1. The document discusses multitasking by managers and provides arguments both for and against the practice. It notes that while multitasking allows managers to seem busy, research shows humans are poor at multitasking and lose productivity when frequently switching between tasks. 2. Good reasons for some multitasking include allocating senior staff part-time to multiple junior staff or handling intermittent tasks, but scheduling multiple ongoing tasks concurrently is generally inefficient. 3. The document advocates scheduling tasks sequentially without overlap to avoid lost productivity from context switching and ensure work products are completed and benefits realized without undue risk.

1. DHARMSINH DESAI UNIVERSITY, NADIAD.
MBA 2nd
Sem.
Batch 12
A Report on
‘MULTI TASKING BY MANAGERS’
Submitted to: Submitted by:
Prof. Shefali Jain Hitesh Gamit 1
209
Monil Gandhi 1210
Viraj Hirpara 1211
Anand Kharadi 1212
Date : March 30 ,2010.

2. MULTI TASKING BY MANAGERS
What is the actual meaning of ‘multitasking’? Multitasking means
doing several things all at once, so theoretically it allows you to complete more
tasks during the short period of time. This is not easy activity; it probably made
you very tired after all.

3.  Defining multitasking
This paper is concerned with conscious multitasking and it is important,
before engaging with this topic in detail, to distinguish between this and
subconscious multitasking. The conscious mind can only focus on one task at any
point in time. The subconscious, on the other hand, can cope with a number of
simultaneous.
A simple example of subconscious multitasking is driving a car and changing
gear whilst turning a tasks corner and listening to music on the car radio at the
same time. The subconscious can control the movement of both feet on the
pedals, one hand on the gear stick, one hand on the wheel and ears listening to
both the music and the sound of the engine while both eyes focus on where the
car is going. Only one of these tasks can have the attention of the conscious mind
at any point in time.
The subconscious can do the remaining tasks simultaneously because it has been
trained to do them to the point where they have become routine. In certain
circumstance, the conscious mind is not necessary in this process at all. Many
readers will be aware of the experience of having been driving a car for some time
without being conscious of driving and/or of letting their mind drift away from the
act of driving whist still at the wheel.
As with any moderately complex task, the first time an individual drives a
car it requires enormous concentration as the conscious mind has to attend to
every necessary action. In time, and with practice, most of the actions required to
control the car become programmed or automatic so that a driver does not have
to think about the physiological mechanics of changing gear for example. His or
her full attention can therefore be on the road. However if the driver’s conscious
is diverted by something else that requires its attention, such as a telephone call,
this can be dangerous because, as noted above, the subconscious must now take
over the non routine activity of watching the road.

4. It is interesting to note that in their efforts to eradicate the use of the
mobile phone while driving, the UK law enforcement authorities in 2007/8 fined
165,000 drivers. This is thought to be a small fraction of those actually breaking
the law. The fact that people are in jail because the law takes the dangers of
multitasking while driving so seriously, is indicative of the importance of the
impact of multitasking on task effectiveness when driving. If it affects driving, it
will also affect many other types of activity.
People around might see you as very busy and hardworking person, you
were trying to combine different activities, writing report and talking by phone at
the same time, or for example keeping conversation with your friend and writing
mobile message. But at the end of the day can you say, that you have done all the
things you planned to do, and are you sure you got the best possible results.
Well, of course, there are a lot of things that you can do at the same
time easily, such as doing sport exercises and listening to music, or reading a
newspaper and eating or drinking something. These simple things are also an
example of multitasking, but they are so easy to do, because one doesn’t need to
concentrate on both tasks. It is needed to focus only on one activity and second
comes so natural, that you don’t even think about it. But the person has to focus
on both things: writing report and talking by phone, so the attention is divided. It
means it is impossible to do your best if you are trying to focus on more then one
activity. In this case doing more and more things brings less and less result.

