LinkedIn and its dubious productivity promotion

Did you receive a LinkedIn sales promotion this morning? This curiosity piquer in particular.

Build effective productivity habits (apparently)

Productivity: what is really going on out there?

Is the quality of LinkedIn productivity advice worth the money? Are its courses worth your time? How does LinkedIn's knowledge of productivity stack up against the science?

The applied research into business insight, measurement and improvement, with which I have been involved for 20 years, has shown two dichotomous streams (see references below):

1.?????? Productivity is at the crux of business life

2.?????? Productivity is a constant topic of business conversation and literature

3.?????? Business does not know how to measure productivity

4.?????? Business therefore talks about productivity as an ethereal thing that everybody has and that can be improved with advice from management helpers and management gurus

Science shows us the following:

A.????? You can accurately and quantitatively measure productivity for any job from Cleaner to Chief Executive, including all management roles

B.????? Issues with management lie at the heart of why 70% of people leave their jobs

C.???? The inevitable conclusion is that management does not want to know how to measure productivity because that will highlight management ineffectiveness. Thus,

D.???? Business does not engage with the science of productivity

And we begin again from Point 1 (above).

?

LinkedIn Productivity

So what did LinkedIn's productivity expert produce? Might you be surprised to learn that their advice comes straight from Section 4 on the above list? ?LinkedIn presents us with truisms mixed with specious advice. Here is a salient example:?

?

LinkedIn says: Multitasking/switch-tasking is bad for your productivity

LinkedIn tells us that multitasking is not actually multitasking; it is switch-tasking between different activities. This is true to an extent. Multi-tasking becomes switch tasking becomes single tasking depending upon cognitive load.?

If cognitive load is light, we can multi-task. We multi-task like champions when we drive. If we switch or single tasked “I’ll just concentrate on the steering”, or? “I’ll only use the accelerator for a bit, because I want to use it perfectly,” we would be wrapped in the arms of the nearest oak and having very early night-nights.

Where would we be without multi-tasking in the kitchen? “I’ll do the peas first, then the roast potatoes…” Everything might be perfectly cooked, but it would be cold as clay and of appeal to your Labrador rather than to your family.

So when this LinkedIn masterclass tell us “there’s a study that’s shows that…switch-tasking increases error by 50% and the tasks take 50% longer"; you can be absolutely sure that this is either misrepresentation or fabrication. It is not science.

“There’s a study that’s shows that…” or "research says" is just a more deceptive version of "they say". These phrases all mean "I want this to be true and I am going to make it up" or "I am misrepresenting stuff, because it is convenient and fits my narrative.”? If there is a study, then cite the bloody thing. E.g., “Knight & Haslam ,2010, find that…”

Otherwise, remember Archimedes

“Those who claim to discover everything but produce no proofs of the same may be confuted as having actually pretended to discover the impossible.”

?

Multitasking, cognitive load and interruption

Multitasking goes wrong when cognitive load is overburdened.? You might be absolutely fine working through an Excel monthly forecast while your beloved tells you – again – how your parents are giving your kids too much of the wrong food when they babysit. The nature of the conversation is known to you, you know how it will end and that a succession of platitudes such as “Oh dear,” “That's awful,” “I’ll have a word” and “Yes, I mean it this time,” will do the job. You also know how your Excel spreadsheet works, and which line adds with which. A 30:60 split with 10% of your cognition saved for swigging your coffee is fine.? You can do all of those things together. You are multitasking.

The wheels come off though when the unexpected happens. “Our credit card statement is eight grand in the red” is not a phrase that can be handled with “Yes, that’s nice, darling.” And if you don’t switch to single tasking pronto you are in bother. Keep the 10% for the coffee though.

Multi-tasking is not a bad thing, it does exist and can be really useful. The enemy that LinkedIn misses here is interruption. Interruption really messes with your output. It disrupts concentration, breaks flow and it takes time to ramp back up again.

The main culprit? Well you know that already, don’t you? Put your phone out of earshot for a couple of hours and crack on. You will be amazed.

But you can't mount a revenue generating workshop on ‘Putting your Phone in a Drawer.’ ?However, you can spin money from one called ‘Learning to Single Task’ which focuses on improving inchoate productivity with a Consultant versed in 'some research' and misinformation . In fact you can be tapped up to pay for a series of such nonsenses, because business doesn’t understand productivity (see above), struggles with its basic definition and cannot measure it. There may be precious little science, accuracy or verity in LinkedIn's productvity advice, but there is revenue; just not for you.

Or you could...

Just put your phone away, work in the happiest place you can, and if you experience cognitive overload, prioritize your tasks.

There! Fortune saved, time not wasted and far batter advice. Just send me a cheque please.

However, if you really do want to improve productivity across an entire business, call. We can do wonderful things together.

And below, are some references to show that I do know what I am talking about.

Thanks for reading. C x

References

Haslam, S.A., & Knight, C. (2006). Your place or mine?? BBC News Website, retrieved 20th November 2007 from: https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6155438.stm?

Haslam, S. A., & Knight, C. (2010).? Cubicle, sweet cubicle, Scientific American Mind, 21, 30 -35.

Knight, C. (2011) At home in the office? The benefits of space that speaks to employees’ identity, Monacle, 1, 12.15.

Knight, C.P., & Van Osselaer, V. (2011), The smell of distress or a waft of welcome?? The psychological effects of scent in a hospital. University of Exeter: Ambius

Knight, C.P., & Haslam, S.A. (2010). Your place or mine? Organizational identification and comfort as mediators of relationships between the managerial control of workspace and employees’ satisfaction and well-being. British Journal of Management, 21, 717-735.

Knight, C.P., & Haslam, S.A. (2010). The relative merits of lean, enriched, and empowered Offices: An experimental examination of the impact of workspace management, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16, 158 – 172.

Knight, C.P., Haslam, S.A., & Haslam, C. (2010). In home or at home? How collective decision making in a new care facility enhances social interaction and wellbeing amongst older adults. Ageing and Society, 30, 1393 – 1418

Nieuwenhuis, M, Knight, C.P., Postmes, T., & Haslam, S.A. (2014). The relative benefits of green versus lean office space: Three field experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. Vol 20, 199-21

Knight, C.P (2017) Leadership, led design and liberty: How to create a world class workplace. Helsinki: Client Report

Knight, C.P (2018) New York Neighbourhoods: Lean versus Green, New York: Client Report

Knight, C.P. (2019) A report on life: Employment, satisfaction and accommodation. London: Client Report

Knight, C.P. (2021) The impact of harvestable plants on performance and well-being. London: Client Report

Knight, CP (2021) The end of the affair, the return to offices and the route to happiness: Employment lessons from the pandemic. London, Client report

Knight, C.P. (In press) Spaces to encourage creativity, In Augustin & Oseland (edit.) Workplace Zoo. Wiley: London

?