Simulation Game Outcomes: A Multilevel Examination of Knowledge Sharing Norms,Transactive Memory Systems,and Individual Learning Goal Orientations

Abstract

Background. Because computer-based simulation games are widely used in university classrooms, it is important to investigate factors which can lead to effective student team performance and positive individual outcomes.

Aim. This correlational study aimed to examine the effects of knowledge sharing norms, transactive memory systems, and individual learning goal orientations on game outcomes.

Method. The setting for this study was an undergraduate logistics and supply chain class. The class uses a serious simulation game which is designed to realistically mimic the business transactions within an enterprise resource planning system (ERP). Cross-sectional surveys captured individual learning goal orientations. After multiple rounds of simulation game play, subsequent surveys captured student reactions, perceptions of knowledge sharing behaviors, and transactive memory systems.

Results. Two sets of analyses were conducted using a sample of 100 undergraduates performing in 42 teams. At the group-level, OLS regression results suggest that, while there was no effect on objective team performance, knowledge sharing norms enhanced perceptions of team performance, and this effect was mediated through the development of transactive memory systems. For individual-level outcomes, multilevel results suggest that knowledge sharing norms were positively related to satisfaction with the team, but not satisfaction with the task. However, transactive memory systems were positively related both satisfaction with the team and satisfaction with the task. Individual learning goal orientation was positively related to satisfaction with the task but not satisfaction with the team.

Conclusion. Our findings suggest that learning goal orientations and norms for knowledge sharing are linked to positive outcomes of team-based simulation game learning activities. Because learning goal orientations are malleable and norms for knowledge sharing can be encouraged, these factors are within the influence of the instructor. As such, they should be nurtured and developed through the active encouragement of experimentation, exploration, and communication between team members.

Keywords

affective reactions computer-based simulation games knowledge sharing team cognitions transactive memory systems

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Akgün

A. E.

Byrne

Keskin

Lynn

G. S.

Imamoglu

S. Z.

(2005). Knowledge networks in new product development projects: A transactive memory perspective. Information & Management, 42(8), 1105–1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2005.01.001

Bachrach

D. G.

Lewis

Kim

Patel

P. C.

Campion

M. C.

Thatcher

S. M. B.

(2019). Transactive memory systems in context: A meta-analytic examination of contextual factors in transactive memory systems development and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(3), 464–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000329

Bartol

K. M.

Liu

Zeng

(2009). Social exchange and knowledge sharing among knowledge workers: The moderating role of perceived job security. Management and Organization Review, 5(2), 223–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-8784.2009.00146.x

Bedwell

W. L.

Fiore

S. M.

Salas

(2014). Developing the future workforce: An approach for integrating interpersonal skills into the MBA classroom. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2011.0138

Bell

B. S.

Kanar

A. M.

Kozlowski

S. W.

(2008). Current issues and future directions in simulation-based training in North America. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(8), 1416–1434. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190802200173

Bell

B. S.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

(2002). Goal orientation and ability: Interactive on self-efficacy, performance, and knowledge. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 497–505. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.873.3.497

Bell

B. S.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

(2008). Active learning: Effects of core training design elements on self-regulatory processes, learning, and adaptability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.296.x

Bell

B. S.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

(2009). Toward a theory of learner-centered training design: An integrative framework of active learning [Electronic version]. In Kozlowski

S. W. J.

Salas

(Eds.), Learning, training, and development in organizations (pp. 263–300). Routledge.

Biemann

Cole

M. S.

Voelpel

(2012). Within-group agreement: On the use (and misuse) of rWG and rWG(J) in leadership research and some best practice guidelines. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(1), 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.006

10.

Blau

P. M.

(1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry, 34(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1964.tb00583.x

11.

Bliese

P. D.

(2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In Klein

K. J.

Kozlowski

S. W.

(Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). Jossey-Bass.

12.

Bliese

P. D.

(2002). Multilevel random coefficient modeling in organizational research: Examples using SAS and S-PLUS. In Drasgow

Schmitt

(Eds.), Measuring and analyzing behavior in organizations (pp. 401–405). Jossey-Bass.

13.

Bliese

P. D.

Maltarich

M. A.

Hendricks

J. L.

(2018). Back to basics with mixed-effects models: Nine take-away points. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9491-z

14.