5.  Multitasking in the office
While subconscious multitasking is common amongst workers engaged in
manual occupations, it is not what is normally understood when applied to office
or knowledge workers. What is meant here is carrying on several activities more
of less simultaneously, all of which require the attention of the conscious mind.
This type of multitasking involves continual switching of attention between tasks
and devices/other people. An analogy with computers is helpful. A modern, single
core processor simulates multitasking by switching between tasks so quickly that
the user does not notice.
Humans switch their attention in a similar way and incur an analogous time
overhead and delay in so doing. This switch may happen voluntarily, for example
somebody may stop reading to look at their e-mail, or it may be interrupt driven
such as when a user stops what they are currently doing to take a telephone call.
If they are not suitably configured, computers that use multitasking to support
multiple users or tasks can become overloaded.
This phenomenon occurs when the switching activity takes up all or almost all
of the processor’s time, leaving no available capacity for application tasks. A term
sometimes used by computer professionals for this is ‘thrashing’. Humans, when
they try too much switching, can experience an analogous phenomenon. So much
time is taken with juggling tasks that little.
The problem of task interruption continues to be compounded by the
emergence of new forms of interruption. While there is much research into
multitasking the phenomenon has become steadily more complicated as both
additional technologies appear and a generation which has grown up with these
technologies moves into the workplace.

6. The following is a list, in rough historical order, of some technologies which either
facilitate multitasking and/or voluntary and involuntary interruption in the
workplace:
Land line telephones; Pagers; Conference calling; Video conferencing; e-Mail;
Real time data streaming; Real time alerts; Graphical user interfaces (i.e.
multitasking operating systems); Digital dashboards; Mobile telephones;
SMS/text messaging; Digital cameras; Browsers (the Internet/Web); Chat rooms;
On-line messaging; Social networking.
If one were to plot these on an historical graph, most of them would be
concentrated in the last 20 years. Some, which have been around for a long time
(such as e-mail and video conferencing (which dates back to the 1960s) have only
come into widespread use in relatively recent times as costs have fallen and the
infrastructure to support these activities has been laid down. Some of these are
also more ubiquitous than others and what might be called the business value to
disruptive capacity ratio of each varies.
 DIFFERENT PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT VIEWS:
Peter Drucker:
"In every executive job, a large part of the time must therefore be
wasted on things which, thought they apparently have to be done,
contribute nothing or little. Yet most of the tasks of the executive require,
for minimum effectiveness, a fairly large quantum of time. To spend in one
stretch less than this minimum is sheer waste. One accomplishes nothing
and has to begin all over again"? To be effective, every knowledge worker,
and especially every executive, therefore needs to be able to dispose of
time in fairly large chunks. To have dribs and drabs of time at his disposal
will not be sufficient even if the total is an impressive number of hours."

7. Bob Seldon:
By comparison, in today's fast moving world we seem to do many things
at once. For instance, as you read this article you may also be texting a
friend or colleague, talking on the phone, or even checking emails on your
Blackberry. A true multitasker!
Professor Clifford I. Nass, one of the study team, put it this way,
"Multitaskers were just lousy at everything." So, when you multitask, it
seems as if you're doing a lot of work, but you're not doing most (or any) of
it well.
However, multitasking in fact is a misnomer. When we talk about
multitasking, we are really talking about attention: the art of paying
attention, the ability to shift our attention and more broadly, to exercise
judgment about what objects are worthy of our attention. In fact despite
its sophistication, the brain can only concentrate on one task at a time.
Edward Hallowell, psychiatrist and author of Crazy Busy, describes
multitasking as, "a mythical activity in which people believe they can perform
two or more tasks simultaneously."
Multitasking may even be affecting how we plan our work. Frank Patrick of
consulting firm Focused Performance, suggests that when it comes to say,
working on two projects at the same time, "many of our project plans could very
well be twice as long as they need to be."
He further suggests that multitasking may well start from the allocation of
resources to projects, "The idea of assigning half or a quarter of one head count
to a project is a good way to start down the slippery slope of multitasking."

