In the podcast, “Faculty in Research,” several of our colleagues have remarked on the role of having multiple research projects ongoing at the same time. Some are working on multiple papers during same time period. One might be in an initial drafting stage. Another might be under final submission status. Another might be a “revise and resubmit” status.
Others are sketching out ideas for one book, while finishing up drafts of another book, while writing an essay that may be the germ of another book.
One of the unusual aspect of the life of a scholar is that most of their research agenda is self-identified. They choose what to work on. They choose how wide versus narrow is the scope of the project. They choose the level of risk of failure in achieving the project’s goals. They choose how big a departure from common practice in the field the project aims to make.
In that sense, much of the scholarly work of academics is creative — a new way of expressing a thought is being invented, a new hypothesis is being constructed to explain prior anomalous findings, a new research approach is invented to unlock previous hidden phenomena, a new synthesis of arguments is constructed. Creative work can sometimes be taxing, and solutions to puzzles become elusive.
Our colleagues are telling us that working on multiple projects at the same time can be more productive. One literature that comes to mind in this regard is that on multitasking, the act of quickly switching between tasks. But, there is common critique that multitasking is counterproductive.
But maybe that is the wrong literature. Another might be studies of the feeling of “hitting the wall” on a task, not being able to push it forward because of some conceptual or logistical impediment. What our colleagues may be saying is that hitting a wall on one project need not be stifling if there is another project needing attention. By deliberately switching to another project within their broader research program, they enjoy the later benefits of returning to the first with fresh perspectives. By avoiding focused attention on the work that “hit a wall,” many times the wall is conquered. Working on something else permits that refreshment.
This is also probably related to our colleagues’ choosing different kinds of projects to work on during the same time period. They seem to be saying that the positive feedback from completing a task (even an intermediate step of another project) is helpful to continuing to progress their research agenda. Hence, having a mix of project tasks available at any point assists the completion of all of them, as the scholar moves across them. When stuck on one task, they take up another task as an aid to making progress of a relevant piece of their research program. They return to the first task with renewed energy (and sometimes a solution to “hitting the wall”).
As a mentor to younger faculty colleagues and graduate students, advice on this part of our jobs can be of real value. In addition to the normal guidance about how to juggle teaching, research, and service duties, more advice on planning a multifaceted research program, with separate paths of projects might be a useful mentoring thrust.
Interesting. I think that variability of tasks might also allow us to think more creatively by seeing connections that might be possible by thinking outside the box! Just a thought.