I’m in the midst of some social media navel-gazing. (What’s new, right?) Nothing revolutionary at all, just a dose of malformed rumination on the effects of social technology on behavior, with a side dish of cranky “you kids stay offa my lawn” thrown in for good measure.

Previously, I’d written that “Text messaging is a way for unaccompanied non-smokers to look busy in bars,” but we’ve clearly taken it to the next level. I’ve been disturbed to note the now-many times I’ve been hanging out with folks, and finding we’re all sitting together, but head-down and screen-lit, texting, browsing, or otherwise fiddling with our mobiles.

Presence vs. Attention
There was a Washington Post article on texting that trod similar territory earlier this month, “Text Is Cheap,” on how we let texting interrupt our real-world attention and conversation. You’d think that being with the person you’re, you know, with, should take priority over remote people, but it’s kind of like when you’re standing at a sales counter and the clerk is taking a call — because you’re a presence right there, the clerk doesn’t have to do as much to keep you there, whereas the other person is just a disembodied voice on the phone and can hang up at any time. So the clerk has to put more effort into keeping the remote person on the line, and can buy some time using nonverbal gestures to mollify you (especially since many folks don’t want to be “rude,” even if they’re being rude to.)

It makes a perverse kind of sense.

A related phenomena is the competition for attention — Salon has a book review of Rapt, by Winifred Gallagher. (Which I haven’t read. The book, I mean — I skimmed the review.) Again, not really new stuff — we know all about switching costs, multitasking, shiny things, distractions, and sensory overload. For an additional buzzword, there’s always continuous partial attention.

Friend-Surfing
Another challenge when you’re interacting with someone is the insidious desire to see what else is going on, and even the temptation to trade up. It’s like being at a networking event, cocktail party, or meat market where you’re always looking for someone better to talk to.  Having mobile social media can mean that you’re always shopping for a more interesting conversation from someone online, which means that you’re not invested in your current conversation — it’s kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Unquestionably, mobile social media can take you out of the moment, so the question is, is the remote connection you’ve established as meaningful as the one you’ve sacrificed? Given that in-person connections are so packed with information and nuance (through both verbal and non-verbal means), I’d have to say generally, no. Unless you’re not getting anything out of it and looking for a distraction, anyway.

Anyway, there’s a book called Be Here Now by guru Ram Dass. I’ve never read it (and in fact, have no clue as to what it’s about, but I always liked the title. To me, it suggests that you should stay in the moment and the presence you’re currently inhabiting. One of the things about social media and mobile media tools is that it helps you connect with people who are remote from you, at some expense of disconnecting you from people close to you.

I realize there’s not a whole lot of concreteness in this entry, so I’d be interested in hearing your comments and anecdotes — do you think you have a grip on balancing your mobile social communications when you’re out and about?

I’ve got video envy. I work primarily in text (with the occasional photo), but I think a lot about audio and video content, and I wish had a better grasp of the language and metaphor of video (in theory, I’m a little closer on the audio stuff).

With modern tools, video is really easy to do really badly. You have to have the content, of course (which is where good writing and planning comes in), but you also have to have good audio, and then (duh) good video. If you’re lacking in any one of these three areas, it’s really obvious and distracts from your message. So good production values are key.

And then you still have problems with searchability and accessibility. You can do written transcripts, though that increases your post-production tasks even more (among others, the Wall Street Journal usually does a good job with integrating video — the article text summarizes what’s said in the video, and the visuals complement and enhance the text).

I don’t want to overstate the problem. Lots of folks have found a way to make video work for them, and if you’re a single talking head looking into the camera, all you really need on the production side is a  backdrop, a good light (preferably bounced off of something), and a quiet space.

(If you’re primary ouevre is cute animals falling asleep or riding on Roombas, you don’t even need this.)

On the other hand, the consumption problem is trickier and doesn’t have an easy answer.

In order to get the most out of a video, you really have to be fully engaged — you have to be watching (not just looking) and listening (not just hearing). Even if you’re zoning out and watching passively, you still have to be paying attention. And to fully consume 5 minutes of video, you have to watch the whole thing. And that means you can’t really be doing anything else while you watch (unlike audio).

If you just listening to a video, you’re either missing something, or the video broadcaster isn’t taking full advantage of the medium and is wasting bandwith and might as well just be doing audio.

(That last bit, of course, is a slight exaggeration, or at least an annoyingly purist point of view. For a basic talking head interview, you might just need the audio, and doing video gives you the option of consuming audio or video. Also, look at the example of television advertisers, who have known for a long time to make sure their ads gracefully degrade  — they try to make sure their message still gets across if you’re watching in black and white, or with the sound off, or you come into the middle of it.)

Anyway, in our theoretically pure consumption of video, you can’t be driving, walking, or doing other things. (Well, you can, but something’s not going to get the proper attention.) With reading, your attention also has to be focused, but you can read at your own pace, and you can stop and start as you need to (though there are some switching costs when you multitask — you can’t get something for nothing), and audio is probably the best medium to consume while you’re doing something else.

Despite all the shortcomings of video, we’re going to see a lot more of it. And that’s because we like watching stuff. And we know that the consumption of media comes at the expense of non-media activities (i.e. we spend more time being couch/mouse potatoes). So the point of all this is to just consider that when you’re doing video, either produce it so that you’re taking full advantage of the medium (and really demand people’s full attention), or produce it so it gracefully degrades so people can use it when they don’t give it their full attention.

