Modern Wisdom - #317 - Cal Newport - How To Master Your Email Overload

Episode Date: May 6, 2021

Cal Newport is an associate professor of computer science at Georgetown University and an author. Email has changed the way we collaborate and work. Free, frictionless, instant communication sounds great, but many workers are tyrannised by their email inbox, no matter how many productivity tools they add in. Cal is proposing a new type of solution to this overload. Expect to learn why workers checking their email every 6 minutes is neutering productivity, how reducing your email can improve how good you are at your job, why you need more than 5 email addresses, Cal's advice for changing your company culture around email and much more... Sponsors: Get 83% discount & 3 months free from Surfshark VPN at https://surfshark.deals/MODERNWISDOM (use code MODERNWISDOM) Get perfect teeth 70% cheaper than other invisible aligners from DW Aligners at http://dwaligners.co.uk/modernwisdom Extra Stuff: Buy A World Without Email - https://amzn.to/32WFZ4v Check out Cal's website - https://www.calnewport.com/  Get my free Ultimate Life Hacks List to 10x your daily productivity → https://chriswillx.com/lifehacks/ To support me on Patreon (thank you): https://www.patreon.com/modernwisdom - Get in touch. Join the discussion with me and other like minded listeners in the episode comments on the MW YouTube Channel or message me... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chriswillx Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/chriswillx YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/ModernWisdomPodcast Email: https://www.chriswillx.com/contact Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hello, you beautiful humans. productivity tools they add in. Cal is proposing a very new type of solution to this overload. Expect to learn why workers checking their email inbox every six minutes is neutering productivity. How reducing your email can improve how good you are at your job. Why you need more than five email addresses. Cal's advice for changing your company culture around email and much more.

Every time that Cal writes a book, whether it be deep work or digital minimalism, or a world without email, this new one, it does seem to change the perspective of a particular corner of the world around how we should be looking at productivity. And I can predict, if I was to look into my crystal ball, I predict that we are going to see some changes in email.

Perhaps kicked off by this book, but more so, just kicked off by the fact that people do not like their relationship with their email. It's unnecessary, it causes them ambient anxiety. And as Carl says, it's completely annihilating any productivity that we could achieve. So listen to this podcast incredibly carefully. And if you enjoy it, share it with a friend because it will save an awful lot of people

from an awful lot of wasted time checking their inbox. But now it is time to learn about how to defeat your email inbox with Cal Newport. Cal Newport, welcome to the show. Ah, it's my pleasure. Thank you for being here. Do you purposefully go out of your way to write the most shocking and triggering books in the world? You know, otherwise I get bored. So if you're going to spend a couple of years working on a book and getting it out there,

my philosophy is you might as well take a big swing because I don't know. I couldn't imagine anything more tedious than just, I call it writing for the sake of writing, but just coming up with an idea that, just qualifies as a reasonable thing to write a book about and crafting the book and putting out there and knowing cares. I like to take big swings. So I either want to hit the ball out of the park or twist around and fall down after I miss, but that's more interesting, I think, then playing it safe. Yeah, I totally agree. It seems to me looking at kind of the cow-new port of us at the moment that the deep work philosophy is kind of the central thrust and then currently you're creating different

delivery mechanisms and doing objection handling for what's getting in the way of achieving it. You reckon that's a fair assessment? I think that explains deep work in a world without email. If we want to increase the umbrella big enough to also capture digital minimalism, the term that was born basically of the pandemic so over the last year,

the term I coined was the deep life. And I see if the deep life is sort of the umbrella concept that most of this work goes under. So it includes work and includes the world outside of work. So in the world of work, the deep life pushes towards deep work. So the book deep work is about that, the book of world without email is about the structural and organizational obstacles to having this more fulfilling work

and then probably digital minimalism, which is more about your phone and social media and your personal life. That's more about making your life deeper outside of work. So I'm trying to unify everything I talk about with this word, deep. Yeah. I'm what's the end goal of that. I want a deeper life.

It's just to get to important. I mean, look, I'm interested in my life being as deep as possible and I have to write about what I care about. There's also just a huge hunger for it, and I didn't really articulate this is what I was doing until I began podcasting during the pandemic and having a much tighter feedback loop with my audience and realizing that there's this real hunger out there. I think there's a lot of people in the US for sure, but in a lot of other countries as well, of people in the US for sure, but in a lot of other countries as well, young people, newly emerging middle-aged people like in my cohort that are relatively, I would say, a drift. And what I mean by a drift is that they're not actually rooted to resilient philosophies

or foundational systems, right? So they're just sort of just going through careerism in life and something comes and knocks you off your path and you don't know what to do or nothing Noxiaf your path But work just seems one of my doing here. I'm just on email all day There's a hunger for this and we see that hunger out there and that's a it's a hunger. I feel and I'm trying to feed All of the previous wisdom that our parents generation and even the stuff that I did at a business and even the stuff that I did at a business bachelor's and then a marketing master's 13 years ago, or 12 years ago, most of that feels irrelevant now.

This is how quick the world is moving. There was no social media marketing when I did it. It was just after you needed to have a university email address to get on Facebook, Twitter wasn't there, Instagram wasn't there, there was no such thing as influencer marketing. There was no talk about productivity systems on how to get past the digital minions and the pitfalls that you can tumble down. So it doesn't surprise me that this is an emerging field, right? The technology is always going to move quicker than the cultural artifacts that teach us how to keep up with it, and even quicker than the legislation which might

actually be needed to help control people's use. Yeah, everything moves quickly, and everything has impacts. When it comes to technology, I think that one of the more interesting actually analyses comes from Neil Postman, who talks about the ecological impact of tech, for example, which is we're often incorrect when we think about tech as being additive. We're way too, I would say, self-important when we feel like, oh, tools come along, and we just use them strategically for extra power they give us.

Actually, new tools, new technology innovations tend to be ecological. The new technology comes in in the whole way the world works changes. And so what you're talking about is a great example of that. We've been getting a lot of these ecological changes driven by new technology. And the last, let's say, 25 years if we want to go back to the beginning of email, but certainly with smartphones and social media. And that's a big threat I talk about too, because part of this dislocation, this lack

of depth, this shallowness has been a consequence of new technology coming in in an emergent fashion changing the ecology. So it's not like people were really planning to do it this way. We weren't ready for it and suddenly we've the extent this metaphor, we've lost our old ecological niche and feel a drift and our work is all we're on email all day and work at at home. We're just scrolling phones all day. We're anxious. We don't feel rooted to anything. Tech played a big role in that. So it's time to actually stand back like naturalist and study this ecology here. I'm like, okay, the world has changed. We need to rebuild our lives.

What's the primary issue with email then? Is there something wrong with the technology itself? The primary issue is actually neurological. It's the cost of network switching. So human beings, their brains in particular, attention systems are very sequential. What we're wired to do is to pay attention to one thing, and then we're done, switch our attention to another thing. That switch can take some time, and it takes some energy. It could take five, 10, 15 minutes to really change your cognitive context from this over to that. If you're doing one thing after another, the way that humans operated for most of our existence that switching costs.

It gets lost in the noise is not a big deal you know i'm working on this for two hours and then i switch over to go fix the wagon for the next hour the fact that there is ten minutes up front before i really got. Locked in on my wagon fixing who cares right. Email and here's the issue is. email, and here's the issue, is the checking of these inboxes, or the checking of Slack, or the checking of teams, triggers a network switch. Your mind is seeing a completely different context that's very salient because it involves communication from other people, and it involves urgency. Our mind immediately begins to trigger a network switch when we see an inbox. But then we wrench our attention back to what we're doing

before that network switch can complete. We don't sit there for 10 minutes. What we're really doing is just seeing, oh, did my boss write back about what time the meeting is. So we initiate network switches, turn our attention back to the main thing, try to abort that network switch and go back to the previous cognitive context. And before we can get back there, we go back

and look at the inbox again. It is these repeated partial network switches from a neurological standpoint that is a disaster. It reduces our ability to think clearly. It causes cognitive exhaustion. This is why by 2 o'clock in the afternoon most office workers kind of give up on doing anything hard and it makes us anxious. So as a tool fine, SMTP is a great protocol.

