So Where Was I?
A conversation on workplace interruptions with Dr Gloria Mark
Gloria Mark is a professor at the Department of Informatics in the Donald Bren School of Information and Computer Sciences, UC Irvine. Her research focuses on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), and in this interview we talked about her fascinating work on workplace interruptions.
Before reading this interview, ask yourself these three questions: How many times are you interrupted in a typical workday? How long does it take you to get back on task once you are interrupted? And, who is the one person who interrupts you the most in a typical workday? Jot down the answers, and see how your guesses relate to Dr. Mark's fascinating findings. Prepare to be surprised!
What are interruptions?
Dr. Mark started by explaining the important distinction between external and internal interruptions. External interruptions are probably what everyone thinks of when hearing the term "workplace interruptions": these are situations when someone or something makes us stop the work we are doing. The three most common categories of external interruptions are someone who steps into the room in which we are working, e-mail notifications that alert us to an incoming message, and a phone that rings. And, what are internal interruptions? These are situations in which we stop the work we are doing with no apparent external cause. The two most common examples are getting up to leave the room we are working in, and stopping the work we are doing to check the computer for incoming messages. As Dr. Mark made this distinction, I glanced at my own screen, and saw that the little white envelope was already in my system tray... Will I dare check my e-mail?
The answers to the three questions
I had no time to check my e-mail since my attention was drawn to Dr. Mark's description of how, through careful observations and measurements, she and her colleagues discovered that a whopping 44% of all interruptions people experience in the workplace are internal interruptions! Moreover, they found that the knowledge workers they closely tracked for hundreds and hundreds of hours, were interrupted or switched the topic they were working on almost every 11 minutes! Indeed, even these blocks of 11 minutes were broken down into short tasks that lasted, on average, only 3 minutes before they were abandoned. Lastly, the research showed that on average it took people more than 20 minutes to get back to the task they were on when they were interrupted. Given these findings, is it any wonder Dr. Mark's 2004 paper with Victor Gonzales was titled: "Constant, Constant, Multi-tasking Craziness"? How do we get anything done?
Interruptions and Information Overload
Just as Dr. Mark started explaining the link between Information Overload and workplace interruptions, I heard her phone ringing. I tried to ignore it but the Skype call we were on was very clear and it sounded as if the phone on my desk were ringing. I smiled to myself: there was our first interruption.
Dr. Mark bravely ignored the ringing phone, and continued describing an experiment in which they induced two types of interruptions on the participants: the interruptions were either 1) related to the topic the person was working on or 2) they were not related to the topic. The hypothesis was that interruptions which were not related to the topic at hand would cause more information overload than those interruptions that were related to the topic.
Just as Dr. Mark started describing the unexpected findings, her cell phone started ringing. This time we both agreed that it sounded like she should answer the call. And, to be honest, I used the opportunity to check my e-mail. Dr. Mark returned and continued describing the surprise of finding that in actuality, people who were interrupted, performed just as well as those who were not. Not only did they not perform more poorly but they actually completed the task faster. It looked as if people compensated for the interruptions by being more efficient. Nevertheless, the interruptions did have an impact: they led to significantly increased levels of stress, frustration, time pressure and effort. And this, Dr. Mark emphasizes, is the overload we experience.
Good interruptions?
So, are all interruptions bad? Not necessarily says Dr. Mark. Some interruptions, for example, have a social function. If you are working by yourself, you have a need to communicate with other people and... RING RING RING now it was my phone ringing, and both of us started laughing. My son answered the phone on another extension, but just as Dr. Mark started describing a new study they just completed, he stepped into my study and handed me the phone. Another few seconds, and I was back with Dr. Mark and the new study. So, where were we? Ah, yes, in the study they found that when people interrupt themselves and take a break, quite often they use the break to browse social networking sites and blogs. Dr. Mark's interpretation is that this might be a new type of work break where, instead of going to the coffee room or getting up and walking around, people interact socially online. Dr. Mark;s conclusion is that interruptions are sometimes very beneficial: they are opportunities for some social interaction, they can help trigger new ideas, or they could be used to "incubate" problems for a while. For example, programmers might leave a programming problem alone for a while, do something else, and then get back to the problem and find a better solution to it.
An addict getting her fix on the sidewalk in Berlin
Despite some benefits, interruptions are usually negative. Several years ago Dr. Mark was on sabbatical in Berlin. It was during the World Cup and, probably because of the heavy user load, the ISP she was using was down for two weeks. In these two weeks offline, she was able to complete writing a paper that she had not been able to complete for months. The fact that she was offline and not constantly interrupted by the need to check and respond to e-mails made all the difference. The part I won't forget about this story is how every night at around 10 p.m., Dr. Mark would walk up to a travel agency that had a hotspot, sit on the stairs in front of the closed door, and go online, despite the astonished looks of passers-by who were wondering why this woman was sitting in the middle of a busy street with her laptop.
Is such an "Internet fast" a solution to interruptions? Not according to Dr. Mark's personal experience. She told me that she tried repeating the experience and going offline for periods of time but that she was not able to repeat her successful Internet "holiday". The only weapon she has successfully adopted against information overload is not using IM, mainly since when she did turn her IM on, many students chose that method to contact her and the level of interruption was just too high.
So what did we have?
During this 30 minute interview we had two phone calls, one cell phone call, and one person stepping into the room. I also checked my e-mail once. I think that given the study findings, only four interruptions in 30 minutes is pretty good! Did you too manage to read this whole interview without interruptions?