Brown

K. G.

(2001). Using computers to deliver training: Which employees learn and why? Personnel Psychology, 54(2), 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00093.x

15.

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.

16.

Chen

Donahue

L. M.

Klimoski

R. J.

(2004). Training undergraduates to work in organizational teams. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(1), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2004.12436817

17.

Choi

S. Y.

Lee

Yoo

(2010). The impact of information technology and transactive memory systems on knowledge sharing, application, and team performance: A field study. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 855–870. https://doi.org/10.2307/25750708

18.

Cropanzano

Anthony

E. L.

Daniels

S. R.

Hall

A. V.

(2017). Social exchange theory: A critical review with theoretical remedies. The Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 479–516. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0099

19.

Cropanzano

Mitchell

M. S.

(2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602

20.

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

21.

De Dreu

C. K. W.

Nijstad

B. A.

van Knippenberg

(2008). Motivated information processing in group judgment and decision making. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 12(1), 22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868307304092

22.

DeShon

R. P.

Kozlowski

S. W.

Schmidt

A. M.

Milner

K. R.

Wiechmann

(2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1035–1056. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1035

23.

Dierdorff

E. C.

Ellington

J. K.

(2012). Members matter in team training: Multilevel and longitudinal relationships between goal orientation, self-regulation, and team outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 65(3), 661–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2012.01255.x

24.

Dierdorff

E. C.

Surface

E. A.

Harman

R. P.

Kemp Ellington

Watson

A. M.

(2020). Ebb and flow of dispositional goal orientations: Exploring the consequences of within-person variability. Journal of Business and Psychology, 35, 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9559-4

25.

Dirks

K. T.

Ferrin

D. L.

(2001). The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 12(4), 450–467. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.4.450.10640

26.

Dragoni

(2005). Understanding the emergence of state goal orientation in organizational work groups: The role of leadership and multilevel climate perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1084–1095. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1084

27.

Dweck

C. S.

(1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10

28.

Eisenberger

Armeli

Rexwinkel

Lynch

P. D.

Rhoades

(2001). Reciprocation of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.42

29.

Faria

A. J.

(1998). Business simulation games: Current usage levels—An update. Simulation & Gaming, 29(3), 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878198293002

30.

Faria

A. J.

Hutchinson

Wellington

W. J.

Gold

(2009). Developments in business gaming: A review of the past 40 years. Simulation & Gaming, 40(4), 464–487. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878108327585

31.

Faria

A. J.

Wellington

W. J.

(2004). A survey of simulation game users, former-users, and never-users. Simulation & Gaming, 35(2), 178–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878104263543

32.

Fiore

S. M.

Salas

Cannon-Bowers

J. A.

(2001). Group dynamics and shared mental model development. In London

(Ed.), How people evaluate others in organizations (pp. 309–336). Lawrence Erlbaum.

33.

Fisher

S. L.

Ford

J. K.

(1998). Differential effects of learner effort and goal orientation on two learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 51(2), 397–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1998.tb00731.x

34.

Gockel

Robertson

Brauner

(2013). Trust your teammates or bosses? Differential effects of trust on transactive memory, job satisfaction, and performance. Employee Relations, 35(2), 222–242. https://doi.org/10.1108/01425451311287880

35.

Hayes

A. F.

(2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.

36.

Hays

R. T.

(2005). The effectiveness of instructional games: A literature review and discussion (Tech. Rep. No 2005-004). Naval Air Warfare Center, Training Systems Division.

37.

Butler

B. S.

King

W. R.

(2007). Team cognition: Development and evolution in software project teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(2), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240210

38.

Hinsz

V. B.

Tindale

R. S.

Vollrath

D. A.

(1997). The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.43

39.

Hollingshead

A. B.

(1998). Retrieval processes in transactive memory systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(3), 659–671. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.659

40.

Hox

(2002). Multilevel analysis techniques and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum.

41.

Ilgen

D. R.

Hollenbeck

J. R.

Johnson

Jundt

(2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56(1), 517–543. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250

42.

Janz

B. D.

Colquitt

J. A.

Noe

R. A.

(1997). Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 877–904. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb01486.x

43.

Jarvenpaa

S. L.

Majchrzak

(2008). Knowledge collaboration among professionals protecting national security: Role of transactive memories in ego-centered knowledge networks. Organization Science, 19(2), 260–276. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0315

44.