Pop 3 is a great protocol. If I want to send you a file or broadcast out a memo, I'd rather use those protocols than a fax machine or memos. The thing that's killing us is this style of work that email enabled that requires us to keep checking. And that has been a disaster. So the primary issue is that it forces you to switch attention from doing work to talking about doing your work and then back again. Yeah, and even if even if what you're doing in your inbox is very critical and it's part of your work, that's the network switching, having the network switch that much means you can't do anything that well. Now the key distinction is that is not a necessary side effect of the tool of

email. In fact, email spread in the early 1990s had nothing to do with that. Email spread in the early 1990s to replace the fa machine in the replace voice mail, which it did really well. It makes complete sense why it spread. It was a productivity silver bullet for those purposes. Once it was in the offices, we adopted this way of working that I call the hyperactive high find where we said, well, now that we can do very low friction fast digital communication, why don't we just work everything out on the fly with back and forth messaging?

That's what causes all the context shifts because if I'm working everything out with back and forth messaging, I have to keep tending these conversations. If I don't check my inbox, I'm grinding to a halt. A lot of these asynchronous back and forth conversations and stuff doesn't get done.

So it was really the adoption of this hyperactive hive mind workflow that followed the spread of email that began to cause all the problems. If you get rid of the hyperactive hive mind workflow, that's great that we have email. Because again, I don't want to have to fax you a contract. I want to send it to you. I don't want to send you the new menu in a memo folder for the office cafeteria. I want to see see it to you.

Email is not the problem. The hyperactive hive mind workflow that email makes possible. That's really the culprit. And I think that is the thing that has been causing a lot of trouble in modern work right now. Why is context switching so suboptimal and yet so tempting? Is it hacking into something somewhere in the neurology or the psychology of how we work? Well, it's an important question, right? Because when we think about distraction writ large, let's say digital distraction writ large, there is often an aspect to this conversation,

which is the addictive impulse to check. But what I want to do here is actually separate out two classes of the distractions that seem similar, but there's different underlying mechanisms going on. I want to separate the professional distraction of, I need to go back and check my inbox, I need to go back and check Slack. I want to separate that, let's say, from, I want to check my phone. I want to look at what's going on Twitter, I want to look on what's going on on social media, I want to see what's on YouTube, right? Let's separate those two.

When it comes to the stuff that's happening on your phone, this is what my book Digital Minimalism is about. There is what's called a moderate behavioral addiction usually at play here. These tools have often been designed to actually induce this behavior of constant checking. There's a lot of aspects to go into that. So I think it is proper to use even the framework of behavioral addiction when thinking about why we look

at our phones so much. Email and Slack seem similar because we look at it so much, but the underlying dynamic is different. It's less because there is an addictive impulse, but more because if the hyperactive hive mind is how your organization largely collaborates, you have to check it. Because if you don't check it, you're falling behind on back and forth conversations and it's going to slow things down, it's going to upset other people. And that's why I've been pushing back on using the perspective of addiction

for thinking about email. It's not an issue about irrational or sub-optimal behavior of the user. In fact, checking your inbox all the time is basically your only option if this is the way your work actually functions. What we have to do here is change the way that you, the underlying way that you actually collaborate.

That we don't fix the email problem with individuals tweaking their hacks. We fix it by having the whole team change the rules by which they collaborate. Otherwise it would just be get some Tiago forte course or learn to batch process or do a David Allen and that would fix it. But there's a lot of people listening and myself who have gone knee deep in that world and yet, there's still this hyperactive hive mind, this relationship, this expectation from other people, which pulls you through.

It's almost like, if social media didn't have the compulsive the variable schedule reward, but did have people waiting on the app to see if you were going to clear your notifications all the time, that's kind of what it's like. And there would be professional revocations if you did it. And I think a very useful analogy here is like if you're in a boat and you're out on a lake and it's filling with water. The equivalent in this metaphor of better productivity tools and taking online courses about productivity and buying these tools, it's like, okay, here's what I'm going to do.

I'm going to buy better buckets to bail this with. I'm going to take an online course about superhuman, what get on the weight in this for superhuman. an online course about. Subscribe to Superhuman, get on the weight and this is the Superhuman. Zidle cast in bucket. My bucket technique is going to get better, right? Like I'm going to have more fish. Big bucket technique.

When what you need to do is plug to bottom of the boat, that's what the issue is. This is what's happening with our inboxes. We need to stop trying to bail the messages out of their quicker. We have to change the underlying processes that are putting those messages into the inbox in the first place. If you do that right, you don't really need much productivity tools or hacks or thinking

to handle your inbox well because it'll be relatively trivial to do. Well, I mean, as a perfect example, your approach to digital minimalism, you have a limited slippery slope of how much social media can impact you if you don't have social media. Yeah, if you get at the root cause Yeah, if you know like so I don't use any social media, so I don't have to worry about it The people I know who are digital minimalist and you social media so they're deploying it in a minimalist fashion They also are much better off because if you're deploying social media in a minimalist fashion, that means you're deploying it

for particular uses. And that changes the whole equation because if you know, oh, I'm using this tool for this, then it's much, much easier to put guard rails around everything else, right? So if you say, well, yeah, I'm using, it's a real example from someone I know, he's an Instagram fitness influencer.

So Instagram is very important to his business, right? I mean, posting, he's a very muscular guy, and he needs to post photos of him doing athletic thing or videos or however Instagram works, right? But when he knows, okay, here's why I use Instagram, because if we put these photos on the schedules, it helps this business. It's important to me, Here's why I'm using it. Once you know exactly why he's using it, then he can optimize how he uses it. And his big hack was, I'm not going to use the phone on the camera.

We're actually going to use better GoPro's. We're going to use better cameras. And my team then takes the photos and on a desktop, post them the Instagram on a regular schedule. And not having Instagram on my phone means, and I'm speaking in the perspective of the influencer now, it means that I'm not going to be distracted all the time by

this, like going through seeing what everyone's up to, and yet I'm still getting all the power out of it, because once I know why I'm using it, I can figure out how best to use it. How much of people checking email? So the one study I cite says, once every six minutes, another study I cite says about 126 messages since received a day which works out to something actually quite similar. I just summarize that all as basically constantly. That was average knowledge work. That was using rescue time, right?

Yeah, so rescue time is a great data set because they have these tens of thousands of users. I talked to their CEO when I was working on this book, they realized at some point is a great data set because they have these tens of thousands of users. And I talked to their CEO and I was working on this book. They realized at some point they had great data, so they hired a real professional data scientist and let her just get her hands into that data and they produced all these great reports. But it's backed up.

