Reading 3. Read the article. Answer Questions 8-15.
Many schools and companies introduce digital tools to make communication faster. Yet speed can create a problem of its own. When every message produces an alert, people may start treating availability as responsibility: because someone can reply immediately, there is an assumption that they should. An unanswered message can feel like neglect even when no immediate response is needed.
The result is fragmented attention. People repeatedly move between tasks and notifications without giving one activity sustained concentration. Some organisations introduce “quiet hours”, when staff are encouraged not to send routine messages. Critics argue that this can delay collaboration, especially across time zones or when decisions cannot wait.
That criticism is reasonable. A hospital cannot treat communication exactly like a publishing company. But this does not establish that constant availability is necessary everywhere. Teams can distinguish urgent messages from convenient ones, agree a channel for emergencies, and set realistic response times for ordinary communication.
Managers also need to model these expectations. Staff are unlikely to protect their evenings if their manager routinely sends non-urgent messages and expects immediate replies.
In one small pilot, staff reported better concentration after quiet hours began. However, the organisation also simplified its approval process that month. The improvement is encouraging, but attributing it entirely to quiet hours would go beyond the evidence. Nor does the absence of a clear causal result make the policy worthless; its practical value can still be reviewed alongside any delays it creates.
The aim is clearer expectations, not slower communication for its own sake. Technology can transmit information instantly. Organisations must still decide when instant attention is valuable.