8.  So what's the message here for managers?
First, it's not only legitimate, but highly productive if people turn off all
electronic devices during meetings, so that they can concentrate on what
needs to be achieved. Your introductory words could be something like,
"Who'd like to reduce their IQ by 10%?"
It would seem that the time honored time-management technique of
putting like-tasks together, prioritizing and taking one task at a time, has a
proven basis in scientific research. Time to start the "To Do" list again?
Perhaps encouraging your people to do things such as their emails in
specific blocks of time might be an option. One manager I know recently
reached an agreement with his boss – they agreed to answer emails by
10AM each morning – if anything else came up during the day that was
urgent, they would phone, not text or email.
Give people the opportunity to "check out" from constant media input such
as phone, text, email – particularly out of office hours.
Think about the allocation of resources, particularly to projects – is this
likely to affect the performance of your people? How could these resources
be better allocated to allow people to focus?
Then of course, there's the open-plan office – so essential to the economic
well being of the organisation and so useful for staff interaction! Perhaps
making people aware of the downsides of multitasking and discussing
alternative strategies in staff meetings, might be a start.
Finally, there's the great feeling of satisfaction one gets from completing a
task. Salespeople, and sales managers in particular, have traditionally been
very good at recognising and appreciating results - both theirs and their
people. How could you encourage recognition and appreciation of
completed tasks with your people?

9.  Multitasking—performing multiple tasks at the same time or, more
accurately, time-slicing between tasks so that they execute concurrently—
was a profound innovation for computer systems but doesn't work well for
human activities. Human brains do not multitask well.
 When we shift our attention from one activity to another, there is a loss of
productivity as we try to recall where we were when we return to a task in
progress. You have experienced this when you were reading something
dense and were interrupted by a phone call. When you return to your
reading, it takes a moment to recall and re-create the context. This "restart
time" is unavoidable and represents lost productivity and wasted time.
Most of us intuitively recognize the inefficiency of multitasking, particularly
for complex, thought-intensive tasks. Imagine trying to write an opera,
design a complex data system, and do your taxes while shifting your
attention from one task to another every ten minutes.
 If multitasking is inefficient, why do so many project plans call for people
to work concurrently on multiple tasks? There are a few good reasons:
1. Allocation of senior staff, who provide specialized consulting to a task on a
part-time basis to coach or assist junior staff, who are doing the heavy
lifting.
2. Tasks that are inherently "bursty," requiring focused effort interspersed
with delays. Imagine a task to staff a help desk—it needs you when the
phone rings, but you may have available time when things are quiet.
Another low-priority task could run concurrently to maximize resource
usage.
3. I could only think of two. Anyone else have good reasons? If so, comment
below and let me know.

10.  The list of good reasons is short. When you review projects that have
people "multitasked," it often isn't about the nature of the work. It is a thin
veil trying to cover the project's not having sufficient staff. Rather than
admitting that there aren't enough people to get the work done, multiple
tasks are assigned to the same people and scheduled to run concurrently.
Later, everyone acts surprised at missed delivery dates, and managers
rattle their sabers and makes noises about "holding people accountable"
for their schedules.
Imagine you are asked to estimate tasks A, B, and C, each of which
produces a needed work product. Suppose you respond that each task will
take a week of my time. Do you imagine that through the magic of
concurrent scheduling you could get all tasks done in the same week?
 If you had assumed that each task was a full-time effort, then the initial
estimate was for three weeks of my effort. If we run the tasks concurrently,
does it become less work? No, actually it becomes MORE work because of
the inefficiency of task switching. Rather than three weeks’ worth of effort,
it will require three weeks plus whatever the overhead factor is for task
switching.
 Yet, despite evidence of its inefficiency, some managers can't resist the
pressure to schedule tasks concurrently, even if it means elongating the
schedule for all three tasks.

11.  A few years ago, a friend named Dohn showed me a simple picture that
explains why even this kind of multitasking is often a bad business decision.
Let's look at three tasks run concurrently.
Even if we imagine that we can context switch with perfect efficiency, when is the
first work product received? At the end of Week 3, with the other two tasks’ work
products.
If you get the sniffles at the end of the second week and must go to a hospital,
what do you have to show for your labor?
Contrast that with work scheduled without concurrency.