I talk about there's observational workplace ethnographies where they actually go into workplaces and look over people's shoulders. There's other studies where they go into workplaces and temporarily put monitoring software on computers. And all these numbers work out to be about the same. There's certain points in the day where you can't check email. You're literally in the middle of something where you're away from your computer. Outside of those moments, people rarely go more than a handful of minutes without at least doing a quick check. But the quick checks are just as damaging as spending 20 minutes because it initiates the network switch and it's the initiation that kills you. Not how long you

spend afterwards, the initiation kills you. I had Stephen Kotler on the show a little while ago. Do you know who that is? Yes, I know. Flow research collective guy big into flow. And he was the art of impossible dude you would you would love it. I highly highly recommend you should really consider getting him on the show. I don't know whether you do how often you do guests but man he blew me away. Fantastic dude. And he was talking about because he understands the biology right. He's not bothered with psychology. He just wants to get straight into how the body works. And he was talking about the most common thing that knocks people out of flow is an emotion. So if you sense any emotion,

whether that be an impulse of happiness or sadness or anger or discomfort or whatever it might be, that will just knock you out of flow. And if you think it takes a while, you've got to get the brain waves at the balance between delta and theta or something is the correct brain wave state that biologists have found. That's where the neuroscience of flow and so on and so forth. You've got to do all this work to get yourself into this optimal state. And just a little bit of an emotion, not only gives

you all of the pain of the context switching and then takes time for you to get back into rhythmically kind of how it feels, but flow this peak performance state that we're all desperately trying to chase where you get your 110% output done. It's writing words that you can only write when you're in that position, and you've just lost it because the compulsion to check email or you've left notifications on or whatever it might be. Yeah, I mean, if you wanted to design, what are the worst possible things you could expose yourself to when trying to get in flow or do something meaningful and deep?

Probably email and social media would be what you would come up with. Like if you were a mad scientist, saying like, my goal is not to take over the world, but to reduce productivity as much as possible. Those would be what you would design, because what do you get with email? It's communication from other people that is often urgent and introduces unsatisfiable in the moment demands. You're exposing yourself to things that people you know need that you can't get to them

right now, and then you try to turn your attention back. Good luck. Social media is all built around right now. Most of the platforms, this type of emotional valency, trying to trigger various emotions. Again, that is also designed like a mad scientist would do. Let's expose you to some outrage or funny, whatever it is, really quickly, really distilled, just like Kotler talks about, right? So those two things are like, if you work backwards from his book and said, how can I minimize your output? I would say, okay, here's what I want you to do.

Every five minutes or so, look at one of these two things. And yet, this is how most people in the knowledge economy work. And it is 50% of the U.S. economy. We're like, we're fine with this. Let's just work with our brains, create value with our brains, but set up an environment that is the worst possible way to do it.

It would be like if in the 1920s, we were running auto factories with the lights off, right? And people were putting steering wheels where the tires should go and we forgot to put the roof on. And we said, yeah, but you know, we're saving on the electric bill or something, right? It's like, it's crazy. People like, this is insane, but we have this blind spot because we don't really understand knowledge work that well. Yeah, I think it's hard to see inside of brain where you can see physical stuff.

You can see that I'm missing the tire, but it's hard to see what's going on in the brain. We're working in the worst possible way. And we seem to just shrug our shoulders. I mean, I guess this is just what work is, and there's an absurdity to it. You talk about the similarities between the industry and the revolution of industry about a hundred years ago,

and sort of where we're at with the knowledge economy now. Can you talk about that relationship in similarities? Well, there's often a lot of work that's required when you have a technological revolution that intersects with commerce. It's not night and day, right? It's not, here's the electric dynamo next week, we've completely rebuilt how factories work. It's not, okay, here's the first car factory next week, we have the assembly line. It takes a long time for us often to figure out what's the best way to actually integrate new technology into commerce. And I talk about in

the book in particular car manufacturing, it took about 25 years to figure out what's the best way to actually integrate new technology into commerce. I talk about in the book in particular car manufacturing. It took about 25 years to figure out how to do this right. And to get from building cars using the convenient and simple craft method to the inconvenient real pain tons of overhead annoying assembly line method. It was also 10X faster that took time and a lot of experimentation. I think something similar needs to happen in knowledge work. So right now we're working in the simplest, easiest, most flexible possible way, the first thing we came up with, which is the hyperactive hive mind.

Well, everyone can be connected. Let's make communication as fast and low friction as possible. And we'll just work things out on the fly. That's fine. It was a good first step. But inevitably we're going to evolve. We're going to evolve to better ways to actually work. We're going to turn the lights back on inside the metaphorical auto factory.

But the main thing to remember about this evolution in the industrial sector is that it took time and it was a pain. The best way to build cars was harder than the easiest way. The best way to build cars had a lot of false starts, a lot of experimentation. It was a huge pain for the employees. It had the higher more managers. It was very difficult to figure out how to make this thing work, but it was worth it because it took the man hours required to produce a Model T from 12.5 down to 93 minutes.

And so that's the main thing and what people take away from that metaphor is that yes, KnowledgeWorker is going to get more sophisticated. We're going to get more out of our minds. It's going to be less frustrating. But the ways we work is probably going to have more rules and We're going to get more out of our minds. It's going to be less frustrating. But the ways we work is probably going to have more rules and guides and systems on hard edges. It's not going to be easy to get right at first. And that's just what the evolution of business looks like.

Wasn't it a statistic that Henry Ford became the richest man in America five years after he perfected the production line process? Yeah, and the company became the biggest in the world. Yeah, but it was a pain. I mean, just imagine if you were in the Ford factory and you're working in the Ford factory before this experimentation began.

The way they were building cars would have made complete sense. They would put a chassis up on two saw horses. You would be part of a team that would sit on that chassis and build a car. It made complete sense. And to have a factory, you would just have lots of chassis and lots of teams, you would be part of a team that would sit on that chassis and build a car. It made complete sense. And to have a factor, you would just have lots of chassis and lots of teams. And you're like, yeah, how else would you build a car?

This is very convenient, it's very flexible. I understand it. Now, imagine the assembly line comes along. Now, we're going to have these chains moving with gearing systems. We have the build custom tools that can come in and bore 12 holes at a time into the engine blocks so that we can move it from here to here faster And it keeps breaking and this part is going faster than this part and the whole thing stops and yet to hire all these managers and Engineers just to get it working. You must have been like this is the most annoying thing

This is not at all convenient. This makes no sense. Can't we just sit here and build cars? And then it became the biggest company in the world and became the richest man in the world because the right the best way to do things is not Not often the same as what's the easiest, what's the most convenient. Are you familiar with Rory Sutherland, the vice chairman of Ogil V, big, gruff British man? And he talks like this and everything's a bit fucking shit, isn't it? He's one of the smartest behavioral economists on the planet. He's a wonderful guy, he's been on the show twice.

And he's always said, for years and years, email would be far better if it cost five pence every time that you had to send one, to just add that little bit of friction. And I think you talk about this as well. People use email for all manner of malign intents because the cost to do it is so low. You get an email, I do this all the time, I find it.

If I can't be bothered to answer the central question of the email, sometimes I'll ask a much more superficial question to just be like, no, bang, back over to you, it's your side of the net until I can then be bothered to deal with it. Or the inevitable unnecessary confirmation that goes round when there's 10 people seet seasied in in a big group thread. I mean, like, all this is doing is just throwing this thread back to the top of, so yeah, I think because it is so frictionless, which is what makes it a great communication tool, it also creates this slippery slope. You talk about,

is it, we don't understand what happens to a technology when the cost goes down to zero or when the friction goes down to zero, it causes some strange externalities? Yeah, you got to be careful about very low friction. And I think that's absolutely what happened with email. We can document this, right? I mean, I want to, stories I got from a researcher, a behavioral organizational, behavioral psychologist I talked about in the book was this story about where they came into this office and ran an experiment where they took 12 people off email for a week, with no prep, just

like, you're off email for a week, let's see what happened. And she told me, like, one of the interesting stories here is there's this one guy, one of the 12th, and he had been really complaining because his boss would bother him so much with these quote unquote urgent emails, right? Like what about this? Can you do this? What's happening here? And this guy's job required him to set up a lab because this is a research company and

it would take hours, but it would take more than it needed to because his boss would bother bother bother him with all these urgent emails. So now the guy seen up the lab is one of the 12 who's going to take one week away from email because he's participating in this experiment. And the boss stopped bothering him during that week. And what made it interesting is that the boss's office was three doors down. So the friction for asking this guy to do something went from this and hitting sin to let me just open a door, walk 10 feet open a door and be like, hey, Bob, can you do whatever? That friction was enough to basically drastically reduce the

amount of stuff that this boss was bothering him with because zero friction is a really weird state. I think this is what's happening with zoom meeting overload during the pandemic. If you're in an office and you want to set up a meeting, a little bit of friction. A, there's a little bit of friction if I have to go and reserve the room, and that takes a little bit of time. But there's also more of a heightened social capital friction because I got to see those people come into the room for the meeting I set up and they had to go get their coffee and then they're not that happy necessarily.

