![]() So taking creative, renewing, or as-needed breaks, without purporting that the magic 90-minute number for enhancing performance has been scientifically proven, seems to make good sense.įifty-two minutes on and seventeen minutes offĪ couple of years ago a huge media buzz started when DeskTime, a firm that produces employee productivity tracking software, produced research done by the firm showing that the “ most productive people work for 52 minutes, then break for 17 minutes.” DeskTime, with access to millions of records that monitored employees’ productivity while at the computer, isolated the “top 10% most productive employees” and analyzed their behavior. ![]() Recent research conducted by faculty of the Wharton School of Business found that compliance with safety regulations increases when people take real breaks between shifts, a finding that’s relevant for today’s over-taxed physicians who might otherwise forget to wash their hands. That doesn’t mean the idea of syncing your work with your ultradian rhythms isn’t intriguing, and the benefits of taking more planful breaks in today’s constantly driven work cultures make sense. The US Army even commissioned a study in the 1990’s to look at the connection between the rhythms and performance, but the findings weren’t strong. But the research isn’t so clear.Ī ttempts to scientifically test Kleitman’s idea that working for 90-minutes and then resting improves productivity haven’t panned out. Could working in 90-minute cycles during the day help improve performance? Apparently Kleitman thought so, as Schwartz does today. (Ultradian means a recurring cycle of time that repeats over a 24 hour period.) Nathan Kleitman, a physiologist and sleep researcher, did groundbreaking research uncovering the “Basic rest-activity cycle” (BRAC) of 90-120 minutes that occurs when we sleep and, it appears, when we’re awake. Personal energy guru and leadership consultant Tony Schwartz promotes the idea of improving performance by working with our daily ultradian rhythms of activity and rest. Let’s explore these ideas, after tipping our hat to science, (so politically endangered these days), to see what the research actually says. Should we follow the research on ultradian rhythms (see below) and time our work for 90 – 120 minutes followed by a 20-minute break? Or should we heed the research that says the sweet spot for productivity is 52 minutes of work, followed by a 17-minute break? Or should we stick to bursts of 25 minutes, using the popular Pomodoro Technique? When you search online you’ll find a wealth of expert-sounding opinions, with references to a few core ideas that are repeated so often that you almost think they are true. ![]() But when should we take those breaks, and for how long, to keep our performance rolling during the day?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |