Advertising
Advertising

How to Maximize Productivity For The Perpetually Distracted

How to Maximize Productivity For The Perpetually Distracted

Most people in 2013 have a nasty habit of placing too much on their to-do lists. Each day, the list grows longer and we struggle to get even half of it done. Day in and day out we disappoint ourselves, and those around us, with our persistent lack of productivity and and palpable absence of achieved goals.

However, there are things you can do to make that to-do list an “all-done” list.

Why Can’t I Get Anything Done?

If you’re visiting this web site, you’re looking for ideas and inspiration. If you’re like me, you’re looking at this site when you ought to be doing something “productive.” If you clicked this article, you’re really trying to avoid some work. Is that you? It’s okay. It’s me, too.

Advertising

How was your drive to work this morning? Did you get stuck in traffic (if you didn’t and for some miraculous reason have never experienced traffic, bear with me)? Did you know that your brain acts in a similar way? It’s true—if you have too many things to process, it will clog up faster than the freeway during rush hour. How many times have you caught yourself just staring at your monitor, doing nothing in particular? Plus, the guilty feeling that follows isn’t very helpful, is it?

Well, guess what? Let it go.

Let Your Mind Wander

It seems counterintuitive, but if you have a hard time focusing on one particular task at a time, this method could work for you.

Advertising

If you have 8 tasks that need accomplishment in a given day, what’s your plan of attack? Do you order them from easiest to hardest? Hardest to easiest? In either one of those scenarios, there’s a point where you’ll freeze. A task that should take an hour now takes three or four because it’s hard to maintain your focus for more than 15 minutes at a time.

Don’t Fight Your Own Brain

Rather than try, futilely, to muscle through task #1 before moving on to task #2, allow yourself to move on to another project whenever your attention wanes. You’ll maintain your interest throughout the day and minimize the time you spend staring at your monitor. 

By cutting the “down-time” out of your day, you’ll get that list checked off a lot quicker. You may not check anything off until the afternoon, but as you wrap up your day, all your projects get completed with no feelings of guilt or wasted time.

Advertising

The Shower Principle

So—how and why does this work? Well, your brain never really shuts off. Your subconscious can work wonders when it’s not jammed up with unnecessary worry.

When your mind is otherwise distracted, your subconscious is freed up to process obstacles you might be trying to overcome. This method is referred to as “The Shower Principle,” and oddly enough, is best explained by Jack Donaghy, Alec Baldwin’s character on 30 Rock:

The Shower Principle is a term scientists use to describe moments of inspiration that occur when the brain is distracted from the problem at hand. For example, when you’re showering, if the cerebral cortex is distracted by showering then another part of the brain—the anterior superior temporal gyrus—is activated. This is the site of sudden cognitive inspiration.”

Advertising

Okay, granted 30 Rock is a sitcom, and “Jack Donaghy” isn’t actually real, but The Shower Principle certainly is. In fact, it works for me so frequently that when I’m writing on a deadline, I’ve taken up to 5 showers in a day. Other popular distractions include taking a walk, a drive, and even a quick nap.

So if you’re the kind of person who is constantly looking for a distraction (ahem, I caught you reading this so you’re already busted), try this technique. If you work in an office you might not have the opportunity to take a shower in the middle of the day, or your bosses might not understand just why they caught you napping underneath your desk, but allow yourself to take breaks when your attention span requires them. Watch a YouTube video. Do some jumping jacks. Find out what sufficiently distracts you and do it for five minutes. It’s like a reset button.

And if you get in trouble for doing jumping jacks at work, show this article to your bosses. While they are reading it, take a little nap under your desk. You’ll feel better.

More by this author

How to REALLY Let Go of a Resentment Social Media Marketing Secrets Revealed How to Maximize Productivity For The Perpetually Distracted How To Get 10,000 Shares on Facebook in 24 Hours

Trending in Productivity

1The Productivity Paradox: What Is It And How Can We Move Beyond It? 210 Best Time Management Books Recommended By Entrepreneurs 3What Is Procrastination (And the Complete Guide to Stop Procrastinating) 46 Simple Steps to Make Progress Towards Achieving Goals 5Secrets to Organizing Thoughts and Ideas (So You’ll Never Lose Ideas!)

Read Next

Advertising
Advertising

The Productivity Paradox: What Is It And How Can We Move Beyond It?

The Productivity Paradox: What Is It And How Can We Move Beyond It?

It’s a depressing adage we’ve all heard time and time again: An increase in technology does not necessarily translate to an increase in productivity.

Put another way by Robert Solow, a Nobel laureate in economics,

“You can see the computer age everywhere but in the productivity statistics.”

In other words, just because our computers are getting faster, that doesn’t mean that that we will have an equivalent leap in productivity. In fact, the opposite may be true!

