تاثیر مدیریت دانش تیمی بر خلاقیت و عملکرد مالی تیم‌های سازمانی

An increasing number of organizations are turning to teams for innovation and creativity. The present study investigated the effects of team knowledge management (TKM) on the creativity and financial performance of organizational teams. Our analysis of data collected from 65 sales teams, across 35 branches of a Korean insurance company, showed that team knowledge utilization (but not team knowledge stock) was positively related to team creativity, which in turn predicted team financial performance over the 6-month period. The positive effects of knowledge utilization were stronger when team leaders had a systematic cognitive style and when teams were exposed to high environmental uncertainty. Furthermore, the systematic cognitive style of leaders had a positive main effect on team creativity and positively moderated the relationship between team knowledge stock and team creativity. The implications of these findings were considered, and some possible directions for future research were suggested.► We examine the effects of knowledge management on team creativity and performance. ► Team knowledge utilization was positively related to team creativity. ► The systematic cognitive style of leaders was positively related to team creativity. ► Team creativity increased financial performance of the team.

With the increasing appreciation of teams as the source of innovations (De Dreu and West, 2001 and Nijstad and De Dreu, 2002), creativity in group settings has gained increasing research attention (Lopez-Cabrales, Pérez-Luño, & Cabrera, 2009). Working in teams is expected to lead to more novel associations and creative outcomes because of the broader set of perspectives available to members and the cross-fertilization of ideas (Perry-Smith and Shalley, 2003 and Tesluk et al., 1997). Team creativity can be defined as the generation of novel and appropriate ideas, solutions, or processes in the context of team objectives (Amabile, 1996). Because the initial interest in team creativity originated from the brainstorming paradigm (Osborn, 1957), researchers have often compared and contrasted idea-generation processes involving groups and individuals primarily in laboratory settings (e.g., Nijstad and Stroebe, 2006 and Paulus and Dzindolet, 1993). Although these studies reveal drawbacks of team creative processes, such as free riding and evaluation apprehension (Diehl and Stroebe, 1991 and Paulus, 2000), interest in team creativity among scholars and practitioners has continued to grow (Anderson, De Dreu, & Nijstad, 2004). Extant studies of team creativity have highlighted the importance of group composition and team emergent states or processes, such as a supportive climate (Gilson & Shalley, 2004), intra-team communication (Leenders, Van Engelen, & Kratzer, 2003), and team conflict (Chen, 2006). These studies presumed that a heterogeneous membership provides teams with diverse information and knowledge, and that certain team processes promote the efficient flow and exchange of such information and knowledge (Anderson et al., 2004 and Hülsheger et al., 2009). Thus, researchers have acknowledged that the ability of a team to generate novel and useful ideas is inextricably linked to task-relevant knowledge embodied in members (Lopez-Cabrales et al., 2009) as well as to the adroit exploitation of knowledge by the team (Zahra & George, 2002). In explaining individual creativity, Amabile (1996) emphasized similar dimensions, such as domain-specific knowledge and creative processes, that promote the utilization of knowledge (cf. Choi, Anderson, & Veillette, 2009). Based on the literature, we propose that team creativity is positively related to team knowledge management (TKM), which includes the presence of knowledge within a team (team knowledge stock) and the process of using such knowledge (team knowledge utilization). To understand the way teams use knowledge in performing their tasks, researchers have proposed several theoretical approaches, such as transactive memory systems (TMS; Liang, Moreland, & Argote, 1995), shared mental models (SMM; Mohammed, Klimoski, & Rentsch, 2000), and prior experience (Gino et al., 2009). Studies have shown that all of these are meaningful predictors of group performance (Austin, 2003 and Mathieu et al., 2000). Nevertheless, empirical support for the effects of TKM on team creativity is generally lacking. Our study examines such effects in a sample of organizational teams. We also propose that the relationship between TKM and team creativity is moderated by internal and external factors. First, we identify cognitive problem-solving styles (either intuitive or systematic) as a moderator of the TKM–creativity relationship, because creativity involves the cognitive manipulation of information, and the cognitive process of a team can be shaped by the cognitive orientation of its constituents, particularly the leader of the team (Sosik, Avolio, & Kahai, 1997). Cognitive styles involve stable individual differences in perceiving and processing information and experiences that ultimately affect how people feel, think, and act (Sagiv, Arieli, Goldenberg, & Goldschnidt, 2010). An intuitive cognitive style is a tendency to simultaneously analyze information from various perspectives (Scott & Bruce, 1995). In contrast, a systematic cognitive style is a tendency to analyze a situation based on logic and intention (Sagiv et al., 2010). The cognitive styles of team leaders may stimulate the creative thinking of members, and thereby facilitate the identification and utilization of knowledge for creative problem solving by the team (Shin and Zhou, 2007 and Taggar, 2002). Second, based on institutional theory, which highlights the role of the external environment in shaping the operations of work units (Anderson & Tushman, 2001), we posit that the TKM–creativity link can be moderated by the operational context of teams. By providing greater group-wide motivation to search for new ideas and fully exploit knowledge, for example, environmental uncertainty may strengthen the effects of TKM on creativity. Finally, responding to the call for research on the performance implications of creativity (Shalley, Zhou, & Oldham, 2004), we examine the effects of team creativity on team financial performance. Studies of team creativity have focused mostly on antecedents or processes that foster creativity (Hülsheger et al., 2009), reflecting the underlying assumption that creativity is beneficial to performance. In this study, we propose that TKM enhances performance by providing creative solutions to teams. Our theoretical model is empirically validated using multi-source, longitudinal data collected from 65 teams in a large insurance company in Korea.

Although we used multi-source data and objective measures of team performance, the predictors were all collected at the same time and were based on psychometric scales rated by team members and managers. To test the empirical distinctiveness of the measures, we factor-analyzed the eight items that comprised the two TKM scales rated by members, and the 11 items that comprised the three scales for cognitive styles and team creativity rated by leaders. A two-factor model of the TKM scales exhibited good fit with the data (χ2 (df = 16) = 25.40, p = .063; CFI = .97; RMR = .059) and performed better than the alternative single-factor model (p < .001). A three-factor model for the cognitive styles of leaders and team creativity also showed a good fit (χ2 (df = 28) = 33.10, p = .232; CFI = .98; RMR = .078) and provided a significantly better fit to the data than the alternative two-factor and single-factor models (all p < .001). Overall, these confirmatory factor analysis results demonstrated the empirical distinctiveness of the scales used. Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients for all study variables.