Effective Project Management Strategy Depending on Individual Self-efficacy and Task Characteristics under Multitasking Situation

멀티태스킹 상황에서 업무적 특성과 개인의 자기 효능감을 고려한 효율적인 프로젝트관리 전략

  • 박준영 (국민대학교 비즈니스IT 전문대학원) ;
  • 박도형 (국민대학교 경영정보학부/비즈니스IT 전문대학원)
  • Received : 2019.08.12
  • Accepted : 2019.10.02
  • Published : 2019.12.31


Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate cognitive mechanism of goal relations (Single-goal vs. Multiple-goals) and to-do list (Packing vs. Unpacking) and also verify the role of self-efficacy in the perspective of motivation belief. The perspective of cognitive mechanism is related to the effects of how the relations of multitasking environments affects to facilitating relation or conflicting relations. In pursuit of a single goal, judgement of task importance can be facilitated by unpacking effect due to relations of strongly associated project components including to-do list. On the other hands, in pursuit of multiple goals, judgement of task importance can be conflicted due to mutually exclusive relations of multiple goals. Additionally, the cognitive mechanism can be regulated from the role of self-efficacy, which contributes to motivation belief on how much a person is confident in achieving given tasks. In the end this research is to identify self-efficacy as boundary condition in inhibiting the effects of facilitation and conflict. Design/methodology/approach This study conducted Two-way ANOVA (Packing/ Unpacking * Single-goal/ Multiple-goals) to explore the effects of cognitive mechanism on task importance. After that we performed Three-way ANOVA, 2 (To-do list: Packing/ Unpacking) * 2 (Goal relation: Single-goal/ Multiple-goals) * 2 (Self-efficacy: Low self-efficacy/ High self-efficacy) to verify the role of self-efficacy between goal relations and to-do list. Findings In the cognitive mechanism, the task importance is not significantly different between in packed and in unpacked condition in pursuit of a single goal. But multitasking with multiple goals causes goal conflict, which means packed condition indicates significantly higher task importance than unpacked condition. Additionally, for a group with low self-efficacy unpacking leads to conflicting relation, which implies that packed condition is more efficient strategy than packed condition. On the other hands, in pursuit of mulitple goals, either packing or unpacking has no distinctive effects on task importance. However, participants with high self-efficacy are no longer affected by facilitating relation and conflicting relation as well in pursuit of either a single goal or multiple goals as well.


