Optimizing the Functionality of Teams with Dispersed Individuals an Exploration into the Conditions for Effective Knowledge Management Applications in Virtual Teams

Abstract

As the technological environment is constantly changing and becoming more global, organizations must continue to find ways to compete advantageously. Teams are increasingly being used as a mechanism for accomplishing organizational work yet researchers are still exploring what leads to the ability to learn as an organization or to exhibit effective knowledge management. A parallel trend is the dispersion of organizations globally and the set of virtual teams and even virtual organizations operating in different places and times. One body of research that may help in understanding how to improve the functioning of virtual teams focuses on Transactive Memory Systems (TMSs). Prior studies have indicated that TMS emergence leads to improved team performance. Therefore, the present research explores and analyzes the roles that influential factors play in TMS emergence and maintenance in virtual teams. Specifically, a number of factors will be investigated with a goal of identifying how best to utilize findings to assemble virtual teams.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alavi

Tiwana

(2002). Knowledge Integration in Virtual Teams: The Potential Role of KMS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(12): 1029–1037.

Brandon

D. P.

Hollingshead

A. B.

(2004). Potential Benefits of Communication in Transactive Memory Systems, Human Communication Research, 29(4): 607–615.

Chudoba

K. M.

Wynn

. (2005). How virtual are we? Measuring virtuality and understanding its impact in a global organization. Journal of Information Systems, 15: 279–306.

Clarke

H. H.

Brennan

S. E.

(1991). Grounding in Communication. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, Resnick

L. B.

Levine

R. M.

Teasley

S. D.

. Washington D.C., American Psychological Association: 127–149.

Cummings

Cross

(2003). Structural properties of work groups and their consequences for performance. Social Networks, 25: 197–210.

DeSanctis

Monge

(1999). Introduction to the Special Issue: Communication Processes for Virtual Organizations. Organization Science, 10(6): 693–703.

Faraj

Sproull

(2000). Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams. Management Science, 46(12): 1554–1568.

Griffith

T. L.

Neale

M. A.

(2001). Information Processing in Traditional, Hybrid, and Virtual Teams: From Nascent Knowledge to Transactive Memory. Research in Organizational Behavior (Volume 23), Staw

B.M.

Sutton

R. I.

(eds.) JAI PressStamford, CT. 379–421.

Griffith

T. L.

Sawyer

J. E.

. (2003). Virtualness and Knowledge in Teams: Managing the Love Triangle of Organizations, Individuals, and Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 27(2): 265–287.

10.

Grudin

(1994). CSCW: History and Focus. IEEE Computer, 27(5): 19–26.

11.

Henry

R. A.

(1995). Improving group judgment accuracy: Information sharing and determining the best member. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62(2): 190–197.

12.

Hollingshead

A. B.

(1998a). Communication, learning, and retrieval in transactive memory systems. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 34(5): 423–442.

13.

Hollingshead

A. B.

(2001). Cognitive Interdependence and Convergent Expectations in Transactive Memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 81(6): 1080–1089.

14.

Lewis

(2003). Measuring Transactive Memory Systems in the Field: Scale Development and Validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(4): 587–604.

15.

Lewis

(2004). Knowledge and Performance in Knowledge-Worker Teams: A Longitudinal Study of Transactive Memory Systems. Management Science, 50(11): 1519–1533.

16.

Liang

D. W.

Moreland

. (1995). Group versus individual training and individual performance: The mediating role of transactive memory. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull, 21(4): 384–393.

17.

Lipnack

Stamps

(1997). Virtual Teams. WileyNew York.

18.

Littlepage

G. E.

Robison

. (1997). Effects of task experience and group experience on group performance, member ability and recognition of expertise. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69(2): 133–147.

19.

Lurey

J. S.

Raisinghani

M. S.

. (2001). An empirical study of best practices in virtual teams. Information & Management, 38(8): 523–544.

20.

Martins

Gilson

. (2004). Virtual Teams: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go From Here?. Journal of Management, 30(6): 805–835.

21.

Moreland

R. L.

(1999). Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. Sharing Knowledge in Organizations. Thompson

Messick

Levine

, eds. Hillsdale, NJ., Lawrence Erlbaum.

22.

Moreland

R. L.

Myaskovsky

(2000). Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication?. Organizational Behavior and Group Decision Processes, 82(1): 117–133.

23.

Nevo

Wand

(2005). Organizational memory information systems: A transactive memory approach. Decision Support Systems, 39(4): 549–562.

24.

Olson

J.S.

Olson

G.M.

(1999). Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. in Durso

F.T.

(Eds), Handbook of Applied Cognition. New York, N.Y.: Wiley409–442.

25.

Olson

G.M.

Olson

J.S.

(2000). Distance Matters. Human-Computer Interaction, 15: 139–178.

26.

Pavitt

(2003). Why we still have to be reductionists about group memory. Human Communication Research, 29(4): 592–599.

27.

Ramesh

Tiwana

. (1999) Supporting collaborative process knowledge management in new product development teams. Decision Support Systems, 27(1–2): 213–235.

28.

Reagans

Argote

. (2005). Individual experience and experience working together: Predicting learning rates from knowing who knows what and knowing how to work together. Management Science, 51(6): 869–881.

29.

Siegel

Dubrovsky

. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(2): 157–187.

30.

Singleton

R. A.

Straits

B. C.

(1999). Approaches to Social Research, 3rd Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.

31.

Stasser

Stewart

D. D.

. (1995). Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: The importance of knowing who knows what. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych., 31(3): 244–265.

32.

Straus

S.G.

(1996). Getting a clue: The effects of communication media and information distribution on participation and performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups. Small Group Research, 27(1): 115–142.

33.

Van de Ven

A.H.

Huber

G. P.

(1990). Longitudinal field research methods for studying processes of organizational change. Organizational Science, 1(3): 213–219.

34.

Wegner

D. M.

Giuliano

. (1985). Cognitive interdependence in close relationships. Ickes

W. J.

, ed. Compatible and incompatible relationships. New York, Springer-Verlag: 253–276.

35.

Wegner

D. M.

(1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. Mullen

Goethals

G. R.

, eds. Theories of Group Behavior. New York, Springer-Verlag.

36.

Wegner

D. M.

Erber

. (1991). “Transactive memory in close relationships.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(6): 923–929.

37.

Yoo

Kanawattanachai

(2001). Developments of transactive memory systems and collective mind in virtual teams. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(2): 187–208.