Technological innovation and embracement in all aspects of personal, organizations, and sectors in the current world make it easier and faster to accomplish tasks than it was three or four decades ago. The ease and quickness in undertaking a task increase the habit of multitasking. However, does multitasking increase or diminish productivity, can people become good at multitasking or what are the aspects and ways to enhance productivity through multitasking? The above questions always tend to arise in whenever the subject of multitasking arises. Scholars tend to agree that there is no distinct definition of the term multitasking.
According to Otto, Wahl, Lefort, and Frei (2012), scholars concur that multitasking involves undertaking more than one task simultaneously rather than completing one task before beginning the other task (Otto, Wahl, Lefort & Frei, 2012). Based on this definition the essay addresses three major issues. The issues relate to analyzing researches on multitasking and individuals, who believe they are good at multitasking, determining whether people can be good multitaskers, and describing ways multitasking can improve productivity in personal or professional settings.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Research Suggestions on Multitasking and Multitaskers
The millennial generation is one of the generations that tend to believe that they are good at multitasking due to their embracement of technology in their world. Scholars tend to reject the notion of increased productivity through multitasking. For instance, Russ and Crews (2014) cited a past study demonstrating that the continuous emphasis on multitasking results in wasting two working hours daily. The study also demonstrated that as of 2005, the U.S. economy lost at least $588 billion from the wasted time from interruptions of moving from one task to the other (Russ & Crews, 2014). The study argues that continued multitasking results in stress and burnout of workers thus reducing the level of productivity in the long term.
According to Otto, Wahl, Lefort, and Frei (2012), most studies tend to focus most of their efforts on determining to multitask based on age or gender. Past studies argued that women are better at multitasking compared to men due to their job preferences, but experiment-based studies do not show any significant differences (Otto, Wahl, Lefort & Frei, 2012). It was evident that women are more likely to multitask due to their job requirements but men are quick in changing focus and concentration from one task to the other.
According to König, Oberacher & Kleinmann, 2010), individual characteristics such as polychronicity, impulsivity, and cognitive interference and environmental factors such as work and family demands influence multitasking behaviors. The study demonstrated that people are different due to their characteristics and environmental factors. Kirchberg, Roe, and Van Eerde (2015) concur with these arguments demonstrating that the two factors influence the degree and productivity of the employees in the different workplaces. Both studies portrayed interruptions from one task to the other results in a lapse in memory and disruption in the visual or auditory pattern, the motor response and retrieving memory (König, Oberacher & Kleinmann, 2010 and Kirchberg, Roe & Van Eerde, 2015). The studies depict that polychronicity involves the motivation and personal values of people who like to multitask over undertaking one task at a time. It was clear that people with high polychronicity value are more likely to multitask compared to people with low polychronicity value. Impulsive individual multitasks as failure to engage in a different task results in boredom. Other triggers from off-task cognitions also increase the rate of multitasking. Lastly, the changes and dynamics of implementing technology result in the need to engage in multiple tasks at the same time.
Can people become good multitaskers?
Recent studies argue that work overload led to organizations including multitasking to be one of the main skill during recruitment. Studies opposed to human multitasking argue that the time loss and the stress caused by multitasks result in mood swings, anxiety and inability to concentrate on any task thus diminishing the task quality. The studies argue that due to the time lapse in the short and long-term means that human, unlike computers, cannot effectively multitask. However, such studies fail to recognize that multitasking creates pressure to the employees to engage in different tasks, for instance, a secretary is expected to send emails, receive calls and engage in other official tasks without disrupting her productivity.
These tasks are all important and simultaneous due to the time constraints. Impulsive individuals’ inability to engage in a single task for a long period reduces their productivity if they are not allowed to engage in other tasks that enhance their impulsive nature. Therefore, to enhance the productivity of the impulsive workers, companies must establish a dynamic environment to enhance multitasking (Kirchberg, Roe & Van Eerde, 2015). Lastly, monotonous jobs result in boredom thus requiring the companies to enhance multitasking to limit complacency that reduces the performance of the employees.
The main challenge of people becoming good multitaskers is the lack of personal regulation that increases work overload, inability to concentrate on these tasks due to the pressure and anxiety created by the overload. Stress and fatigue depreciate the level of concentration thus reducing productivity. According to Kirchberg, Roe, and Van Eerde (2015), determining the characters and environment proves that some people can be good multitaskers due to their impulsivity, polychronicity and tasks requirements but setting a limit is vital to improve productivity.
Increasing Productivity through Multitasking
The studies discussed above demonstrate that multitasking can diminish productivity and personality influences the ability of individuals to undertake more than one task simultaneously. Russ and Crews (2014) argued that the continuous disruptions from a phone call, email notifications and other disruptions over a long period reduce an individual’s IQ by about ten, which is equivalent to a sleepless night. Therefore, to eliminate such disadvantages, a company should require employees to undertake personality tests that determine their impulsivity and polychronicity to ensure that employees with these characteristics engage in multitasking. The company must also set strict regulations to ensure that an employee does not engage in more than two tasks to limit the workload.
Other factors that affect performance are tasks complexity. Simple and monotonous tasks lead to boredom and complacency, which reduces the employees’ creativity. Companies should integrate such tasks to exploit the creativity and work concentration thus increasing performances. Training is also vital in improving multitasking productivity. Lastly, complex tasks require much concentration, enhance the creativity and task-orientation of the workers thus making the employees limit multitasking will enhance the quality and efficiency in the organizations.
References
Kirchberg, D., Roe, R., & Van Eerde, W. (2015). Polychronicity and Multitasking: A Diary Study at Work. Human Performance , 28 (2), 112-136.
König, C., Oberacher, L., & Kleinmann, M. (2010). Personal and Situational Determinants of Multitasking at Work. Journal of Personnel Psychology , 9 (2), 99-103.
Otto, S., Wahl, K., Lefort, C., & Frei, W. (2012). Exploring the Impact of Multitasking In the Workplace. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly , 3 (4), 154-162. Retrieved August 23, 2018, from http://jbsq.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/JBSQ_June2012_12.pdf
Russ, M., & Crews, D. (2014). A Survey of Multitasking Behaviors in Organizations. International Journal of Human Resource Studies , 4 (1), 137.
