Which leads to the chronic concern that distractedness, and the omnipresence of screens from kids' earliest days, will somehow affect the way people think. What about this "Kids today ..." concern?
Well, I think they're more informed simply because of the ease of information. It's a lot easier to be able to get data you want when you want it. As opposed to "Oh, yeah," now just with my iPad I wake up in the morning and go, "Okay, why is the number 13 unlucky in our culture?" I just looked that up two days ago. It's just one of those things, I don't know how long I've had that question. Now I can go find that out. Whether that makes me smarter or not, it certainly makes me more information rich. I've got more data at hand. What you do with it, I guess, has to do with your intelligence, and how easily you integrate it and combine it with other stuff.
So I think in a way we're able to--a lot of the electronic tools let you leverage your mind: I get to use my mind, I don't have to keep using my mind to keep respinning over something, because I now have a place to capture it that puts it in the appropriate map. So I only have to have ideas once. So that gives me, I think, an increased capacity to be thinking about and managing and spinning a lot more plates without any [more] stress than I ever had before. So it may look like I'm smarter, but it may just be that I'm more prolific with what I do with my cognitive abilities. And also I think people, because of what I mentioned earlier--because there's so much stuff that people then have to make decisions about--[are] learning to make good executive decisions about "what's really important to me" matters. I think a lot more people are facing that. I can't say how well they're learning it, but they never had to have that lesson before like they are now.
Do you think we'll evolve new rules or protocols for dealing with distractedness and attention--for instance, rules about smartphone use?
Hmm, that's a good question. As I looked in my own company, as we do this, we don't make a lot of hard and fast rules about any of that stuff. I think that that's always been some sort of an issue, about whether people were distracted, whether you can tell whether they're listening to your conversation or not, whether you care. I think the kids probably have different conventions with that stuff already. They just don't have any expectation that if somebody else is standing in line, that they should talk to them, if they're talking on their cellphone or if they're texting. It does kind of look robotic, these little kids walking around texting x, y, and z. But I don't have an answer to that, Jim. I don't know.
And you've worked around the world. Is anything in our current American predicament specifically American? Or is this a worldwide phenomenon of technology and connectedness?
I think it's the same if you're talking to the same kind of professional with the same kind of job.
I think what's probably happened is, the world hasn't quite caught up yet to how many middle-class professionals there are that have these more knowledge-worker jobs. But certainly the few that I've met around the world are having the same issues that everybody else is. Again, it's a little bit of a bias, because most of them are working in global companies. So Goldman Sachs is a 24/7, around-the-world organization, and anybody working in it--they don't allow some countries to not work as hard. So that's why I think at that level it's probably pretty much the same thing. A hundred million people now have the "problem" of e-mail overload.
I know that you've laid out your message in your books and in seminars and recordings. Still, I'll ask you: What is the single main point you'd like people to remember again, gaining a feeling of control in their lives?
All the stuff that is coming in needs to be externalized. I don't know that I could get it any simpler than that. You need to capture the stuff that's potentially meaningful, you need to clarify what those things mean to you, and you need to keep a series of maps of the results of all of that so you can step back and see it from a larger perspective. That's the only choice: you're ultimately going to have a lot more to do than you can do, so the question is, do you want a half-empty or half-full life?
Really, you can only do one thing at a time with conscious attention, so you either are saying "That is the thing I need to do" or you're going "Shit, I'm not sure this is what I need to do." And one is stress-free productivity, and the other is an ulcer. Right? In a way, it comes down to that.
So, what do you need to feel comfortable about what you're doing and, maybe more importantly, what you're not doing? Well, you need to have a map of all the possibilities. You know, I just spent four hours with the head of [a large government organization] last week, and all we did were two mind maps--one for his job and one for his personal life, just to do the 20,000-foot areas of focus and interest and accountabilities about all of that--and then spent time making sure he got all the projects he needed ... to make sure he wasn't letting anything fall through the cracks, and then did a triage on some of the projects he needed to get rid of and hand off to associates. He just needed to externalize that, be more objective about it. He's buried, as is everybody.