Jehn

K. A.

Northcraft

G. B.

Neale

M. A.

(1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(4), 741–763. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667054

45.

Kanawattanachai

Yoo

(2007). The impact of knowledge coordination on virtual team performance over time. MIS Quarterly, 31(4), 783–808. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148820

46.

Klein

H. J.

Noe

R. A.

Wang

(2006). Motivation to learn and course outcomes: The impact of delivery mode, learning goal orientation, and perceived barriers and enablers. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 665–702. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00050.x

47.

Klimoski

Mohammed

(1994). Team mental model: Construct or metaphor? Journal of Management, 20(2), 403–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639402000206

48.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

Bell

B. S.

(2008). Team learning, development, and adaptation. In Sessa

V. I.

London

(Eds.), Group learning: Understanding, improving and assessing how groups learn in organizations (pp. 15–44). Taylor & Francis Group.

49.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

Bell

B. S.

(2013). Work groups and teams in organizations: Review update. In Schmitt

Highhouse

(Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 12. Industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 412–469). Wiley.

50.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

DeShon

R. P.

(2004). A psychological fidelity approach to simulation-based training: Theory, research and principles. In Salas

Elliott

L. R.

Schflett

S. G.

Coovert

M. D.

(Eds.), Scaled worlds: Development, validation, and applications (pp. 75–99). Ashgate Publishing.

51.

Kozlowski

S. W. J.

Klein

K. J.

(2000). A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations. In Klein

K. J.

Kozlowski

S. W.

(Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 3–90). Jossey-Bass.

52.

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

53.

Léger

P.-M.

Robert

Babin

Lyle

Cronan

Charland

(2010). ERP simulation game: A distribution game to teach the value of integrated systems. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 37, 329–334.

54.

Léger

P.-M.

Robert

Babin

Pellerin

Wagner

(2007). ERPsim, ERPsim Lab, HEC Montréal, Montréal, Qc.

55.

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

56.

Lewis

(2004). Knowledge and performance in knowledge-worker teams: A longitudinal study of transactive memory systems. Management Science, 50(11), 1519–1533. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0257

57.

Lewis

Herndon

(2011). Transactive memory systems: Current issues and future research directions. Organization Science, 22(5), 1254–1265. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0647

58.

Lewis

Lange

Gillis

(2005). Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer. Organization Science, 16(6), 581–598. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0143

59.

Liang

D. W.

Moreland

Argote

(1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating factor of transactive memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(4), 384–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295214009

60.

Lovelace

K. J.

Eggers

Dyck

L. R.

(2016). I do and I understand: Assessing the utility of web-based management simulations to develop critical thinking skills. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15(1), 100–121. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2013.0203

61.

Marlow

S. L.

Lacerenza

C. N.

Paoletti

Burke

C. S.

Salas

(2018). Does team communication represent a one-size-fits-all approach? A meta-analysis of team communication and performance. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 144, 145–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.08.001

62.

Marlow

S. L.

Salas

Landon

L. B.

Presnell

(2016). Eliciting teamwork with game attributes: A systematic review and research agenda. Computers in Human Behavior, 55(Pt. A), 413–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.028

63.

Mathieu

J. E.

Hollenbeck

J. R.

van Knippenberg

Ilgen

D. R.

(2017). A century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 452–467. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000128

64.

Mesmer-Magnus

J. R.

DeChurch

L. A.

(2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 535–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013773

65.

Michinov

Olivier-Chiron

Rusch

Chiron

(2008). Influence of transactive memory on perceived performance, job satisfaction and identification in anaesthesia teams. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 100(3), 327–332. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aem404

66.

Mohammed

Dumville

B. C.

(2001). Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.86

67.

Molm

L. D.

Takahashi

Peterson

(2000). Risk and trust in social exchange: An experimental test of a classical proposition. American Journal of Sociology, 105(5), 1396–1427. https://doi.org/10.1086/210434

68.

Muthén

(1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide (8th ed.).

69.

National Association of Colleges and Employers. (2016). Job outlook 2016: The attributes employers want to see on new college graduates’ resumes. https://www.naceweb.org/career-development/trends-and-predictions/job-outlook-2016-attributes-employers-want-to-see-on-new-college-graduates-resumes/

70.

