The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Impact of Knowledge Coordination on Virtual Team Performance over Time1
Abstract
As the role of virtual teams in organizations becomes increasingly important, it is crucial that companies identify and leverage team members’ knowledge. Yet, little is known of how virtual team members come to recognize one another’s knowledge, trust one another’s expertise, and coordinate their knowledge effectively. In this study, we develop a model of how three behavioral dimensions associated with transactive memory systems (TMS) in virtual teams—expertise location, task–knowledge coordination, and cognition-based trust—and their impacts on team performance change over time. Drawing on the data from a study that involves 38 virtual teams of MBA students performing a complex web-based business simulation game over an 8-week period, we found that in the early stage of the project, the frequency and volume of task-oriented communications among team members played an important role in forming expertise location and cognition-based trust. Once TMS were established, however, task-oriented communication became less important. Instead, toward the end of the project, task–knowledge coordination emerges as a key construct that influences team performance, mediating the impact of all other constructs. Our study demonstrates that TMS can be formed even in virtual team environments where interactions take place solely through electronic media, although they take a relatively long time to develop. Furthermore, our findings show that, once developed, TMS become essential to performing tasks effectively in virtual teams.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151312 · Cited by 109,314
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs
Churchill, G. A. (1979) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377901600110 · Cited by 16,549
Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40183951 · Cited by 11,113 · cited 2×
“(1994) allow each member to express how he/she understands the overall problem and think systematically (Argyris and Schön 1978).”
BackgroundAn integrative model of organizational trust
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258792 · Cited by 10,736
The Content Analysis Guidebook
Neuendorf, K. A. (2017) · doi:10.4135/9781071802878 · Cited by 9,286 · cited 1×
“According to Neuendorf (2002), the unit of analysis for content coding can either be determined in advance (an etic approach) or generated during the analysis (an emic approach).”
MethodAffect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346
Cited by
Media, Tasks, and Communication Processes: A Theory of Media Synchronicity1
Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M., & Valacich, J. S. (2008) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148857 · Cited by 1,511
Virtual Teams Research: 10 Years, 10 Themes, and 10 Opportunities
Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Jones Young, N. C., Vartiainen, M., & Hakonen, M. (2015) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314559946 · Cited by 825
Leading virtual teams: Hierarchical leadership, structural supports, and shared team leadership.
Hoch, J. E., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2014) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0030264 · Cited by 657
Trust and team performance: A meta-analysis of main effects, moderators, and covariates.
De Jong, B. A., Dirks, K. T., & Gillespie, N. (2016) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000110 · Cited by 616
Virtual Work: Bridging Research Clusters
Raghuram, S., Hill, N. S., Gibbs, J. L., & Maruping, L. M. (2019) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2017.0020 · Cited by 426
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2016) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000113 · Cited by 375
Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., Paoletti, J., Burke, C. S., & Salas, E. (2018) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.08.001 · Cited by 346
Understanding teleworkers’ technostress and its influence on job satisfaction
Suh, A., & Lee, J. (2017) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-06-2015-0181 · Cited by 347
Communication in virtual teams: a conceptual framework and research agenda
Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., & Salas, E. (2017) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.005 · Cited by 291
Measuring Team Cohesion: Observations from the Science
Salas, E., Grossman, R., Hughes, A. M., & Coultas, C. W. (2015) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720815578267 · Cited by 236
A meta-analytic investigation of virtuality and information sharing in teams
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., DeChurch, L. A., Jimenez-Rodriguez, M., Wildman, J., & Shuffler, M. (2011) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.03.002 · Cited by 234
Something(s) old and something(s) new: Modeling drivers of global virtual team effectiveness
Maynard, M. T., Mathieu, J. E., Rapp, T. L., & Gilson, L. L. (2012) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.1772 · Cited by 225
Lowry, P. B., Zhang, D., Zhou, L., & Fu, X. (2010) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2009.00334.x · Cited by 206
O’Leary, M. B., Wilson, J. M., & Metiu, A. (2014) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2014/38.4.13 · Cited by 191
Gkeredakis, M., Lifshitz-Assaf, H., & Barrett, M. (2021) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2021.100344 · Cited by 173
Operator training simulators in virtual reality environment for process operators: a review
Patle, D. S., Manca, D., Nazir, S., & Sharma, S. (2019) · Virtual Reality · doi:10.1007/s10055-018-0354-3 · Cited by 95
Nanyang Technological University, Chandra, S., Srivastava, S., HEC School of Management, P., Theng, Y.-L., & Nanyang Technological University (2012) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00310 · Cited by 90
Peñarroja, V., Orengo, V., Zornoza, A., & Hernández, A. (2013) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.020 · Cited by 89
The effect of voice and humour on users’ perceptions of personal intelligent agents
Moussawi, S., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2021) · Behaviour & Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2020.1772368 · Cited by 83
A longitudinal examination of the relationship between team leadership and performance
Gupta, V. K., Huang, R., & Niranjan, S. (2010) · Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · doi:10.1177/1548051809359184 · Cited by 82
The effects of virtualness on teamwork behavioral components: The role of shared mental models
Schmidtke, J. M., & Cummings, A. (2017) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.011 · Cited by 61
Understanding commitment in business process outsourcing relationships
Chou, S. W., Techatassanasoontorn, A. A., & Hung, I. H. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.10.003 · Cited by 43
Saffarizadeh, K., University of Texas at Arlington, Keil, M., Georgia State University, Boodraj, M., Boise State University, Alashoor, T., & University of Navarra (2024) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00839 · Cited by 41
Zhang, X., Xu, T., Wei, X., Tang, J., & Ordonez de Pablos, P. (2024) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-10-2022-0791 · Cited by 40
Hao, Q., Zhang, B., Shi, Y., & Yang, Q. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.899142 · Cited by 37
Perceived Proximity and Trust Network on Creative Performance in Virtual Collaboration Environment
Chae, S. W. (2016) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2016.07.084 · Cited by 26
The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Zhou, L., Rudin, C., Duke University, Gombolay, M., Georgia Institute of Technology, Spohrer, J., International Society of Service Innovation Professionals, Zhou, M., Juji, et al. (2023) · AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.17705/1thci.00085 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Kanawattanachai, P., & Yoo, Y.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2007-12-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 783-808
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W2129539485
- Cited by
- 614
- References
- 22
- FWCI
- 36.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
