The Effects of Communication Networks and Turnover on Transactive Memory and Group Performance

References

• Ahuja MK, Galletta DF, Carley KM (2003) Individual centrality and performance in virtual R&D groups: An empirical study. Management Sci. 49(1):21–38.Link, Google Scholar
• Arrow H, McGrath JE (1995) Membership dynamics in groups at work: A theoretical framework. Res. Organ. Behav. 17:373–373.Google Scholar
• Aven BL (2015) The paradox of corrupt networks: An analysis of organizational crime at Enron. Organ. Sci. 26(4):980–996.Link, Google Scholar
• Balkundi P, Harrison DA (2006) Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structure’s effects on team viability and performance. Acad. Management J. 49(1):49–68.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernard HR, Killworth P, Kronenfeld D, Sailer L (1984) The problem of informant accuracy: The validity of retrospective data. Annual Rev. Anthropol. 13:495–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau PM (1974) Presidential address: Parameters of social structure. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 39(5):615–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Cross R (2003) A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Sci. 49(4):432–445.Link, Google Scholar
• Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Johnson JC (2013) Analyzing Social Networks (Sage, London).Google Scholar
• Bosch J, Bosch-Sijtsema P (2010) From integration to composition: On the impact of software product lines, global development and ecosystems. J. Systems Software 83(1):67–76.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bunderson JS, Boumgarden P (2010) Structure and learning in self-managed teams: Why “bureaucratic” teams can be better learners. Organ. Sci. 21(3):609–624.Link, Google Scholar
• Burns T, Stalker G (1961) The Management of Innovation (Tavistock Press, London).Google Scholar
• Casciaro T, Barsade SG, Edmondson AC, Gibson CB, Krackhardt D, Labianca G (2015) The integration of psychological and network perspectives in organizational scholarship. Organ. Sci. 26(4):1162–1176.Link, Google Scholar
• Chao GT, O’Leary-Kelly AM, Wolf S, Klein HJ, Gardner PD (1994) Organizational socialization: Its content and consequences. J. Appl. Psych. 79(5):730–743.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi HS, Levine JM (2004) Minority influence in work teams: The impact of newcomers. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 40(2):273–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi HS, Thompson L (2005) Old wine in a new bottle: Impact of membership change on group creativity. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 98(2):121–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational Psych. Measurement 20(1):37–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Croson R, Anand J, Agarwal R (2007) Using experiments in corporate strategy research. Eur. Management Rev. 4(3):173–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Csárdi G, Nepusz T (2006) The igraph software package for complex network research. Interjournal, Complex Systems:Manuscript 1695.Google Scholar
• DeChurch LA, Mesmer-Magnus JR (2010) The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psych. 95(1):32–53.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Devine DJ, Clayton LD, Philips JL, Dunford BB, Melner SB (1999) Teams in organizations prevalence, characteristics, and effectiveness. Small Group Res. 30(6):678–711.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faraj S, Sproull L (2000) Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Sci. 46(12):1554–1568.Link, Google Scholar
• Faucheux C, Mackenzie KD (1966) Task dependency of organizational centrality: Its behavioral consequences. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 2(4):361–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ferriani S, Cattani G, Baden-Fuller C (2009) The relational antecedents of project-entrepreneurship: Network centrality, team composition and project performance. Res. Policy 38(10):1545–1558.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman L (1979) Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Soc. Networks 1(3):215–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friedkin NE (1981) The development of structure in random networks: An analysis of the effects of increasing network density on five measures of structure. Soc. Networks 3(1):41–52.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gino F, Argote L, Miron-Spektor E, Todorova G (2010) First, get your feet wet: The effects of learning from direct and indirect experience on team creativity. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 111(2):102–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gouldner AW (1954) Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Guetzkow H, Simon H (1955) The impact of certain communication nets upon organization and performance in task-oriented groups. Management Sci. 1(3):233–250.Link, Google Scholar
• Hancock JI, Allen DG, Bosco FA, McDaniel KR, Pierce CA (2013) Meta-analytic review of employee turnover as a predictor of firm performance. J. Management 39(3):573–603.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hausknecht JP, Holwerda JA (2013) When does employee turnover matter? Dynamic member configurations, productive capacity, and collective performance. Organ. Sci. 24(1):210–225.Link, Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2015) An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Res. 50(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hollingshead AB (1998) Retrieval processes in transactive memory systems. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 74(3):659–671.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz N, Lazer D, Arrow H, Contractor N (2004) Network theory and small groups. Small Group Res. 35(3):307–332.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinbaum AM, Stuart TE, Tushman ML (2013) Discretion within constraint: Homophily and structure in a formal organization. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1316–1357.Link, Google Scholar
