Navigating Multiple Virtual Teams: How Variety in Communication Rules Affects Knowledge Sharing

Valerio Incerti; Kelly J. Fadel; Elisa Mattarelli; Fabiola Bertolotti; Francesca Bellesia; Paula Ungureanu; Katherine M. Chudoba

doi:10.37725/mgmt.2025.10635

Valerio Incerti SKEMA Business School, Université Côte d’Azur (GREDEG), Paris, France https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3742-3560
Kelly J. Fadel Department of Data Analytics and Information Systems, Jon M. Huntsman School of Business, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0578-6236
Elisa Mattarelli School of Management, Lucas College and Graduate School of Business, San José State University One Washington Square, San José, CA, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5810-1881
Fabiola Bertolotti Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia RE, Italy https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5120-3957
Francesca Bellesia Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia RE, Italy https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2419-7242
Paula Ungureanu Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia RE, Italy https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4657-4478
Katherine M. Chudoba Jon M. Huntsman School of Business, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37725/mgmt.2025.10635

Keywords: Multiple Team Membership, Virtual Teams, Context Variety, Collaborative Technology, Communication Rules, Knowledge Sharing

Abstract

In contemporary workplaces, individuals are often members of more than one virtual team at a time, that is, they experience multiple virtual team membership (MVTM), and they are subjected to context variety due to different rules across their teams. The aim of this paper is to understand the relationship between context variety related to communication rules and knowledge sharing in situations of MVTM. We propose that context variety and switching between teams negatively affect the individual capability to acquire and provide knowledge resources in a team, due in part to an increased perception of role overload. Through an experimental study, we confirm that context variety directly and negatively affected individuals’ ability to acquire resources and, through role overload, negatively influenced the ability to provide resources. Contrary to our hypotheses, switching frequently between teams reduced role overload, which, in turn, increased the ability to provide resources. Our results have theoretical implications for understanding the changing nature of work in increasingly virtual and complex team contexts.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Valerio Incerti, SKEMA Business School, Université Côte d’Azur (GREDEG), Paris, France

Valerio Incerti is assistant professor of management and organization at Skema Business School, Université Côte d’Azur (GREDEG). His work focuses on the changing nature of collaborations and teams, and new forms of work. Specifically, he focuses on multiple team membership (MTM) and virtuality in the workplace (e.g. virtual teams). To study these topics, he makes use of a multimethod approach, including agent-based modelling and simulation, experiments, and social network analysis. Before starting at Skema Business School, Valerio has been a postdoctoral fellow in the organizational behaviour area at INSEAD.

Kelly J. Fadel, Department of Data Analytics and Information Systems, Jon M. Huntsman School of Business, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA

Kelly J. Fadel is a professor of data analytics and information systems in the Jon M. Huntsman School of Business at Utah State University. He received his PhD from the University of Arizona in 2007. His research areas include knowledge management, collaborative work, and cognitive aspects of information processing. His research has appeared in journals such as Journal of Management Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, Information Systems Research, and Journal of the Association for Information Systems, among others.

Elisa Mattarelli, School of Management, Lucas College and Graduate School of Business, San José State University One Washington Square, San José, CA, USA

Elisa Mattarelli is a professor at the School of Management, San José State University. She received her PhD from the University of Padua, Italy, was a Fulbright visiting professor at Stanford University and a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Arizona. Her research focuses on work practices, team dynamics, and identity processes in knowledge-intensive settings characterized by innovative organizational arrangements and intense use of collaborative technology. Her work has appeared, among others, in Organization Science, Journal of Management Studies, Human Relations, Research Policy, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, and Long Range Planning.

Fabiola Bertolotti, Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia RE, Italy

Fabiola Bertolotti is a professor of management at the Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia. She received her PhD from the University of Padua, Italy. Her research interests include the sharing of knowledge in work groups and among professional workers, and team dynamics and performance in contexts characterized by multiple team membership. Her research has appeared, among others, in Organization Science, Organization Studies, European Journal of Information Systems, Research Policy, Human Relations, and Strategic Organization.