I’m curious to hear from people who are working with video — do you do it because you can, or because you truly need the information presentation capabilities that video offers?

Jared is a serious multi-tasker with the projects to back it up. He is currently President of SET Consulting, a firm dedicated to helping organizations work smarter and look better in Microsoft Office. He also writes the blog, Technotheory.com which is focused on helping people use technology to become more productive. In fact, instead of just talking the talk, he walked the walk and will soon launch AwayFind.com which is an e-mail productivity tool inspired by the work Tim Ferriss did in his book “The 4-Hour Work Week”.
In between juggling many tasks, we recently sat down for an interview and I was able to spend some time with him and discuss productivity and his new project, AwayFind.com. Here is a transcript of our interview:

Steve: Let’s start out with the basic concept of productivity. Do you think technology has helped us or just increased our ability to handle more?
Jared: When I started SET (software efficiency training) Consulting in 2002 it was with the hope of getting people more productive with technology, so they could better enjoy their work and leave their offices a little earlier. But most people are as concerned with how much they work as they are with the results. That is, they feel the need to work at least eight hours, regardless.
So, technology does help us to accomplish more, and certainly offers conveniences. But, in and of itself, I don’t think it’s led us to work less or be any happier.

Steve: How long have you been working in the technology space? What motivated you to start SET Consulting?
Jared: I’ve been in technology since my first HTML support job at a startup in ’95. I worked in web or Windows development at four other startups, half of which are still in existence, and I spent three years in development with the Federal Trade Commission.

While working at the FTC I realized that even the most technical users weren’t particularly adept with the seemingly basic Microsoft products like Word, Excel, and Outlook. I saw this both walking-through the office, and in some training sessions I held. After some more investigation, I considered that there was a market in helping people who used these tools 6+ hours per day. I had always been the kid who shared the little “computer tricks” with friends; it turned out that law firms, government agencies, and small businesses needed those tricks even more.

Steve: What is your philosophy on using technology to become more productive?
Jared: Productivity should never be an end in itself. If you focus just on how long things take, then you can become a cog in a machine. But if you can better apply your time to skip past the minutiae, then you can be more creative and add greater value to everything you touch—in other words, a little thought about productivity can help people to use technology as a vehicle rather than an obstacle to getting stuff done.

Steve: You are definitely someone who has been inspired by productivity thought leaders. Who do you find are most effective and why?
Jared: I’ve learned and been inspired by people like Tim Ferriss and Marc Orchant. Tim has really helped people to see their 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s completely differently: as the time we should really be enjoying ourselves. Marc Orchant was a personal role model who exemplified just how much the tools can accomplish, and where to draw the line between tools and education. So many others have offered their ideas and inspiration, and I was an early adopter of David Allen’s Getting Things Done, as you might guess.

He taught me that whatever we do for personal organization, we need to rely on a system and get stuff out of our head, or we’ll never be able to focus and things will always slip through the cracks.

Steve: Switching gears a bit, I would like to talk about your exciting new project, AwayFind. This summer you launched it in a small beta and have grown it since then. What is the basic principle of AwayFind?
Jared: The principle that underlies AwayFind is that one needs to check their email less often if they want to focus on the task at hand, or escape from their work. AwayFind makes this possible by giving people the confidence that they can be reached with time-sensitive messages when they’re not checking their email.

Steve: How was it motivated by the “4-Hour Work Week”?
Jared: Tim stressed the value of an auto-responder to assist in people’s email workflow. I really liked the idea, but didn’t want people to have to call me when they needed me sooner. So I decided to create a similar solution with AwayFind—rather than providing my phone number, I placed a web link in my auto responder that could SMS me or delegate the problem when something urgent arose.

Steve: What are some lessons good or bad you have learned from a software product like this?
Jared: The slogan for SET Consulting used to be, “Technology does not create productive people. We do” – it stressed that how people use technology drives their productivity, not the software itself. Similarly, AwayFind on its own won’t make people more productive—they still have to check their email less often. In building AwayFind I’ve learned how to draw the line between what technology can accomplish and what I have to offer or teach people in order to change their behavior. I’m still learning.

Steve: How much does it cost and how does one signup for the beta?
Jared: AwayFind is “Freemium”—most features are totally free, but some additional branding, security, and routing features will be purchasable for a few dollars per month (still working out the exact price, but it’ll be in the $5-10/range and offer 30-day trials.)

The first 25 who click over to www.awayfind.com from this page will get an invitation code within an hour.

Steve: As we close the interview I would like to leave our mostly overworked small business owners who are our loyal readers a bit of productivity advice. What are the top 5 things a small business owner can do to get more productive?
Jared:
Gosh, that’s a tough question. Most of it comes down to guarding your time and minimizing interruptions:
1. Turn off all email notifications: on your smartphone, in your email program, etc.
2. Don’t multitask: do one thing and do it well.
3. Learn lots of keyboard shortcuts instead of just mouse-clicking things. It’ll take a few weeks to master them, but 2 seconds saved 1,000 times per day will add up
4. If there’s something you really want to accomplish but continue to have trouble with, tie an external commitment to it—for instance, tell your friends you’re doing it, set a deadline that costs money that relies upon it, make a plan with a co-worker/spouse/friend to work on it one day/weekend, etc
5. Sign up for www.awayfind.com and stop checking your email 100 times per day!