12.  When is the first work product received? If you get the sniffles at the end of
the second week, what do you have to show for your labor?
Which schedule is the lowest risk?
Multitasking is often a poor business decision. It is inherently
inefficient and defers realizing the benefit from work performed while
increasing risk, often with little or no benefit. If this argument can help
reduce the amount of multitasking your managers request, that would be
great.
If it can't help you with your managers in the short term, I hope that,
when you are in a position to influence how tasks are assigned, you might
be encouraged to resist the temptation to multitask except where someoe
can make a compelling business case in favor of it.
Some Professional Manager Tasks
 Providing direction to the firm: The first task, envisioning goals, is one of
the tasks that should never be delegated. This is the ability to define
overarching goals that serve to unify people and focus energies. It’s about
effectively declaring what’s possible for the team to achieve and compelling
them to accomplish more than they ever thought possible.
 Managing survival and growth: Ensuring survival of the firm is a critical
task of a manager. The manager must also seek growth.
Two sets of factors impinge upon the firm’s survival and growth.
The first is the set of factors which are internal to the firm and are
largely controllable. These internal factors are choice of, efficiency of

13. labour, competence of managerial staff, company image, financia
resources, etc.
The second set of factors are external to the firm like government
policy, laws and regulations, changing customer tastes, attitudes and values,
increasing competition, etc.
 Maintaining firm’s efficiency: A manager has not only to perform and
produce results, but to do so in the most efficient manner. The more
output a manager can produce with the same input, the greater will be the
profit.
 Meeting the competition challenge: A manager must anticipate and
prepare for the increasing competition. Competition is increasing in terms
of more producers, products, better quality, etc.
 Innovation: Innovation is finding new, different and better ways of doing
existing tasks. To plan and manage for innovation is an on-going task of a
manager. The manager must maintain close contact and relation with
customers. Keeping track of competitor’s activities and moves can also be a
source of innovation, as can improvements in technology.
 Renewal: Managers are responsible for fostering the process of renewal.
Renewing has to do with providing new processes and resources. The
practices and strategy that got you where you are today may be inadequate
for the challenges and opportunities you face tomorrow.
 Building Human Organization: Man is by far the most critical resource of
an organization. A good worker is a valuable asset to any company. Every
manager must constantly look out for people with potential and attract
them to join the company.
 Leadership: Organizational success is determined by the quality of
leadership that is exhibited. "A leader can be a manager, but a manager is
not necessarily a leader," says Gemmy Allen (1998). Leadership is the
power of persuasion of one person over others to inspire actions towards
achieving the goals of the company.

14.  Those in the leadership role must be able to influence/motivate workers to
an elevated goal and direct themselves to the duties or responsibilities
assigned during the planning process. Leadership involves the interpersonal
characteristic of a manager's position that includes communication and
close contact with team members. The only way a manager can be
acknowledged as a leader is by continually demonstrating his abilities.
 A manager has to perform the task of a change agent. It’s the managers
task to ensure that the change is introduced and incorporated in a smooth
manner with the least disturbance and resistance.
 Selection : Today’s managers are faced with a bewildering array of
information technology choices that promise to change the way work
getsdone. , the Internet, intranets, telecommunications, and a seemingly
infinite range of confront the modern manager with the challenge of using
the best technology.
Below you will find information about other disadvantages of
multitasking:
Multitasking doesn’t lead to high quality of the work done; actually it may
reduce the quality substantially. When you try to talk by phone and write
report, the person you are talking with will feel the lack of attention from
your side and may be irritated by it and react negatively on your words.
Don’t try to concentrate on several things at the same time; anyway it
won’t bring any good results. Much better way to be highly effective is to
switch quickly from one activity to another, as it is impossible to keep being
focused on some tasks at the same moment.

