As groups become more diverse and geographically dispersed they need to rely on a larger variety of skill sets and experiences among the group members. This wide diversity of skills require group members to have the ability to know who knows what, who has what skills, and who has specific experiences related to the task at hand. A key construct that identifies with the ability of group members to encode, store, and retrieve information collectively (Liang et al., 1995) is known as transactive memory systems (TMS). From the seminal work on TMS, Liang et al. (1995) provided the best description of TMS in that TMS represents “an external storage device” (p. 385) that is accessible to all group members.
Liang et al. (1995) found that teams who trained together, compared to team members training apart from other team members, performed better and made less errors. Findings from Liang et al. (1995) study indicated that groups who trained together were more able to: recall different aspects of the task, coordinate their task activities, and trust on another’s expertise (p. 390).
Since the inception of TMS from Liang et al. (1995) other research efforts have provided support for the cooperative memory systems that exist in groups (Lewis, 2003). Faraj and Sproull (2000) viewed TMS as an emergent property among groups. This emerging construct involves “socially shared cognitive processes that develop and evolve in order to meet the demands of task-based skill and knowledge dependencies” (p. 1556). Further, TMS has also been identified as being a multidimensional construct consisting of three components; specialization, credibility, and coordination. Akgün et al. (2005) provided the following definitions for each of these multidimensional constructs”
- Specialization: The differentiated structure of member knowledge.
- Credibility: Members’ beliefs about the accuracy and reliability of other members’ knowledge.
- coordination: Effective and orchestrated knowledge processing. (p. 1106)
The definitions provided in the literature relating to TMS, specialization, credibility, and coordination are provided in the follow table.
| Source | Transactive Memory System Definitions |
| TMS | |
| Akgün et al. (2005); Wegner et al. (1985) | Individuals, in continuing relationships, utilize each other as memory sources or aids to supplement their own limited and unreliable memories and knowledge. |
| Lewis (2003) | Transactive Memory: Memory that is influenced by knowledge about the memory system of another person. TMSs: The active use of transactive memory by two or more people to cooperatively store, retrieve, and communicate information. |
| Liang et al. (1995) | Shared experiences often lead groups of people to encode, store, and retrieve relevant information together. |
| London et al. (2005) | Rests in the beliefs group members have about each others’ expertise. |
| Michinov & Michinov (2009); Wegner (1986, 1995( | A specialized and implicit division of cognitive labour wherein members of a group assume responsibility for learning information within their own knowledge domain while expecting others to do the same. |
| Michinov et al. (2009); Hollingshead (2001); Wegner (1986) | When two or more people cooperatively encode, store, retrieve, and communicate information and knowledge. |
| Pearsall et al. (2009); Wegner (1987) | A team’s cooperative division of labor for learning, remembering, and communicating relevant team knowledge. |
| Pearsall et al. (2009); Austin (2003); Ilgen et al. (2005) | An emergent cognitive state that represents a combination of knowledge possessed by each individual and a collective awareness of who knows what. |
| Specialization | |
| Akgün et al. (2005) | The differentiated structure of member knowledge. |
| Lewis (2003); Liang et al. (1995); Moreland & Myaskovsky (2000) | The differentiated structure of members’ knowledge. |
| Michinov & Michinov (2009); Lewis (2003); Moreland (1999); Moreland et al. (1996) | The recognition of expertise distributed among the group. |
| Michinov et al. (2009); | |
| Pearsall et al. (2009); Lewis (2003); Liang et al. (1995); Moreland & Myaskovsky (2000) | The recognition of memory differentiation within the team. |
| Credibility | |
| Akgün et al. (2005) | Members’ beliefs about the accuracy and reliability of other members’ knowledge. |
| Lewis (2003); Liang et al. (1995); Moreland & Myaskovsky (2000) | Members’ beliefs about the reliability of other members’ knowledge. |
| Michinov & Michinov (2009); Lewis (2003); Moreland (1999); Moreland et al. (1996)Michinov & Michinov (2009); | The degree to which group members trust each other’s expertise on a given task. |
| Pearsall et al. (2009); Lewis (2003); Liang et al. (1995); Moreland & Myaskovsky (2000) | Team members’ faith in the reliability of their teammates’ knowledge. |
| Coordination | |
| Akgün et al. (2005) | Effective and orchestrated knowledge processing. |
| Lewis (2003); Liang et al. (1995); Moreland & Myaskovsky (2000) | Effective, orchestrated knowledge processing. |
| Michinov & Michinov (2009); Lewis (2003); Moreland (1999); Moreland et al. (1996)Michinov & Michinov (2009); | The ability of the group members to work together efficiently on a task and with greater collaboration, less confusion, and fewer misunderstandings. |
| Pearsall et al. (2009); Lewis (2003); Liang et al. (1995); Moreland & Myaskovsky (2000) | The ability of the team members to efficiently access each other’s expertise. |
References
Akgün, A. E., Byrne, J., Keskin, H., Lynn, G. S., & Imamoglu, S. Z. (2005). Knowledge networks in new product development projects: A transactive memory perspective. Information & Management, 42, 1105-1120. doi:10.1016/j.im.2005.01.001
Faraj, S., & Sproull, L. (2000). Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Science, 46, 1554-1568. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.12.1554.12072
Lewis, K. (2003). Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 587-604. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.587
Liang, D. W., Moreland, R., & Argote, L. (1995). Group versus individual training and group performance: The mediating role of transactive memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 384-393. doi:10.1177/0146167295214009
London, M., Polzer, J. T., & Omoregie, H. (2005). Interpersonal congruence, transactive memory, and feedback processes: An integrative model of group learning. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 114-135. doi:10.1177/1534484305275767
Michinov, E., Michinov, N., & Huguet, P. (2009). Effects of gender role and task conflict on performance in same-gender dyads: Transactive memory as a potential mediator. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 24, 155-168. doi:10.1007/BF03173008
Pearsall, M. J., Ellis, A. P. J., & Stein, J. H. (2009). Coping with challenge and hindrance stressors in teams: Behavioral, cognitive, and affective outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 18-28. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.02.002
Wegner, D. M. (1986). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In G. Mullen & G. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp. 185-208). Springer-Verlag.
Wegner, D. M. (1987). Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. In G. Mullen & G. Goethals (Eds.), Theories of group behavior (pp. 185-208). Springer-Verlag.