Building on social identity theory, the paper sheds new light on knowledge creation and performance within teams by enhancing our understanding of the role played by shared skill-based identity on knowledge creation and team performance. Besides addressing team coordination issues, this study helps bridge the gap between shared skill-based knowledge and knowledge creation as well as team performance. Based on two field studies, the authors found that (1) a shared skill-based identity leads to higher behavioral integration; (2) having skill-based knowledge enhances shared skill-based identity; (3) behavioral integration mediates the shared skill-based identity–team performance relationship. Overall, our findings demonstrate that shared skill-based identity plays a crucial role in team performance and knowledge creation by enhancing behavioral integration. However, although shared skill-based knowledge positively impacts shared skill-based identity, it has no direct effect on knowledge creation and team performance. The authors hence demonstrate that the factors influencing team performance are complex and individuals need to feel integrated in teams to create knowledge. Furthermore, the study provides empirical evidence that may advance the study of team performance and inform managers on how to form effective teams. For instance, the authors suggest that, when forming teams, managers should consider how each potential member defines their identity.
AlgesheimerRDholakiaUMHerrmannA (2005) The social influence of brand community: Evidence from european car clubs. Journal of Marketing69(3): 19–34.
2.
AllenNJHechtTD (2004) The ‘romance of teams’: Toward an understanding of its psychological underpinnings and implications. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology77(4): 439–461.
3.
AmbroseSCMatthewsLMRutherfordBN (2018) Cross-functional teams and social identity theory: A study of sales and operations planning (S&OP). Journal of Business Research92: 270–278.
4.
AronAAronENSmollanD (1992) Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology63(4): 596.
BaerMVaderaAKLeendersRT, et al. (2013) Intergroup competition as a double-edged sword: How sex composition regulates the effects of competition on group creativity. Organization Science25(3): 892–908.
8.
BandieraOBarankayIRasulI (2011) Field experiments with firms. Journal of Economic Perspectives25(3): 63–82.
9.
BarronB (2003) When smart groups fail. The journal of the learning sciences12(3): 307–359.
10.
BartelCAGarudR (2009) The role of narratives in sustaining organizational innovation. Organization Science20(1): 107–117.
11.
BellSTVilladoAJLukasikMA, et al. (2011) Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management37(3): 709–743.
12.
BergamiMBagozziRP (2000) Self-categorization, affective commitment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British Journal of Social Psychology39(4): 555–577.
13.
BiemannTColeMSVoelpelS (2012) Within-group agreement: On the use (and misuse) of rwg and rwg (j) in leadership research and some best practice guidelines. The Leadership Quarterly23(1): 66–80.
14.
ByrneABarlingJ (2017) When she brings home the job status: Wives’ job status, status leakage, and marital instability. Organization Science28(2): 177–192.
15.
CardonMSPostCForsterWR (2017) Team entrepreneurial passion: Its emergence and influence in new venture teams. Academy of Management Review42(2): 283–305.
16.
CarlilePR (2002) A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: Boundary objects in new product development. Organization Science13(4): 442–455.
17.
CarmeliAHaleviMY (2009) How top management team behavioral integration and behavioral complexity enable organizational ambidexterity: The moderating role of contextual ambidexterity. The Leadership Quarterly20(2): 207–218.
18.
CarmeliAShteigmanA (2010) Top management team behavioral integration in small-sized firms: A social identity perspective. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice14(4): 318.
ChandrasekaranALindermanK (2015) Managing knowledge creation in high-tech R&D projects: A multimethod study. Decision Sciences46(2): 267–300.
21.
ChenSWangWChengJ, et al. (2021) Activating the benefit of diversity through team role clarity and implicit coordination. Small Group Research52(4): 379–404.
22.
CostinYO’BrienMPHynesB (2022) Entrepreneurial education: Maker or breaker in developing students’ entrepreneurial confidence, aptitude and self-efficacy?Industry and Higher Education36(3): 267–278.
23.
CroninMAWeingartLR (2007) Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. Academy of Management Review32(3): 761–773.
24.
CunninghamGB (2007) Opening the black box: The influence of perceived diversity and a common in-group identity in diverse groups. Journal of Sport Management21(1): 58–78.
25.
