The Organization as a Transactive Memory System

  • Paul Jackson
  • Jane Klobas
Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)


Several forms of repository have been proposed for organizational memory, including people, culture, routines, technology and software, organizational structure and workplace ecology [5; 16], but what if we change the focus from repositories to processes? By observing couples and small groups, psychologists have found that the storage and retrieval of knowledge is transactional, i.e., that people develop systems for sharing responsibility for storage and retrieval of knowledge in such a way that no single individual needs to know everything that the group needs to know — it is sufficient to know who knows what and to be able to retrieve the information from that person. Transactive memory systems (TMS) essentially consist of sets of directories containing metadata which point to knowledge locations and the processes that maintain and utilize those directories. In this chapter, we introduce the notion of the organization as a TMS and consider how this perspective can assist with design of human and technology- supported systems to improve knowledge sharing in distributed and virtual organizations.


Information System Organizational Memory Virtual Team Head Office International Staff 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alavi M, Tiwana A (2002) Knowledge integration in virtual teams: the potential role of KMS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53:1029–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen TJ (1977) Managing the flow of technology: technology transfer and the dissemination of technological information within the R&D organization. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anand V, Manz CC, Glick WH (1998) An organizational memory approach to information management. Academy of Management Review 23:796–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Argote L (1993) Group and organizational learning curves: individual, system and environmental components. British Journal of Social Psychology 32:31–51Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Argote L (1999) Organizational learning: creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Kluwer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Griffith TL, Sawyer JE, Neale M (2003) Virtualness and knowledge in teams: managing the love triangle of organizations, individuals and information technology. MIS Quarterly 27:265–87Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL (2006) Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hollingshead AB, Brandon D (2003) Potential benefits of communication in transactive memory systems. Human Communication Research 29:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klobas JE, McGill TJ (1995) Identification of technological gatekeepers in the information technology profession. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 46:581–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lewis K (2003) Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: scale development and validation. Journal of Applied Psychology 88:581–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moreland RL (1999) Transactive memory: learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. In: Thompson JM, Meseick, DM (eds) Shared cognition in organizations. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 3–31Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moreland RL, Argote L, Krishnan R (1998) Training people to work in groups. In: Tindale RS, Heath L, Edwards J, Posavac E, Bryant FB, Suarez-Balcazar Y, Henderson-King E, Myers J (eds) Theory and research in small groups. Plenum, New York, pp 36–60Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moreland RL, Levine JM (1992) Problem identification by groups. In: Worchel S, Wood W, Simpson JA (eds) Group process and productivity. Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp 17–47Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nevo D, Wand Y (2005) Organizational memory information systems: a transactive memory approach. Decision Support Systems 39:549–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stasser G, Stewart D, Wittenbaum GM (1995) Expert roles and information exchange during discussion: the importance of knowing who knows what. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 31:244–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Walsh JP, Ungson GR (1991) Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review 16:57–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wegner DM (1987) Transactive memory: a contemporary analysis of group mind. In: Mullen B, Goethals GR (eds) Theories of group behavior. Springer Verlag, New York, pp 185–208Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wegner DM (1995) A computer network model of human transactive memory. Social Cognition 13:319–339Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wegner DM, Erber R, Raymond P (1991) Transactive memory in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61:923–929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wegner DM, Guiliano T, Hertel P (1985) Cognitive interdependence in close relationships. In: Ickes WJ (ed) Compatible and incompatible relationships. Springer Verlag, New York, pp 253–276Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wittenbaum GM, Vaughan SL, Stasser G (1998) Coordination in taskperforming groups. In: Tindale RS, Heath L, Edwards J, Posavac E, Bryant FB, Suarez-Balcazar Y, Henderson-King E, Myers J (eds) Theory and research in small groups. Plenum, New York, pp 177–204Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Jackson
    • 1
  • Jane Klobas
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.School of ManagementEdith Cowan UniversityJoondalupAustralia
  2. 2.Carlo F. Dondena Centre for Research on Social DynamicsUniversità BocconiMilanItaly
  3. 3.UWA Business SchoolUniversity of Western AustraliaNedlandsAustralia

Personalised recommendations