The Effects of Team-Skills Training on Transactive Memory and Performance

Abstract

The existence of effective transactive memory systems in teams has been found to enhance task performance. Methods of developing transactive memory are therefore an important focus of research. This study aimed to explore one such method, the use of a generic team-skills training program to develop transactive memory and subsequent task performance. Sixteen three-member teams were all trained to complete a complex collaborative task, prior to which half the teams ( n = 8) completed a team-skills training program. Results confirmed that those teams that had been trained to develop a range of team skills such as problem-solving, interpersonal relationships, goal setting, and role allocation evidenced significantly higher team skill, transactive memory, and performance than those that were not trained in such skills. Results are discussed with reference to the wider transactive memory literature and the mechanisms through which team-skills training could facilitate the more rapid development of transactive memory.

Evaluating the effects of team-skills training on subjective workload

“…Thus, not only will high levels of team-skill expertise lower an individual's experience of workload due to a higher degree of automaticity of the relevant skills, but also additionally the coordination of one's efforts with others will be made easier if the others are similarly skilled. This is especially important when the task is complex and involves a high degree of interdependence of team members (Prichard & Ashleigh, 2007).…”

From Cognitive Load Theory to Collaborative Cognitive Load Theory

“…These activities which may occur synchronously or asynchronously (Popov et al 2017) enable groups to acquire collective knowledge of who the others are and how they can deal with the task (i.e., a collective executive function), the group's accuracy and willingness to resolve it, and how all members should coordinate what they are doing with each other to accomplish the task together by mediating the acquisition individual and group domainspecific knowledge and the shared, generalised knowledge (Kalyuga 2013;Prichard and Ashleigh 2007). As stated by Popov et al (2017) Blearning is particularly likely to occur when the collaborating students engage in transactive discourse (i.e., critique, challenging of positions and attainment of synthesis via discussion), because this form of discourse gives rise to cognitive activities that stimulate knowledge construction^(p. 426).…”

“…They must develop a shared mental model and/or a collective scheme of cognitive independence on how to effectively communicate and coordinate their actions so as to share group knowledge, appropriately distribute available task information, and exploit the quality of participation of each group member in the solution of the problem at hand (Hollingshead 2010). To develop collective knowledge, learners should unfold appropriate and efficient transactive activities and be willing to expend resources on collaborative tasks (Fransen et al 2013;Noroozi et al 2013;Premo et al 2017;Prichard and Ashleigh 2007).…”

Getting Beneath the Surface: Scapegoating and the Systems Approach in a Post-Munro World

“…McEvily et al (2003) propose that the effects of trust can be understood by conceptualising it as an organising factor which helps to build and facilitate the use of social networks and communication within and across organisations. Where trust is present it increases information sharing, the quality of interactions between people and their commitment to one another (Ashleigh et al, 2007;Calnan et al, 2008). In contrast, in the absence of trust, individuals are likely to engage in higher levels of defensive monitoring and behaviours aimed at selfpreservation.…”

“…Where the culture is one of openness, with systems supporting information sharing and policies that demonstrate benevolence towards employees, this fosters trust between employees and in management (Schoorman et al, 2007). In a reciprocal relationship, the atmosphere of trust that is created within such a culture in turn promotes on-going information sharing and supportive interpersonal relationships between employees (Lewicki et al, 2006;Prichard et al, 2007). In contrast, organisational structures that control and monitor staff excessively can foster distrust by signalling suspicion (Cummings et al, 1996).…”