15. Multitasking don’t give you a try to build effective time management plan.
And if your employees had to think about many different tasks at the same
time – then their productivity falls.
Multi-tasking Doesn't Work
As you brush your teeth in the morning, you think about the agenda for big
meeting later in the day. It doesn't take much of your brain's processing power
anymore to brush your teeth, so your agenda planning isn't suffering too much
from having to share.
But what about two tasks that require more of your brain's capacity? You
might be talking on the phone while you're preparing breakfast. You may get both
tasks done correctly, but you would have gotten both of them done better, and in
less total time, if you had done them one after the other instead of at the same
time.
Chunking Works Better
 "Chunking" describes how human memory utilization works. It is important
to remember this concept as we look at doing several tasks
"simultaneously". We are in fact switching between them rather than doing
them at the same time (although in the case of brushing your teeth it may
seem like they are simultaneous).
 You are on the phone when someone walks into your office. They ask for
your advice or a decision. You stop listening to the person on the phone
briefly, scan the note in front of you, scribble a response and go back to the
phone call. You did not do the two activities (phone call and in-person
conversation) at the same time.
 You actually did three tasks in sequence; started the phone call, had the in-
person conversation, and then resumed the phone call. Just as in the
breakfast example above, you could have gotten both of them done better,
and in less total time, if you had done them one after the other instead at
the same time. The reason is that as you begin each task you have to focus
on it and get started.

16. Start-up Time Kills Multi-tasking
 When you started the phone call, you had to think about it, find the phone
number, and make the call. When you were interrupted, you had to figure
out what the person wanted from you in order to be able to give them a
decision. Finally, when you resumed the phone call, you had to remember
where you left off. You might even have had to say, "Oops, sorry, someone
walked in. What were you saying?"
 The more starts and stops you make during the day, the more of these
start-up moments you have. These moments are non-productive time. If
you have a daily report to prepare, the start-up moment is probably pretty
short compared to that for the report you only do quarterly. Still, if you are
preparing that report and you get interrupted, you have almost the same
length of time for start-up each time.
 I can write my weekly report in about 30 minutes without any
interruptions. I have had it take several hours to complete simply because
my job is operational and requires that I deal with unplanned tasks a lot.
The culprit was not the people who interrupted me. The culprit was the
time required for start-up moments each time I re-started the report.
Some Times You Have to Multi-task
 Chunking is the concept of breaking up your day into larger chunks instead
of reacting to each "emergency". The more chunks of time you can devote
to specific tasks, the fewer start-up moments you will have. Since you won't
be spending as much time in start-up moments, you will have more time
and you will get more done. As a bonus, since you will be able to focus on
the single task at hand, you will do it better.

17. Chunking
 Start small until you get the feel of it. Pick a single task, perhaps your
weekly report. Set aside the 30 minutes you know it will take. Close your
door. Put up a sign that reads "Genius at work" or something like that and
then concentrate on the report and nothing but the report. Ignore the
phone. Don't check email. Just write the report. After about two weeks
you'll notice how much more quickly you are able to get your report done.
 When you're ready for the next phase, set aside a chunk of time for
another activity. For example, instead of interrupting whatever you are
working on to read each email as it comes in, set aside a specific time to
tackle a chunk of emails. One manager I know reads all her email at the
beginning of each hour and then ignores it until the beginning of the next
hour.
Bottom Line
Don't waste so much of your time trying to multi-task. Instead, make yourself
more efficient and more productive by chunking.
Set aside chunks of time for specific tasks
Reduce the time spent in start-up moments
Don't allow interruptions
Increase the number and size of chunks during your day and weeks
Recognize that there will still be interruptions no matter how well you
chunk.
Use chunking to make yourself more focused and ultimately productive.
Is there any solution?
 The secret is that multitasking is actually great thing, but it works only if
different people are doing different tasks. One has to focus on area he is
the best in, and other tasks have to be delegated to other people, who will

18. do it better and quicker, then you. Another solution is to give these
numerous tasks to outside workers, so called freelancers.
 Multitasking don’t give you a try to build effective time management plan.
And if your employees had to think about many different tasks at the same
time – then their productivity falls.
References
http://www.universalteacherpublications.com
www.ejise.com
www.SmartTime.com
www.projectperfect.com.au