Cal Newport’s new book discusses nothing about laziness. Instead, his book gives us specific rules for being ‘focused’ at work in a world that often distracts us. His main aim is to explain what he calls ‘deep work’, which is work that we produce as a result of maximum focus. But his insights are also useful to rethink our understanding of laziness, although he does not explicitly discuss this concept. To understand how we can reflect on laziness using Newport’s book, we can ask the following question: Are we lazy or simply wrong in our approach to work? In other words, are we wrong about being lazy?
Popular conceptions of laziness are associated with words like procrastination and idleness. But according to Neel Burton, a psychologist, laziness is a ‘reluctance’ to work, especially when such work is the best thing to do at a given time. Simply put, laziness is an attitude towards work, not our approach to it. While procrastinators tend to lay off work for a later time and idlers tend to not work for a certain time, both regard the value of work and intend fully to complete it. But lazy people often look at work as a burden and hesitate to do it.
If procrastination and idleness are not inherently lazy, then why do most of us have difficulty managing time, meeting deadlines and being organised with work? While Newport does not give a response to this question, he does give us insight into adopting a work habit that ‘works for us’. Based on his insights, we can understand that most of us try to fit ourselves into a system that is not suited to our gifts and abilities. If not for his insights into our work approach, we might end up labelling ourselves as incompetent or lazy. Simply put, the problem is not with our attitudes towards work. It’s simply our approach to it! So, what can we do to change our approach?
Newport’s four philosophies of deep work are helpful to rethink how we work. The first is monastic philosophy. It seeks to maximise our efforts to do deep work and eliminate everything that distracts us from such time. This approach might work best for those who have to spend long hours mastering a specific skill. Second, the bimodal philosophy of work enables us to divide our time into deep stretches of work and leave the rest for everything else. This would work for those who need to prioritise both work and people.
Third, Newport discusses the rhythmic philosophy of work, which enables us to do deep work consistently and transform work into a regular habit. By setting specific times for deep work, we get to work consistently and in a rhythm. Everyone can adopt this strategy, according to Newport, who claims that it is in line with human nature. Lastly, he discusses what is called journalistic philosophy, which enables us to schedule work whenever we can. This approach works only for those who can readily switch from their distractions to doing deep work.
By adopting any of these approaches, based on what suits our personality and type of work, we can change how we work. And in doing so, we can adopt a work style that is uniquely ours, such that it not only makes our work more enjoyable but can also make us more productive. It can empower us to consider our own competence, overcome the struggle of procrastinating, and be an example to those who tend to be lazy and reluctant to work.
Therefore, laziness does not stem from our approach to work. Rather, it is an unwillingness to work, despite work being a good thing and benefiting those who do it. While most of us who struggle with managing time and delivering work according to specific deadlines might feel incompetent, the problem lies not in our attitudes toward work but in our approach to it. But finding a work approach that suits us best, according to who we are and what we do, can save us from feelings of inadequacy and self-reproach. Moreover, it can make us competent and even more proactive at work and can altogether alter our notions of incompetence and laziness.
_________________________________________
Written by Roselina Vundi