Francesca Bellesia, Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia RE, Italy

Francesca Bellesia is an assistant professor at the Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia. She received her PhD from the School of Management, University of Bologna, and was a visiting student at the Center for Work, Technology and Organization, Stanford University. Her research focuses on new forms of work that entail knowledge intensive and technology supported collaboration. She is interested in crowdsourcing, digital platforms’ and algorithms’ impact on the work of professionals, and multiple team membership. Her work has appeared, among others, in Journal of Management Studies, Organization Studies, Journal of Managerial Psychology, and Strategic Organization.

Paula Ungureanu, Department of Sciences and Methods for Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Reggio Emilia RE, Italy

Paula Ungureanu is an associate professor at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia. Her research interests include knowledge sharing, governance mechanisms and identity dynamics in cross-boundary collaborative settings such as work and occupational groups, inter-organizational partnerships and digital ecosystems, and in particular studies how new technologies such as AI and blockchain shape individuals’ ability to perform boundary work in such contexts. Her work has been published in journals such as Organization Studies, Strategic Organization, Academy of Management Learning and Education, among others.

Katherine M. Chudoba, Jon M. Huntsman School of Business, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA

Katherine M. Chudoba is a professor emerita in the Jon M. Huntsman School of Business at Utah State University. She is a member of SIG Social Inclusion, the AIS Women’s Network, and SIG IT Project Management. Her research interests focus on the nature of work in distributed environments, and how information and communication technologies (ICTs) are used and integrated into work practices. Her research has been published in outlets such as MIS Quarterly, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Information Systems Journal, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Organization Science. She served as a 2015 Fulbright scholar to Brazil.

References

Andres, H. P. (2021). Technology-mediated collaboration, shared mental model and task performance. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 24(1), 64–81. doi: 10.4018/joeuc.2012010104

Ardichvili, A., Page, V. & Wentling, T. (2003). Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1), 64–77. doi: 10.1108/13673270310463626

Berger, S. & Bruch, H. (2021). Role strain and role accumulation across multiple teams: The moderating role of employees’ polychronic orientation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(7), 835–850. doi: 10.1002/job.2521

Berger, S., van de Brake, H. J. & Bruch, H. (2022). Resource leverage, resource depletion: A multilevel perspective on multiple team membership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(2), 298–309. doi: 10.1037/apl0000889

Bertolotti, F., Mattarelli, E. & Dukerich, J. (2019). The relationship between polychronicity and social networks: A mixed-methods study of research and development professionals. Human Relations, 72(10), 1595–1622. doi: 10.1177/0018726718810097

Bertolotti, F., Mattarelli, E., Vignoli, M. & Macrì, D. M. (2015). Exploring the relationship between multiple team membership and team performance: The role of social networks and collaborative technology. Research Policy, 44(4), 911–924. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.01.019

Bluedorn, A. C., Kalliath, T. J., Strube, M. J. & Martin, G. D. (1999). Polychronicity and the Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV): The development of an instrument to measure a fundamental dimension of organizational culture. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14(3–4), 205–231. doi: 10.1108/02683949910263747

Bolino, M. C. & Turnley, W. H. (2005). The personal costs of citizenship behavior: The relationship between individual initiative and role overload, job stress, and work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 740–748. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.740

Brennecke, J. & Rank, O. N. (2016). The interplay between formal project memberships and informal advice seeking in knowledge-intensive firms: A multilevel network approach. Social Networks, 44, 307–318. doi: 10.1016/j.socnet.2015.02.004

Carlson, J. R., Carlson, D. S., Hunter, E. M., Vaughn, R. L. et al. (2017). Virtual team effectiveness: Investigating the moderating role of experience with computer-mediated communication on the impact of team cohesion and openness. In Information Resources Management Association (Ed.), Remote work and collaboration: Breakthroughs in research and practice (pp. 687–706). IGI Global. doi: 10.4018/978-1-5225-1918-8.ch036

Chan, R. Y. K. & Ma, K. H. Y. (2017). Impact of executive compensation on the execution of IT-based environmental strategies under competition. European Journal of Information Systems, 26(5), 489–508. doi: 10.1057/s41303-017-0052-3

Chang, K. T.-T. (2008). Psychological contracts and knowledge exchange in virtual teams. In International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS) 2008 Proceedings (146). Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2008/146/

