Sustaining Effectiveness in Global Teams: The Coevolution of Knowledge Management Activities and Technology Affordances

Abstract

Despite the dynamic nature of knowledge-related activities and the availability of a variety of communication technologies, many global teams habitually use technology in the same way across activities. However, as teams move through cycles of accumulating, integrating, and implementing knowledge, the purposes for communication technologies change. Current theorizing and empirical work on team knowledge management has yet to develop a dynamic theory that incorporates these changes. By conducting a multiwave, mixed method analysis of 48 global teams, we develop a theory of how global teams sustain effectiveness through technology affordance processes. We found that effective teams are those that recognize cues indicating change is necessary and coevolve a symbiosis between new activities, new purposes for interaction, and new uses of communication technologies. This coevolution of purpose with technology use forms new affordances, which enable the team to move on to new knowledge management activities and sustain effectiveness. Our theory more realistically models the dynamics of staying connected while sharing, combining, and implementing knowledge across the globe.

Knowledge integration for resilience among multinational SMEs amid the COVID-19: from the view of global digital platforms

“…In turn, this affects the firm’s KM practices. In the context of COVID-19, Gibson et al (2021) recently proposed that KM practices in relation to global digital platforms depend on affordances – affordances that are formed from the organization’s intentions combined with the platform’s technology. For our purposes, viewing global digital platforms through the lens of affordance theory is appropriate, as it tells us what firms think they can do with this infrastructure (Treem and Leonardi, 2012).…”

“…For our purposes, viewing global digital platforms through the lens of affordance theory is appropriate, as it tells us what firms think they can do with this infrastructure (Treem and Leonardi, 2012). This is as opposed to focusing on the features and functions of the infrastructure, which will not tell us how using this technology will create resilience (Gibson et al , 2021; Meurer et al , 2022).…”

“…These intentions can determine the different processes of KI and can also have different effects on resilience. As such, affordance theory has been regarded as an appropriate lens through which to study KI processes in a digital environment (Gibson et al , 2021; Liu et al , 2022).…”

Cultural code-switching in high context global virtual team members: A qualitative study

“…Similarly, knowledge sharing is a communication activity between two individuals who possess tacit and explicit knowledge both gain from transferring this knowledge (Hendriks, 1999). Several studies have further described knowledge sharing as a dynamic and complex communication process involving the exchange of knowledge between people of diverse cultural backgrounds (Gibbs et al, 2021; Gibson et al, 2022). Knowledge sharing is the most critical and complex process in knowledge management, to three key areas: the individual, organizational, and technological.…”

“…Like traditional face-to-face teams, knowledge sharing in global virtual teams also face critical factor such as swift trust to develop effective and efficient cross-cultural performance (Zakaria and Mohd Yusof, 2020; Muton et al, 2022). Global virtual teams can also facilitate knowledge sharing by efficiently organizing workers with diverse backgrounds and increasing access to information and knowledge using information communication technology (Jackowska and Lauring, 2021; Gibson et al, 2022). In our research context, knowledge sharing refers to the mutual formal or informal exchange of ideas between individuals or groups from diverse cultures within an organization voluntarily to accomplish cross-cultural performance in GVTs.…”