Breaking Down Context-Switching
How to Define it, and Why it Might Be Inevitable in Certain Professions
Context-switching refers to the challenge of oscillating between different classes of tasks, assignments, or environments (broadly referred to as “contexts”) that a working individual may face in order to satisfy their job or career responsibilities. In other words, context-switching is a process where an individual is moving between workstreams for different projects, subjects, or tasks, and is required to frequently readjust their workflows to suit the new responsibilities.
For example, a product manager, generally speaking, moves between analyzing data and generating product insights, sourcing user feedback, working with engineering teams, developing release strategy with marketing teams, designing new product features, etc. In the case of the product manager, they must jump back and forth between different subjects, teams, and ways of thinking in order to execute the responsibilities of their role. Another example would be college students, who are always context-switching as they move between attending classes to taking care of their living space, studying to socializing, athletics or other extracurriculars, leadership positions to part-time jobs; college students are routinely exposed to new people, unfamiliar situations, and novel environments.
Most productivity experts assert that context-switching is unequivocally detrimental to one’s productivity, as it reduces the ability to focus, ensure quality task completion, and finish as many tasks as possible. Specifically speaking, there are three primary issues context-switching introduces:
· The first issue is fatigue — switching between environments is inherently tiring, as one has to re-insert themselves in a new context, adopt a new mindset, align themselves with different ways of thinking, and then work in this new space. One ends up losing substantial working time by expending mental energy to readjust to their different work environments.
· The second issue is disorganization — switching between contexts of work leads to increasing chaos in project management, as the individual has to keep track of simultaneous workstreams and backlogged tasks in each of these workstreams. Resulting from this disorganization, one could end up forgetting important tasks, losing sight of the goals of a particular project, and becoming overwhelmed by the deluge of unaddressed tasks.
· The third issue is distraction — switching between contexts frequently prevents any ability to sink into the state which Professor Cal Newport refers to as “deep work,” or a state of focused productivity. By switching between workstreams frequently, one loses the opportunity to engage more profoundly with tasks at hand, and this opportunity cost manifests in a loss in quality of the particular assignment.
These issues are fairly substantial, and as the number of available contexts for switching rises, these productivity detriments will also accumulate at an increasing rate. Further, if many members of a team or group are facing an accumulation of context-switching responsibilities, then overall focus and productivity of that group can substantially deteriorate. As such, productivity experts recommend reducing or eliminating context-switching completely from your work routine; the general idea relies on removing complicated context-switching processes by focusing on as few key workstreams/projects as possible. When working on the designated workstreams/projects, experts also recommend focusing on individual tasks sequentially rather than bouncing between tasks, between projects. Generally, these approaches are helpful for reducing the negative effects of context-switching (fatigue, disorganization, distraction), as these approaches aim to reduce the amount of context-switching actually taking place.
However, despite context-switching’s notable detriments to productivity, there are jobs and positions when context-switching is unavoidable. As evidenced by the examples of the product manager or the college student, context-switching can be inherent to the responsibilities and objectives facing the individual. Other roles with unavoidable amounts of context-switching include entrepreneurs, consultants (especially solution and management consultants), employees at younger or early-stage companies, politicians/elected officials, and educators/professors. In these positions, context-switching is not a choice — it’s a reality and expectation in order to execute the core functions of the position. In these aforementioned roles, managing context-switching becomes an implicit prerequisite in order to execute the objectives of the respective position, and those who can excel in roles such as product managers, solution consultants, or entrepreneurs are individuals who can effectively manage context-switching. Consequently, it is an extremely valuable skill to be able to context-switch without facing the aforementioned negative effects.
What does effectively managing context-switching entail? I will discuss this in a sequel article, since it requires a more in-depth look at how the liabilities associated with context-switching can be managed and transformed into assets. However, broadly speaking, managing context-switching is not the process of trying to eliminate it from your routine, but learning to work with it in order to maximize instances of comparative advantage (I’ll discuss this more in-depth later as well).