Chen, G., Smith, T. A., Kirkman, B. L., Zhang, P. et al. (2019). Multiple team membership and empowerment spillover effects: Can empowerment processes cross team boundaries? Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(3), 321–340. doi: 10.1037/apl0000336

Chen, H., Jiao, J., Yang, N. & Wang, X.-H. (Frank). (2021). How identity conflict and identity synergy influence innovative performance of employees with multiple team membership. Psychological Reports, 124(2), 792–808. doi: 10.1177/0033294120916863

Chudoba, K. M., Wynn, E., Lu, M. & Watson-Manheim, M. B. (2005). How virtual are we? Measuring virtuality and understanding its impact in a global organization. Information Systems Journal, 15(4), 279–306. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00200.x

Cornelius, C. & Boos, M. (2003). Enhancing mutual understanding in synchronous computer-mediated communication by training: Trade-offs in judgmental tasks. Communication Research, 30(2), 147–177. doi: 10.1177/0093650202250874

Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346–371. doi: 10.1287/orsc.12.3.346.10098

CultureWizard. (2018). Virtual teams survey: 2018 Executive brief. Retrieved from https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/466336/Virtual%20Teams%20Survey-Executive%20Summary--Final%20(2018).pdf

Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Science, 50(3), 352–364. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1030.0134

Cummings, J. N. & Haas, M. R. (2012). So many teams, so little time: Time allocation matters in geographically dispersed teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3), 316–341. doi: 10.1002/job.777

Czerwinski, M., Czerwinski, M., Horvitz, E. & Wilhite, S. (2004). A diary study of task switching and interruptions. In E. Dykstra-Erickson & M. Tscheligi (Eds.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 24–29 April 2004 (pp. 175–182). Vienna: Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/985692.985715

Dow, G. K. (1988). Configurational and coactivational views of organizational structure. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 53–64. doi: 10.5465/amr.1988.4306781

Ehsan, N., Mirza, E. & Ahmad, M. (2008). Impact of computer-mediated communication on virtual teams’ performance: An empirical study. In H. B. Zaman, T. M. T. Sembok, K. van Rijsbergen, L. Zadeh, et al. (Eds.), 2008 International Symposium on Information Technology, 26–29 August 2008 (Vol. 3, pp. 1–8). Kuala Lumpur: Institute of Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. doi: 10.1109/ITSIM.2008.4632068

Eisenberg, J. & Mattarelli, E. (2017). Building bridges in global virtual teams: The role of multicultural brokers in overcoming the negative effects of identity threats on knowledge sharing across subgroups. Journal of International Management, 23(4), 399–411. doi: 10.1016/j.intman.2016.11.007

Ellwart, T., Happ, C., Gurtner, A. & Rack, O. (2015). Managing information overload in virtual teams: Effects of a structured online team adaptation on cognition and performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(5), 812–826. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2014.1000873

Espinosa, J. A., Slaughter, S. A., Kraut, R. E. & Herbsleb, J. D. (2007). Team knowledge and coordination in geographically distributed software development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(1), 135–169. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240104

Finstad, K., Bink, M., McDaniel, M. & Einstein, G. O. (2006). Breaks and task switches in prospective memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(5), 705–712. doi: 10.1002/acp.1223

Gibson, C. B., Dunlop, P. D., Majchrzak, A. & Chia, T. (2021). Sustaining effectiveness in global teams: The coevolution of knowledge management activities and technology affordances. Organization Science, 33(3), 1018–1048. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2021.1478

Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Jones Young, N. C., Vartiainen, M. et al. (2015). Virtual teams research: 10 Years, 10 themes, and 10 opportunities. Journal of Management, 41(5), 1313–1337. doi: 10.1177/0149206314559946

González, V. M. & Mark, G. (2005). Managing currents of work: Multi-tasking among multiple collaborations. In H. Gellersen, K. Schmidt, M. Beaudouin-Lafon & W. Mackay (Eds.), ECSCW 2005: Proceedings of the Ninth European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 18–22 September 2005, Paris, France (pp. 143–162). Springer Netherlands. doi: 10.1007/1-4020-4023-7_8

