Predicting transactive memory system in multidisciplinary teams: The interplay between team and professional identities

Abstract

1Predicting transactive memory systems in multidisciplinary teams: The interplay between team and professional identitiesIn explaining how communication quality predicts TMS in multidisciplinary teams, we drew on the social identity approach to investigate the mediating role of team identification and the moderating role of professional identification. Recognizing that professional identification could trigger intergroup biases among professional subgroups, or alternatively, could bring resources to the team, we explored the potential moderating role of professional identification in the relationship between team identification and TMS. Using data collected from 882 healthcare personnel working in 126 multidisciplinary hospital teams, results supported our hypothesis that perceived communication quality predicted TMS through team identification. Furthermore, findings provided support for a resource view of professional subgroup identities with results indicating that high levels of professional identification compensated for low levels of team identification in predicting TMS.We provide recommendations on how social identities may be used to promote TMS in multidisciplinary teams.Keywords: transactive memory system, team identification, professional identification, multidisciplinary teams 2 Predicting transactive memory systems in multidisciplinary teams: The interplay between team and professional identitiesIn response to demands for complex work requiring the contribution and integration of a diverse range of professional knowledge and skill sets, multidisciplinary (or cross-functional) teams have become common work design features in today's organizations. Multidisciplinary teams require inter-professional collaboration and the distribution of workload according to areas of expertise. In this respect, ensuring a well-developed transactive memory system (TMS) is especially critical in these teams (Faraj & Yan, 2009;Jarvenpaa & Majchrzak, 2008; Kotlarsky, van den Hooff, & Houtman, 2012). A TMS is defined as the shared division of cognitive labor for encoding, storing, and retrieving information based on a collective awareness of where specialized knowledge resides in the team (Lewis & Herndon, 2012). Whereas the positive effects of TMS have been welldocumented in the literature, such as improved team learning (e.g., Lewis, Lange, & Gillis, 2005;Rau, 2006) and team performance (e.g., Chiang, Shih, & Hsu, 2014;Zhang, Hempel, Han, & Tjosvold, 2007), there is notably less research on the antecedents of TMS (see Ren & Argote, 2011).Ren and Argote's (2011) empirical review of the literature highlighted that although there is considerable support for the role of communication in predicting TMS, the processes through which team members are motivated to build a well-developed TMS are not well understood. They argued that social identification processes may be one potential factor in motivating TMS building because members who identify with their team are more likely to rely on each other for expertise coordination, an...

Communication in Theory and Research on Transactive Memory Systems: A Literature Review

“…Another study in software development teams shows that benevolence‐ and competence‐based trust mediates the positive relationship between communication quality and TMS (Tang, ). Liao, O'Brien, Jimmieson, and Restubog (), in turn, found that team identification mediates the positive relationship between communication quality and the level of TMS in multidisciplinary teams. Taken together, these studies suggest that TMS is both an antecedent and outcome of communication frequency and quality.…”

Individual‐level Foci of Identification at Work: A Systematic Review of the Literature

“…We only found two studies examining the relationship between team identification and targets other than ‘organizational identification’. Liao and colleagues () demonstrated how high levels of professional identification compensated for low team identification in predicting shared division of cognitive labour in diverse specialists teams. And, Mitchell and colleagues () demonstrate that inter‐professional openness (motivation to use team members’ expertise for the team's task) strengthens team identification and reduces professional identity threat.…”

Selecting and Composing Cohesive Teams

“…For example, members of football teams with winning records were more likely to emphasize a superordinate team identity (i.e., football team as a whole) rather than their subgroup identities (i.e., offense or defense; Murrell & Gaertner, 1992). A strong superordinate team identity can help teams better leverage potentially competing identities that team members may have such as a subgroup or professional identity (Liao, O'Brien, Jimmieson, & Restubog, 2015). Self-categorization theory explains why people define themselves in terms of one group as compared to another.…”