My partner can have a million things going on at once and somehow not miss a beat. He’ll spend an hour on one project, hit a wall, jump to something completely different, then come back later and suddenly know what to do.
I’ve called him scattered before, and he’s called himself that too, because we’re taught that productive people pick one thing and grind until it’s finished. But psychology suggests there’s an important difference between being distracted and deliberately stepping away from something when you’re stuck.
And the people who rotate between projects might be doing something smarter than it looks.
Past a certain point, pushing harder just means going in circles
Everyone knows what this feels like. You’ve been staring at the same paragraph for twenty minutes, and every version sounds worse than the last.
You’ve tried the same spreadsheet formula from three different angles and keep ending up in the same place. You’re rearranging a design for the fourth time, and it still doesn’t work, but you can’t see why.
The instinct is to try harder. Stay at the desk. Focus. Push through. And sometimes that works, especially if the problem is just tedious or time-consuming.
But there’s a point where effort stops being productive and becomes something else: repetition.
What’s happening is that your brain has committed to one way of approaching the problem, and the harder you concentrate, the deeper that commitment gets. You’re stuck in what psychologists call cognitive fixation, and pushing harder only makes the groove deeper.
Every attempt you make runs down the same track because you can’t step far enough back to see that the track is the problem.
That’s the moment where more time at the desk isn’t helping. What would help is leaving.
People who alternated between tasks came up with better ideas than people who pushed through
Researchers at Columbia Business School ran a series of experiments to test what happens when people switch between creative tasks instead of powering through one at a time.
They compared three approaches: alternating back and forth between two tasks at regular intervals, switching whenever you feel like it, or finishing one task before starting the other.
The people who alternated regularly produced more creative ideas than either of the other groups. The researchers’ explanation was straightforward: every time someone stepped away from a task and came back, the fixation broke and new angles became visible.
But the finding that sticks with me is what happened when people got to choose their own strategy. Almost nobody chose to alternate.
They preferred to grind, even though grinding produced worse results. People consistently underestimated how much stepping away would help and overestimated how productive they were being by pushing through.
That’s what I’m seeing when I call my partner scattered. The behavior that looks unfocused is the one that produced better results.
More Bolde Stories
A stuck problem can loosen while you’re working on something else
There’s a reason the answer to something you’ve been struggling with sometimes shows up while you’re folding laundry or driving to the store.
In psychology, this is called the incubation effect, and it’s one of the better-tested ideas in creativity research.
When Ut Na Sio and Thomas Ormerod at Lancaster University pulled together 117 studies on the phenomenon, the pattern was clear: people who took a break from a hard problem and came back to it later performed better than people who kept pushing straight through.
The effect was strongest when the problem required creative or open-ended thinking. And interestingly, what people did during the break mattered.
Something easy and unrelated, like a different low-effort task, worked better than something mentally demanding. Which is exactly what project-switching gives you: a change of scene that doesn’t drain the same resources.
The science is still working out exactly why this happens. Part of the explanation seems to be that when you step away, the assumptions and dead-end strategies you were locked into start to fade. They stop feeling like the only option.
You come back with less baggage from your last failed attempt, and it’s easier to see the thing from a different angle.
That’s what rotating between projects does. It’s not abandoning project A. It’s giving project A room to breathe while project B gets your attention.
And when you come back an hour later, the solution that felt invisible can look obvious. The thing that was blocking you lost its grip while you were gone.
Jumping ship every five minutes isn’t the same thing
Bouncing between emails, texts, and whatever just popped up on your phone every few minutes is not the same as deliberate switching.
Research on multitasking has consistently shown that every interruption forces your brain to drop what it was doing and rebuild its focus from scratch, and those small losses add up across a day.
The version that works is more specific. It means having a few meaningful projects you can move between, and switching when you’ve hit a real wall, when the same idea keeps circling back, and nothing new is arriving no matter how long you sit there.
There’s a difference between stepping away from a stuck problem and running away from a hard one. The first gives your brain room to do something it can’t do while you’re staring at the thing. The second just means the thing never gets finished.
The rhythm looked scattered from the outside
I’ve stopped calling my partner scattered. What he’s doing has a shape to it, even if the shape isn’t a straight line. Work on something until the wheels start spinning, move somewhere else, come back later with fresh eyes.
The lesson isn’t that everyone should keep ten projects half-finished at all times. It’s that persistence doesn’t always mean refusing to walk away. Sometimes it means staying with the larger work while being willing to leave one stuck piece alone for a while.
When you come back, the path will look different than it did when you left.