I have to be there and they're looking to you like, okay, like you made me come all the way over here, what's going on. There's a little bit of friction. In a world of remote work and Zoom, it all goes away. I just add your email addresses and hit invite boom and then you'll just show up at this thing. What happened? Zoom took over people's entire day, right? And you now have people during the pandemic that were basically doing Zoom from nine to five people have complained to me that like they don't have time to go to the bathroom during the day. That's a problem because there's not any breaks in between zoo and then they have to do their

real work elsewhere. So when you get rid of friction, very weird things happen. How does email make us miserable? Well, for one thing, the idea of communication from people we know, highly enough, and we're not responding to them, does not play well with our paleolithic social circuits. Like we treat, we've evolved the treat one-on-one relationships very carefully, and for good reason, because if we don't, you know, we're going to starve next time we go through a famine, and the tribes are not going to share food with us because they don't like us.

We take relationships very seriously. That type of circuit is not well suited for an inbox that's filling. You can rationally tell yourself, don't worry about it. This is not tribe members. And it's not urgent. And look, we have response time norms in our company that says, don't expect a response within 12 hours. So it's all fine. Your rational brain can say this, but your deeper brain doesn't care. It says, people need us. We're ignoring them. Just like you can't convince yourself not to be hungry, even if you explain very carefully that you have dinner reservations in two hours, you're not going to starve. So I don't need this warning about being hungry.

You're going to stay hungry until you eat that food. The deep social circuits are going to remain anxious about you ignoring people until you answer them, no matter what your frontal cortex tells your mind about response time norms. So it makes us anxious because that makes us unhappy. The constant contact shifting makes us physiologically unhappy, right? I mean, it's a draining feeling of exhaust stuff that can create anxiety, like we physiologically feel bad if we're doing this unnatural, rapid context shifting. You do this over a long period of time. It's just straight up exhausting. Our brains aren't meant to do this. And then

three, it's incredibly frustrating because linguistic communication, purely written communications, incredibly impoverished. We're really not good at communicating just with written words. We're much better at having voice and tonation and body language, and then we get a lot of information when communications is much more accurate. So we are constantly being misunderstood and constantly misunderstanding other people, but again, as social creatures, is in itself very fraught and very frustrating. You put all those things together. It's not surprising that when they do surveys on people's well-being, you see very strong correlations between increased use with these information communication technologies and increased

unhappiness. It's so interesting when you try and take a first principles approach to something that's so ubiquitous. Like, the vast majority of people that are listening, they have to use email. Whatever it is, the nurses, so the NHS is a really good example of this. God, you'd have a field day. One of my buddies is a recently qualified medical doctor just gone through his F1 and ZF2 as a student and now he's fully fledged. And some of the processes that they need to go through to send an email downstairs, they can't take something downstairs, they have to wait for it to come back up. So they're physically, and you know, there's people on beds waiting for them.

So I think when you can see these individuals moving, you know, they've got to locomot around places. and they're tethered, they're genuinely tethered as opposed to this which is more psychologically tethered, I suppose, the impacts are crazy. It really is. I mean, it's, we're a little bit used to it in some sense that all of this constant ongoing communication, this is just what work is. It's kind of what it's being. That's the way it'll always be. And I think the biggest problem is,

and it totally identified that the hyperactive high-vine is the issue. People's thought process is, okay, I feel really overwhelmed with all this communication, but if I just stopped using email, it would be terrible. And they're right. Like if the hyperactive high-vine is how you organize, then you can't just not use email.

And the problem, that's when people give up though. He's like, well, if I just stopped using email, I want to be able to talk, nothing will get down and I get fired. And they're right about that. But what they're wrong to do is just to give up there. You got to ask the next question, okay, why is it that the way we work requires me to use so much email? And that's where you start to get somewhere interesting.

So to me, like the first principle that unlocks everything, is stop talking about individual's habits. Let's go underneath the covers and say, what are the different processes that make up what we do in my freelance business, and my team, and my company, whatever I do. What are the different processes I come back to again, and again, these are the things that make up my working life. Great.

How do we actually implement these processes? How do we move the information around? How do we communicate and collaborate? How do we reach decisions? What is our actual explicit set of rules or guides or system for this one and for this one and for this one and for this one? And until you actually do that, the default will just be the hyperactive hive mine. We'll get overloaded with context switches. We'll all be miserable. But once you realize, oh, if I change the underlying process,

how we implement it, that's generating all these unscheduled messages in the first place, the underlying process, how we implement it, there's generating all these unscheduled messages in the first place. I can actually fix the problem, and that's the way to fix the problem. The underlying structure about how we work needs to move away from unscheduled messaging towards other things. It might be more of a pain, the assembly line was a pain, but is absolutely worth it if it gets rid of these unscheduled messages as the primary mean by which we collaborate. these unscheduled messages is the primary mean with by which we collaborate. That's great from a God's eye view with all of the perspective of not having to be in the trenches.

But if you're just some nat, desperately trying to be a digital minimalist and a deep worker and a world without email or deep lifer, it's a little bit more difficult. Where are people supposed to start? Why should they highlight what are the places that someone could start to begin looking at the process? Principle.

So if you have no say over other people, you're part of a team in a big company, you can still do this process just with what you can control. So you literally start by saying, what are the different processes to make up what I do in my job? And if you're not sure what those are, use your inbox to help you, right?

Take one day and every time you get an email message, ask the question, what is the repeated process this email is involved with? It is connected to. What's the thing that I do regularly that this email is helping me make progress on? And you can use your inbox to help figure out and literally write down. I'm involved in scheduling client meetings on a regular basis, producing white paper reports on new products. I'm involved in,

you're paying after thing after thing. Now you have this list of the different processes you're involved with. Ask the question for each and not all at once. We'll start with the low hanging fruit and once that goes well, we'll move on to new ones. But take some of these processes and ask the question, given just what I can control, how do I want to implement my involvement with this process in such a way that it minimizes the number of unscheduled messages required to actually get this thing done? And looking at just what you can control, you can drastically reduce this unscheduled messages. And sometimes it's very simple, right? Sometimes it's just, there's a tool you can slot in there, right? It's, okay, I have to set up a lot of meetings with people.

That generates a lot of unscheduled messages because we go back and forth. So I'm going to use scheduling software. One quick solution, boom, that saved you a lot of unscheduled messages. Sometimes you have a process, you figure out some implementation that you're not going to advertise as some new sort of system. you kind of stealthily recruit people into it, right? So you email someone, okay, we got to get this report out. Here's what I suggest. I'll work on a draft on Monday and by close the business Monday, I'll put my draft into this shared folder. Then it's all yours. If you have any questions, I have office hours Tuesday at noon so you can just stop by the office

or also I'm in the Slack channel just for office hours and what we can hash it out then and then just get whatever you're doing, get it into the Dropbox by close the business on three. I'll then take a final look, hey designer who I've cc'd on this, whatever you see in that folder at the end of day Tuesday you can take it, format it, put it live, right?

