Cited by 119Team Dynamics and PerformanceKnowledge Management and SharingInnovation and Knowledge Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Knowledge Utilization, Coordination, and Team Performance

Open access
Reagans, Ray, Miron-Spektor, Ella, Argote, Linda·2016·Organization Science

Abstract

Considerable research has established the superior performance of teams on which team members utilize specialized knowledge and also develop transactive processes that promote coordination. Less is known, however, about the consequences for team performance when team members only possess one of the two productivity factors. We develop and test a framework highlighting the distinct challenges these teams will face. In particular, our results show that each productivity factor contributed significantly more to team performance when the other factor was present. And our findings also illustrate a potential failure mode for knowledge utilization. If team members could not coordinate their collective efforts, utilizing knowledge undermined team performance. Our framework outlines a similar risk for too much coordination, if team members cannot utilize their specialized knowledge and are asked to perform a task with a “rugged” performance landscape. We discuss the implications of our framework and results for theory and practice.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.2016.1078

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 57

  1. Aiken LS, 1991, Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions
  2. 10.1016/j.im.2005.01.001 · DOI
  3. 10.1111/1467-8721.00002 · DOI
  4. 10.2307/2392320 · DOI
  5. 10.1126/science.247.4945.920 · DOI
  6. Argote L, 2001, Groups at Work: Advances in Theory and Research, 369
  7. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.866 · DOI
  8. 10.7551/mitpress/2366.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1287/orsc.1050.0149 · DOI
  10. Bliese PD, 2000, Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations: Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions, 349
  11. 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0687 · DOI
  12. 10.1287/orsc.1050.0166 · DOI
  13. Clark HH, 1981, Elements of Discourse Understanding, 10
  14. 10.5465/AMR.2010.53502832 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.2307/2785898 · DOI
  16. 10.1037/a0017328 · DOI
  17. 10.1287/orsc.1060.0181 · DOI
  18. 10.5465/078559811 · DOI
  19. 10.1287/mnsc.1030.0145 · DOI
  20. 10.1287/orsc.1090.0468 · DOI
  21. 10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1554.12072 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 10.1111/j.1465-7295.1976.tb00428.x · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.11.002 · DOI
  24. 10.1287/mnsc.48.11.1408.268 · DOI
  25. Hackman JR, 1990, Groups That Work (and Those That Don’t): Creating Conditions for Effective Teamwork
  26. 10.1037/0033-2909.91.3.517 · DOI
  27. Hinds PJ, 2003, Beyond Knowledge Management: Sharing Expertise, 3
  28. 10.1037/0021-9010.67.2.219 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2011.01381.x · DOI
  30. Krauss RM, 1990, Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technical Bases of Collaborative Work, 111
  31. 10.1287/orsc.1070.0352 · DOI
  32. 10.1086/250105 · DOI
  33. 10.2307/2393721 · DOI
  34. 10.1002/smj.4250141009 · DOI
  35. 10.1287/orsc.10.3.342 · DOI
  36. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.587 · DOI
  37. 10.1287/orsc.1050.0143 · DOI
  38. 10.1177/0146167295214009 · DOI
  39. 10.1287/mnsc.33.1.107 · DOI
  40. 10.1016/j.respol.2012.04.011 · DOI
  41. March JG, 1958, Organizations
  42. McGrath JE, 1984, Groups: Interaction and Performance
  43. 10.1093/bja/aem404 · DOI
  44. Phillips KW, 1998, Res. Organ. Behav., 20, 77
  45. 10.1287/mnsc.47.6.752.9811 · DOI
  46. Polanyi M, 1967, The Tacit Dimension
  47. 10.5465/amr.2010.0535 · DOI
  48. 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0366 · DOI
  49. 10.1080/19416520.2011.590300 · DOI
  50. Simon HA, 1962, Proc. Amer. Philosophical Soc., 106, 467
  51. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.01.002 · DOI
  52. Thompson JD, 1967, Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative Theory
  53. 10.2307/2390603 · DOI
  54. 10.1287/mnsc.26.11.1071 · DOI
  55. 10.1287/mnsc.49.4.400.14430 · DOI
  56. 10.1007/978-1-4612-5044-9_12 · DOI · Paper page
  57. 10.1080/17470910701363041 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 119

Metadata

Authors
Reagans, R., Miron-Spektor, E., & Argote, L.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
Reagans, Ray
Venue
Organization Science
Published
2016-10
Volume
27
Issue
5
Pages
1108-1124
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
OpenAlex
W2521211738
Cited by
119
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
12.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-sa
Locations
  • Organization Science (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Knowledge Management and Sharing
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
knowledge application, team coordination, team performance, expert knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review