You may find the following useful if you want to reduce distractions in order to get better results, but you don’t want to miss out on the opportunity to add value by helping people.
We got interested in this problem because as consultants we are engaged with a specific scope, and to deliver that scope our process includes a cycle around a loop which includes agreeing how much time to spend on which items and when they need to complete, doing the items within the agreed constraints, then reviewing the output. The problem comes in the form of distractions which are like kryptonite for processes. We developed some effective techniques for the specific type of work we do. These are influenced by Cal Newport’s Deep Work concepts.
The solution concept was to…
Use a Focus Schedule, which is a view of the allocation of focus over time. Only a single focus is active at any one time. It’s awkward to use a normal calendar for this because they aren’t focused on integration, categorisation and reporting for both in advance and retrospect, instead they (should) be focused on setting agendas for upcoming meetings just for that particular team or client. For example you could legitimately have two meetings overlapping in a normal calendar, this would not be valid in the Focus Schedule. There is also no risk of your Focus Schedule suddenly telling you that you’re tentatively about to join a new meeting that someone just sent a short notice invite for. It’s deliberately more difficult to get into the Focus Schedule than that.
The solution in practice…
Ideally everything is in it from morning to night, so that it can deconflict time demands from all of the various work or other items. There’s a nice idea about partitioning between “work” and “personal” life which suggests that you should only think about work when at work and thus achieve work life balance and therefore happiness. We’re not binning that idea, on the contrary we’re actually taking it a step further. With the Focus Schedule, for the two hours you’ve got allocated to the spec you’re writing, you’re only thinking about the spec, and then for the two hours you’re taking your kid to her sports club you’re only thinking about your kid at the sports club.
It should ideally be visible at all times. On my standing desk in the Cloud BI office I have the my leftmost monitor showing the Focus Schedule and two other artefacts used by our delivery process, so I can’t escape knowing that the pressure is on with only 15 minutes left to edit this.
It should be updated if an emergency requires it to be updated. This is partly because you need to be able to cross check the time spent against the Delivery List (an artefact potentially to be discussed another time) to make sure the numbers are correct, but it’s also to help make sure emergencies are really emergencies, by making it more annoying to have to edit it.
The Focus Schedule is detailed down to the 5-10 minute level, and its primary interface is a graphic rather than a list. Most tools used to implement it will also show reports summarising the items at various levels. Because of the level of detail, we’d typically fill it in only one day in advance - the optimum approach is to confirm the plan for a day, do the day, then confirm the plan for the next day and so on. Typically throughout a day we put in provisional items for the next day for example where we’ve committed to attending a meeting, so that the confirmation of the plan at the end of the day is quicker.
The reason the Focus Schedule is so useful is that for a capable person, the biggest cause of failure to complete the intended work is not having a clear period of undistracted time to complete the work. The biggest cause of not having a clear period of undistracted time to complete the work is not allocating time with commitment to the allocation. People check email and Slack frequently and each check has a residue either directly or indirectly by taking attention to decide not to do something. Cal Newport’s Deep Work book has a good account of this.
But one of the biggest ironies is that the distracted people may end up being less responsive by an important measure - they could be back and forth in slack all day but not actually read and analyse an important document they had been sent first thing in the morning. The point is not to be self-centred and never answer anyone’s requests for help, the point is actually to proactively look for how to do everything that is considered worthwhile, rather than responding. Trying to get work done without a Focus Schedule is like trying to sail without a keel; the lack of resistance and control means you just go wherever the wind takes you. It might seem like we’re trying to have our cake and eat it by saying that we’ve found a way to improve individual work which actually improves interactions with other members of the team, but for every example which would seem to support that objection, there’s a focused way to do it better. If there’s a new member of the team who’s sending a question on Slack every 10 minutes and you want to help them out, then it’s fair enough to say typing back and forth is better for them than ignoring them, but you’d probably both be better off scheduling some calls at suitable times.
In summary…
What is the fundamental concept, the apparent cost, and an ironic benefit?
If you have a clear commitment to stick to the focus schedule unless there’s a legitimate emergency, then you won’t lose attention switching context. You’ll be a lot more productive.
The apparent cost is you’ll engage less with people at short notice for anything other than an emergency. You can still be available in a genuine emergency, for example people could phone instead of sending a slack message. If it’s the kind of work where you are meant to be on call, then you can accept that’s actually what you’re primarily doing.
If you have realistically allocated the schedule to proactively help out others at efficient times then you will actually help them better than you could otherwise. You’ll also be better able to assess what value you’re really adding and at what cost, which is an important topic for potential future discussion, because “helping” is not always a simple good.
What’s wrong with people that this Focus Schedule psychotechnology solves? Shouldn’t people just be able to knuckle down to doing the work?
You’re unlikely to choose to schedule time for specific distracting activities, but if your time is not scheduled then you are likely to end up losing time to distraction. This is how people are. There are different distractions in different contexts - during office hours unplanned communications are the main distraction, outside of office hours social media can eat a lot of . So with the Focus Schedule you actually have more productive time in the day, which is actually a double benefit because being distracted has a bleed-over attention cost into subsequent productive time.
If you have explicitly allocated the schedule to the important items, you won’t lose attention wondering if you ought to be doing something else. If you haven’t explicitly made decisions about the allocation, then you probably ought to be worrying about it. Time allocation is best done using a structured process because we can’t rely on our intuitions to do it well.
Extra benefits:
You’ll have a much better understanding of what works well as a schedule for the day and have options to adjust it for better long term productivity, or short time bursts if necessary. You won’t be misrepresenting to yourself (as much) about what you can get done.
You will be able to see in advance which items don’t fit, and replan accordingly, which leads to better working with others.