Multitasking- NOT the Best Strategy: Can Less Lead to Achieving More

In today's fast-paced world, multitasking has become synonymous with productivity. We pride ourselves on juggling multiple tasks simultaneously, believing it's the key to getting more done. However, research and real-world experience are increasingly challenging this widely accepted notion. As an expert with over two decades in strategy development, I've witnessed firsthand how this trend has not only failed to increase productivity but has also significantly impaired strategic thinking.The Multitasking Myth

Multitasking, once heralded as a skill of the highly productive, has been pushed to extreme levels by our increasing reliance on technology. We've become so accustomed to dividing our attention that it's now the norm to respond to emails during meetings, scroll through social media while working on projects, or even text while driving – a behavior so dangerous that laws have been enacted to curb it.

But here's the reality check: our brains aren't wired for multitasking. What we perceive as simultaneous task execution is actually rapid task-switching, and it comes at a cost. Each switch requires our brain to refocus, leading to mental fatigue and decreased efficiency. Studies have shown that multitasking can reduce productivity by as much as 40% and even temporarily lower IQ scores.

The Impact on Strategic Thinking

The negative effects of multitasking extend beyond day-to-day tasks, significantly impairing our ability to engage in deep, strategic thinking. Strategic planning requires focus, creativity, and the ability to consider complex scenarios – all of which are compromised when our attention is divided.

In my years of experience facilitating strategic planning sessions, I've observed two common scenarios where multitasking hinders the process:

Scenario 1: The Leader as Facilitator

When a company's leader – be it the CEO, President, or Board Chair – takes on the role of facilitator in strategic planning sessions, they're attempting to multitask in a high-stakes environment. This approach, while well-intentioned, often backfires for several reasons:

1. The Boss Effect: Even in organizations with open and collaborative cultures, employees may hesitate to express unformed ideas or challenge the leader's viewpoints. The fear of potential career repercussions, however unfounded, can stifle creativity and lead to groupthink.
2. Political Navigation: Participants may engage in discussions while constantly evaluating the political implications of their contributions. This careful self-censorship limits the free flow of ideas crucial for innovative strategies.
3. Reduced Psychological Safety: The presence of "the boss" as a facilitator can decrease the psychological safety necessary for truly creative exchanges. Employees may default to "safe" positions rather than proposing bold, potentially game-changing ideas.
4. Leader's Dual Role Conflict: It's virtually impossible for a leader to shed their authoritative role when facilitating fully. This internal conflict can lead to inconsistent facilitation and may inadvertently steer the discussion in certain directions.

Scenario 2: The Team Member as Facilitator

The second common approach is to have a member of the leadership team with process training or planning experience lead the strategic discussions. While this may seem like a compromise, it still presents significant challenges:

1. Perceived Influence: Other team members may believe the facilitator has undue influence over the process outcomes, even if they maintain strict neutrality.
2. Loss of Valuable Input: By taking on the facilitator role, this team member is effectively removed from active participation in strategy development. Their unique insights and experiences are lost or significantly diluted.
3. Process vs. Participation Conflict: If the facilitator attempts to contribute to discussions actively, the meeting process often suffers. It's challenging to manage the agenda, time, and group dynamics while also being a full participant.
4. Reduced Meeting Efficiency: Meetings led by an internal facilitator often run over schedule or fail to cover all planned topics, as the facilitator struggles to balance process management with participation.

The Cost of Multitasking in Strategic Planning

The impact of these multitasking attempts in strategic planning can be substantial:

1. Diminished Creativity: The constant task-switching between facilitation and participation reduces the cognitive resources available for creative thinking.
2. Incomplete Perspectives: When key team members are partially or fully occupied with facilitation, their valuable perspectives may not be fully incorporated into the strategic plan.
3. Reduced Buy-in: If participants feel they couldn't fully express their ideas or concerns, they may be less committed to the resulting strategy.
4. Missed Opportunities: The constraints imposed by multitasking can lead to overlooking innovative ideas or failing to explore potential strategic directions fully.
5. Inefficient Use of Time: What seems like a time-saving measure often results in longer, less focused meetings and the need for additional sessions to cover all necessary ground.

The Alternative: Focused Strategic Planning

To overcome these challenges and maximize the effectiveness of strategic planning sessions, consider the following approaches:

1. Hire a Professional Facilitator: An external facilitator can maintain neutrality, manage the process efficiently, and ensure all voices are heard.
2. Create Dedicated Thinking Time: Build in periods for uninterrupted, focused strategic thinking outside of group sessions.
3. Use Technology Wisely: Implement tools that aid in collaboration and idea-sharing without causing distraction.
4. Establish Clear Roles: Define distinct roles for facilitation, note-taking, and participation to avoid multitasking pitfalls.
5. Practice Mindfulness: Encourage participants to be fully present and engaged during strategic discussions.

Conclusion: Embracing Focused Strategy Development

In an age where multitasking is often celebrated, it's crucial to recognize its limitations, especially in the realm of strategic planning. By acknowledging that wearing multiple hats rarely produces optimal results, organizations can create an environment conducive to deep, creative thinking and effective strategy development.

Remember, the goal of strategic planning is not just to have a plan but to have the best possible plan. This requires giving the process the focused attention it deserves. By moving away from the multitasking mindset and embracing focused, dedicated strategic thinking, organizations can unlock their full potential for innovation and growth.

In the end, when it comes to developing strategies that will shape your organization's future, doing less – in terms of multitasking – truly can lead to achieving more.

Ready to give up on multitasking through your next strategic planning cycle?

Book a call to discuss your options.