3 ms·
You're going to get a lot of denial, because chatting with colleagues and sharing memes/news is fun -- and hey, it's related to work. And every once in a while,
by rsj_hn 9y ago
You're going to get a lot of denial, because chatting with colleagues and sharing memes/news is fun -- and hey, it's related to work. And every once in a while, important info is transmitted.
Also, people swear they can multi-task just fine, when in fact they can't. Just like people swear they only need 4 hours of sleep. It's strange, but very few people say "Hey, I eat 300g of sugar each day, and my body loves it! That's just the way I am. Whatever works for you, right?" But when it comes to cognitive performance, it's as if the human brain is so diverse that there are no behaviors that objectively impede cognitive functioning in all cases. Multi-tasking always makes everyone less productive. It lowers your (effective) IQ. It makes you slow and dumb. It is also an objective fact that those who multi-task are generally unaware about their drop in cognitive performance. [ * ]
Also, there is a bit of a technological bias here. If you were to ask someone what is the worst possible kind of work meeting, they would tell you that it's the meeting that has no clear agenda, no one seems to be in charge, everyone is piping in with whatever's on their mind, and there is no well-defined stop period so the meeting goes on until no one has anything left to chime in about. Basically, Slack.
I wouldn't volunteer to attend a meeting just for fun, nor would I sign up for an open office floorplan, so why spend half the day in a virtual chat when I have work to do.
Once I'm done working, then I can meet with friends at a restaurant or bar, or be on social media.
[ * ] http://www.apa.org/research/action/multitask.aspx http://www.apa.org/research/action/multitask.aspx
- ravenstine 9y agoMulti-tasking is insidious because there are plenty of people who can sustain productivity whilst spending a significant amount of time on Slack; their acceptable level of production blinds them to just how much further ahead they could get without Slack(and other distractions), and it can cause others to feel ashamed for their lack of performance. I keep a presence on Slack and do some of the usual fun stuff, but have taken the steps I outlined after I continued to discover just how much of a penalty gets imposed on the brain when it has to frequently switch contexts. > Also, there is a bit of a technological bias here. If you were to ask someone what is the worst possible kind of work meeting, they would tell you that it's the meeting that has no clear agenda, no one seems to be in charge, everyone is piping in with whatever's on their mind, and there is no well-defined stop period so the meeting goes on until no one has anything left to chime in about. Basically, Slack. What you said here is a very astute observation. I'm tempted to print it out and post it on my wall. To be fair, people hate those sorts of physical meetings because they usually don't serve to bolster the social proof of most of the individuals involved. Even when Slack is a distraction, there is a perceived redeeming value to the lack of productivity because posting a meme or a poignant joke can make one appear to be more funny in general. True, a person's Slack persona can affect how others perceive that person in real life, but then you have to wonder just what you're getting for impressing these particular people. TLDR; people actually hate formality. As I stated before, coworkers are not your friends. I say this as someone who works with an unusually friendly team. We pay Mario Kart after work every few weeks, and we sometimes hang on Saturdays to chill and play Civ V. In fantasy land, these people are my friends. In reality, that friendship would sublimate instantly if I ever left the company. I've never experienced otherwise. It's friendship in the most superficial sense, which isn't a bad thing, but people with similarly friendly coworkers shouldn't sacrifice energy they'd be devoting to their craft for the sake of cultivating fake friendships.
- rsj_hn 9y agoI'm tempted to print it out and post it on my wall. That's kind of you! Now I wish I'd cleaned it up a bit. they usually don't serve to bolster the social proof of most of the individuals involved. Yes, that's true. Online interactions have this extra layer of karma collection (whether explicit or implicit).