Effects of ICT Shared Mental Models on Team Processes and Outcomes

Abstract

Although existing studies have shown that shared mental models of information and communication technology (ICT shared mental models) are related to better computer-mediated teamwork, causal effects on team processes and outcomes remain unclear. This study analyzes the effects of ICT shared mental models on team effectiveness indicators via ICT use and team communication. Results based on 69 three-person teams show that manipulated ICT shared mental models significantly influence team performance, coordination effectiveness, and affective team commitment, partially mediated by consistent ICT use in a team and team communication. Study results extend findings on antecedents, mechanisms, and effects of ICT shared mental models.

Keywords

ICT shared mental models computer-mediated communication virtual groups performance commitment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andres

H. P.

(2011). Shared mental model development during technology-mediated collaboration. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 7(3), 14–30. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2011070102

Andres

H. P.

(2013). Team cognition using collaborative technology: A behavioral analysis. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(1), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941311298850

Antoni

Hertel

(2009). Team processes, their antecedents and consequences: Implications for different types of teamwork. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18(3), 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320802095502

Ayyagari

Grover

Purvis

(2011). Technostress: Technological antecedents and implications. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 831–858. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409963

Bishop

J. W.

Scott

K. D.

(2000). An examination of organizational and team commitment in a self-directed team environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 439–450. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.85.3.439

Brennan

S. E.

(1998). The grounding problem in conversations with and through computers. In Fussell

S. R.

Kreuz

R. J.

(Eds.), Social and cognitive psychological approaches to interpersonal communication (pp. 201–225). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Breuer

Hüffmeier

Hertel

(2016). Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1151–1177. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000113

Cannon-Bowers

J. A.

Salas

Converse

(1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In Castellan

N. J.

(Ed.), Individual and group decision making: Current issues (pp. 221–246). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Carlson

J. R.

Zmud

R. W.

(1999). Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Academy of Management Journal, 42(2), 153–170. https://doi.org/10.5465/257090

10.

Chudoba

K. M.

Watson-Manheim

M. B.

(2008). Shared communication practices and mental models in the virtual work environment. In Panteli

Chiasson

(Eds.), Exploring virtuality within and beyond organizations (pp. 55–72). Palgrave Macmillan.

11.

Conger

A. J.

(1980). Integration and generalization of kappas for multiple raters. Psychological Bulletin, 88(2), 322–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.2.322

12.

Daft

R. L.

Lengel

R. H.

(1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554

13.

Day

Paquet

Scott

Hambley

(2012). Perceived information and communication technology (ICT) demands on employee outcomes: The moderating effect of organizational ICT support. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17(4), 473–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029837

14.

DeChurch

L. A.

Mesmer-Magnus

J. R.

(2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 32–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017328

15.

Dennis

A. R.

Fuller

R. M.

Valacich

J. S.

(2008). Media, tasks, and communication processes: A theory of media synchronicity. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 575–600.

16.

Dunham

R. B.

Grube

J. A.

Castaneda

M. B.

(1994). Organizational commitment: The utility of an integrative definition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(3), 370–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.370

17.

D’Urso

S. C.

Rains

S. A.

(2008). Examining the scope of channel expansion: A test of channel expansion theory with new and traditional communication media. Management Communication Quarterly, 21(4), 486–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318907313712

18.

Ellwart

Happ

Gurtner

Rack

(2015). Managing information overload in virtual teams: Effects of a structured online team adaptation on cognition and performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(5), 812–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2014.1000873

19.

Fulk

Schmitz

Steinfield

C. W.

(1991). A social influence model of technology use. In Fulk

Steinfield

(Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 117–140). Sage.

20.

Fuller

R. M.

Dennis

A. R.

(2009). Does fit matter? The impact of task-technology fit and appropriation on team performance in repeated tasks. Information Systems Research, 20(1), 2–17. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1070.0167

21.

Gevers

J. M.

Rutte

C. G.

Van Eerde

(2006). Meeting deadlines in work groups: Implicit and explicit mechanisms. Applied Psychology, 55(1), 52–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2006.00228.x

22.

Gilson

L. L.

Maynard

M. T.

Jones Young

N. C.

Vartiainen

Hakonen

(2015). Virtual teams research: 10 years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1313–1337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314559946

23.

Greve

Wentura

(1997). Wissenschaftliche Beobachtung. Eine Einführung (2nd ed.). Beltz.

24.

Gurtner

Tschan

Semmer

N. K.

Nägele

(2007). Getting groups to develop good strategies: Effects of reflexivity interventions on team process, team performance, and shared mental models. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(2), 127–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.05.002

25.

Handke

Schulte

E. M.

Schneider

Kauffeld

(2018). The medium isn’t the message: Introducing a measure of adaptive virtual communication. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 5(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2018.1514953

26.

