The article argues that despite the abundance of digital tools designed to enhance workplace efficiency, the opposite is often true. Email, instant messaging, and numerous other applications, while intended to improve focus, instead contribute to a constant state of distraction and overwhelm. The author posits that we haven't yet discovered how to optimally utilize these technologies.
Even minor context shifts, such as briefly checking emails, significantly hinder productivity. The article emphasizes the detrimental effect of constant context switching, highlighting its impact on cognitive function and overall work quality.
The current workplace environment of instant communication (Slack, email, etc.) contributes to a "hyperactive hive mind." This constant communication loop creates a suboptimal equilibrium, demanding immediate responses and leading to continuous context switching.
Productivity has become individualized, placing the burden on workers to manage their time and workflow. This is particularly challenging with knowledge work, which cannot be broken down into assembly-line tasks. The resulting tension between work and personal life contributes to burnout.
The solution lies in organizational-level changes, such as scheduling dedicated "office hours" for communication, rather than relying on constant back-and-forth messaging. This approach aims to reduce context switching and enhance focus.
The author proposes "slow productivity," a concept centered on doing fewer things, working at a natural pace, and focusing on quality rather than visible activity. This approach, exemplified by the work habits of John McPhee, emphasizes sustainable, high-impact output.
Managers often perpetuate the problem by emphasizing visible activity over actual output. This is rooted in the historical difficulty of managing knowledge workers, who, unlike industrial workers, cannot be easily monitored via easily quantifiable output. A shift away from managing visible activity towards supporting knowledge workers would improve the current situation.
The article concludes that it will likely take time to optimize our use of digital tools in the workplace. Drawing parallels with the historical integration of the electric motor in factories, the author suggests that we are still in the early stages of understanding how best to leverage technology for efficient and meaningful knowledge work.