Most people have taken exams of one type or another, whether it be GCSE, (or O level if you’re of a certain age) A level, professional exams, vocational training, even the driving test. We’re probably all familiar with advice on the most effective method to revise: start in plenty of time, don’t cram; break up revision into smaller chunks punctuated by a break; have someone test you; get plenty of sleep and eat well. As public exams draw to a close, all of this has got me thinking about how this advice might be applied to the work environment; in particular the holy grail of increased productivity, and this was how I happened across the Pomodoro technique of time management.
It’s a system devised in the 1980s by the then student, Francesco Cirillo, now productivity consultant, to maintain his focus through the seemingly monumental task of revision. In a nutshell, he divided his time into segments of 25 minutes work followed by a 5 minute break, timing his efforts using a tomato-shaped kitchen timer (pomodoro is Italian for tomato), each 25 minute work session being called a Pomodoro. During the Pomodoro, you focus solely on the task in hand, politely deflecting any distractions (colleagues, pinging, ringing, and flashing vibrating devices). When the bell trills, take a break of 5 minutes, doing something very different from the task. Repeat the process three more times, but then take a longer break of 15 to 20 minutes. There are additional rules but that’s the basic tenet of the technique.
So it’s been around for some time now and there are books and apps to help you on the way. But does the technique work and is there any evidence that it works? I cannot find any published, peer-reviewed prospective controlled studies comparing the use of the Pomodoro technique with a control group (either no specific technique or some other time-management technique) but there’s certainly plenty of anecdotal evidence both for and against. Some people find it gives them the discipline to focus on a task, others find it unrealistic to have to ignore, for example, a prospective customer phoning from the other side of the world whilst you finish your pomodoro. David Nowell, a clinical psychologist, is a proponent, saying it’s particularly useful to manage procrastination, ‘Something really boring that’s gotta get done? Do it! But just for 25 minutes!’
As for taking regular breaks between work sessions rather than just ploughing on until the job is done, the social networking company Draugiem Group used a time-tracking and productivity app Desk time to study the habits of their most productive employees. Reported by Julia Gifford in ‘the Muse’, results allegedly show (though not published that I can find) that the top 10% of employees in terms of productivity ratings did not work for the greatest amount of time; on average, they took breaks amounting to 17 minutes for each 52 minutes worked. That sounds like a lot of down time but if they’re getting the work done, and more, it has to be right for them.
A prospective study by Alejandro Lleras (1), Professor of Psychology at the University of Illinois, found that taking breaks from a 50 minute computerised task prevented deterioration in attention. A group of 84 subjects were randomly assigned to four groups; one group performed the task without breaks or diversions; the other three were interrupted in different ways. The group that was interrupted briefly to perform a short mental task twice during the main 50 minute task maintained their performance on the main task, whilst the other three groups deteriorated.
“It was amazing that performance seemed to be unimpaired by time [in the group that was given two short mental breaks], while for the other groups performance was so clearly dropping off,” Lleras said.
Collection of scientific data on the effect of breaks on performance is in its infancy, but anecdotally, it works for some, so for the sake of a timer, it’s worth a go. (The research and writing of this article took eight Pomodoros!)
(1) ‘Brief and rare mental breaks keep you focused’. A Ariga and A. Lleras. Cognition Vol 118, March 2011.