It feels like you're just sort of laying out a plan and you know, just in the email, people it, put it live, right? It feels like you're just sort of laying out a plan and you know, just in the email, people like, yeah, sure what, I'm glad there's a plan, whatever. So I need to do this tomorrow great. I don't want to think about anymore. You've just co-opted all those people into an implementation of this process that's going to get that report created with zero unscuduled messages. So there's a lot you can do without having to make believers of everyone, without having to give everyone a copy of my book and convince them to read it, there's a lot you can do just from the perspective of an individual, once you know what it is you're trying to do.

And once you know that the objective is look at your processes, adjust your implementation to reduce unscheduled messages. The more you can do that, the better your life is going to get, even if no one else around you knows that you're doing that, and even if no one else around you is even on board with that plan. The vast majority of the work that you do, after you've been in a job for, well, probably six months to a year, is just repetition. Done this before, I know this before, and you realize this, because when you first step into a job, you're constantly asking people for advice, where do I get the media pack from,

and how do I send a file to accounts, and what do we do when we need to schedule a meeting in and all this sort of stuff. Then after a while, you're like, you just know it. So one of the principles here, I think, that we can try and take away is, okay, how can I automate as much of the workflow of the things that I need to do as possible? How can I make it go seamless? And yeah, I think using your email inbox over an extended period of time as an identify, okay, so what's coming up consistently, scheduling into counts, it's asking for the drop box link, or whatever else it might be, and focusing

on the attention capital that should hopefully free us up because we're not doing this constant context switching. It allows us to get more work done that actually matters. Yeah. So that's absolutely right. I mean, the way I think about it is there's two rough classes, maybe three to pin out what we want to talk about. But let's say there's a small number of rough classes

of what these optimized process implementations look like. One big class in there is automation, right? This is something where it's the same steps every time, like you're talking about. So if there's something you do in your work, where it's the same steps every time, like this gets written, it gets reviewed, it gets signed off on, it gets formatted, it gets posted, right? It's the same steps every time. You can automate that, which means you find a workflow that allows you to go through

those steps without ever requiring someone to have to wait for a message unscheduled and then respond to it, right? Another class of things you might need to optimize or one off like oh, we have a new project we have to work on So there's not some steps that we it's always the same every time but there what you want to focus on is How can we structure where the information goes and how we communicate and collaborate about that information, right? So there's probably going to be on Trello or Asana or Flow or Base Camping. Let's get a place for the information goes and how we communicate and collaborate about that information, right? So there's probably going to be on Trello or Asana or Flow or Base Camp. Let's get a place for the information to live. Let's have these highly structured meetings, which we can check in and look at the information

and decide who's working on what. You want a structure when you talk about it where the information lives. The third class, roughly speaking in the book, I talk about our protocols, where it's literally like a type of back and forth communication that happens on a frequent basis, and how you can put in place protocols there that actually makes that require much fewer unscheduled messages. So instead of clients just calling, sending you emails whenever they have an issue, you maybe have, we've set up, no, no, we have this weekly check-in call, and we immediately post a written summary of everything we committed to do during that call, but you have to wait till the next call if you have a question, right?

So, these are kind of the three classes of what these all look like, but the key thing is what you're trying to get away from is the context switch. That's the productivity poison. The best proxy for context switching is unscheduled messages. So unscheduled messages is what generates all those context switches because you have to keep checking while you're waiting for that message to come. Be willing to do more work, more work and spend more time if the tradeoff is less on schedule messages. That's how painful it is. So I would rather, I would rather spend 10 minutes to try to list out in an email. Okay, here is all the times I'm available for the next three weeks because

I don't want to go back and forth to set up a meeting with because that's gonna generate five unscheduled messages. I'd rather spend five to ten minutes now and give you 20 options. Then, since you a 30 second message right now, it's like, yeah, when are you free? But no, there's gonna be five more interruptions over the next couple of days to set it up. The context switching are sort of so much more dramatically costly than actually just spending more time in the moment, that I really like to emphasize that. You're not trying to optimize time, you're not trying to optimize convenience. Be willing to work harder and have more complexity and spend more time if it saves you from the need to have to do unscheduled messaging. And this is because there is a power law effect going on

with the context switching, right? It's not just the time that, because if we were going for pure time, if context switching didn't have this disproportionate impact on our ability to focus, I imagine that most of these arguments, or some of these arguments at least, would have a lot less veracity. We could go about this thing, but actually considering I can just send off an email

in 30 seconds, I need to get 20 emails worth of time saving because of that, but it's not just the 30 seconds of the email, it's the subsequent time that goes over the top. I think that little story is a good microcosm for kind of the entire world of email use, right? That everybody, every organization, and then into between organizations as well, everybody has had the opportunity to step back from the urgent and look at process, protocol and whatever the third one was that I've forgotten, to look at those things and think, right, how can I, how can I change these? What can I do now? Let's just take a month off, take a month off from clients that's, Let's not have any business coming in,

but know that for the next five years, we are going to have every workflow under the sun done and we're going to be working at 2X capacity. Yeah, yeah. But if we have to change it every month, we have to change it every month, right? Still worth it, right? If we have to evolve, we miss things,

new things come up great. Spend the time to do it, spend a half day a week, you're still going to end up better off, like over just been three hours a week doing nothing but meeting and talking about our workflows and trying to make them better and reduce the context, switching, you would still be better off. You can spend a day a week and probably still end up better off. Like we're going to a four day week because all we do on Friday is figure out how to reduce messages, you would still end up better off. That's how disproportionate the cost is. Does an inherent laziness, isn't that you talk about, to do with using email? Because it's so frictionless and it doesn't actually require you to do much in the way

of abstract thinking. There's no medicognisance required. It's just brain, fingers, send, brain, fingers, send over and over and over again. Yeah, and we play responsibility, hoppitated with email, which you mentioned earlier, which is where basically, I feel a little bit of stress or anxiety that this thing is my responsibility on my brain. If I shoot you an email that says, like, hey, what about this or thoughts, question mark, it relieves that temporarily.

It is now on your plate, right? Because the email is in your inbox and I freed up that space and I feel a little bit better. You get the thoughts question mark email. You're like, crap, the hot potatoes on my plate now, right? You're like, okay, so remind me again what this was about, sin, boom, off your plate. You've found the hot potato on the my plate now

and now I have this thing in my head. I'm like, well, let's chat about it. When are you free? Boom, now it's off my plate, right? And we do this with everything, because we don't like to just comfort of having things on our plate. This is what happens when we try to keep up with an inboxes overflowing.

It's like just getting it off my plate. I don't care if I know it's coming back. I just want that relief in the moment. But a good and the response to all this is basically too bad, right? Work by definition is the application of force against something that is otherwise on rest. It is by definition something that requires effort.

It is what work actually is. So trying to minimize effort is not a very good metric. If you're trying to say what's going to make me more effective at work, what's going to make my company more successful, what's going to make my company grow. We have to figure out what's the right way to do this. And then we have to do it because we want to be successful in what we're doing. And work is effort. It's actually synonymous. What is some of the best practices for people who have to send emails? What are some of the

ways that they can create and send emails that can't be automated? Well, so if you're thinking about unscheduled messaging as the poison, then it really changes the way you think about your communication. So now when you're communicating with people, you're seeing the bigger picture here. Oh, there's some objective we are trying to get to. It's going to require some collaboration coordination. How can we do this with a minimum of messages? And once you have that mindset, it really drastically changes what you send and what you suggest.