Hantula

D. A.

Kock

D’Arcy

J. P.

DeRosa

D. M.

(2011). Media compensation theory: A Darwinian perspective on adaptation to electronic Communication and collaboration. In Saad

(Ed.), Evolutionary psychology in the business sciences (pp. 339–363). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92784-6_13

27.

Jung

D. I.

Sosik

J. J.

(2002). Transformational leadership in work groups: The role of empowerment, cohesiveness, and collective-efficacy on perceived group performance. Small Group Research, 33(3), 313–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/10496402033003002

28.

Kenny

D. A.

(2018, September 25). Mediation. Retrieved August 13, 2020, from http://davidakenny.net/cm/mediate.htm#OS

29.

Klitmøller

Lauring

(2013). When global virtual teams share knowledge: Media richness, cultural difference and language commonality. Journal of World Business, 48(3), 398–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.07.023

30.

Klötzer

Hardwig

Boos

(2017). Gestaltung internetbasierter kollaborativer Team-und Projektarbeit. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 48(4), 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-017-0385-3

31.

Kock

(2004). The psychobiological model: Towards a new theory of computer-mediated communication based on Darwinian evolution. Organization Science, 15(3), 327–348. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0071

32.

Kozlowski

S. W.

Chao

G. T.

Grand

J. A.

Braun

M. T.

Kuljanin

(2013). Advancing multilevel research design: Capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organizational Research Methods, 16(4), 581–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428113493119

33.

LeBreton

J. M.

Senter

J. L.

(2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 815–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296642

34.

Lewis

(2003). Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4), 587–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.587

35.

Mannix

E. A.

Griffith

Neale

M. A.

(2002). The phenomenology of conflict in distributed work teams. In Hinds

P. J.

Kiesler

(Eds.), Distributed work (pp. 213–233). The MIT Press.

36.

Marks

M. A.

Mathieu

J. E.

Zaccaro

S. J.

(2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356–376.

37.

Marks

M. A.

Sabella

M. J.

Burke

C. S.

Zaccaro

S. J.

(2002). The impact of cross-training on team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.3

38.

Marks

M. A.

Zaccaro

S. J.

Mathieu

J. E.

(2000). Performance implications of leader briefings and team-interaction training for team adaptation to novel environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 971–986. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.971

39.

Mathieu

J. E.

Heffner

T. S.

Goodwin

G. F.

Cannon-Bowers

J. A.

Salas

(2005). Scaling the quality of teammates’ mental models: Equifinality and normative comparisons. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.296

40.

Mathieu

J. E.

Heffner

T. S.

Goodwin

G. F.

Salas

Cannon-Bowers

J. A.

(2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2), 273–283. https://doi/10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.273

41.

Mohammed

Ferzandi

Hamilton

(2010). Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. Journal of Management, 36(4), 876–910. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309356804

42.

Mohammed

Hamilton

Tesler

Mancuso

McNeese

(2015). Time for temporal team mental models: Expanding beyond “what” and “how” to incorporate “when”. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(5), 693–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2015.1024664

43.

Müller

Antoni

C. H.

(2019). Einflussfaktoren und Auswirkungen eines gemeinsamen Medienverständnisses in virtuellen Teams. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 50(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-019-00447-3

44.

Müller

Antoni

C. H.

(2020a). Individual perceptions of shared mental models of information and communication technology (ICT) and virtual team coordination and performance—The moderating role of flexibility in ICT use. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 24(3), 186–200. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000130

45.

Müller

Antoni

C. H.

(2020b). Scale development and validation of shared mental models of information and communication technology (ICT SMM). Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 26(7/8), 391–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-03-2020-0025

46.

Rice

R. E.

D’Ambra

(1998). Cross-cultural comparison of organizational media evaluation and choice. Journal of Communication, 48(3), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1998.tb02757.x

47.

Rico

Gibson

C. B.

Sánchez-Manzanares

Clark

M. A.

(2019). Building team effectiveness through adaptation: Team knowledge and implicit and explicit coordination. Organizational Psychology Review, 9(2), 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386619869972

48.

Rico

Sánchez-Manzanares

Gil

Gibson

(2008). Team implicit coordination processes: A team knowledge–based approach. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.27751276

49.

Schmidtke

J. M.

Cummings

(2017). The effects of virtualness on teamwork behavioral components: The role of shared mental models. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 660–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.011

50.

Stasser

(1992). Information salience and the discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: A “thought experiment”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52(1), 156–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(92)90049-D

51.

Thomas

Bostrom

(2007, January 3–6). The role of a shared mental model of collaboration technology in facilitating knowledge work in virtual teams [Conference session]. 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’07), Waikoloa, HI, United States. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2007.552

52.

Venkatesh

Morris

M. G.

Davis

G. B.

Davis

F. D.

(2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540