I wrote recently about the challenges we face from constant disruptions at work and suggested that companies should not be recruiting employees who boast of their ability to multitask. Today I want to delve further into some of the evidence that multitasking isn’t all it’s cracked up to be – and the lessons we can take from that research.

All of us are all too familiar with the constant bombardment of our electronic world: constant emails; text messages; multiple websites open on our desktops; music on the in the background – all while speaking with the colleague passing by our desk and trying to focus on our work. Workers who seem to keep many plates spinning at once are sought after, as we assume that people who prefer these environments must somehow have magical powers, or at least special skills. 

In fact, the opposite is true – heavy multitaskers tend to underperform in many cognitive tasks.

A trio of researchers at Stanford – Clifford Nass, Eyal Ophir, and Anthony Wagner – set out to determine whether multitaskers had innate cognitive abilities that somehow made them superior performers. The researchers conducted a series of experiments with two groups, one that tended to work in a heavy, multimedia environment, and one that tended to work in a less distracting setting. 

In the first experiment, each group was asked to report on a series of relevant images while ignoring other, irrelevant ones. The multitaskers did horribly, constantly distracted by the irrelevant information.

The second experiment tested recollection – whether the multitaskers had better native ability remember. Again, they failed miserably.

Finally, in the third experiment, the subjects were tested to see if one group was more adept at switching from one task to another. And again, the multitaskers’ performance was inferior.

What does this all mean? For starters, multitaskers don’t have superpowers. In fact, they are far more likely to be distracted from the task at hand by extraneous information and thus perform poorly. 

More importantly, what are the lessons for businesses? I can think of several:

· Don’t list the ability to multitask as a job requirement, or recruit employees based upon their purported ability to multi-task. In fact, those who self-identify as multitaskers should be shuffled to the bottom of the pile. They are fooling themselves; don’t let them fool you.

· Create a physical environment that limits inputs. The days of private offices for everyone are gone, and electronic messaging is ubiquitous. But survey the physical layout and see where even small improvements can be made.

· Where possible, limit access to non-work emails or text messages. This is difficult in practice without creating a heavy-handed, “unfriendly” work environment. On average, it takes twenty-three minutes to get back on task after an interruption. In most offices, everyone knows who spends a disproportionate time on personal matters. Educate these workers about the steep price of these distractions.  

· Most importantly, create a culture that doesn’t overvalue an immediate response to everything. Change the rhythm of your workplace. Set an appropriate expectation for responsiveness. Not every email requires an immediate reply – most do not. An employee who provides an immediate response to every ping is not efficient – he is distracted.