The effect of transactive memory system on team creativity and its acting mechanism:Taking exploitative learning and explorative learning as mediators

Abstract

Abstract: In the past few decades, how transactive memory system impacts on team creativity is under the debate. The mediating effect of team members’ learning on the relation between transactive memory system and team creativity is examined based on learning approach. The data of 33 operational teams from a comprehensive university in China are collected. The two dimensions of team members’ learning involving exploitative learning and explorative learning are constructed and validated. Based on the hierarchical regression analysis on the up and down rank matching data, the results show the positive effect of transactive memory system on team creativity and the mediative effect of exploitative learning on the relation between transactive memory system and team creativity. Meanwhile there is no mediative effect of explorative learning on the relation between transactive memory system and team creativity.

Key words: transactive memory system, exploitative learning, explorative learning, team creativity

CLC Number:

C939

Wang Duanxu, Xue Huijuan. The effect of transactive memory system on team creativity and its acting mechanism:Taking exploitative learning and explorative learning as mediators[J]. Science Research Management, 2013, (6): 106-114.

References

[1] Gino F., Argote L., Miron-Spektor E., Todorova G. First, get your feet wet: The effects of learning from direct and indirect experience on team creativity[J].Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2010, 111: 102-115.
[2] Hollingshead A. B. Communication, learning, and retrieval in the transactive memory system[J]. Experiment Social Psychology, 1998, 34: 423-442.
[3] Brandon D. P. & Hollingshead A. B. Transactive memory systems in organizations: Matching tasks, expertise, and personalities[J]. Organization Science, 2004, 15: 633-645.
[4] Lewis K., Lange D. & Gillis L. Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer[J]. Organization Science, 2005, 16(6): 581-600.
[5] Moreland R. L. & Myaskovsky L.Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication?[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2000, 82: l17-l33.
[6] Austin J. R. Transactive memory in organizational groups: The effects of content, consensus, specialization, and accuracy on group performance[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(5): 866-878.
[7] Wegner D. M. Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1987.
[8] Lewis K. Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88: 587-604.
[9] Henry R. Improving group judgment accuracy: Information sharing and determining the best member[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1995, 62: 190-197.
[10] Leonard B. D. Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1992, 13: 111-125.
[11] Levitt B., & March J. G. Organizational learning[M]. In: Scott WR, Blake J, editors. Annual review of sociology. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, 1988.
[12] Dougherty D. Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms[J]. Organizational Science, 1992, 3: 179-202.
[13] Moorman C. & Miner A. S. The impact of organizational memory on new product performance and creativity[J].Journal of Market Research, 1997, 34: 91-106.
[14] March J G. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning[J]. Organizational Science, 1991, 2 (1); 71-87.
[15] Gupta A K., Smith K G. & Shalley C E. The interplay between exploration and exploitation[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2006), 49(4): 693-706.
[16] He Z L. & Wong P K. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis[J]. Organization Science, 2004, 15: 481-494.
[17] Cao Q. Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects[J]. Organization Science, 2009, 20(4): 781-796.
[18] Milliken H J. & Martins L L. Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups[J]. The Academy of Management Review, 1996, 21: 402-433.
[19] Andrews K M. & Delahaye B L. Influences on knowledge process in organizational learning: The psychological filter[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2000, 37(6): 2322-2380.
[20] 张钢, 熊立. 交互记忆系统研究回顾与展望[J]. 心理科学进展, 2007, 15(5): 840-845.
[21] Cohen W M. & Levinthal D A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1990, 35: 128-152.
[22] Lewis K., Belliveau M., Herndon B. & Keller J. Group cognition, membership change, and performance: Investigating the benefits and detriments of collective knowledge[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2007, 103: 159-178.
[23] 张志学, Hempel P. S. 韩玉兰, 邱静. 高技术工作团队的交互记忆系统及其效果[J]. 心理学报, 2006, 38(2): 271-280.
[24] Neil E. & Michael A W. Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory; Summary[J].. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1998, 19(3): 235-259.
[25] 莫申江, 谢小云.团队学习、交互记忆系统与团队绩效: 基于IMOI范式的纵向追踪研究[J].心理学报, 2009, 41(7): 639-648.