Supported by : 한국연구재단


  1. 김건우, 박도형. "브랜드 명성에 따른 기술 침해에 대한 소비자의 태도 변화: 약자 브랜드의 언더독 효과를 중심으로." 정보시스템연구, 제27권, 제4호, 2018, pp. 167-187.
  2. 김정애, 김재휘, "미래 사건의 제시방식과 사건들의 특성이 자기개발 목표행동에 미치는 효과," 한국광고홍보학보, 제16권, 제3호, 2014. pp. 64-94.
  3. 양윤, 김혜미, "대안 제시형태, 대안 수의 크기, 정보처리 양식이 소비자의 선택 과부하에 미치는 영향," 한국심리학회지: 소비자.광고, 제19권, 제2호, 2018, pp. 429-450.
  4. 원성두, 송명선, "목표중심 자기조절과 알코올 조절실패 간의 관계: 정서조절 및 충동성의 매개효과," 한국심리학회지: 건강, 제22권 제4호, 2017, pp. 969-994.
  5. 유인진, 박도형. "중소기업 프로파일링 분석을 통한 기술유출 방지 및 보호 모형 연구," 정보시스템연구, 제27권, 제1호, 2018. pp. 171-191.
  6. Agrawal, N., Wan, E. W., "Regulating risk or risking regulation? Construal levels and depletion effects in the processing of health messages," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 36, No. 3, 2009, pp. 448-462.
  7. Appelaum, S. H., Marchionni, A., and Fernandez, A., "The multi-tasking paradox: perceptions, problems and strategies," Management Decision, Vol. 46, No. 9, 2008, pp. 1313-1325.
  8. Bandura, A., "Self efficacy," The Corsini encyclopedia of psychology, pp. 1-3.
  9. Baumgartner, H., Pieters, R., Haugtvedt, C., Herr, P., and Kardes, F. "Goal-directed consumer behavior," Handbook of consumer psychology, 2008, pp. 367-92.
  10. Bayuk, J., "Should I plan? Planning effects on perceived effort and motivation in goal pursuit". Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 14, No. 5, 2015, pp. 344-352.
  11. Botvinick, M., and Braver, T., "Motivation and cognitive control: from behavior to neural mechanism," Annual review of psychology, Vol. 66, 2015, pp. 83-113.
  12. Biswas, D., Keller, L. R., and Burman, B., "Making probability judgments of future product failures: The role of mental unpacking". Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2012, pp. 237-248.
  13. Colquitt, J. A., and Simmering, M. J., "Conscientiousness, goal orientation, and motivation to learn during the learning process: A longitudinal study," Journal of applied psychology, Vol. 83 No. 4, 1998, pp. 654-665.
  14. Dalton, A. N., and Spiller, S. A., "Too much of a good thing: the benefits of implementation intentions depend on the number of goals," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2012, pp. 600-614.
  15. Delahaij, R., and van Dam, K., "Coping style development: The role of learning goal orientation and metacognitive awareness," Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 92, 2016, pp. 57-62.
  16. Etkin, J., Evangelidis, I., and Aaker, J., "Pressed for time? goal conflict shapes how time is perceived, spent, and valued," Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 52 No. 3, 2015, pp. 394-406.
  17. Fishbach, A., and Dhar, R., "Goals as excuses or guides: the liberating effect of perceived goal progress on choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No. 3, 2005, pp. 370-377.
  18. Gollwitzer, P. M., "Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans," American psychologist, Vol. 54, No. 7, 1999, pp. 493-503.
  19. Gollwitzer, P. M., and Sheeran, P., "Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta analysis of effects and processes," Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 38, 2006, pp. 69-119.
  20. Hochli, B., Brugger, A., and Messner, C., "How Focusing on Superordinate Goals Motivates Broad, Long-Term Goal Pursuit: A Theoretical Perspective," Frontiers in psychology, Vol. 9, 2018. pp. 1-14
  21. Hofmann, W., Schmeichel, B. J., and Baddeley, A. D., "Executive functions and self-regulation," Trends in cognitive sciences, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2012, pp. 174-180.
  22. Kanfer, R., and Ackerman, P. L., "Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition," Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 74, No. 4, 1989, pp. 657-690.
  23. Kivetz, R., and Simonson, I., "Self-control for the righteous: Toward a theory of precommitment to indulgence," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, No. 2, 2002, pp. 199-217.
  24. Kruger, J., and Evans, M., "If you don't want to be late, enumerate: Unpacking reduces the planning fallacy". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 5, 2004, pp. 586-598.
  25. Kruglanski, A. W., Belanger, J. J., Chen, X., Kopetz, C., Pierro, A., and Mannetti, L. "The energetics of motivated cognition: a force field analysis," Psychological review, Vol. 119, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1.1-20
  26. Kruglanski, A. W., Chernikova, M., Rosenzweig, E., and Kopetz, C., "On motivational readiness," Psychological Review, Vol. 121, No. 3, 2014, pp. 367-388.
  27. Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., and Friedman, R. "A theory of goal systems," Advances in Experimental social psychology, Vol. 34, 2002, pp. 311-378.
