Working (and Learning?) in 90-Minute Segments

Fifty years ago, a researcher named Nathaniel Kleitman discovered that a night of sleep consists of recurring 90-minute cycles. Every 90 minutes, we pass through five stages spanning light sleep to deep sleep, to light sleep once again. Dr. Kleitman named this the “basic rest-activity cycle.” Others have called this our “ultradian rhythm.”

Nathaniel Kleitman also discovered that these 90-minute cycles continue during our waking hours; affecting our level of alertness and productivity. Working with, rather than battling, our natural ultradian rhythm may increase productivity. By working for three, 90-minute periods each day,  interspersed with rejuvenating breaks, Harvard Business Review’s Tony Schwartz was able to write his latest book in six months. Working 10-12 hours per day, his previous books took more than a year each to produce. So, working less than half the time, he produced his book twice as quickly.

Mr. Schwarz believes that working continuously, as many of us do, is detrimental to productivity.

But what are the costs of working continuously? Do we think as clearly, creatively and strategically, or work as effectively with colleagues and clients, in the 10th or 12th or 14th hour of a workday devoid of real breaks, as you do in the 2nd or the 4th?

Of course not. And that’s because human beings aren’t wired to operate like computers.

Research into cycles of alertness could impact learning programs. For face-to-face events, there could be advantages to scheduling three 90-minute sessions with rejuvenating 90-minute breaks in between. (RN)

For Real Productivity, Less is Truly More | Harvard Business Review | Tony Schwartz | 17 May 2010

Tagged as: Neuroscience