Modern Machine Shop

APR 2017

Modern Machine Shop is focused on all aspects of metalworking technology - Providing the new product technologies; process solutions; supplier listings; business management; networking; and event information that companies need to be competitive.

Issue link: https://mms.epubxp.com/i/802599

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 42 of 172

40 MMS April 2017 mmsonline.com COMPETING IDEAS Columnist Multitasking is one of those concepts that has found its way into our daily lives. People claim to b e g re at m u l ti t a s ke r s, m e a n i n g th ey c a n c o m p l e te m a ny th i n g s at o n c e. Ye t w h at i s multitasking, and is it really an effective approach to task completion? Most dictionaries will define multitasking in two ways. One describes the ability of a computer to run multiple programs at the same time. The other refers to a person's ability to perform mul- tiple tasks at one time. If multitasking could really be done as effectively by people as by computers, there would be worldwide productivity gains that dwarf the respectable individual gains we see. If people could really multitask, they would b e a bl e to re pa ir t wo (or may b e eve n thre e) machines simultaneously, build two completely different assemblies at once, produce two dif- ferent technical drawings at the same time, and even conduct two telephone calls with different people and retain 100 percent of what was said in each call. The truth is, there is little that mere mortals actually complete simultaneously, but we perceive we are multitasking when we share our attention and effort among different tasks. Unfortunately, this approach to completing tasks forces us to continuously restar t and refocus. The typical result of multitasking is that it takes longer to complete each task; reduces an individual's productivity; produces more errors; reduces our ability to retain information; and impairs our abil- ity to make selections and decisions. Proponents of multitasking believe they are being more ef fective by work ing on multiple things at once, and it can be difficult to convince them otherwise (even as they are asking them- selves, "Now where was I?"). I do applaud anyone who is trying his best to complete tasks faster. This certainly shows initiative and willingness to improve. But results are the key indicator of any process' effectiveness. Consider the following examples in which people thought they were effectively multitasking: • A customer service representative was trying to multitask by assisting two customers on the telephone at the same time. As dedicated and customer-friendly as this person was tr ying to be, she found herself bouncing back and forth between the two different customers and was forced to place each customer "on hold" numer- ous times during the calls. The customer service representative became confused and frustrated trying to help both customers at once. Likewise, each customer became upset with the amount of time he was put on hold. Although each cus- tomer eventually received the information he needed, the telephone interaction took more than twice as long as it should have. • An employee claimed to be multitasking by having five different customer orders on his desk. The employee believed he was working on all of the orders at the same time. In reality, he was only able to take action on one order at a time. He would pick up one order and attempt to enter it into the company's order entry system. If there were no problems, he completed the entire entry process for that order. If he encountered prob- lems, such as incomplete or inaccurate informa- tion, he could not finish entering the order and Multitasking Exposed Is working on more than one task at once really more efficient than tackling one thing at a time? WAYNE S. CHANESKI EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CENTER FOR MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Modern Machine Shop - APR 2017