Modern work environments are technologically and socially rich, requiring individuals to manage multiple tasks that involve different technologies and varying degrees of interdependence. Individual and team performance hinge on functional work shifts that can involve changing tasks (multi-tasking), technologies (multi-tooling), and/or teammates (multi-teaming). We extend research on task switching to explain how the social and technological dimensions of tasks affect switch costs. The task switching literature identifies lateral shifts that occur when individuals change tasks. We also consider vertical switches that occur when individuals change from independent (i.e., working alone) to interdependent work (i.e., as part of a team) or from interdependent to independent work. We then integrate personological, social, task, and technological factors into one conceptual framework. Our framework lays the groundwork for understanding the effect of functional work shifts on task and team performance in modern-day work environments.
References
1.
AllportA.WylieG. (2000). Task switching, stimulus-response bindings, and negative priming. Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII, 35-70.
2.
AltmannE. M.TraftonJ. G. (2002). Memory for goals: An activation-based model. Cognitive science, 26(1), 39-83.
3.
BaardS. K.RenchT. A.KozlowskiS. W. (2014). Performance adaptation: A theoretical integration and review. Journal of Management, 40(1), 48-99.
4.
BaumeisterR. F.LearyM. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497.
5.
BlascovichJ.MendesW. B.HunterS. B.SalomonK. (1999). Social “facilitation” as challenge and threat. Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(1), 68-77.
6.
BrumbyD. P.CoxA. L.BackJ.GouldS. J. (2013). Recovering from an interruption: Investigating speed- accuracy trade-offs in task resumption behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19(2), 95-107.
7.
Cannon-BowersJ. A.SalasE. (2001). Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 195-202.
8.
CummingsJ. N.KieslerS. (2005). Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 703-722.
9.
DeChurchL.A.Mesmer-MagnusJ.R. (2010). Measuring shared team mental models: A meta-analysis. Group Dynamics:Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 1-14.
10.
DeShonR. P.KozlowskiS. W.SchmidtA. M.MilnerK. R.WiechmannD. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1035-1056.
11.
FahrR. (2011). Job Design and Job Satisfaction–Empirical Evidence for Germany?.
12.
GergleD.TanD. S. (2014). Experimental Research in HCI. In Ways of Knowing in HCI (pp. 191-227). SpringerNew York.
13.
GersickC. J.HackmanJ. R. (1990). Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 47(1), 65-97.
14.
GutzwillerR.WickensC.CleggB. (2014). Workload over- load modeling: An experiment with MATB II to inform a computational model of task management. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 58 pp. 849–853). SAGE Publications.
15.
HelsonH. (1949). Design of equipment and optimal human operation. The American Journal of Psychology, 473-497.
16.
HindsP. J.CarleyK. M.KrackhardtD.WholeyD. (2000). Choosing work group members: Balancing similarity, competence, and familiarity. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 81(2), 226-251.
17.
JarmaszJ.HerdmanC. M.JohannsdottirK. R. (2005). Object-based attention and cognitive tunneling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11(1), 3-12.
18.
KaffM. S. (2004). Multi-tasking is multitaxing: Why special educators are leaving the field. Preventing School Failure, 48(2), 10-17.
19.
KönigC. J.BuhnerM.MurlingG. (2005). Working memory, fluid intelligence, and attention are predictors of multi-tasking performance, but polychronicity and extraversion are not. Human Performance, 18(3), 243-266.
20.
KozlowskiS. W.IlgenD. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77-124.
21.
LeeJ. D.SeeK. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50-80.
22.
MarkG.IqbalS. T.CzerwinskiM.JohnsP. (2014). Bored mondays and focused afternoons: the rhythm of attention and online activity in the workplace. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 3025-3034). ACM.
23.
MarksM. A.DeChurchL. A.MathieuJ. E.PanzerF. J.AlonsoA. (2005). Teamwork in multiteam systems. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 964.
24.
MathieuJ. E.HeffnerT. S.GoodwinG. F.SalasE.Cannon-BowersJ. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of applied psychology, 85(2), 273-283.
25.
MathieuJ. E.MarksM. A.ZaccaroS. J. (2001). Multiteam systems. International handbook of work and organizational psychology, 2, 289-313.
26.
McGrathJ. E.ArrowH.BerdahlJ. L. (2000). The study of groups: past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 95-105.
27.
MortensenM.WoolleyA. W.O’LearyM. (2007). Conditions enabling effective multiple team membership. In CrowstonK.SieberS.WynnE. (Eds.), Virtuality and virtualization (pp. 215-228). Boston: Springer.
28.
MuraseT.CarterD. R.DeChurchL. A.MarksM. A. (2014). Mind the gap: The effect of leadership on collective cognition in multiteam systems. The Leadership Quarterly.
29.
ResickC.J.MuraseT.RandallK.DeChurchL.A. (2014). Information elaboration and team performance: Examining the psychological origins and environmental contingencies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. The social psychology of intergroup relations, 33(47), 74.
32.
TraftonJ. G.MonkC. A. (2007). Task interruptions. Reviews of human factors and ergonomics, 3(1), 111-126.
33.
WickensC. D.HooeyB. L.GoreB. F.SebokA.KoenickeC. S. (2009). Identifying black swans in NextGen: Predicting human performance in off-nominal conditions. Human Factors, 51(5), 638-651.
34.
WickensC. D.SantamariaA.SebokA. (2013). A Computational Model of Task Overload Management and Task Switching. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 57, pp. 763-767). SAGE Publications.
35.
ZaccaroS. J.MarksM. A.DeChurchL. (Eds.). (2012). Multiteam systems: An organization form for dynamic and complex environments. New York: Routledge.
36.
ZhangJ.NormanD. A. (1994). Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science, 18, 87-122.
37.
Zika-ViktorssonA.SundströmP.EngwallM. (2006). Project overload: an exploratory study of work and management in multi-project settings. International Journal of Project Management, 24(5), 385-394.