DoughertyD (1992) Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms. Organization Science3(2): 179–202.
26.
DuJChanLBBirnbaumA, et al. (2021) Learning within teams: A multilevel analysis of team behavioral integration and creativity. Small Group Research. Online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/1046496421989415.
27.
ElsbachKDBhattacharyaC (2001) Defining who you are by what you’re not: Organizational disidentification and the national rifle association. Organization Science12(4): 393–413.
28.
FioreSM (2008) Interdisciplinarity as teamwork: How the science of teams can inform team science. Small Group Research39(3): 251–277.
29.
FladererMPHaslamSASteffensNKFreyD (2021) The value of speaking for “us”: The relationship between CEOs’ use of I-and we-referencing language and subsequent organizational performance. Journal of Business and Psychology36(2): 299–313.
30.
FordJO’HareDHendersonR (2013) Putting the “we” into teamwork: Effects of priming personal or social identity on flight attendants’ perceptions of teamwork and communication. Human Factors55(3): 499–508.
HayesAF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
33.
HindsPJMortensenM (2005) Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science16(3): 290–307.
34.
HoogendoornSParkerSCVan PraagM (2017) Smart or diverse start-up teams? evidence from a field experiment. Organization Science28(6): 1010–1028.
35.
HorwitzSKHorwitzIB (2007) The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management33(6): 987–1015.
36.
GillCMetzITekleabAG, et al. (2020) The combined role of conscientiousness, social networks, and gender diversity in explaining individual performance in self-managed teams. Journal of Business Research106: 250–260.
37.
GuanMSoJ (2016) Influence of social identity on self-efficacy beliefs through perceived social support: A social identity theory perspective. Communication Studies67(5): 588–604. DOI: 10.1080/10510974.2016.1239645.
38.
Janowicz-PanjaitanMNoorderhavenNG (2009) Trust, calculation, and interorganizational learning of tacit knowledge: An organizational roles perspective. Organization Studies30(10): 1021–1044.
39.
JehnKANorthcraftGBNealeMA (1999) Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly44(4): 741–763.
40.
KearneyEGebertDVoelpelSC (2009) When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members’ need for cognition. Academy of Management Journal52(3): 581–598.
41.
KlotzACHmieleskiJMBradleyBH, et al. (2014) New venture teams: A review of the literature and roadmap for future research. Journal of Management40(1): 226–255.
42.
LamSKAhearneMHuY, et al. (2010) Resistance to brand switching when a radically new brand is introduced: A social identity theory perspective. Journal of Marketing74(6): 128–146.
43.
LaraTMHugheyAW (2008) Implementing the Team Approach in Higher Education: Important Questions and Advice for Administrators. Industry and Higher Education22(4): 245–251. DOI: 10.5367/000000008785201775.
44.
LawrenceBS (1997) Perspective-the black box of organizational demography. Organization Science8(1): 1–22.
45.
LeeJYChoiBCGhauriPN, et al. (2020) Knowledge centralization and international R&D team performance: Unpacking the moderating roles of team-specific characteristics. Journal of Business Research128(May): 627–640. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.052.
46.
LembkeSWilsonMG (1998) Putting the “team” into teamwork: Alternative theoretical contributions for contemporary management practice. Human Relations51(7): 927–944.
47.
LinC-PHeHBaruchY, et al. (2017) The effect of team affective tone on team performance: The roles of team identification and team cooperation. Human Resource Management56(6): 931–952.
48.
LubatkinMHSimsekZLingY, et al. (2006) Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management32(5): 646–672.
49.
LundqvistMWilliamsMKNowellP (2015) Entrepreneurial identity and role expectations in nascent entrepreneurship. Industry and Higher Education29(5): 327–344. DOI: 10.5367/ihe.2015.0272.
50.
MaelFAshforthBE (1992) Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior13(2): 103–123.
MathieuJMaynardMTRappT, et al. (2008) Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management34(3): 410–476.
53.
MeiXXWangHYWuXN, et al. (2022) Self-efficacy and professional identity among freshmen nursing students: a latent profile and moderated mediation analysis. Frontiers in Psychology13.
54.
MitchellRNicholasS (2006) Knowledge creation in groups: The value of cognitive diversity, transactive memory and open-mindedness norms. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management4(1): 67–74.
