Transactive Memory Systems

This article was downloaded by: [Carnegie Mellon University] On: 07 March 2014, At: 17:16 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Academy of Management Annals Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rama20

Transactive Memory Systems 1985–2010: An Integrative Framework of Key Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences Yuqing Ren a & Linda Argote b a Carlson School of Management , University of Minnesota b Tepper School of Business , Carnegie Mellon University Published online: 26 Jul 2011.

To cite this article: Yuqing Ren & Linda Argote (2011) Transactive Memory Systems 1985–2010: An Integrative Framework of Key Dimensions, Antecedents, and Consequences, The Academy of Management Annals, 5:1, 189-229, DOI: 10.1080/19416520.2011.590300

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.590300

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with

primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

C ar

ne gi

e M

el lo

n U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 17

:1 6

07 M

ar ch

2 01

4

Transactive Memory Systems 1985 – 2010: An Integrative Framework of Key Dimensions, Antecedents,

and Consequences

YUQING REN∗

Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota

LINDA ARGOTE

Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University

Abstract

Over two decades have passed since Wegner and his co-authors published the groundbreaking paper on transactive memory systems (TMS) in 1985. The concept attracted the interest of management, psychology, and communication scholars who have employed a variety of methods to examine the phenomenon. In this paper, we review 76 papers that examined transactive memory systems and summarize the findings in an integrative framework to show the antecedents and consequences of TMS. Our review also reveals important issues in the litera- ture related to the measurement of TMS, its multidimensional nature, extending TMS from the team level to the organizational level, and the potential role of TMS in explaining the benefits of experience in existing organizations and

∗ Corresponding author. Email:chingren@umn.edu

The Academy of Management Annals Vol. 5, No. 1, June 2011, 189 – 229

ISSN 1941-6520 print/ISSN 1941-6067 online # 2011 Academy of Management DOI: 10.1080/19416520.2011.590300 http://www.informaworld.com

189

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

C ar

ne gi

e M

el lo

n U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 17

:1 6

07 M

ar ch

2 01

4

new entrepreneurial ventures. We conclude by calling for future research to examine the dynamic evolution of TMS, TMS in virtual teams, TMS in entrepre- neurial ventures, and TMS at the organizational level facilitated with information technologies.

Introduction

Over two decades have passed since Wegner and his collaborators first pre- sented the concept of transactive memory to refer to a collective system that individuals in close relationships use to encode, store, and retrieve knowledge (Wegner, Giuliano, & Hertel, 1985; Wegner, 1987). Over the past two decades, researchers from many disciplines including communication, management, social psychology, and information systems have become interested the concept and its effects in group and organizational settings. The concept has been extended beyond its original context of collective remembering in inti- mate couples to work groups and organizations (e.g., Liang, Moreland, & Argote, 1995; Jackson & Klobas, 2008; Lewis, 2003). We have also accumulated a large body of literature regarding the antecedents and consequences of trans- active memory in dyads and work groups. Much of the insight, nonetheless, remains dispersed in separate studies with limited integration.

In this article, we report findings from a comprehensive review of the transac- tive memory literature. We summarize the literature in an integrative framework that shows the antecedents, consequences, and factors that moderate the relation- ship between transactive memory systems (TMS) and various outcomes. Our review suggests four important issues that need to be considered and addressed in future research in terms of (1) using standard scales in measuring transactive memory systems, (2) deciphering the relationships among the dimensions of transactive memory systems, (3) extending transactive memory systems to the organizational level, and (4) investigating the role of TMS in explaining the benefits of experience in existing organizations and new entrepreneurial ventures.

Three observations motivated our decision to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature. First, despite two decades of research, the transactive memory literature remains somewhat fragmented. Researchers choose to study variables of their individual interest and there is little systematic inte- gration such as the input – process – output framework of team effectiveness (Mathieu, Maynard, Rapp, & Gilson, 2008). Although many researchers have examined factors of great interest—such as stress (Ellis, 2006), gender stereo- types (Hollingshead & Fraidin, 2003), and communication (Lewis, 2004), to name just a few—a review is likely to help us integrate accumulated knowledge and identify gaps in the literature for future research.

Second, the growth of the literature increases the likelihood of replicating studies and cross-checking the effects of variables across studies. At the same time, we begin to observe relationships that are inconsistent or even contradict

190 † The Academy of Management Annals

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

C ar

ne gi

e M

el lo

n U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 17

:1 6

07 M

ar ch

2 01

4

one another across studies. One example is how the relationship between trust and transactive memory is conceived. Kanawattanachai and Yoo (2007) measured cognition-based trust as a key dimension of transactive memory, similar to the task credibility dimension in Lewis’s 15-item scale (2003). In con- trast, Akgun, Byrne, and Kesin (2005) examined trust as an antecedent to transactive memory systems, whereas Rau (2005) examined trust as a modera- tor of the relationship between transactive memory systems and top manage- ment team performance. A review is likely to help us cross validate insights from different studies and begin to reconcile inconsistencies in the relation- ships between TMS and other constructs.

Third, we hope the review will serve as a vehicle to bridge the gap between theory and practice. While the benefits of TMS have been consistently demon- strated in small groups, there is not much evidence showing its working and benefits in organizations at large, although many organizations have invested heavily in technological solutions to make better use of their intellectual capital (Moreland & Argote, 2003). Part of the answer may reside in the context of the studies that linked TMS to improved performance and the extent to which these findings generalize beyond small face-to-face groups. A comprehensive review allows us to compare findings across methods and contexts and thereby to identify consistencies and inconsistencies in the literature.

In the rest of the article, we first define the concept of transactive memory and present a representation of its key elements. We then describe how we selected the articles to review, together with basic statistics about the literature. We summarize our findings in an integrative framework about the theoretical antecedents and consequences of transactive memory on group outcomes together with factors that moderate the relationship between transactive memory systems and outcomes. We conclude with a discussion of important issues that need to be addressed and our recommendations for future research.

Transactive Memory Systems Defined

The concept of transactive memory systems was first introduced as a mechan- ism to illustrate how individuals can rely upon external aids such as books, arti- facts, or group members to extend individual memory. Wegner, Giuliano, and Hertel (1985) defined the two components of transactive memory as: (1) orga- nized knowledge contained entirely in the individual memory systems of group members, and (2) a set of transactive processes that occur among group members. A TMS consists of a set of individual memory systems in combi- nation with the communication that takes place between individuals (Wegner, 1987). A commonly used definition of transactive memory system is a shared system that people in relationships develop for encoding, storing, and retrieving information about different substantive domains (Hollingshead, 1998a; Ren, Carley, & Argote, 2006).

Transactive Memory Systems 1985 – 2010 † 191

D ow

nl oa

de d

by [

C ar

ne gi

e M

el lo

n U

ni ve

rs it

y] a

t 17

:1 6

07 M

ar ch

2 01