  28. Kool, W., McGuire, J. T., Rosen, Z. B., and Botvinick, M. M., "Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand," Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 139, No. 4, 2010. pp. 665-682.
  29. Kopetz, C. E., Kruglanski, A. W., Arens, Z. G., Etkin, J., and Johnson, H. M., "The dynamics of consumer behavior: a goal systemic perspective," Journal of Consumer Psychology. Vol. 22, No. 2, 2012, pp. 208-223.
  30. Kurzban, R., Duckworth, A., Kable, J. W., and Myers, J., "An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance," Behavioral and brain sciences, Vol. 36, No. 6, 2013, pp. 661-679.
  31. Labuschagne, C., and Brent, A. C., "Sustainable project life cycle management: the need to integrate life cycles in the manufacturing sector," International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2005, pp. 159-168.
  32. Liu, P., and Li, Z., Task complexity: A review and conceptualization framework. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 42, No. 6, 2012, pp. 553-568.
  33. Moskowitz G. B., "The representation and regulation of goals," in Goal-Directed Behavior, eds Aarts H., Elliot A. J., editors. New York, NY: Psychology Press 2012, pp. 1-47.
  34. Neal, A., Ballard, T., and Vancouver, J. B., "Dynamic self-regulation and multiple-goal pursuit," Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, Vol. 4, 2017, pp. 401-423.
  35. Oberauer, K., and Kliegl, R., "Simultaneous cognitive operations in working memory after dual-task practice," Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol. 30 No. 4, 2004, pp. 689-707.
  36. Pashler, H., "12 Task Switching and Multitask Performance". Control of cognitive processes, 2000, pp. 267-307.
  37. Presseau, J., Francis, J. J., Campbell, N. C., and Sniehotta, F. F., "Goal conflict, goal facilitation, and health professionals' provision of physical activity advice in primary care: An exploratory prospective study," Implementation Science, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2011, pp. 73-81.
  38. Rottenstreich, Y., and Tversky, A., "Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: advances in support theory," Psychological review, Vol. 104, No. 2, 1997, pp. 406-415.
  39. Shah, J. Y., and Kruglanski, A. W., "Priming against your will: How accessible alternatives affect goal pursuit," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 4, 2002, pp. 368-383.
  40. Sheeran, P., Webb, T. L., and Gollwitzer, P. M., "The interplay between goal intentions and implementation intentions," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 31, No. 1, 2005, pp. 87-98.
  41. Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., Gonsalkorale, K., Hugenberg, K., Allen, T. J., and Groom, C. J., "The self-regulation of automatic associations and behavioral impulses," Psychological review, Vol. 115, No. 2, 2008, pp. 314-335.
  42. Shenhav, A., Musslick, S., Lieder, F., Kool, W., Griffiths, T. L., Cohen, J. D., and Botvinick, M. M., "Toward a rational and mechanistic account of mental effort," Annual review of neuroscience, Vol. 40, 2017, pp. 99-124.
  43. Shiffrin, R. M., and Schneider, W., "Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory," Psychological review, Vol. 84, No. 2, 1977, pp 127-190.
  44. Swait, J., and Adamowicz, W., "The influence of task complexity on consumer choice: a latent class model of decision strategy switching," Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2001, pp. 135-148.
  45. Trafimow, D., and Rice, S., "Potential performance theory: A general theory of task performance applied to morality," Psychological Review, Vol. 115 No. 2, 2008, pp. 447-462.
  46. Tsai, C., Zhao, M., and Robitaille, N., "How "time until the end" influences actual versus predicted consumer experiences: a resource allocation," Advances in Consumer Research. Vol. 44, 2016, pp. 241-245.
  47. Tversky, A., and Koehler, D. J., "Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability". Psychological review, Vol. 101, No. 4, 1994, pp. 547-567.
  48. Unsworth, K., Yeo, G., and Beck, J., "Multiple goals: A review and derivation of general principles," Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 35, No. 8, 2014, pp. 1064-1078.
  49. Van Boven, L., and Epley, N., "The unpacking effect in evaluative judgments: when the whole is less than the sum of its parts," Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2003, pp. 263-269.
  50. Wilcox, K., Laran, J., Stephen, A. T., and Zubcsek, P. P. "How being busy can increase motivation and reduce task completion time," Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 110, No. 3, 2016, pp. 371-384.