi-tasking is inefficient – People have a limited amount of attention available at any moment.  When one’s attention is divided, something’s got to give, whether the quality or quality of your work – usually both!
• Multi-tasking is unhealthy – Individual blood pressure and stress levels go bananas when someone attempts to multi-task for prolonged periods. We all need mental downtime to relax and reflect.

From a time management perspective, there are a few extreme strategies you can employ for multitasking.  One – do the usual stuff but in less time e.g. by  speed-reading.  Two – do more stuff by making more time e.g. by using transition time.  For myself, I feel that traditional speed reading is another myth (although smart reading isn’t).  And using transition time to squeeze in extra work is a recipe for a heart attack.

Anyway, you can see the interview this Sunday (29th) on The Politics Show Northern Ireland, BBC 1, 12 noon.

If you’re interested, here are some insightful articles on the negative side of multi-tasking.

IS MULTITASKING MORE EFFICIENT? SHIFTING MENTAL GEARS COSTS TIME, ESPECIALLY WHEN SHIFTING TO LESS FAMILIAR TASKS

Multitasking Wastes Time and Money

The Multitasking Generation (TIME article)

Your brain on multitasking (blog with further reading suggestions)

So if you’re reading this article while doing somethign else…dont!

Especially if you’re a politician.

On Wednesday 18 November 2009 I’m delivering a 1-day workshop as part of the Queen’s University Continuing Professional Development (CPD)  Short Coruse Programme…for the second time.  It’s name?  Radical Time Management!

Here’s the rundown.

“Notes and checklists, calendars and appointment books, project timetables and reminder systems – should managing time require so much… time? And once the training session is over, how many of these tools do we actually employ to effect in our working lives?  Statistics tell a grim tale: most Time Management training is ineffective and therefore literally (and ironically) a waste of time. So this workshop will take a radically different track. We will focus on two proven techniques that yield maximum results for time-poor managers and business people. The first is the revolutionary ‘80/20 Principle’; the second is the ‘Quadrant 2′ system developed by Stephen Covey. Between them, these ideas will radically alter how you view and use time – from a quantity to a quality perspective, from spending time to investing time.”

This was a popular course first time round with great feedback.  I felt compelled to design it after reading about and personally experimenting with a host of time management techniques myself which I found overly complex or (more usually) overly simplistic.  For instance, I remember reading a whole book by some time management guru whose basic big idea was the cunning use  of suspension files and file dividers!  As Dawn would say, pur-leese!

I’ve built this course around what I personally have found the most useful, and therefore what I’m keen to share with others.  This is a cut-the-crap, back-to-basics sort of course that sets time management in the larger framework of where you’re going with your life and how best to get there.

If you’ve time, see you there.  If you haven’t, definitely see you there!

To book a place, contact Marc Forte at the School of Education (Short Courses Programmes) on 028 9097 5260 or email cpd@qub.ac.uk.

Image credit: Orange42.

I’ve been re-reading another one of Postman’s book recently,  the lesser known Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology.  His thesis is that the US is the first modern culture to have shifted from a  technology-using worldview to a technology-dominated one.  This is one ‘culture war‘ that is not usually included in debate but that is far more deep-seated in the American psyche.

This isn’t a book review, so I’ll spare you the summary.  Postman considers the question of when America changed into a Technopoly, a state in which culture “seeks its authorization in technology, finds its satisfactions in technology, and takes its orders from technology”.  To answer this question, Postman turns not to scientists or industrialists or politicians, but to a now almost forgotten management consultant.

Fredrick W Taylor published a book in 1911 called The Principles of Scientific Management.  Now just pause and ponder that title for a second.  Management is about managing people.  Taylor claims this can be achieved scientifically, that is, objectively, impersonally, mathematically.  People are reduced to bits of technology that require engineering.  Postman claims that this book…

…contains the first explicit and formal outline of the assumptions of the thought-world of Technopoly.  These include the beliefs that the primary, if not only, goal of human labour and thought is efficiency; that technical calculation is in all respects superior to human judgment; that in fact human judgment cannot be trusted, because it is plagues by laxity, ambiguity, and unnecessary complexity; that subjectivity is an obstacle to clear thinking; that what cannot be measured either does not exist or is of no value; and that the affairs of citizens are best controlled by experts.

Postman also has brilliant things to say about language and statistics as examples of ‘invisible technologies’.  But for now, I have a few questions.  How far has this technological mind-set, this treating people as bits of technology, infected our thinking on such topics as time management, psychometric testing, and the other tools of modern HR?  And when were human beings demoted to a ‘resource’ anyway?

Let me know if you can think of any more examples of Technopoly in the workplace.