Requests from your manager: how can you protect concentration?
A brief request from a manager can interrupt a much longer analysis, without making that cost visible to them. The useful question is therefore specific: how can you agree with your manager on when interruptions are warranted, without compromising coordination?
What the literature establishes
Sophie Leroy (2009, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes) demonstrates experimentally that some attention can remain attached to the previous task when switching to another activity, particularly when the first task remains unfinished. This “attention residue” can impair performance on the next task. A manager's request may therefore cost more than the time needed to answer it, although the study does not specifically examine hierarchical relationships.
Not all interruptions serve the same purpose
Quintus R. Jett and Jennifer M. George (2003, Academy of Management Review) propose a theoretical framework distinguishing several forms of interruption and their possible consequences for work. Their analysis does not treat interruptions solely as a nuisance: depending on their form and context, they may also provide useful information or disrupt a routine that is no longer appropriate. Applied to the relationship with a manager, this invites discussion of a request's purpose rather than just its frequency.
The premature conclusion
One might conclude that managers should be asked to stop interrupting periods of focused work. These studies do not support such a general rule: information that prevents someone from continuing an analysis that is no longer needed may warrant an immediate interruption. The challenge is to distinguish what should interrupt work from what can wait until an agreed stopping point. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence cannot specify
Task-switching experiments establish neither a universally appropriate period of protected concentration nor an optimal response time to a manager. Jett and George's framework is conceptual, not a trial testing the effectiveness of a manager–employee protocol. In practice, counting messages is also insufficient: it is necessary to identify which ones actually triggered a change of activity.
A practical check in Lausanne
As part of SHR's “Construire une relation efficace avec son manager” programme, a Lausanne-based manager and employee can test an agreed focus period for two weeks, with a channel reserved for jointly defined emergencies. In medtech, a higher education institution, an international sports organisation or a Lake Geneva region scale-up, these exceptions should reflect the context: safety, a research deadline, an ongoing event or a customer incident. For each request received during this period, the employee records whether it prompted an immediate change of activity, met the urgency criterion and, if deferred, blocked a decision. The pair compares the observed proportions with those from a preceding week without the new agreement: this local comparison cannot establish causality, but can help assess whether the rule protects concentration without shifting difficulties into coordination. To go further: explore the Building an Effective Relationship with Your Manager training in Lausanne in the canton of Vaud, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Building an Effective Relationship with Your Manager in Lausanne
- building an effective relationship with your manager
- Lausanne
- research
- training lausanne