
The Myth of Focus - kseven
http://www.mindvalleyinsights.com/the-myth-of-focus/
======
adventured
I think there's a common, mistaken simplification of the concept of focus.

If Richard Branson had never focused enough to finish actual tasks within his
various enterprises, he would not be a billionaire today. It's a mistake to
think that there isn't a difference between focusing on getting tasks done
versus focusing on only doing one business at a time (in this case). Branson
was absolutely a focuser, and he chose to focus on numerous businesses. It'd
be like thinking that having more than one errand to do throughout the day
meant you didn't have focus - obviously people can do more than one thing.

As an entrepreneur, I find it necessary to focus on micro level tasks to be
productive and push a product forward. For example, finishing up code for a
specific feature. If I fail at micro focus, nothing gets done / launched.

However, I don't find it necessary to stick to only one macro effort at a
time. If I do that I feel like I'm stuck in a straight jacket. I experiment a
lot and constantly take new opportunities into consideration. I don't find
this macro focus variable detracts from being productive.

The key for me, is to focus on micro elements when it's time to do so, in
order to be productive. After that my macro focus can go wherever I choose to
direct it. I think that understanding which camp a particular item of focus
falls into is critical.

~~~
peeplaja
The article says the exact same things - you're just rephrasing it. The point
it makes is that it's okay to work on several projects, the important thing is
to finish at micro level.

~~~
adventured
Except the article claims people like Sam Walton / Jobs / Branson / Musk
weren't or aren't 'focusers.' I disagree completely with that notion. They
were / are exceptionally talented at focusing on what mattered, when it
mattered.

~~~
kabisote
> _focusing on what mattered, when it mattered_

This nails it. The article isn't entirely wrong but focus isn't a myth. Our
eyes can't focus on two things at the same time. We too can't give full
attention to multiple issues at the same time.

------
jaimebuelta
I think it also suffers from: "Steve Jobs did X, so X is amazing". Well, not
necessarily.

By definition high-profile entrepreneurs (like Jobs, Gates, Branson, etc) are
rare and their multi-zillion-companies are also rare. I miss general lack of
analysis of "common success strategies". Call me eccentric, but if I am
building a company, I'd like to base my strategy to something that will give
me the best chance to do it. And, in case I decide to not use it, know that I
am doing so.

~~~
Felix21
But but but, if they did things like everyone else then perhaps they'll be
like everyone else and if their goals are similar to yours then there is great
value in following their footsteps and taking their advise.

If however your goals are different then it should go without saying that they
are perhaps not your best role models.

------
bpyne
The author's point meets with my own observations.

Something else I observe is that a person who works on multiple projects
successfully almost always has one or more people who s/he can delegate tasks
to. There is always someone on the project team, in my organization's case
it's the software engineer, who cannot delegate. The tasks simply have to be
performed by that person or the project fails. The person working on those
tasks will not be able to work on as many projects as the project
leader/initiator. Personally, I need 3 hours of uninterrupted time daily in
order to push forward on a new application. To get maximum performance, I need
two 3-hour blocks of time separated by one 2-hour block of time to do
something unrelated.

Another point is that the author limited his scope to work. I think everyone
has multiple "projects" going on at all times. They are just not all related
to work. Having a family, home, hobbies, civic involvement all necessitate
working on multiple "projects" simultaneously.

The people who successfully keep so many "projects" going are good at not
being stressed. The author makes this point and it's a good one to reflect on.

------
foz
Focus is not just about what you choose to work on at a high level. Avoiding
distractions day-to-day is a bigger part of it. Many people I have worked with
complain that they want to focus on "one thing at a time", but that doesn't
mean it has to be the same thing all day, every day. It means being
productive, without having switch gears to deal with things that have nothing
to do with their goals and tasks. To me, that's what focus really means.

------
singold
This reminded me of my uncle who is an artist. He told me once that he would
paint three or four pictures at the same time, because while some part of one
paint was drying he could paint another.

I think something similar happens with entrepeneurs, some parts of a project
(or idea) needs 'to dry', you need time to pass to understand it better, or
leave it 2 or 3 hours to address that what you've written is BS. So having
multiple projects lets you use your time more effectivelly and also forces you
to let things 'dry' because you have other things to do.

------
jdmitch
"Attachment leads to fear. Fear leads to worry. Worry leads to chaos." This
line summarizes how I've felt at times as I have tried to be more focused on
my PhD, leaving out side projects I have been working on, and found my
productivity plummet into chaos. I don't feel like the solution is to focus
less though, but I find it difficult to detach and get out of the chaos. Any
suggestions on "focusing more" while avoiding "attachment" ?

~~~
Uncompetative
Your brain is fatigued from doing your PhD. It craves variety. Try doing one
of your side projects for a month to refresh yourself. It needs to be
something different from your PhD, something fun that you can make immediate
progress with and which holds some challenge. Don't just bake ornamental
bread.

After this 'reset', you will be in a position to alternate your focus between
your PhD and this other activity. You may need to take on another later, but
try to keep it below four. This is because your brain may not be that
accustomed to the switching of focused attention required by multi-tasking. So
don't try spinning too many plates or they will all come crashing down.

The key here is to release yourself from thinking about the outcome of your
PhD by tricking your mind into treating it like the other tasks you
alternately focus upon. You may assume that doing unrelated stuff would cut
into the precious time you need to do your main thing, but by reducing your
anxiety over not having finished it already and just enjoying the process of
doing it you will find that your productivity will increase as you spend less
time not actually working on the PhD, but worrying about it and reading
endless articles about procrastination and meditation.

Remember, it may seem a cliche but "The Journey is the Reward" - in other
words take pleasure in doing not finishing.

------
khitchdee
Thinking is like digging. If you don't keep digging at one point, you wont go
deep. However, the deeper you want to go, the broader your hole is going to
be.

