TL;DR
- Multitasking creates the illusion of productivity but often results in cognitive overload and preventable errors.
- Itai Liptz’s disciplined approach to compartmentalization—focusing deeply on one task at a time—helps him manage complex work that demands precision.
- Scientific research consistently shows that multitasking reduces performance, accuracy, and attention span, especially in knowledge-driven roles.
- Liptz structures his work to protect focus, demonstrating that deliberate time management enhances decision-making and minimizes critical mistakes.
- True productivity in high-stakes environments stems from depth, not speed—focus is not optional, but a professional safeguard.
Multitasking has become an expectation in many workplaces, but its effectiveness remains widely overstated. The constant shifting between messages, documents, and conversations can mimic productivity without delivering real progress. For work that requires careful judgment, even small distractions can result in costly errors. The appearance of efficiency often hides the erosion of attention, and in some roles, that tradeoff isn’t just unhelpful—it’s dangerous.
Itai Liptz understands that reality from experience. As someone whose professional responsibilities involve investigative rigor and operational oversight, he works in environments where small details carry significant weight. In a recent interview, he described his most consistent productivity habit as “compartmentalization—focusing deeply on one thing at a time without distractions.” That structure, he explained, helps him give full attention to tasks ranging from complex reviews to personal matters.
His approach reflects the nature of the work. It demands structure, concentration, and careful attention to avoid costly mistakes. The ability to sustain focus becomes a safeguard, especially when decisions carry legal, reputational, or procedural implications. Liptz’s routine has developed in step with those realities.
He builds his schedule around that need for depth. The method creates space to think clearly, weigh risks, and recognize what others may overlook. It prioritizes depth over immediacy and allows for more deliberate decision-making. In roles where mistakes are expensive, good judgment starts with uninterrupted time.
What the Research Says About Multitasking
Despite its popularity, multitasking doesn’t align with how the brain actually works. People may believe they’re performing multiple activities at once, but neuroscience shows they’re rapidly switching between tasks. That switching creates a cognitive toll. The brain has to reorient with every shift, leading to slower performance and a greater likelihood of error.
A study from Stanford University examined people who identified as effective multitaskers. The results found the opposite: these individuals were more easily distracted, retained less information, and performed worse on tests measuring attention control. Another report from the American Psychological Association noted that task-switching could reduce productivity by up to 40 percent.
Even more concerning is the impact on accuracy. When someone reviews complex documents while answering emails or toggles between research tools and messaging platforms, the chance of missing a critical inconsistency rises. In roles where accuracy is essential, that kind of oversight isn’t theoretical. It can unravel months of work or lead to conclusions based on incomplete or misunderstood information.
The day-to-day impact is often subtle. A missed clause in a contract, an overlooked data point, or a misread report may not cause immediate failure, but these lapses accumulate. Over time, they shape patterns of decision-making that no longer reflect careful thought. What begins as a small sacrifice of attention becomes a structural weakness.
Itai Liptz: When Attention Becomes a Safeguard
The consequences of shallow attention are visible in some of the highest-profile failures in recent organizational history. The collapse of Wirecard in 2020 revealed how extended inattention, even by experienced professionals, can allow glaring issues to go unaddressed. Despite years of reporting that questioned the company’s accounting practices, oversight bodies and auditors failed to act decisively. The missing funds, which eventually totaled nearly €2 billion, weren’t hidden through sophisticated deception. They persisted in part because not enough people were paying sustained attention.
This example underscores the value of uninterrupted thinking in roles where trust, accuracy, and scrutiny are required. Liptz’s routine supports that level of engagement. “I organize my time around mentally distinct tasks and avoid overlapping projects that pull focus in competing directions,” he says. Investigative work, in particular, relies on the ability to sustain attention over time. Following a lead, analyzing conflicting accounts, and reviewing supporting documentation are tasks that require immersion.
To maintain that immersion, Liptz protects blocks of time where no other input competes. He sets aside space to review, question, and reflect without pressure to multitask. This structure supports more thoughtful analysis and clearer outcomes. The goal isn’t to isolate, but to concentrate enough to recognize what’s often missed in a distracted setting.
The result is more than efficiency. It’s a form of quality control. A focused mind is less likely to miss red flags or settle for assumptions. In Liptz’s work, those differences carry weight—not just in process, but in result.
Designing for Depth in a Distracted Environment
This kind of time management is possible for more people than they may assume. One useful approach is to divide the day by cognitive load. Deep-thinking work can be grouped into the parts of the day when attention is strongest, while administrative or communication tasks can be saved for lighter hours. That shift doesn’t require an overhaul of one’s calendar, but it does require consistency and forethought.
Other professionals build rituals around focused work. These might include silencing notifications, closing unnecessary browser tabs, or stepping away from email during specific periods. Some choose to schedule cognitively demanding work at the same time every day to create predictable rhythms. The point isn’t to eliminate every interruption, which may be unrealistic, but to reduce them enough that focused thinking becomes possible again.
It’s also worth considering the cost of each interruption. Research suggests it can take over 20 minutes to fully return to a complex task after being pulled away. That recovery time is rarely tracked, but it drains attention just the same. A handful of minor disruptions scattered throughout the day can erase hours of concentrated effort, even when the calendar looks full.
When teams or leaders defend time for uninterrupted work, the benefits show up in quality, not just quantity. Fewer mistakes, better decisions, and greater clarity often follow. This isn’t a matter of working more hours but protecting the best ones.
Focus as a Deliberate Professional Choice
In many workplaces, being quick to respond is still mistaken for being effective. But there’s a difference between reacting and thinking. Work that depends on rigor—whether investigative, legal, research-based, or operational—requires more than momentum. The most valuable contributions often come from slowing down, not speeding up.
Liptz’s emphasis on compartmentalization offers a different model for handling complexity. He gives each task the time and attention it requires, without rushing to shift gears midstream. This approach may not translate neatly into metrics or dashboards, yet it directly influences how reliable the final outcome is. In fields where decisions carry weight, the thinking that precedes them matters just as much as the action that follows.
Maintaining focus is difficult, particularly in environments that interrupt more than they support concentration. That difficulty is part of what gives focused attention its value. Staying with a problem longer than most people are willing to isn’t just a habit of temperament; it changes what becomes possible. In work where small errors have large consequences, this kind of persistence often makes the difference.
The ability to resist fragmentation has become increasingly rare. But for professionals like Liptz, it’s not a luxury. It’s a condition for sound judgment, thoughtful analysis, and work that can withstand scrutiny. That isn’t about doing more. It’s about doing the things that matter, without letting them slip through the noise.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why does Itai Liptz prioritize focus over multitasking?
Because his work involves investigative oversight and risk analysis, Liptz prioritizes deep focus to ensure accuracy, prevent oversight, and maintain sound judgment—areas where multitasking introduces unnecessary risk.
What are the risks of multitasking in high-stakes roles?
Multitasking leads to cognitive fatigue, lower retention, and a greater chance of missing critical details—issues that can result in significant financial, legal, or reputational damage in fields requiring precision.
How does research support the dangers of multitasking?
Studies from Stanford and the APA have shown that multitasking reduces productivity by up to 40% and impairs attention control, making individuals more prone to errors and distractions.
What are Liptz’s strategies for maintaining focus?
He builds his schedule around task separation, avoids overlapping priorities, and protects blocks of uninterrupted time to engage deeply with complex problems.
Can professionals apply these focus strategies in everyday settings?
Yes. By organizing the day based on mental load, reducing digital distractions, and developing routines for deep work, professionals can improve clarity, accuracy, and performance without working longer hours.
Cover photo credit: IdeaMensch
