Reply to post: Agree with the myth comment.

Multitasking is a myth: It means doing lots of things equally badly

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Agree with the myth comment.

Multi-tasking is a myth. I used to have an Operations Director who was a firm believer that multi-tasking meant getting more done = more productivity. He tried to get everyone juggling so many tasks at once, that it was impossible, without a really good memory and things regularly went wrong. I refused, and continued to work on projects one at a time. At my disciplinary I pulled out the following diagram as a simplified representation of my workload*.

Your Way

1234 5678 9012 3456


My Way

1234 5678 9012 3456


The numbers represented months, and the letters distinct jobs I was to work on each taking 4 months each. I demonstrated that by working on jobs sequentially, that job A could be delivered 8 months earlier, job B 5 months earlier, and job C 2 months earlier than his method, and job D would be delivered at the same time. Overall not only would we be able to deliver and bill 3 jobs earlier than planned, it would mean the end users of the jobs would have 9, 6 and 3 more months of productivity with the final products than they would have had we only delivered in the final quarter. I also argued that because I was working solely on one job, that the work being produced was better, and that the follow up support requirements demonstrated that also.

He couldn't argue with my logic, but it didn't stop him making my life a misery by micromanagement. Some people just can't accept efficient workers even when the results are slapping them round the face.

*Edit: The Reg strips double spaces, everything was supposed to be in columns.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020