~~~
jtheory
Staying in the flow is more important than staying focused on one problem --
that's more what I got out of the article.

Applying the digging metaphor -- keep up a good digging rhythm. If you get
stuck in one hole, instead of losing your rhythm (and motivation, and flow),
switch to work on a completely different digging job... and switch back later
when you're getting tangled up in that one.

The metaphor starts straining there -- since if you hit a huge rock in this
hole, it's going to be exactly the same when you get back -- but for more
intellectual work, problems tend to simplify themselves when you put them
aside for a bit, so this strategy can make you far more productive than
"brute-forcing" your way through the problems on the first project.

~~~
khitchdee
If the holes you dig are all in a general area, you don't have to shift
dimensions to switch holes, though sometimes you could do that. You could also
connect your holes which helps create a mesh of connected knowledge.

Staying in the flow makes sense, but you also need to get depth sometimes and
that means yanking yourself back from jumping to another thought-stream and
sticking to the one you were on. Discipline has a role to play in the thinking
process, I think.

~~~
jtheory
When you get to digging holes in alternate dimensions, and making a mesh of
connected holes, it's probably time to drop the metaphor. :)

Staying "in the flow" -- I'm not sure how you think of it, but for me this
means significant depth. When I'm properly engaged, I'm past the point of
flipping idly between thought-streams, and I'm completely engaged in a single
task.

The interesting thing about having multiple projects is not that we can flip
rapidly between them (i.e., never deeply mentally engaged in any of them), but
that when the engagement is waning on project #1 and we come up for air,
instead of opening HN/NYT/whatever and wandering off, we can switch to a fresh
project and dive back in again.

I.e., our brains don't need "rest" as much as they need sufficient novelty and
variety; if you can harness that, you can be hugely more productive -- not
just because you're minimizing downtime, but you're also getting into the
habit of frequent deep mental engagement.

~~~
khitchdee
The point of the metaphor is you don't do your thinking in one shot. Usually
you build on what you did last time and it requires effort focused at a point
each time and a repetition of the process over a sustained amount of time.
After you've thought through something, usually it stays with you. So there is
some permanence to the results of the the process, much like the hole you dig.

The flow thing is related to being a little lazy and listening to every whim
and fancy of your mind while you're thinking on a topic. If I were to choose,
I would choose depth over flow -- it's more difficult to go deep.

------
kabisote
I think this advice is intended for the people who run the business and not
the people who do the actual work. Elon Musk can oversee three companies at
the same time but I doubt the spacecraft pilot can afford to be distracted
with too many tasks at once.

~~~
joemoon
I think you skimmed the post. The memo is to his employees and he specifically
addresses whether or not the advice is applicable to non-entrepreneurs
(spoiler: he thinks it is).

I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the advice, but it's clear that it
is intended for "people who do the actual work".

~~~
kabisote
I reread the post and I agree that the advice is also applicable to non-
entrepreneurs (e.g. hackers, hobbyists). What became clearer is that his
advice is to pursue multiple goals, not to juggle multiple tasks at once.

------
polskibus
I think there's a false dichotomy in the article. The true choice is
understanding that success is not always deterministic and dependend only on
one factor but that there are many risks to be managed and that you need to
hedge your bets. The world of finance has worked it out best so far. Thats
what's the VCs do right too.

------
dspeyer
Multiple projects mean that when one gets blocked on an outside obstacle, you
can shift to another while you wait. However, if the queue of blocked projects
grows without bound, then you need to pull back. I've been there.

------
tunesmith
TL;DR: Boo single-minded, yay disciplined.

------
webbtraverse
I am not sure I am adding: But there's a difference between have autonomy to
focus on one or many thing as you wish vs. having responsibility/role dictated
by others, and not being able to leverage your personality type/work style to
its strengths to fulfill that role (and perhaps go above and beyond or take on
an "epic endeavor").

------
calinet6
Oh nice, they ripped off the Snowbird logo—<http://www.snowbird.com/>

Side note: I've always loved Snowbirds unabashed and beautiful use of
Helvetica throughout their brand. Same since the 70's but it's aged so well.

~~~
psweber
Logo rip off aside, everyone do yourself a favor and check out the Snowbird
site. Beautifully designed and implemented.

~~~
calinet6
Seriously, yes, that site is one of the best of any ski resort, or frankly any
company on the net. Really well done.

------
calhoun137
The problem with this article imho is that it cherry picks only 4 people. What
about all of the people who did focus on one thing and were successful, or the
people who tried to take on too much at once and failed?

------
antidaily
Get good at launching fast and you can work on more projects.

------
opminion
Buried inside, is a reminder that diversifying risk is good.

