We’re all familiar with the following terms that attempt to explain and define our ability or lack of ability to process an increasing number of events within a shrinking time horizon: multi-tasking, ADD, ADS (attention deficit syndrome) ... Each week seems to bring with it a new term to help us make sense of our crazed existence.
Here’s a new way to describe our hectic, emotionally complex chaotic modern (business) lives: Continuous Partial Attention – It’s a term coined by Linda Stone (a former VP at Microsoft where co-founded and directed the Virtual Worlds (now Social Computing Group) in Microsoft Research in 1994).
A recent New York Times article describes CPA: “We are so busy keeping tabs on everything that we never focus on anything. This can actually be a positive feeling, inasmuch as the constant pinging makes us feel needed and desired. The reason many interruptions seem impossible to ignore is that they are about relationships – someone, or something, is calling out to us. It is why we have such complex emotions about the chaos of the modern office, feeling alternately drained by its demands and exhilarated when we successfully surf the flood.”
Want to explore further? Here’s an extract from the SuperNova 2005 Conference where Linda was a keynote speaker (thanks to O’Reilly Radar for capturing Linda’s following stream of consciousness):
Pop quiz. It's okay to answer "yes" to a question even if you're contradicting an earlier answer:
*
Technology has improved my life
* Technology has harmed my quality of
life
* I pay full attention to people when they talk to me, when I am in
meetings, when I work
* I pay partial attention to what I'm doing and I'm
scanning my devices or software for other inputs
* Technology sets me
free
* Technology enslaves me
In 1997 I coined the phrase "continuous partial attention". For almost two decades, continuous partial attention has been a way of life to cope and keep up with responsibilities and relationships. We've stretched our attention bandwidth to upper limits. We think that if tech has a lot of bandwidth then we do, too.
With continuous partial attention we keep the top level item in focus and scan the periphery in case something more important emerges. Continuous partial attention is motivated by a desire not to miss opportunities. We want to ensure our place as a live node on the network, we feel alive when we're connected. To be busy and to be connected is to be alive.
We've been working to maximize opportunities and contacts in our life. So much social networking, so little time. Speed, agility, and connectivity at top of mind. Marketers humming that tune for two decades now.
Now we're over-stimulated, over-wound, unfulfilled.
Are you beginning to ignore call-waiting? At some companies, email-free Fridays are taking off. We’re turning into a generation of email junkies. Email creates way of doing business but a new headache. Nestle Rowntree is the first company in Britain to do email-free Fridays. Email is banned on Friday to see whether employees will be more creative when they discuss things face-to-face.
Another consequence of email culture is that we don't make decisions: send emails around. Saw an increasing tendency for that in latter years at Microsoft. At once company, CEO requires people going into a meeting to drop Blackberrys, cellphones, etc. at door: disarm.
Bill Gates has three types of meetings: free-for-all, mixed (sitting at back indicates paying half-attention), and full (if you're sitting at the table, you focus on what's going on).
We're shifting into a new cycle, new set of behaviours and motivations. Attention is dynamic, and there are sociocultural influences that push us to pay attention one way or another. Our use of attention and how it evolves is culturally determined.
I see twenty year cycles. Coming through in the cycles is a tension between collective and individual, and our tendency to take set of beliefs to extreme then it fails us and we seek the opposite.
1945-1965: organization/insitution center of gravity. We paid attention to that which we serve. Lucy paid full attention to phone conversations, Seinfeld does not. Belief that by serving insitution of (marriage|employer|community) we'd leave happy and well-ordered lives. Marketing, command-and-control lifestyle, parents and authority figures, all fit in. Service to institution would bring us satisfaction. We paid full-focus attention to that which served the institution: family, community, marriage. We trusted experts in authority to filter the noise from the signal, to give us the information that matters. As those things failed us, we embraced what we'd suppressed.
1965-1985: me and self-expression. Self and self-expression new center of gravity. Trusted ourselves, entrepreneurial. Apple, Microsoft, Southwest Airlines. Marketers said we have our power to be our best. Fashion broke free. We paid attention to that which created personal opportunities. Paid attention to full-screen software like Word and Excel. Willing to fragment attention if it enhanced our opportunity. Multitasking was adaptive. Our sense of committment dropped: rising divorce rate, 3 companies/career, etc. Became narcissistic and lonely, reached out for network.
1985-2005: Network center of gravity. Trust network intelligence. Scan for opportunity. Continuous partial attention is a post-multitasking adaptive behaviour. Being connected makes us feel alive. ADD is a dysfunctional variant of continuous partial attention. Continuous partial attention isn't motivated by productivity, it's motivated by being connected. MySpace, Friendster, where quantity of connections desirable may make us feel connected, but lack of meaning underscores how promiscuous and how empty this way of life made us feel. Dan Gould: "I quit every social network I was on so I could have dinner with people."
So now we're overwhelmed, underfulfilled, seeking meaningful connections. iPod is as much about personal space as personalized playlists. Driving question going from 'what do I have to gain?' to 'what do I have to lose?' Success turning to fear.
Attention captured by marketing messages and leaders who give us a sense of trust, belonging in a meaningful way. Now we long for a quality of life that comes in meaningful connections to friends, colleagues, family that we experience with full-focus attention on relationships, etc.
The next aphrodisiac is committed full-attention
focus. In this new area, experiencing this engaged attention is to feel alive.
Trusted filters, trusted protectors, trusted concierge, human or technical,
removing distractions and managing boundaries, filtering signal from noise,
enabling meaningful connections, that make us feel secure, are the opportunity
for the next generation. Opportunity will be the tools and technologies to take
our power back.
David Feldt





Comments (1)
Great analysis and I agree with the conclusion- technology feels very atomizing and alienating right now, particular for late adopters like me. For example, I have refused to take up IM because it seems to bring *less* value/ productivity when you factor in (a) partial attention on my end and (b) the very low barrier for the sender to drone at me. I think that's probably the key area for the next gen of technologies. I can limit those with constant access to me to my close friends, family, and biz colleagues. But somehow I need to train them not to use the ease of reaching me to essentially spam.
Posted by Misha | June 23, 2006 9:10 AM
Posted on June 23, 2006 09:10