Of course, instant messaging is different. I’ll use it occasionally, but the unending stream of beeps makes it impossible to focus. It’s great for the “always-connected” kids, with their Facebook pages and twitters about their daily movements, but I’ve got serious work to do.

A few weeks ago, after months of frustration with my half-hearted use of instant-messaging for project-related communication, my colleague Adri reached her breaking point. “I don’t even know how to hold those conversations via email,” she said. “IM is so much easier, and more efficient.”

This assault on human attention has to stop! I summarized the findings in an e-mail and wearily returned to grading. Case closed.

Three hours later, an IM popped up on my screen with a link to an article by Anne Zelenka in the blog Web Worker. “I see your research on interruptions,” wrote Adri, “and raise you this article about burst workstyles.”

Though I remain unconvinced by all of the arguments in Zelenka’s piece, her central premise is unassailable. Recent years have witnessed an explosion in the number of interpersonal communication channels. While the contemporary workplace is fixated on electronic mail and telephone calls, newer forms of messaging are more appropriate for transmitting certain types of information and inquiries. Thus, we are witnessing a culture clash between more traditional habits and “burst” working styles that selectively embrace the new technologies.

“Bursters realize that they don’t need to live in their e-mail,” writes Zelenka. “They know you should try instant messaging if you need a quick answer, go with a blog post if you’re announcing something, and use a wiki for archiving information useful to the entire team… [B]ursters know that the less they use e-mail, the more their colleagues will seek them out using other channels.”

And then it struck me. If I didn’t at least try to fold IM into my workflow, I risked becoming my former professor. And at least he had tenure and an awe-inspiring list of publications. After quickly consulting Pitchfork Media to reassure myself that my music taste had not fallen too far behind the curve, I resolved to give instant messaging another try.

Thirty seconds of Googling led me to blog postings by other knowledge workers revisiting their hostility to instant messaging. In these pieces, they share useful tactics for controlling the flood of unwanted interruptions.

Contemporary IM programs allow users to suppress audible and visual notifications of incoming messages, and this is the single most important strategy for interruption management. Diligent use of the “away” message is also crucial. Just as leaning over a notepad or closing the door signals “leave me alone” in the physical workspace, an away message announcing “grading” or “coding” can indicate focused attention to trusted IM correspondents. Researchers have actually found that such messages reduce the number of interruptions by forcing others to carefully consider whether or not the topic is important enough to warrant an interuption.

This morning, I set up new personal accounts on AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), ICQ, and Yahoo Messenger. I used a free program called Trillian to integrate all of the accounts into a single interface, but could just as easily have used the free programs GAIM, Meebo or Miranda. It took ten minutes to understand and configure all of the notification/interruption options, but they’re now adjusted to match my different modes of working.

In exchange for my willingness to experiment with (gasp) different ways of communicating, I have one request for my colleague. Ten years from now, when Metaversatility is hard at work on Metaverse 5.0, and one of our co-workers pressures you to adapt your work style, I hope you will remember our recent conversation. When this happens, be sure to dash off an e-mail message with all the details. Or, better yet, why not just send me a quick IM? It’s easier that way.