55.
MitchellRNicholasSBoyleB (2009) The role of openness to cognitive diversity and group processes in knowledge creation. Small Group Research40(5): 535–554.
56.
MooneyACHolahanPJAmasonAC (2007) Don’t take it personally: Exploring cognitive conflict as a mediator of affective conflict. Journal of Management Studies44(5): 733–758.
57.
PelledLHEisenhardtKMXinKR (1999) Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly44(1): 1–28.
58.
Perry-SmithJEMannucciPV (2017) From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Academy of Management Review42(1): 53–79.
59.
Perry-SmithJEShalleyCE (2014) A social composition view of team creativity: The role of member nationality-heterogeneous ties outside of the team. Organization Science25(5): 1434–1452.
60.
RandelAEJaussiKS (2003) Functional background identity, diversity, and individual performance in cross-functional teams. Academy of Management Journal46(6): 763–774.
61.
RaibleSEWilliams-MiddletonK (2021) The relatable entrepreneur: Combating stereotypes in entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education35(4): 293–305.
62.
ReagansRMiron-SpektorEArgoteL (2016) Knowledge utilization, coordination, and team performance. Organization Science27(5): 1108–1124.
63.
RichterAWWestMAVan DickR, et al. (2006) Boundary spanners’ identification, intergroup contact, and effective intergroup relations. Academy of Management Journal49(6): 1252–1269.
64.
RinkFEllemersN (2010) Benefiting from deep-level diversity: How congruence between knowledge and decision rules improves team decision making and team perceptions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations13(3): 345–359.
65.
RobnettRDChemersMMZurbriggenEL (2015) Longitudinal associations among undergraduates' research experience, self‐efficacy, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching52(6): 847–867.
66.
RousseauVAubéCSavoieA (2006) Teamwork behaviors: A review and an integration of frameworks. Small Group Research37(5): 540–570.
67.
SalasESimsDEBurkeCS (2005) Is there a “big five” in teamwork?Small Group Research36(5): 555–599.
68.
SalazarMRLantTKFioreSM, et al. (2012) Facilitating innovation in diverse science teams through integrative capacity. Small Group Research43(5): 527–558.
69.
SeongJYKristof-BrownALParkW-W, et al. (2015) Person-group fit: Diversity antecedents, proximal outcomes, and performance at the group level. Journal of Management41(4): 1184–1213.
70.
SethiRSmithDCParkCW (2001) Cross-functional product development teams, creativity, and the innovativeness of new consumer products. Journal of Marketing Research38(1): 73–85.
71.
SimsekZVeigaJFLubatkinMH, et al. (2005) Modeling the multilevel determinants of top management team behavioral integration. Academy of Management Journal48(1): 69–84.
StetsJEBurkePJ (2000) Identity theory and social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly63(3): 224–237.
74.
TajfelHTurnerJC (1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: AustinW.WorchelS. (eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole, p. 3347.
75.
TajfelH (1982) Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual Review of Psychology33(1): 1–39.
76.
TekleabAGKaracaAQuigleyNR, et al. (2016) Re-examining the functional diversity–performance relationship: The roles of behavioral integration, team cohesion, and team learning. Journal of Business Research69(9): 3500–3507.
77.
TjosvoldDWongASChenNYF (2014) Constructively managing conflicts in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior1(1): 545–568.
78.
TurnerJC (1975) Social comparison and social identity: Some prospects for intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology5(1): 1–34.
79.
Vad BaunsgaardVCleggS (2013) ‘Walls or boxes’: The effects of professional identity, power and rationality on strategies for cross-functional integration. Organization Studies34(9): 1299–1325.
80.
Van KnippenbergDDe DreuCKHomanAC (2004) Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology89(6): 1008–1022.
81.
WegnerDM (1987) Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind In Theories of Group Behavior. Springer, pp. 185–208.
82.
WilliamsKYO’ReillyCA (1998) Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior20: 77–140.
83.
WoolleyAWChabrisCFPentlandA, et al. (2010) Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science330(6004): 686–688.
84.
ZhangLGuoH (2019) Enabling knowledge diversity to benefit cross-functional project teams: Joint roles of knowledge leadership and transactive memory system. Information & Management56(8): 103156.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