For more information on Gloria Mark's work, visit her website at http://www.ics.uci.edu/~gmark. This Web site has links to all of the studies discussed in this interview, as well as to much much more.
Before reading this interview, ask yourself these three questions: How many times are you interrupted in a typical workday? How long does it take you to get back on task once you are interrupted? And, who is the one person who interrupts you the most in a typical workday? Jot down the answers, and see how your guesses relate to Dr. Mark's fascinating findings. Prepare to be surprised!
What are interruptions?
Dr. Mark started by explaining the important distinction between external and internal interruptions. External interruptions are probably what everyone thinks of when hearing the term "workplace interruptions": these are situations when someone or something makes us stop the work we are doing. The three most common categories of external interruptions are someone who steps into the room in which we are working, e-mail notifications that alert us to an incoming message, and a phone that rings. And, what are internal interruptions? These are situations in which we stop the work we are doing with no apparent external cause. The two most common examples are getting up to leave the room we are working in, and stopping the work we are doing to check the computer for incoming messages. As Dr. Mark made this distinction, I glanced at my own screen, and saw that the little white envelope was already in my system tray... Will I dare check my e-mail?
The answers to the three questions
I had no time to check my e-mail since my attention was drawn to Dr. Mark's description of how, through careful observations and measurements, she and her colleagues discovered that a whopping 44% of all interruptions people experience in the workplace are internal interruptions! Moreover, they found that the knowledge workers they closely tracked for hundreds and hundreds of hours, were interrupted or switched the topic they were working on almost every 11 minutes! Indeed, even these blocks of 11 minutes were broken down into short tasks that lasted, on average, only 3 minutes before they were abandoned. Lastly, the research showed that on average it took people more than 20 minutes to get back to the task they were on when they were interrupted. Given these findings, is it any wonder Dr. Mark's 2004 paper with Victor Gonzales was titled: "Constant, Constant, Multi-tasking Craziness"? How do we get anything done?
Interruptions and Information Overload
Just as Dr. Mark started explaining the link between Information Overload and workplace interruptions, I heard her phone ringing. I tried to ignore it but the Skype call we were on was very clear and it sounded as if the phone on my desk were ringing. I smiled to myself: there was our first interruption.
Dr. Mark bravely ignored the ringing phone, and continued describing an experiment in which they induced two types of interruptions on the participants: the interruptions were either 1) related to the topic the person was working on or 2) they were not related to the topic. The hypothesis was that interruptions which were not related to the topic at hand would cause more information overload than those interruptions that were related to the topic.
Just as Dr. Mark started describing the unexpected findings, her cell phone started ringing. This time we both agreed that it sounded like she should answer the call. And, to be honest, I used the opportunity to check my e-mail. Dr. Mark returned and continued describing the surprise of finding that in actuality, people who were interrupted, performed just as well as those who were not. Not only did they not perform more poorly but they actually completed the task faster. It looked as if people compensated for the interruptions by being more efficient. Nevertheless, the interruptions did have an impact: they led to significantly increased levels of stress, frustration, time pressure and effort. And this, Dr. Mark emphasizes, is the overload we experience.
Good interruptions?
So, are all interruptions bad? Not necessarily says Dr. Mark. Some interruptions, for example, have a social function. If you are working by yourself, you have a need to communicate with other people and... RING RING RING now it was my phone ringing, and both of us started laughing. My son answered the phone on another extension, but just as Dr. Mark started describing a new study they just completed, he stepped into my study and handed me the phone. Another few seconds, and I was back with Dr. Mark and the new study. So, where were we? Ah, yes, in the study they found that when people interrupt themselves and take a break, quite often they use the break to browse social networking sites and blogs. Dr. Mark's interpretation is that this might be a new type of work break where, instead of going to the coffee room or getting up and walking around, people interact socially online. Dr. Mark;s conclusion is that interruptions are sometimes very beneficial: they are opportunities for some social interaction, they can help trigger new ideas, or they could be used to "incubate" problems for a while. For example, programmers might leave a programming problem alone for a while, do something else, and then get back to the problem and find a better solution to it.
An addict getting her fix on the sidewalk in Berlin
Despite some benefits, interruptions are usually negative. Several years ago Dr. Mark was on sabbatical in Berlin. It was during the World Cup and, probably because of the heavy user load, the ISP she was using was down for two weeks. In these two weeks offline, she was able to complete writing a paper that she had not been able to complete for months. The fact that she was offline and not constantly interrupted by the need to check and respond to e-mails made all the difference. The part I won't forget about this story is how every night at around 10 p.m., Dr. Mark would walk up to a travel agency that had a hotspot, sit on the stairs in front of the closed door, and go online, despite the astonished looks of passers-by who were wondering why this woman was sitting in the middle of a busy street with her laptop.
Is such an "Internet fast" a solution to interruptions? Not according to Dr. Mark's personal experience. She told me that she tried repeating the experience and going offline for periods of time but that she was not able to repeat her successful Internet "holiday". The only weapon she has successfully adopted against information overload is not using IM, mainly since when she did turn her IM on, many students chose that method to contact her and the level of interruption was just too high.
So what did we have?
During this 30 minute interview we had two phone calls, one cell phone call, and one person stepping into the room. I also checked my e-mail once. I think that given the study findings, only four interruptions in 30 minutes is pretty good! Did you too manage to read this whole interview without interruptions?
For more information on Gloria Mark's work, visit her website at http://www.ics.uci.edu/~gmark. This Web site has links to all of the studies discussed in this interview, as well as to much much more.
