Learning from Project Experiences Using a Legacy-Based Approach

As project teams become used more widely, the question of how to capitalize on the knowledge learned in these teams remains an open issue. Using previous research on transactive memory systems, an approach to promoting post-project learning was developed. This Legacy Session concept was tested on four in-tact project teams. The results from those pilot sessions were used to evaluate the feasibility of the approach and develop recommendations for future research.

[1]  Lynne P. Cooper,et al.  Knowledge Reuse for Innovation , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[2]  R. Moreland.  Transactive memory: Learning who knows what in work groups and organizations. , 1999 .

[3]  J. Pfeffer,et al.  An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes. , 1977 .

[4]  Aaron J. Shenhar,et al.  From theory to practice: toward a typology of project-management styles , 1998 .

[5]  Susan D. Kladiva.  Committee on Science House of Representatives , 1998 .

[6]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: PAST RESEARCH, PRESENT FINDINGS, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS , 1995 .

[7]  Nancy J. Cooke,et al.  Measuring Team Knowledge , 2000, Hum. Factors.

[8]  D. Sandy Staples,et al.  Exploring Perceptions of Organizational Ownership of Information and Expertise , 2001, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[9]  D. Dougherty.  Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms , 1992 .

[10]  Curtis D. Hardin,et al.  Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. , 1996 .

[11]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[12]  R. Grant.  Chapter 8 – Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration , 1999 .

[13]  R. Moreland,et al.  Group Versus Individual Training and Group Performance: The Mediating Role of Transactive Memory , 1995 .

[14]  DoughertyDeborah.  Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms , 1992 .

[15]  P. Kim.  When What You KnowCanHurt You: A Study of Experiential Effects on Group Discussion and Performance , 1997 .

[16]  J. Levine,et al.  Shared Cognition in-Organizations: The Management of Knowledge , 1999 .

[17]  Randy Hirokawa,et al.  A comparative analysis of communication patterns within effective and ineffective decision‐making groups , 1980 .

[18]  A. P. Jagodzinski,et al.  An ethnographic study of engineering design teams at Rolls-Royce Aerospace , 2000 .

[19]  L. Sproull,et al.  Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams , 2000 .

[20]  D. Wegner.  Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind , 1987 .

[21]  Estelle Brodman,et al.  Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information Within the R&D Organization (Book Review) , 1978 .

[22]  W. D. Compton,et al.  Project Goals, Team Performance, and Shared Understanding , 1999 .

[23]  B. Mullen,et al.  Theories of group behavior , 1987 .

[24]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[25]  K. Weick,et al.  Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. , 1993 .

[26]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

[27]  G. Stasser,et al.  Expert Roles and Information Exchange during Discussion: The Importance of Knowing Who Knows What , 1995 .

[28]  K. Weick.  FROM SENSEMAKING IN ORGANIZATIONS , 2021, The New Economic Sociology.

[29]  Roderick M. Kramer.  Social Uncertainty and Collective Paranoia in Knowledge Communities: Thinking and Acting in the Shadow of Doubt , 1999 .