Are we obsessed with gadgets or are we interested in working?


Are we obsessed with gadgets or are we interested in working?

Another day, another New York times story about technology addiction. It is almost as if they were trying to win a Pulitzer prize, or by pandering to journalists’ previews about the ills of modern communication.

In any case, this time matt rich of The Times talked to a group of silicon valley people who recommended “getting out of the device”. The basic argument is this:

And, more recently, at the meeting of top executives of many technology companies interview, it is about, and constantly stimulate the temptation – general requirements, ring and update – is creating a deep desire, body may hurt productivity and personal interaction.

Now, I’m trying to figure out how devices or social networks fit into a person’s life, and even recognize that some of them have an addictive feedback mechanism rather than a bug. But in order to let out a loud cry, the “New York times” small gadget addiction work need to realize “big acceleration in the American workplace” in keeping the people of the role of the constraints of its equipment. Here’s Clara Jeffery and Monica Bauerlein:

Sound familiar: brain teasers at four in the morning? Feeling guilty that you were only half listening to your child in the last hour? At the traffic light, at the dinner table, check work emails on the bed? Afraid of having a pleasant change, like having dinner with a friend, just like doing one more thing on your to-do list?

Guess what: it’s not you. These may seem like personal questions – of course, the pharmaceutical industry is happy to continue this concept – but it’s a real economic problem. The average American now spends 122 hours more per year on average than the British, 378 hours more than the germans (nearly 10 weeks!). . , of course, the difference is not just by a longer time to explain, across the world, except we almost everyone at least on paper have the weekend holiday, paid vacation (PDF) and paid maternity leave.

To avoid one of the reasons we spend so much time on the screen, we have to ignore the key points about our relationship with modern technology. The upper middle class (readers of the New York times) are working more hours than ever before. This is a problem for us to approach the workforce, not our equipment. Our devices enable employers to let employees work around the clock, but our strange American political and cultural system has allowed them to do so.

To make matters worse, when Richtel blames the gadget itself, he shifts people’s anxiety and anger about working 24 hours into a fear of the difference and fear of gadgets. The only possible answer is to “put your device down” rather than “organize it politically and civil society and change our collective relationship to work”.

Imagine if factory workers in the 19th century blamed their work hours on work hours. The answer to the terrible working conditions of the late nineteenth century was not to smash the clock or the steam engine! The solution is to organize and fight for your rights, 40 hours a week, and to pay for holidays.

Most of our compulsive associations are symptomatic of a larger problem, not the problem itself. As Jeffery and Bauerlein quoted McKinsey suggest, suggest a strange “drop the device” slogan to the client, but the suggestion is technical.

The world’s largest consulting firm McKinsey Quarterly (McKinsey Quarterly) recently published an article points out: “for a long time, multitasking environment is killing productivity, inhibit creativity, make us not happy.” The global consulting firm is the chief efficiency cheerleader for American companies. “These disasters have dealt a particularly severe blow to the chief executive and their colleagues.”

McKinsey’s advice to troubled executives? Do one thing at a time; On behalf of; Take a break.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here