The widespread belief in multitasking's productivity benefits is challenged by evidence suggesting it impairs performance. Studies show significant work fragmentation, with frequent interruptions and task switching. While some diary studies suggest a link between daily flow and the multitasking-performance relationship, the underlying psychological processes remain unclear. This study proposes a model based on Lazarus and Folkman's transactional model of stress and coping. The model posits that multitasking, as a stressor, influences employees' appraisal of their daily tasks (as less challenging or more hindering), which in turn affects flow experiences. Work engagement is explored as a resource buffering multitasking's negative effects. The study contributes by: 1) examining flow as a mediator in the multitasking-job performance link; 2) emphasizing appraisal as key to understanding multitasking's impact; and 3) investigating work engagement as a daily resource buffering multitasking's effects on flow and performance.

Existing research highlights the prevalence of multitasking and its potential negative consequences on productivity and well-being. Studies using laboratory settings and diary methods show how interruptions and task-switching negatively affect performance. The concept of flow, a state of intense focus and enjoyment, has been identified as a potential key mechanism explaining the relationship between multitasking and job performance. The transactional model of stress and coping and its extensions, the challenge-hindrance stressor framework (CHSF), and the transactional model of stress and flow (TMSF) provide a framework to understand how individuals appraise stressors and utilize coping resources. This research builds upon these models by investigating the specific role of task appraisal and work engagement in the context of multitasking and flow.

This daily diary study involved 33 professional workers in the food industry who completed 10 daily surveys over 4 weeks. Multitasking was operationalized using Simpson's diversity index, which measures the fragmentation of working time across multiple tasks. Flow was measured using a modified Flow State Scale (FSS), focusing on concentration and autotelic experience. Daily work engagement was assessed using a shortened Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-3), and appraisal of daily tasks was measured using scales adapted from the Valencia Eustress-Distress Appraisal Scale (VEDAS). Daily job performance was measured using a single-item self-report measure. Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was used to analyze the nested data structure (days nested within individuals), considering both between-individual and within-individual variance. Multilevel mediation analyses were conducted to test the hypothesized relationships.

The results show a significant negative relationship between multitasking and flow (Hypothesis 1). Multitasking was negatively associated with the appraisal of daily tasks as challenging, which in turn was positively associated with flow (Hypothesis 2a, mediated effect -0.396, 95% CI [-0.821, -0.075]). However, multitasking was not related to hindrance appraisal, and hindrance appraisal was not linked to flow (Hypothesis 2b, not supported). Daily work engagement moderated the multitasking-flow relationship (Hypothesis 3): at higher levels of engagement, the negative effect of multitasking on flow was weaker. Flow was positively related to job performance (Hypothesis 4). A serial mediation model showed that multitasking indirectly affected job performance via challenge appraisal, flow, and hindrance appraisal (Hypothesis 5).

The findings support the proposed model, demonstrating that multitasking impairs flow and subsequently job performance. The mediating role of challenge appraisal highlights the importance of how employees perceive their tasks in the face of multitasking. The moderating role of work engagement suggests that individuals with high engagement are better equipped to cope with the demands of multitasking and maintain flow. These results provide ecologically valid evidence of the negative effects of multitasking and its mechanisms, particularly for those lacking engagement. The study offers practical implications for organizations in understanding and managing the challenges of multitasking.

This study offers valuable insights into the negative impact of multitasking on employee flow and performance. It highlights the mediating role of task appraisal and the moderating role of work engagement. Future research could explore different types of multitasking, use more granular data collection methods, examine long-term consequences, and consider the interplay between work and personal domains. Practical implications include promoting monotasking, limiting interruptions, and providing resources and training to enhance work engagement and mindfulness.

The study's limitations include the relatively small sample size and reliance on self-report measures. The lack of in-the-moment data collection limits the understanding of the exact nature of multitasking behaviors. The study's focus on self-reported performance might introduce common method bias. Future research with larger samples, more granular data, and objective performance measures is recommended.