Learn about Transactive Memory Systems if you're a beginner and find examples on emerging areas of research using TMS.

1. Bjorn Jensen, Purdue University
December 16, 2015
Transactive Memory and Transactive Memory Systems
- A Background
RESEARCH CENTER
Open Digital Innovation

2. CONTENT
▪ What is transactive memory?
▪ How is it applied?
▪ Relevance for transparency? Virtual communities?
AGENDA
“Few people rely exclusively on their own
memories” (Wegner, 1987)

3. Overall: It is a psychological hypothesis and concept envisioned by Wegner and his co-authors in 1985. it is widely
used today in management, psychology, IS, and communication to examine its effects on e.g. virtual group/team
and organizational performance.
 Transactive memory is the shared store of knowledge.
 A transactive memory system includes memory stored in each individual, the interactions between memory
within the individuals, as well as the processes that update this memory, combined with meta-
memory containing information regarding the different teammates’ domains of expertise (Wegner, 1985)
 It is a mechanism through which groups collectively encode, store, and retrieve knowledge (Wegner, et al.,
1985)
 Simply put: when Albert and I spend a lot of time around each other and working together at RCODI, we create
a shared store of knowledge between us. In essence, one member of the couple could store information within
their partner and then recall that information by asking their partner about it.
 In virtual settings, it refers to how we as individuals can rely upon external aids such as artifacts and
collaborators (see Ren & Argote, 2011), also referred to as metaknowledge.
 Transactive memory is not the same as TMS, but is a component of TMS (Ren & Argote, 2011, p. 192).
 TMS is something we develop collectively – antecedents are important
WHAT IS TRANSACTIVE MEMORY AND TRANSACTIVE MEMORY SYSTEMS?
THEORY

4. HOW IS TMS APPLIED?
THEORY
Ren & Argote (2011), adapted from Mathieu et al. (2008),
“Input-Mediators-Output” framework
Existing measures of
TMS

5. Antecedents
 Because there is limited research on the factors affecting the opportunity to develop a TMS further (Ren &
Argote, 2011).
 Because different types of knowledge such as declarative (know-what, know who) might decay at a faster rate
than procedural knowledge or know-how (Cohen & Bacdayan, 1994) – and this could be a visibility problem.
Components
 There are various measures of TMS and no common agreement on these measures except for the ones
developed by Lewis (2003).
 The closest items relevant to transparency are “expertise location” and “bring expertise to bear” which try to
explain the location of knowledge and if it is easy to locate expertise and know who possesses it.
Outcomes
 TMSs develop over time – making certain types of knowledge visible may enhance creativity and/or
performance over time and thus generate a better TMS (Only one study investigating this in team settings was
found by Ren & Argote, 2011).
 Existing literature is “house divided” on whether visibility of information is beneficial for KMS. It may make us
more efficient (Leonardi, 2014) and at the same time less efficient as people may not share correct information
or the whole truth (Leonardi & Treem, 2012)
 Groups with well-developed transactive memory systems have knowledge of members’ expertise, they are in a
better position to envision how members’ expertise can be combined in new ways to create new products and
services (innovations) than teams with less developed transactive memory systems.
WHY ARE TMS’ RELEVANT FOR TRANSPARENCY?
THEORY

6.  There are few studies that address this (see Ren &
Argote, 2011) – it is a conceptual underpinning in
some studies (for one of those see Leonardi, 2014)
 Few studies emphasize the individual and
organizational level, and are mostly focused on
direct communication between members – can be
expanded.
 There are few established measurements of TMS
effects, and these are all team-level analyses, even
in virtual spheres (see Yoo & Kanawattanachai,
2001)
 Because we develop TMS collectively, but lack the
physical interpersonal aspect in online
collaboration.
 Research on ESNS’ for virtual collaboration have
used TMS but as a subset only. There are plenty of
possibilities for using TMS in KMS research in virtual
collaboration (see Fulk & Yuan, 2013)
 TMS’ effects on team innovation is both positive and
negative (Peltokorpi & Hasu, 2014), but what about
the collective? Individual?
WHY IS IT RELEVANT FOR RESEARCH IN VIRTUAL COLLABORATION?
THEORY
Ren & Argote (2011)

7.  Cohen, M.D., & Bacdayan, P. (1994). Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study.
Organization Science, 5, 554–568.
 Fulk, J., & Yuan, Y. C. (2013). Location, Motivation, and Social Capitalization via Enterprise Social Networking. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 19(1), 20-37. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12033
 Leonardi, P. M. (2014). Social Media, Knowledge Sharing, and Innovation: Toward a Theory of Communication Visibility. Information Systems
Research, 25(4), 796-816. doi:10.1287/isre.2014.0536
 Leonardi, P. M., & Treem, J. W. (2012). Knowledge management technology as a stage for strategic self-presentation: Implications for
knowledge sharing in organizations. Information and Organization, 22(1), 37-59. doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2011.10.003
 Lewis, K. (2003). Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: Scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology,
88(4), 587–604.
 Peltokorpi, V., & Hasu, M. (2014). Transactive memory systems and team innovation. Team Performance Management: An International
Journal, 20(5/6), 262-272. doi:10.1108/tpm-04-2014-0031
 Ren, Y., & Argote, L. (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
 Wegner, D. M. (1995). A computer network model of human transactive memory. Social Cognition 13(3): 319–
339. doi:10.1521/soco.1995.13.3.319.
 Wegner, D. M., Giuliano, T., & Hertel, P. (1985). Cognitive interdependence in close relationships. In W. J. Ickes (Ed.), Compatible and
incompatible relationships (pp. 253-276). New York: Springer-Verlag.
 Yoo, Y., & Kanawattanachai, P. (2001). DEVELOPMENTS OF TRANSACTIVE MEMORY SYSTEMS AND COLLECTIVE MIND IN VIRTUAL TEAMS. The
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(2), pp. 187 - 208
REFERENCES
TMS