Don't Multitask

If, on reading this headline, your first response was “If I don’t multitask, how do I get through my long and varied To Do list?”, then read on.

If you switch regularly snd swiftly between tasks, or even worse, try to do two things at one, (like handle your emails while in a meeting), you simply switch your focus too often, ruin your concentration on any one task and show little respect for others you are dealing with.  This is not a recipe for effective and productive work.  

Of course you need to address a variety of tasks but you need to work on any one task for sufficient time to remain familiar with all the contextual information and give strong focus to the current steps in your process of handling this task.    

This is why you should not have too many task on your ToDo list.  If you cannot give this level of focus to each task in turn ,there are too many on your list. You need to delegate some tasks or negotiate with others (including your boss) to reduce the number to a level where you can give full focus to each and deliver quality outcomes.

Then you have to schedule your day to provide periods when you can give full concentration to tasks in turn.  

This presupposes that you know what you want to achieve.from your workday - and you understand the key priorities for your focus of attention.

I know that the above is not necessarily a simple process but if you don’t address the problem, your ToDo list will get longer and the quality of your work will deteriorate.

Crisis, What Crisis?

Media pundits love to talk about the productivity crisis.  (Well, let’s be honest, they love to talk about any crisis…. and if there isn’t a crisis to talk about, they will invent one.)

The productivity crisis isn’t really a crisis.  The decline and stagnation in productivity has been a general factor in the Western world for the last decade. There are lots of reasons suggested and causes put forward but as we said last week, it is is too easy to blame the workforce - or to assign it to any one of a host of external factors.

The real reason for the productivity decline (take a deep breath here) is a lack of bold leadership over a significant time period.  One off the problems of the Western approach to business ownership and to government is its focus on the next 5 years as a maximum planning horizon.

Governments must achieve whatever they set out to do - or at least whatever they promise to do - before the next election

Business executives have a much lesser time period; they are forced into concentrating on the next quarter’s profits.  If these are down, the share price may tank- and with it, the executive’s bonus.

This is no recipe for infrastructure investment by government or business process investment by companies.

We need leaders that are willing to explain to their citizens, or their shareholders, why they intend to take longer-term decisions and make longer-term plans.  They then need the courage of their convictions to set in train the long-term actions that will ensure these plans are implemented successfully. 

If we have a crisis now, it is a crisis of leadership.

And just remind you,  it was not, and indeed is not, always thus.  

Quite a few countries with an authoritarian regime do take a longer-term view because they do not fear the electorate.

Even democratic Victorians made lots of profits but built lots of infrastructure - railways, roads, sewage systems and so on.  Without this infrastructure, we would not have had the industrial revolution.

So, leaders - stand up, take deep breath, look at a calendar rather then your current diary and start to formulate a longer view.

We might just avert ‘the crisis’. 

Breaking out of the SpirL

 Poor, and declining, national productivity is a serious malaise.  Not only does it mean that inflation is likely to rise  - as wage rises lead to increased costs without corresponding output rises - but investment also declines).

It seems ironic that firms invest more when things are going well but they do -and it’s not really very surprising.

So successful countries can benefit from a virtuous spiral while unsuccessful countries continue to decline.

It seems, obvious that those unsuccessful countries need to find a way to breakout of their downward spiral of low investment and resulting low productivity.

This clearly needs government action to stimulate growth.  However the steps to do this are not always clear.

The US has shown us a possible path.  The Biden government, under the inflation reduction measures, made huge investment in infrastructure development.

This does two things. It directly stimulates growth in specific sectors- like construction and allied supply chains; it also provides an improved infrastructure which can benefit other sectors- improved communication, improved transport links, improved employee skills, etc.

(Ironically for Joe Biden, he is unlikely to gain the benefit(in terms of recognition of his ’legacy’ The incoming president will likely take all the credit having spent the last couple of years talking dwn the economy, which has actually been in rude health.)

The NEW UK government does not seem to have learnt the lesson.  Their initial economic steps seem to have reduced the ability, and the willingness, of UK firms to invest in growth - and so far they have not made real progress on, or even plans for, infrastructure development.

It is not easy to break out of the spiral of decline. but to fail to learn such an obvious and recent lesson seems like carelessness at the very least.