And so you have to know what it is you're trying to offer. So one thing you get is more of these process oriented emails like the example I gave about producing the document where it's not just Thoughts question mark, you're laying out, okay, here's the plan to get us from here to us being done. And I'm laying out a plan here that's sensible and doing a little bit of workup front, but I'm going to reduce unnecessary messages along the way.

You do more of that. You also start to do more fallback type things. I'm a big believer, for example, in office hours, set times on set days where you're always available for anyone to stop by in person or virtually depending on what the circumstance is. And you can move more and more quick coordination, questions or discussion to those. Great, grab me at my next office hours, we'll get into it.

You start seeing that message a lot more. Each one of those messages, where you say, just grab me at my next office hours, you may have just saved a 10 message back and forth conversation. Maybe that doesn't sound so bad, but that's five messages in there that you have to wait, wait for and respond to pretty quickly, right? Because if you wait a day to respond, this conversation will take two weeks.

But that means you might do 10 inbox checks for each of those five messages because you're checking, checking, checking, waiting for it. So you may have saved 50 inbox checks in one day, just by saying, this is great, grab me at my next office hours, right? Like the savings are really big. So process oriented emails, defaulting to things like office hours or status meetings. These are the types of best practices you see. Once you realize the whole goal here is not about clearing out your inbox quicker, not about expectations. It's about unscheduling messages like that. Messages that that are gonna come in at some unspecified time that I'm gonna need to respond to relatively quickly,

that is what I am trying to get away from. It completely changes the type of things you do. You use, do you sit in a Zoom room? I know that's one of the potential solutions that you could just have a cow's Zoom room and there's a link and anybody can just drop in and drop out as they need during this window on this day. Yeah, so there's three things I've seen.

Because academics, we do where office hours come from our world, right? So virtually speaking, zoom rooms is a big one. You actually set up a waiting room and then you bring people in one-on-one. So if someone shows up while you're talking to someone else, they don't show up in the middle of your conversation. They're in the waiting room and then you can bring them in. Slack channels, I've also seen, right? It's like an office hour Slack channel. If people want to type instead of talking to you, I will be in this channel during these hours. So jump over there, we can go

and there'll be a transcript and searchables. That's nice too. And then door open, door open, you know, in-person office hours are fantastic professors. I rely on this incredibly heavily in my life as a college professor, like a lot of professors do. We've kind of perfected this idea, especially for working with students, is like, sounds great, sounds interesting, come to my office hours, right?

And the students like it because it's incredibly clear, great, I know what I need to do. And we like it because if we had to keep up 35 different ongoing keep up 35 different ongoing conversations with 35 different students, it would be untenable. So, yeah, zoom, slack, and your door open. What are the main objections that you've heard from people when you've suggested that they implement a reduction in email? So, where you really start to get the objections is before you're able to get into the details of what the real issue is.

So, if you just see, for example, the title of my book, people who live in the world of the hyperactive hive mind, see, any reduction in email would make me worse at my job, and they're right. If the way you organize your work is with back and forth messaging, the more time you're away from messaging, the worse you do at your job. And so, there's a lot of objections around that. Once you get past that though and say, no, no, it's the hyperactive high find itself that's the problem. We need to find ways to collaborate that has much less unscheduled messaging.

There's been almost no complaint. I've actually been surprised. I thought there would be more pushback from tech types or some people that are like, look, no, no, this is good. This rapid back and forth is, it's an advanced state of human existence as we really are able to make quicker decisions. It's just a universal detestation of this. And maybe it's because the pandemic made the hyperactive hive mind more hyperactive.

But once I actually explain what I'm talking about here, people say, yeah, I hate that. That thing. Great. Good. I'm glad. Let's figure out a way to get rid of. And people know it's hard. People are quick to say, it's not going to be obvious how to change this like that. I'll get. But there was a lot less protestation than I thought. I think we're at a point now where we no longer think this is high-tech. We just are frustrated

with it. You touched on something earlier on about the trying to be incognito when you're suggesting these small changes and kind of bringing people in surreptitiously. I think that's quite important because one of the things I imagine that some people might have as an objection is I don't want to be the black sheep that's coming in here, like with my blue blocking glasses on and my special gel wrist pad for my keyboard, so I can type at 0.5% faster. You just don't want to be that guy,

and I've heard you talk previously about how blanket email responses saying, I'm not available, or I'm busy, or I only check email at these times, that that's a bad idea, and also steaming in and saying, right, guys, I'm'm not gonna be dealing with email and I'm not gonna be doing this because it kind of just waves a flag above your head. And socially, we have to remember that we are dealing

with non-rational other beings. And if you steam in, they go, bloody hell. Cowell's bought his light up keyboard in again with him and he's not replying to emails until 4 p.m. every day. But you can, I suppose that the social element of this needs to be more subtle. Yeah, it's really important. The key psychological element is relevant to these type of changes as buy-in, right? If people are involved in a decision being made that affects them, then they're much more

likely a course to buy in to that decision as opposed to being felt like that change is imposed on them. So if you have a team, and ultimately in a perfect world, this is the right scale at which to make these changes is at the team level, not the individual and not the organization, but at the team level. If you have a team making changes, here's how we're gonna work on clients,

here's how we're gonna work on reports, and we're gonna try to minimize the hyperactive hive mind. If everyone on the team is working together and everyone has a say, then yeah, you want to be super clear about it and write it down. And we're going to check in on it every two weeks because everyone has buy in. We all have buy in because we're all involved. What happens is when an individual makes changes that is going to affect your life, right? Because I now, you know I don't use email and you're gonna have to go into my trello board and whatever You're affecting my life, but I had no say in that Like this was just your decision

That is from a psychological perspective very fraught and you're almost certainly gonna get pushed back So that's why yeah, I suggest in the book that you should make changes on your own You should see your own processes and try to reduce back and forth messages But don't advertise because when you advertise changes that you unilaterally made, even though they are better, the people around you say, here is something that impacts me that I had no say in. And the human instinct there, no matter how good it is, no matter how much it's probably going to make even their life better, their instinct is, I don't know about this. I don't like this. And so I always say, don't advertise. You know, don't put out an auto responder explaining when you're not going to be checking emails.

Just check emails when you need to check emails. If someone complains, then you can explain it to them. But don't give people a reason to be upset that they didn't realize they needed to be upset. Wait till they're actually upset and then try to assuage them because you'll figure up, most people don't care. A reader sent me the other day and auto responders like, okay, this is the hive mind gone to a new extreme.

Someone had, it was like a temporary power outage or something, but basically the auto responder was like, the power had to get turned off temporarily by the repair crew, so I'm not gonna be on email for the next hour. He's like, okay, this is the hyperactive hive mind pushed through the extreme where you feel like even if you're just gonna be away from an hour, you need to explain

to people, it's assigned it we're in trouble. So yeah, I'm a big believer if people didn't have a say in the change, don't advertise it. If you're doing it as a team, everyone should be on the same page. That's great. If you're doing it as an individual, just do it. And you know, if someone complains you can finesse that later. What are the smallest first steps that people can take to implement this into their lives? What can they go away and do this evening or tomorrow? Well, so you have to start by listening out all the processes. The list can grow, but here's all the things I do regularly.

Then look for the lowest hanging fruit. What is the thing on here that would be easiest for me to overhaul and reduce unscheduled messages? For most people and most office jobs is gonna be meeting scheduling, right? I am going to use a scheduling tool or if it's socially unacceptable to use a scheduling tool, I'm literally gonna have like a text file with available times on it that I just paste into emails and then once someone takes one,

I just take it off the text file, right? However you need to do that, that's usually the lowest hanging fruit. And it has a disproportionate advantage. Because again, the example I gave before, each meeting you try to set up over email might be 10 messages, 5 of which you have to wait for, each of which requires 10 email inbox checks. So each time you send out a scheduling link and set a saying, when do you want to meet, you might save 50 email inbox checks in a short period of time.