Griffith, T. L., Sawyer, J. E. & Neale, M. A. (2003). Virtualness and knowledge in teams: Managing the love triangle of organizations, individuals, and information technology. MIS Quarterly, 7(2), 265–287. doi: 10.2307/30036531

Gupta, A., Mattarelli, E., Seshasai, S. & Broschak, J. (2009). Use of collaborative technologies and knowledge sharing in co-located and distributed teams: Towards the 24-h knowledge factory. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18(3), 147–161. doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2009.07.001

Hackman, J. R. (Ed.). (1990). Groups that work and those that don’t: Creating conditions for effective teamwork. Jossey-Bass.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.

Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M. & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L. & Løvås, B. (2005). Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 776–793. doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.18803922

Hartman, R. L. & Johnson, J. D. (1990). Formal and informal group communication structures: An examination of their relationship to role ambiguity. Social Networks, 12(2), 127–151. doi: 10.1016/0378-8733(90)90002-Q

Henderson, L. S., Stackman, R. W. & Lindekilde, R. (2016). The centrality of communication norm alignment, role clarity, and trust in global project teams. International Journal of Project Management, 34(8), 1717–1730. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2016.09.012

Hill, N. S. (2005). Leading together, working together: The role of team shared leadership in building collaborative capital in virtual teams. In M. M. Beyerlein, S. T. Beyerlein & F. A. Kennedy (Eds.), Collaborative capital: Creating intangible value (Vol. 11, pp. 183–209). Emerald. doi: 10.1016/S1572-0977(05)11007-3

Hinds, P. J. & Kiesler, S. (Eds.). (2002). Distributed work. MIT Press. doi: 10.7551/mitpress/2464.001.0001

Hinds, P. J. & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science, 16(3), 290–307. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0122

Hinds, P. J. & Weisband, S. P. (2003). Knowledge sharing and shared understanding in virtual teams. In C. B. Gibson & S. G. Cohen (Eds.), Virtual teams that work: Creating conditions for virtual team effectiveness (pp. 21–36). Jossey-Bass.

Hoegl, M. & Muethel, M. (2016). Enabling shared leadership in virtual project teams: A practitioners’ guide. Project Management Journal, 47(1), 7–12. doi: 10.1002/pmj.21564

Hovav, A., Gnizy, I. & Han, J. (2023). The effects of cyber regulations and security policies on organizational outcomes: A knowledge management perspective. European Journal of Information Systems, 32(2), 154–172. doi: 10.1080/0960085X.2021.1908184

Keith, M., Demirkan, H. & Goul, M. (2017). The role of task uncertainty in IT project team advice networks. Decision Sciences, 48(2), 207–247. doi: 10.1111/deci.12226

Kenda, R., Meslec, N. & Oerlemans, L. (2024). Single versus multiple project teams and individual performance: Do they ask for different leadership behaviors? International Journal of Project Management, 42(2), 102563. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2024.102563

Lee, H. & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 179–228. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2003.11045756

Lee, Y. & Larsen, K. R. (2009). Threat or coping appraisal: Determinants of SMB executives’ decision to adopt anti-malware software. European Journal of Information Systems, 18(2), 177–187. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2009.11

Leonardi, P. M., Parker, S. H. & Shen, R. (2024). How remote work changes the world of work. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 11(1), 193–219. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-091922-015852

Leroy, S. (2009). Why is it so hard to do my work? The challenge of attention residue when switching between work tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109(2), 168–181. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.04.002

Leroy, S., Schmidt, A. M. & Madjar, N. (2020). Interruptions and task transitions: Understanding their characteristics, processes, and consequences. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 661–694. doi: 10.5465/annals.2017.0146

Leuteritz, J. P., Navarro, J. & Berger, R. (2017). How knowledge worker teams deal effectively with task uncertainty: The impact of transformational leadership and group development. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1339. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01339

Liefooghe, B., Barrouillet, P., Vandierendonck, A. & Camos, V. (2008). Working memory costs of task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(3), 478–494. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.478

Lowry, P. B. & Gaskin, J. (2014). Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 57(2), 123–146. doi: 10.1109/TPC.2014.2312452