• Kruchten P (2008) What do software architects do? J. Systems Software 81(12):2413–2416.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kush J, Williamson C, Argote L (2012) Challenges and opportunities for group learning and group learning researchers. Neale MA, Mannix EA, eds. Looking Back, Moving Forward: A Review of Group and Team-Based Research, Research on Managing Groups and Teams, Vol. 15 (Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, UK), 209–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leavitt HJ (1951) Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. J. Abnormal Soc. Psych. 46(1):38–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leavitt HJ (1996) The old days, hot groups and managers’ lib. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(2):288–300.Crossref, Google Scholar
• LeBreton JM, Senter JL (2008) Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organ. Res. Methods 11(4):815–852.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee J, Bachrach DG, Lewis K (2014) Social network ties, transactive memory, and performance in groups. Organ. Sci. 25(3):951–967.Link, Google Scholar
• Levine JM, Choi HS, Moreland RL (2003) Newcomer innovation in work teams. Paulus P, Nijstad B, eds. Group Creativity: Innovation Through Collaboration (Oxford University Press, New York),202–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis K (2003) Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. J. Appl. Psych. 88(4):587–604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis K, Herndon B (2011) Transactive memory systems: Current issues and future research directions. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1254–1265.Link, Google Scholar
• Lewis K, Belliveau M, Herndon B, Keller J (2007) Group cognition, membership change, and performance: Investigating the benefits and detriments of collective knowledge. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 103(2):159–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liang DW, Moreland RL, Argote L (1995) Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactive memory. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 21(4):384–393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Manski CF (1993) Identification of endogenous social effects: The reflection problem. Rev. Econom. Stud. 60(3):531–542.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGrath JE (1984) Groups: Interaction and Performance (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Moreland RL, Myaskovsky L (2000) Exploring the performance benefits of group training: Transactive memory or improved communication? Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 82(1):117–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moreland RL, Argote L, Krishnan R (1996) Socially shared cognition at work: Transactive memory and group performance. Nye JL, Brower AM, eds. What’s Social About Social Cognition? Research on Socially Shared Cognition in Small Groups (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 57–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morrison EW (2002) Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1149–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy KR, Myors B (1998) Statistical Power Analysis: A Simple and General Model for Traditional and Modern Hypothesis Tests (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ).Google Scholar
• Opsahl T (2012) tnet: Software for analysis of weighted, two-mode, and longitudinal networks. Accessed July 1, 2013, https://cran.r-project.org/package=tnet.Google Scholar
• Preacher KJ, Kelley K (2011) Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psych. Methods 16(2):93–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ren Y, Argote L (2011) Transactive memory systems 1985–2010: An integrative framework of key dimensions, antecedents, and consequences. Acad. Management Ann. 5(1):189–229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rulke DL, Galaskiewicz J (2000) Distribution of knowledge, group network structure, and group performance. Management Sci. 46(5):612–625.Link, Google Scholar
• Sasovova Z, Mehra A, Borgatti SP, Schippers MC (2010) Network churn: The effects of self-monitoring personality on brokerage dynamics. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(4):639–670.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Spector PE (1994) Using self-report questionnaires in OB research: A comment on the use of a controversial method. J. Organ. Behav. 15(5):385–392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutton RI, Hargadon A (1996) Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(4):685–718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsay J, Dabbish L, Herbsleb J (2014) Let’s talk about it: Evaluating contributions through discussion in GitHub. Proc. 22nd ACM SIGSOFT Internat. Sympos. Foundations Software Engrg. (ACM, New York), 144–154.Google Scholar
• Uzzi B, Spiro J (2005) Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. Amer. J. Sociol. 111(2):447–504.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber M (1947) Henderson AM, Parsons T, eds. The Theory of Economic and Social Organization (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Wegner DM (1987) Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. Mullen B, Goethals GR, eds. Theories of Group Behavior (Springer-Verlag, New York), 185–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wells WP, Pelz DC (1966) Scientists in Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Yuan YC, Fulk J, Monge PR, Contractor N (2010) Expertise directory development, shared task interdependence, and strength of communication network ties as multilevel predictors of expertise exchange in transactive memory work groups. Comm. Res. 37(1):20–47.Crossref, Google Scholar