New York Times writer Matt Richel wrote in an article for the paper back in 2008 that stated, “Statistical and anecdotal evidence mounts that the same technology tools that have led to improvements in productivity can be counterproductive if overused.”

There’s a strange paradox when it comes to productivity. Rather than an exponential curve, our productivity will eventually reach a plateau, even with advances in technology.

Advertising

So what does that mean for our personal levels of productivity? And what does this mean for our economy as a whole? Here’s what you should know about the productivity paradox, its causes, and what possible solutions we may have to combat it.

What is the productivity paradox?

There is a discrepancy between the investment in IT growth and the national level of productivity and productive output. The term “productivity paradox” became popularized after being used in the title of a 1993 paper by MIT’s Erik Brynjolfsson, a Professor of Management at the MIT Sloan School of Management, and the Director of the MIT Center for Digital Business.

In his paper, Brynjolfsson argued that while there doesn’t seem to be a direct, measurable correlation between improvements in IT and improvements in output, this might be more of a reflection on how productive output is measured and tracked.[1]

He wrote in his conclusion:

“Intangibles such as better responsiveness to customers and increased coordination with suppliers do not always increase the amount or even intrinsic quality of output, but they do help make sure it arrives at the right time, at the right place, with the right attributes for each customer.

Just as managers look beyond “productivity” for some of the benefits of IT, so must researchers be prepared to look beyond conventional productivity measurement techniques.”

How do we measure productivity anyway?

And this brings up a good point. How exactly is productivity measured?

In the case of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, productivity gain is measured as the percentage change in gross domestic product per hour of labor.

But other publications such as US Today, argue that this is not the best way to track productivity, and instead use something called Total Factor Productivity (TFP). According to US Today, TFP “examines revenue per employee after subtracting productivity improvements that result from increases in capital assets, under the assumption that an investment in modern plants, equipment and technology automatically improves productivity.”[2]

In other words, this method weighs productivity changes by how much improvement there is since the last time productivity stats were gathered.

But if we can’t even agree on the best way to track productivity, then how can we know for certain if we’ve entered the productivity paradox?

Possible causes of the productivity paradox

Brynjolfsson argued that there are four probable causes for the paradox:

Advertising

  • Mis-measurement – The gains are real but our current measures miss them.
  • Redistribution – There are private gains, but they come at the expense of other firms and individuals, leaving little net gain.
  • Time lags – The gains take a long time to show up.
  • Mismanagement – There are no gains because of the unusual difficulties in managing IT or information itself.

There seems to be some evidence to support the mis-measurement theory as shown above. Another promising candidate is the time lag, which is supported by the work of Paul David, an economist at Oxford University.

According to an article in The Economist, his research has shown that productivity growth did not accelerate until 40 years after the introduction of electric power in the early 1880s.[3] This was partly because it took until 1920 for at least half of American industrial machinery to be powered by electricity.”

Therefore, he argues, we won’t see major leaps in productivity until both the US and major global powers have all reached at least a 50% penetration rate for computer use. The US only hit that mark a decade ago, and many other countries are far behind that level of growth.

The paradox and the recession

The productivity paradox has another effect on the recession economy. According to Neil Irwin,[4]

“Sky-high productivity has meant that business output has barely declined, making it less necessary to hire back laid-off workers…businesses are producing only 3 percent fewer goods and services than they were at the end of 2007, yet Americans are working nearly 10 percent fewer hours because of a mix of layoffs and cutbacks in the workweek.”

This means that more and more companies are trying to do less with more, and that means squeezing two or three people’s worth of work from a single employee in some cases.

Advertising

According to Irwin, “workers, frightened for their job security, squeezed more productivity out of every hour [in 2010].”

Looking forward

A recent article on Slate puts it all into perspective with one succinct observation:

“Perhaps the Internet is just not as revolutionary as we think it is. Sure, people might derive endless pleasure from it—its tendency to improve people’s quality of life is undeniable. And sure, it might have revolutionized how we find, buy, and sell goods and services. But that still does not necessarily mean it is as transformative of an economy as, say, railroads were.”

Still, Brynjolfsson argues that mismeasurement of productivity can really skew the results of people studying the paradox, perhaps more than any other factor.

“Because you and I stopped buying CDs, the music industry has shrunk, according to revenues and GDP. But we’re not listening to less music. There’s more music consumed than before.

On paper, the way GDP is calculated, the music industry is disappearing, but in reality it’s not disappearing. It is disappearing in revenue. It is not disappearing in terms of what you should care about, which is music.”

Perhaps the paradox isn’t a death sentence for our productivity after all. Only time (and perhaps improved measuring techniques) will tell.

Featured photo credit: Pexels via pexels.com

Reference

Read Next