So people are often surprised. It seems minor and yet they feel much, much more relieved. All right, so that's low hanging fruit office hours. I think it's another low hanging fruit process because there's a lot of different processes out there that you can vastly improve simply by pushing people towards office hours. And so I think that's it. Those are becoming more acceptable.

I think that's another, that's another easy thing to set up. So list all the processes, look for some low hanging fruit to get the taste in your mouth. Those are two things that'll probably show up once you're looking for what are the easiest changes I can make.

I like the text file or the spreadsheet that you copy across and delete out of. I have to say, I would be a prime candidate for using Calendly or some of the sort of scheduling software, doing what 150 podcast episodes a year, so three a week plus guessing on other people's shows, Calendly should be my solution, but I know when I ask someone when they're available and I get a reply with a Calendly link, there is something in me that feels a little bit.

I just don't like the process of doing it and I think you touched on it there but you basically get the beauty of a calendar link with. A little bit of a copy and paste you keep on a note you can even make it as an auto fill in Alfred or something else like that. Yeah that's it that's that's a really nice solution. Can you talk me? I just want to say real quick, remember the cost, the proper cost balance. It's going to take me a minute instead of 10 seconds to keep this list and send it out, but you're saving potentially 50 inbox checks, each of which has a 10 to 15 minute impact on your concentrate.

So when you know the cost, you're willing to do a lot more on the front end. So if Lillian from Penguin Random House is listening, she'll know that the reason that she's getting big fat lists of dates off me for all of the upcoming authors is gonna be because Cal told me to do it. Can you tell me? But by the way, like Lillian, I have a good system, because, you know, I know you've got your spreadsheet, right?

And she goes and puts things in. Because we're promoting this book. She had to approve because, right? But we have this've got your spreadsheet, right? And she goes and puts things in. Because we're promoting this book. She had that she had to approve because we have that we have this thing. And she puts it in the share doc and, you know, and I check it twice a week. And, uh, yeah, you know, once you know what you're optimizing it, and I didn't do it for my UK publisher because I don't usually do a ton of publicity in the UK. So like, oh, it's, I won't bother. But then the book was popular in the UK.

So we were booking a lot of a lot more UK publicity with my UK publisher, and we didn't have this system in place, night and day. What about this time? What about that back and forth? So it's this great A, B test. We're doing the exact same thing, two different teams in two different ways. I'm like, oh, man, that was the lily and method is so much better. You should have called it that. She'd love that. that was the lily and method is so much better. You should have called it that. She'd love that. She would.

What's your personal email handling setup? I've heard you say that you've got six different email addresses and a number of other processes. Can you just give us a high level view of how Cal Newport sets his emails up? Yeah, I have multiple addresses. So in my role as a professor, I have sort of a general university address. This is where university business comes through, right?

This is the announcements and stuff like this. And then I have a separate university address I use for my collaborators, right? So people I'm actually working on research, so I separate that. And then in the writing world, I have an address called Interstein for my readers to send me tips and links and books that I might find interesting. And then I have a couple of secret addresses I use once I'm doing back and forth for someone,

but I don't want it to be public-facing. And so I have a relatively, and I have a personal address that I use with my friends and family. A lot of different addresses all have their own inboxes. And it allows me to customize how and when I use them. So some of these addresses, I have what I call sender filters on them. So if you're going to send a message to Interstein, you're going to see, there's a description of what to expect, which is like, I love to see links and books and articles. I do read all these messages. I basically never respond. Like so I can set expectations.

Is that an auto responder? No, it's actually on my contact page. So for me, it's a synthesis. OK, here's the address, and I describe it right there. And if you go to my contact page, for example, it's channels. There's no general purpose address on my website. There's, OK, you want to send me links, go here.

It's like a publicity interview type thing, go here, which we'll go to a publicity team. You want to talk when you book me for to send me links, go here. You want to, it's like a publicity interview type thing, go here, which we'll go to like a publicity team. You want to talk, a talk when you book me for a talk, we'll go here, right? So you see, you can slot yourself into the proper channel and you know what to expect. Some things that people want my attention for, there's no channel for them, but they're not mad at me.

I'm not ignoring them. They're not sending it to a general purpose address that I'm did ignoring them at. There's just no outlet for them to send it. And so psychologically, I think it's much better. And then when and how I check these inboxes, to me, that's less interesting, because what I'm constantly trying to do is figure out what are the underlying processes

that are putting messages into these inboxes in the first place? How can I improve them? They have less unscheduled messages. So for me, it's not a game of how often or when I check it. It's making sure that I don't have too much pressure in any of them. If there's a ton of emails coming into my, one of my personal writer addresses because Lillian and I are trying to schedule a lot of interviews, the question is not how often do I check this inbox is,

oh, we need a better system. So I don't have so many of these back and forth unscheduled messages, right? If there's a bunch of student emails coming in because a lot of students have questions about their grades coming up because a lot of students have questions about their grades coming up because of the midterm, I say, okay, what matters here is not how often I check this inbox, it's I need to talk to my TAs and set up a system where they have access to the grade spreadsheet and they can send the message

to the TA and get this information. Let's figure out a way to do this without just a lot of unscheduled messages. So that's always my mindset with my various inboxes is not when and how I check it. I mean, when I do my time block planning, I put email time in there. Some days I don't check it all. Some days I'm trying to catch up on things. It's the process oriented thinking that matters for me. Are there too many messages in here when I check it? How do I make sure that's not the case

next time I check it? That's the way I'm thinking. It's so counterintuitive to have multiple email addresses. And yet, I think of all of the things that we've gone through today. Everything we've said, what is a high up-front cost that you can pay to make the downstream context switching cost reduced? Just making an email address for online purchases. Just that, just for when you buy some new clothes or DIY equipment or your right move alerts or whatever the hell it is that you've got going on.

It seems, honestly, I've heard you talk about this before, you're my research for this talk. And I thought, I'm such, I considered myself a sophisticated digital individual. And I realized just how idiotic it is that I use a main email for friends, for business, for podcast scheduling, for all manner of different things. Like that should be something that everybody can go away and do today.

You could make the same email address that you have, and just add a number one, two, or three on the end of it, and there you go, there's you three inboxes. And how long does it take on Gmail to do that? Five minutes, maybe less? You don't even have to do that. For some things, you can just do any term and a plus sign, and then your normal Gmail address,

and it'll send it to your normal Gmail address, and you can filter it. So you can do sign up, I think this still works, sign up plus, and then your normal Gmail address, and just use that every time you do any online shopping or have to give your register for anything. And then you set up auto rules in Gmail. Yeah.

And then you set up a filter in Gmail that takes that and tags it. And so this is what I do. So I have some of these addresses all come into Gmail. I was going to say, how do you then, what's the infrastructure on the, on the intern land? Yeah. So I have, I have filter rules that auto label them, right? And, and then auto archive. So there's a couple of things that you, one thing I do, which is, which is considered a centric, but I've been doing this for years and years, is everything that comes to my inbox is marked as red. I do not like this idea of like unread and red messages,

and you can let these things pile up. So make everything just look the same it's all on red so it's like this is not a storage facility, you know handle things and get it out of here you can't you don't have the advantage of new things are going to be black and so, you are caving quite aggressively then, yeah and then I archive quite aggressively so things get a filter rule will apply a label and then archives. And then I go to the different labels to see, so actually I put most things through a Gmail account, but everything's auto-archived and auto-labeled. And then you see the list of labels on the side. They're kind of, these are my inboxes, right? So if I click on the label for, you know, Georgetown collaborators, it will then show me everything tagged with the Georgetown

Collaboration. So it's my inbox for that particular address. But this means I can filter things even beyond just addresses to. Like, well, I know anything that comes from this person. So like, I have an administrative inbox, which is all the sign up stuff and newsletters. And I barely glance at this thing. and it's the bulk of my emails goes into that inbox. What really happens is they're labeled with that in archives and if I click on that label I can see them all. But yeah, so that's the way I handle it. But there's a lot of different ways you can do it. Honestly, I think having completely separate accounts is probably a little better because you want the real context switch

protection of, okay, I need to go see if this Amazon order shipped. I'm log into account that just like this. You want to silo yourself into different operating modes. And the more that you can do that. Yes, yes. Here's my friend. I'll be logging to this account.

