Something very strange is happening in the workplace. A kind ofcommunications anarchy is breaking out in offices all over world andmanagers are feeling powerless to intervene. In fact some have foundthemselves willing accomplices, unable to resist the distractionsoffered by email, the internet and social networking sites.
There is a paradox in this anarchy. Many people are working long hoursin business. The old parameters and intervals that defined the workingday for 100 years are disappearing. Lunch hours, tea breaks, even startand finish times are eroding.
"I wish we had clocking-in cards and were paid for the actual time wework," said my eldest son, while doing a seasonal shop-assistant job atone of the big music store chains. With a degree in economics, an MSc infilm industry management, and a brain as sharp as a razor, he isprobably overqualified for the job, but we all have to start somewhere.He's brimming with ideas for streamlining the business, but can find nomechanism for discussing them with senior management.
I'm sure he is not alone. But at least he is not bored, unlike thousandsof other under-employed, under-used and under-recognised graduates. Whatmany of these 'first rung' employees do not understand is that they havenot been hired for their existing skills, but for their potential. Theyhave wonderful multi-tasking and screen-based collaborative skills. Butmuch office work has not gone beyond the two-ball juggling league,whereas the internet is breeding five-ball jugglers who will not juggleto order. Instead they do so when the whim takes them, led not by thework ethic, but by their eclectic curiosity.
So how can managers persuade their new butterfly colleagues to focustheir attention on the job for which they are being paid?
First, they must face up to their own issues, because managementattention too is being undermined by the very technology that wasdesigned to help people work more efficiently. Just about everyone in arole that exploits the ability of the internet to emancipate their workis led down avenues of information into a toy shop of distractions.
I don't blame those who have banned staff from visiting socialnetworking websites during office hours. Only a fool would deny thatwork routines have been disrupted by socially motivated internetsurfing. But we must not lose a sense of proportion. While I don'tsubscribe to some of the alarmist figures on time lost to businessreleased in recent studies, I do think, nonetheless, there is a problemthat is being ignored in far too many management teams.
Who loses? You could argue shareholders lose in the long term throughlower productivity. On the other hand, it is difficult to see howknowledge work can be sustained without some slack in the system. Deepconcentration levels cannot be maintained for eight hours a day.
The real loser, I believe, is work itself, if the distraction is farmore stimulating than the job. I experience this at first hand when,fairly regularly, part of my working day is diverted into somestimulating social exchange. My conscience is clear. I am paid byresults. But if I was drawing a salary I would feel less comfortable.There would be stress caused by a lack of direction induced byunderwork. There would be guilt, anxiety, listlessness - all symptoms ofoffice-based attention deficit.
I would go so far as to say that this issue is endemic in our age.Indeed it may come to define our age. Where is it taking us? I don'tpretend to have the answers but, deep down, I believe that thesedynamics are changing the meaning of work. Either that or there will besome correction as we become bored with our distractions. I shouldstress that I do break away from the net occasionally and findconcentrated work enjoyable. In fact I'm thinking of taking it up for aliving. It might catch on.