Lowry, P. B., Romano, N. C., Jenkins, J. L. & Guthrie, R. W. (2009). The CMC interactivity model: How interactivity enhances communication quality and process satisfaction in lean-media groups. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(1), 155–196. doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222260107

Margolis, J. (2020). Multiple team membership: An integrative review. Small Group Research, 51(1), 48–86. doi: 10.1177/1046496419883702

Mikalef, P., Pateli, A. & van de Wetering, R. (2021). IT architecture flexibility and IT governance decentralisation as drivers of IT-enabled dynamic capabilities and competitive performance: The moderating effect of the external environment. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(5), 512–540. doi: 10.1080/0960085X.2020.1808541

Mistry, S., Kirkman, B. L., Moore, O. A., Hanna, A. A. et al. (2023). Too many teams? Examining the impact of multiple team memberships and permanent team identification on employees’ identity strain, cognitive depletion, and turnover. Personnel Psychology, 76(3), 885–912. doi: 10.1111/peps.12515

Mo, G. Y., & Wellman, B. (2016). The effects of multiple team membership on networking online and offline: Using multilevel multiple membership modeling. Information, Communication & Society, 19(9), 1250–1266. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1187194

Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 134–140. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7

Mortensen, M. & Gardner, H. K. (2017, September–October). The overcommitted organization. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2017/09/the-overcommitted-organization

Mortensen, M. & Haas, M. R. (2018). Perspective – Rethinking teams: From bounded membership to dynamic participation. Organization Science, 29(2), 341–355. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2017.1198

Natu, S. & Aparicio, M. (2022). Analyzing knowledge sharing behaviors in virtual teams: Practical evidence from digitalized workplaces. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(4), 100248. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2022.100248

Nemiro, J. (2004). Creativity in virtual teams: Key components for success. John Wiley & Sons.

Nordbäck, E. S. & Espinosa, J. A. (2019). Effective coordination of shared leadership in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 36(1), 321–350. doi: 10.1080/07421222.2018.1558943

Ofstad, B. & Bartel-Radic, A. (2024). Cooperative learning through boundary spanning: How a corporate learning department ensures that trainers and content stay current. M@n@gement, 27(4), 114–129. doi: 10.37725/mgmt.2024.9611

O’Leary, M. B., Mortensen, M. & Woolley, A. W. (2011). Multiple team membership: A theoretical model of its effects on productivity and learning for individuals and teams. Academy of Management Review, 36(3), 461–478. doi: 10.5465/amr.2009.0275

Perrin, A. & Rolland, N. (2007). Mechanisms of intra-organisational knowledge transfer: The case of a global technology firm. M@n@gement, 10(2), 25–47. doi: 10.3917/mana.102.0025

Pluut, H., Flestea, A. M. & Curşeu, P. L. (2014). Multiple team membership: A demand or resource for employees? Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 18(4), 333–348. doi: 10.1037/gdn0000016

Rapp, T. L. & Mathieu, J. E. (2019). Team and individual influences on members’ identification and performance per membership in multiple team membership arrangements. Journal of Applied Psychology, 104(3), 303–320. doi: 10.1037/apl0000344

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S. & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS [version 3]. SmartPLS. Retrieved from https://www.smartpls.com

Rishani, M., Schouten, M. E. & Hoever, I. J. (2024). Navigating multiple team membership: A review and redirection of its influence on effectiveness outcomes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 18(1), e12899. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12899

Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J. & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15(2), 150–163. doi: 10.2307/2391486

Silva, C. C., Galster, M. & Gilson, F. (2022). A qualitative analysis of themes in instant messaging communication of software developers. Journal of Systems and Software, 192, 111397. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2022.111397

Smith, J. (2016, February 2). 15 Email etiquette rules every professional should follow: Despite the fact that we’re glued to our reply buttons, plenty of managers still don’t know how to use email etiquette appropriately. Business Insider. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/business-insider/email-etiquette-rules.html

Sohn, M.-H. & Carlson, R. A. (2000). Effects of repetition and foreknowledge in task-set reconfiguration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1445–1460. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1445

Sole, D. & Edmondson, A. (2002). Situated knowledge and learning in dispersed teams. British Journal of Management, 13(S2), 17–34. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.13.s2.3

Staples, D. S. & Webster, J. (2008). Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Information Systems Journal, 18(6), 617–640. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00244.x

Straus, S. G. & Olivera, F. (2000). Knowledge acquisition in virtual teams. In M. A. Neale & E. A. Mannix (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams (pp. 257–282). Emerald. doi: 10.1016/S1534-0856(00)03013-9

Sunwolf & Seibold, D. R. (1999). The impact of formal procedures on group processes, members, and task outcomes. In L. R. Frey, D. Gouran & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 395–431). Sage.