Here's my business account. I'm logging this account. Here's my internal business account. Like in your situation, I might be like, oh, and here's my external facing business account where I'm interacting with guests that we're trying to book or this or that. And so when I'm there and I log into that account, that's all I'm just in that world. I'm not seen something from my friend that I'm not seen something from Amazon. I'm not seen something my mom said, like, oh, I'm just in the world right now of dealing with guests. It really makes a difference because of the context

switching costs. There are people listening to this that are rubbing their hands with glee and waiting to get home to their laptop tonight to set these up. I'm going to 100% take that on. I appreciate the principles. I think the principles and everything else is a fantastic thin end of the wedge to get the buy-in

and to understand the context of why context switching is bad. But I think that on the back end is like a really cool solution for a lot of this. I hope that it's going to help a lot of people. I had the last question actually about actually moving back to digital minimalism and this is something more behaviorally that you may have stumbled on. I wanted to know how people can start a deeper, more digitally minimal journey if they've got hard embedded habits around how they use their devices. But there's no unlinking those synapses. That myelin is down hard.

How do they get past those existing routines? This could work for email as well. Well, I mean, in digital minimalism, I suggest 30 days. You see, okay, you've got to commit to 30 days away from all these optional personal technologies, right? So that's your commitment. 30 days where I'm not on social media, I'm not on YouTube, I'm not on online news, you know, 30 days, okay. Then during those 30 days, some of this is unwiring to the synapse. Some of this is this sort of detoxing effect, but the thing that makes those 30 days successful is if you aggressively reflect an experiment to figure out what do I really want

to do with my time in my life. The aggressive experimentation reflection is what allows you to finish those 30 days and say, here's what I really want to spend my time doing, and now I can rebuild from scratch. Here's the tools I'm going to use, and I'm going to use them to service these things I care about, and everything else, everything that was not an answer to this question of what's the best way to use technology to service these things I care about, I'm not going to use them to service these things I care about and everything else. Everything that was not an answer to this question of what's the best way to use technology to service these things I care about, I'm not going to use anymore. That is much more sustainable, right? Because then what happens as you're going forward is that you're committed to a positive vision of what you want your life to look like.

That is something that is very sustainable. What doesn't work is if you try to just minimize negative. You say, I spend too much time on Instagram. I'm just going to try to use Instagram less. I'm going to take 30 days off from Instagram to somehow feel better. And then I'm going to resolve to use Instagram less. Trying to reduce the negative is often not that effective. Committing the supporting a positive is. So if you come out of the other side of these 30 days with this new vision of, here's how I spend my time. I do this, this, and this. And here's how I use tools to help this. It's much easier to ignore the tool that doesn't fit into that picture.

Maybe you used TikTok a lot, but now you're like, you know, I have this vision. I love it. It makes me feel good about how I'm living and TikTok didn't have any role in this vision. So why would I go do that? I'm much more interested in continuing to live this deep structured life to get after it to do the things I really figured out I want to do. So that's what I recommend. 30 days.

It's not a detox. It's a time for actually re-imagining what you want your life to be like. Have you considered that longer term, probably in 40 or 50 years time, what are going to see I used my phone too much or I spent too much time on email or on social media is one of the top deathbed regrets. Have you thought about that? It's an interesting question because I don't know if it's going to last 50 years, this type of behavior.

I think when you look at techno cycles, there's this initial roughly 10 year period where we have exuberance and experimentation. If something really interesting, new technology comes along, it opens up a lot of new opportunities that didn't exist before. The first period is typically one of experimentation and exuberance, right? This is where you tend to see a lot of extreme behaviors. What happens next in the tech adoption cycle

is that we get past that and begin to settle in and make decisions about all right, all right. We're used to this now. How do we actually want to integrate it into our lives long term? And the hope is when you get to that phase, things become more reasonable. I think that's the transition we're making now

with smartphone use. We created this large attention economy. We had these very appealing apps. We were using them in an experimental exuberant mindset. Those two things came together. And suddenly, we're looking at these things all the time, especially for very young, because the, let's say like the adolescent brain has a very hard time trying to deal with socially engineered distraction, right?

And these are unformed brains that, that hyper focus on sociality. So it's really, really, really appealing to them. And so we're using these things all the time. My observation working on digital minimalism is that as of about 2017, most people realized, this is not great. Okay. We're going to need to bring this back in some as we move forward on the new technologies. And so I'm hoping that the role that our phone and social media, etc., is going to play

in our lives, is going to rain back in over the next 10 years or so. So hopefully 50 years from now, it'll be more like looking back at that period with a little bit of interest or maybe even tinged with a bit of embarrassment. Man, that 2010 to 2020 was a crazy time. It was like the roaring 20s. You know, we were all flapper dancing and speakeasies, but we moved on. And I think that's going to be the case. I mean, I'm not even a big believer in the idea that these have an a small number of giant social media companies that basically dominates interaction

expression on the internet. The idea that that's going to be a long term, I don't even think that's the case. I think even that we're going to look back at and be like, that was this weird period where there is four or five companies that just dominated people's interaction expression on the internet. I don't think that's going to be a long-term thing either.

I think that's also going to be of the moment. And once you no longer have these giant companies with their own private versions of the internet that are trying to monetize attention, a lot of the excessive use is going to go down. And so I'm much more of an optimist about where we're going to get. That's an oddly positive outlet. I thought that you would have had something far more apocalyptic to have been Cassandra about for the future. What is next? What can you talk about or what you're

working on next or what we can expect from you over the next couple of years? You know, I'm not sure yet. I'm thinking about it. So if you have a good idea, I'm happy to hear it. I'm a little farther along than that. Typically, I do have a new book by the time I publish one because it's in the lead up. Once I'm done with a book, but it's not out yet, I need something for my mind to do. So that's typically when I start working on the next book. This year, I did a podcast instead, because of the pandemic and I was feeling isolated from my readers. So I think starting up my podcast last May, took that part of my attention that would have been, we got to get moving on the next book.

And so it slowed that down a little bit. So I have a couple ideas. I'm close to being able to talk about them yet, but I don't want to talk about them until I've locked them in because I'm not quite sure if that's where I'm going to go. But I'm not, it won't be long until I'm back to writing again. Let's put it that way. Good. I'll keep on pestering Lillian and she'll tell me.

I'll just keep on asking for the, for the stories behind the scenes. Kyle, put it that way. Good. I'll keep on pestering Lillian and she'll tell me. I'll just keep on asking for the for the stories behind the scenes. Kyle, this has been awesome, man. It's been a very long time to bring you on the show, and I'm glad that you finally made it. A world without email will be linked in the show notes below. You're also a digital ghost. So asking where people can get you online is kind of a little bit difficult. What's your website? Calnewport.com. That's my email newsletter right this week's USA. I have a podcast, deep questions, but otherwise I'm very hard to find. And that's by design.

Everything will be linked in the show notes below. Cal, thanks for today. Well, thank you. Yeah, I'll fix