Nijstad

B. A.

De Dreu

C. K. W.

(2012). Motivated information processing in organizational teams: Progress, puzzles, and prospects. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 87–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.004

71.

Payne

S. C.

Youngcourt

S. S.

Beaubien

J. M.

(2007). A meta-analytic examination of the goal orientation nomological net. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 128–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.128

72.

Pearsall

M. J.

Ellis

A. P.

(2006). The effects of critical team member assertiveness on team performance and satisfaction. Journal of Management, 32(4), 575–594. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306289099

73.

Poortvliet

P. M.

Darnon

(2010). Toward a more social understanding of achievement goals: The interpersonal effects of mastery and performance goals. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(5), 324–328. www.jstor.org/stable/41038594

74.

Porter

C. O. L. H.

(2012). A multilevel, multiconceptualization perspective of goal orientation in teams. In Sessa

London

(Eds.), Work group learning (pp. 173–198). Psychology Press.

75.

Porter

C. O. L. H.

Franklin

D. A.

Swider

B. W.

R. C.-F.

(2016). An exploration of the interactive effects of leader trait goal orientation and goal content in teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(1), 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.09.004

76.

Preacher

K. J.

Rucker

D. D.

Hayes

A. F.

(2007). Addressing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42(1), 185–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316

77.

Preacher

K. J.

Zyphur

M. J.

Zhang

(2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15(3), 209–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020141

78.

Quigley

N. R.

Tesluk

P. E.

Locke

E. A.

Bartol

K. M.

(2007). A multilevel investigation of the motivational mechanisms underlying knowledge sharing and performance. Organization Science, 18(1), 71–88. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0223

79.

Ren

Argote

(2011). Transactive memory systems 1985–2010: An integrative framework of key dimensions, antecedents, and consequences. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 189–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.590300

80.

Ritter

B. A.

Small

E. E.

Mortimer

J. W.

Doll

J. L.

(2018). Designing management curriculum for workplace readiness: Developing students’ soft skills. Journal of Management Education, 42(1), 80–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562917703679

81.

Saavedra

Earley

P. C.

Van Dyne

(1993). Complex interdependence in task-performing groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.61

82.

Salas

Rosen

M. A.

Held

J. D.

Weissmuller

J. J.

(2009). Performance measurement in simulation-based training: A review and best practices. Simulation & Gaming, 40(3), 328–376. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878108326734

83.

Salas

Shuffler

M. L.

Thayer

A. L.

Bedwell

W. L.

Lazzara

E. H.

(2015). Understanding and improving teamwork in organizations: A scientifically based practical guide. Human Resource Management, 54(4), 599–622. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21628

84.

Salas

Wildman

J. L.

Piccolo

R. F.

(2009). Using simulation-based training to enhance management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(4), 559–573. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2009.47785474

85.

Selig

J. P.

Preacher

K. J.

(2008). Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer software]. http://quantpsy.org/

86.

Singer

J. D.

(1998). Using SAS PROC MIXED to fit multilevel models hierarchical models, and individual growth models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23(4), 323–355.

87.

Sitzmann

(2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 489–528. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x

88.

Spector

P. E.

(1994). Job satisfaction survey. Department of Psychology, University of South Florida.

89.

Stasser

Titus

(1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(6), 1467–1478. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1467

90.

Stasser

Titus

(1987). Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(1), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.1.81

91.

Steele-Johnson

Beauregard

R. S.

Hoover

P. B.

Schmidt

A. M.

(2000). Goal orientation and task demand effects on motivation, affect, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 724–738. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.5.724

92.

Tennyson

R. D.

Jorczak

R. L.

(2008). A conceptual framework for the empirical study of games. In H. O’Neil & R. Perez (Eds.), Computer games and team and individual learning (pp. 3–20). Lawrence Erlbaum.

93.

VandeWalle

(1997). Development and validation of a work domain goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57(6), 995–1015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164497057006009

94.

Wittenbaum

G. M.

Hollingshead

A. B.

Botero

I. C.

(2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71(3), 286–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/0363452042000299894

95.

Zhang

Z.-X.

Hempel

Han

Y.-L.

Tjosvold

(2007). Transactive memory system links work team characteristics and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(6), 1722–1730. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1722