Sze-Sze Wong

Distal and Local Group Learning: Performance Trade-offs and Tensions

There is increasing recognition that group members learn not only within the group (i.e., local learning), but also externally (i.e., distal learning), and these two group learning processes may facilitate group performance in different ways. Yet, despite this recognition, there is much that is not understood about whether they complement or inhibit each other in affecting group performance, and whether group social and task conditions that foster one type of learning do so at the expense of the other. The findings from this field study of teams from four firms show that (1) local learning and distal learning are positively related to group efficiency and group innovativeness, respectively; (2) distal learning negatively interacts with local learning to impede group efficiency; and (3) high levels of group cohesion promote distal learning but diminish local learning. Overall, these findings suggest that there are not only performance trade-offs to engaging in either only local or distal learning, but also performance disadvantages to engaging in both types of group learning because distal learning impedes local learning from achieving a high level of group efficiency. In addition, there is preliminary evidence to suggest that tensions can arise from simultaneously managing both types of group learning because a high level of group cohesion increases distal learning but decreases local learning.

Virtual Teams: What are their Characteristics, and Impact on Team Performance?

To date, efforts to understand virtual teaming have been largely anecdotal and atheoretical. Therefore, drawing from the extant research in the groups domain, we attempt to ground the definition of a virtual team in well-established group-level constructs, and design a simulation study to investigate the impact of different virtual team characteristics on team performance. Essentially, we argue that the virtual team is defined by three key characteristics—the virtual team context, the virtual team composition, and the virtual team structure. Using the VDT computational discrete event simulation model as our experimental platform, we simulated different virtual team models, and examined their impact on various team performance dimensions. We found that virtual team characteristics have different effects on different aspects of team performance. The virtual context team had a lower rework volume but higher coordination volume and longer project duration than the virtual composition team. Interestingly, we also found that the virtual structure team performed better than the software development team baseline model in all aspects of team performance. Based on these results, we proposed strategies to improve performance in different types of virtual team. Specifically, we propose (1) increasing the ease of communication and availability of routines in the virtual context team; (2) clarifying role expectations and fostering a team culture in the virtual composition team; and (3) implementing a lateral structure in the virtual team. Our results also suggest that firms should consider situational demands, specifically tolerance for errors and coordination volume, when considering the design of virtual teams.

A Power Perspective to Interunit Knowledge Transfer: Linking Knowledge Attributes to Unit Power and the Transfer of Knowledge

This research investigates whether unit power affects interunit knowledge transfer. We propose that units are more likely to transfer their knowledge to other units with more critical, nonsubstitutable, and central knowledge because the latter have greater unit power upon the former. Findings from two firms reveal that differences in knowledge criticality and nonsubstitutability predict the degree of power one unit has upon another. However, only findings from one firm supported the mediating effect of unit power on knowledge transfer from a source to a seeker, suggesting that the role of unit power in affecting interunit knowledge transfer may be contingent on the degree of goal interdependence among units.

The Contingent Effects of Social Network Sparseness and Centrality on Managerial Innovativeness

Prior research has highlighted that network sparseness and network centrality enhance innovativeness through access to information and influence, respectively. We advance this perspective by exploring the extent to which individual actions are needed to mobilize information and influence accessed through social networks, and whether such information and influence would mutually reinforce to enhance managerial innovativeness. Our findings found partial support for the idea that actions are needed to actualize potential resources embedded in social networks, as centrally positioned managers enjoy higher innovativeness when they engage in ambassador activities. We also found that advice network sparseness and advice network centrality had independent, not interactive relationships with managerial innovativeness, suggesting that they offer distinct routes to achieving managerial innovativeness. Overall, our research clarifies the relationships of two important social network attributes on managerial innovativeness, and also sheds new light on how managerial action matters in realizing social network advantages for innovative ends.