Autumn of Multitaskers

In Kevin Kelly's book: out of control, he mentions the number of hubs that are needed to maintain an effective network. I could imagine that it is worth studying if there might be a kind of ratio that is applicable to the human mind.

Effective multi-tasking requires a multi-disciplined approach to whatever issue is before you. Bringing specialists from each discipline together and working together to come up with a solution. So you want "big, brilliant and transformative ideas"?

www.sarasvatiproject.com

there are 2 schools of thought

1. Steve Job (i.e. creativity) - need passion to create something unique and pioneering to coming generations.

2. Bill Gate (i.e. multitasking)- need passion to aggregate scattered innovations to create convenience for the user.

but passion is common in both!

I am a serial multi-tasker. Over the course of the day, like many people, I'll work on several utterly unrelated projects. But I've found that I can focus only on one at a time (which doesn't mean other things aren't bubbling in the background). The upside is a lot of cross-pollination: Ideas applicable to one activity may also apply to another.

This speaks to Kevin's point about multi-tasking as part of a collaboration, which isn't really multi-tasking, but a kind of "aggregate-tasking." The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Re individual multi-tasking, it reminds me of those guys on the old Ed Sullivan show spinning plates on long poles. It looks impressive, but is really kind of silly and inevitably doomed. Sooner or later plates will break...

On a related front, is anyone else finding this trend toward "niblet news" -- whether manifest as television screens crammed with crawls, graphics and talking heads, or the "shorter=faster=better" credo so popular in print these days -- ADD-annoying? Rather than informed, I feel assaulted by data bits. Given that we're all busy and really don't have a lot of time, if there isn't enough substance beneath the surface, why bother?

That said, one of the things I like about news on the web is the ability to scan headline/descriptors quickly and then go as deep as I choose, serially multi-tasking the news....

I don't know -- maybe I'm out of step with a Twittery generation, proud to share factoids that reveal more about the banality of life than anything else...

Hi Stephen and Heather,
I've been following your blog and podcasts for a while now, great stuff. I couldn't find any other way to contact you, so I thought I'd try this. I'd like to try to set up an interview with you for a director I am working with - Paul Devlin. We have this innovative new project where fans can join our online project and have access to behind the scenes videos about the making of our film - BLAST. It's a new approach towards funding that uses the internet as a way to connect to fans in an interactive way. If you are interested and would like more information, please contact me.
Cheers!

Amber Yoder
BLAST ArtistShare Project Manager

Well, I was reading comments, and trying to assimilate that pitch on BLAST provided a real multitasking challenge.

Janet, I'm starting to agree with Mr. Black Swan, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, that reading daily (or hourly) news is a waste of time and energy. There's too much back and forth, too much granularity. I think it makes more sense to wait for weekly or monthly magazines. That said, I'm not going to wait for a monthly mag to see who wins the World Series. I'll be watching granular pitch by pitch, starting tonight.

Well, as a native Chicagoan - Northsider - I'm a geographic-destiny Cubs fan. Which means we take the really long view on these things. Sigh. A once-per-century publication would do it...