So you have heard this before... I am sure one of your more self-effacing friends, colleagues or acquaintances has brought this to your attention. Typically, you have come to them and explained that you have multiple tasks to complete, and a very limited amount of time to complete all of them. Therefore, time is not plentiful and you must figure out a way to complete tasks side-by-side. Tasks being what they are, if you do not complete them with a sense of care and quality then it will take twice as long because you will have to do it again. It may also mean a questioning of your expertise, skill and character if you do not complete the tasks and well.
Inevitably you will seek the counsel of your momentarily appointed sage (as known as "a friend"). They will stop what they are doing to listen to your complaint, your request for expertise (advice vs. expertise, is another explanation for another time), and has now rendered their conclusion.
"You cannot multi-task."
Or some deviation of this platitude is spoken in hopes that this brief statement brings with it a tome of enlightenment ala Neo's declaration in The Matrix, "I know kung-fu."
Their hope is that you now know "Kung-Fu" and, in fact, can demonstrate your newest skill without any further output from them or any further input from you.
This is not the case...
This statement seems to only bring with it, an explanation from the requester for an in depth understanding of what is being told to them. The hope for an flash of enlightenment, a Matrix-level epiphany is dashed, we must move to an explanation of the thing disguised as a conversation. We begin the conversation on inter-related tasking or inter-tasks as an evolution based on the mediocrity of multi-taksing.
- What in the entire world does this even mean?
- Why are you making up new words?
Are we just complicating an already complicated topic?
I'm getting to that...
We always do that, it is called language... Twerking is a thing now.
Of course, and complexity breeds simplicity. So let's get back to number one, this will clarify everything...
What in the entire world does this even mean?
In fact we are using language to clarify a misunderstood phenomenon. The idea of multi-tasking is burdensome yoke placed on the upper-back of the achiever. You have a history of success with smaller tasks, which lends itself to the view of mastery in an area, or areas. We then ask you to do more things, with less resources, for a longer period, with a time constraint. This is the definition of a magic trick. Without the most important piece of the magic trick, the magic. Okay, not magic, let's call it the distraction, the slight of hand or the head-fake. Something to draw your attention away from the actual work that is being performed. The work is in sequence based on the completion of work already in progress. It is the efficient start/stop/start of a process that allows for the illusion to take place. It is the same illusion used by people who say they are multi-taskers. It is the same illusion used by people requesting multi-taksers. They are asking for illusionists.
There is a method to this... It is found in the very series of words:
Sequenced. Efficient. Deliberate.
This work is fashioned into inter-related tasking, which is commonly known as multi-tasking. This is sub-standard, a mediocre understanding at best. Multi-tasking is the simultaneous execution of more than one program or task. Which for biological humanoids, is a farce.
We seldom, if at all, complete work simultaneously... we definitely do not complete quality work at the same exact time.
Be not dismayed, allow me to introduce you to the interrelated sequential task/work/program... or Inter-sectional Programming (Intersect).
Inter-sectional Programming: the composition, development and implementation of interdependent tasks which result in a qualitative comprehensive result.
The Intersect...Another douche-laden way we over complicate a very simple colloquialism.
Do one thing well.
Let's continue here with this conversation, or better yet...
Do your work.