Swart, K., Bond-Barnard, T. & Chugh, R. (2022). Challenges and critical success factors of digital communication, collaboration and knowledge sharing in project management virtual teams: A review. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 10(4), 59–75. doi: 10.12821/ijispm100404

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. doi: 10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7

Tannenbaum, S. I., Mathieu, J. E., Salas, E. & Cohen, D. (2012). Teams are changing: Are research and practice evolving fast enough? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), 2–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01396.x

Tomprou, M., Kim, Y. J., Chikersal, P., Woolley, A. W. et al. (2021). Speaking out of turn: How video conferencing reduces vocal synchrony and collective intelligence. PLoS One, 16(3), e0247655. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287800

Valentine, M. A., Retelny, D., To, A., Rahmati, N. et al. (2017). Flash organizations: Crowdsourcing complex work by structuring crowds as organizations. In G. Mark & S. Fussell (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 6–11 May 2017 (pp. 3523–3537). Association for Computing Machinery. doi: 10.1145/3025453.3025811

van de Brake, H. J. & Berger, S. (2023). Can I leave my hat on? A cross-level study of multiple team membership role separation. Personnel Psychology, 76(1), 221–248. doi: 10.1111/peps.12495

van de Brake, H. J., van der Vegt, G. S. & Essens, P. J. (2024). More than just a number: Different conceptualizations of multiple team membership and their relationships with emotional exhaustion and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 109(5), 714–729. doi: 10.1037/apl0001168

van de Brake, H. J., Walter, F., Rink, F. A., Essens, P. J. et al. (2018). The dynamic relationship between multiple team membership and individual job performance in knowledge-intensive work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(9), 1219–1231. doi: 10.1002/job.2260

van de Brake, H. J., Walter, F., Rink, F. A., Essens, P. J. et al. (2020). Benefits and disadvantages of individuals’ multiple team membership: The moderating role of organizational tenure. Journal of Management Studies, 57(8), 1502–1530. doi: 10.1111/joms.12539

van den Hooff, B. & de Leeuw van Weenen, F. (2004). Committed to share: Commitment and CMC use as antecedents of knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 11(1), 13–24. doi: 10.1002/kpm.187

van den Hooff, B. & de Ridder, J. A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: The influence of organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), 117–130. doi: 10.1108/13673270410567675

van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K. & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1008–1022. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.1008

Wageman, R., Gardner, H. & Mortensen, M. (2012). The changing ecology of teams: New directions for teams research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(3), 301–315. doi: 10.1002/job.1775

Walther, J. B. & Bunz, U. (2005). The rules of virtual groups: Trust, liking, and performance in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Communication, 55(4), 828–846. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb03025.x

Wasko, M. M. & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35–57. doi: 10.2307/25148667

Webster, M. & Sell, J. (2007). Theory and experimentation in the social sciences. In W. Outhwaite & S. P. Turner (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social science methodology (pp. 192–211). Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781848607958.n10

Wickens, C. D. (1991). Processing resources and attention. In D. Damos (Ed.), Multiple task performance (pp. 3–34). CRC Press.

Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human Factors, 50(3), 449–455. doi: 10.1518/001872008X288394

Wylie, G. & Allport, A. (2000). Task switching and the measurement of ‘switch costs’. Psychological Research, 63(3), 212–233. doi: 10.1007/s004269900003

Zika-Viktorsson, A., Sundström, P. & Engwall, M. (2006). Project overload: An exploratory study of work and management in multi-project settings. International Journal of Project Management, 24(5), 385–394. doi: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.02.010