Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Team Climate, Team Cognition, Team Intuition, and Software Quality: The Moderating Role of Project Complexity

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Teams represent a prevailing approach to getting work done in today’s hypercompetitive business environment. Although there is a widely held assumption that team-related capabilities determine the success of new product development projects, empirical research on team capabilities is scant. Based on the resource-based view of the firm, organizational learning theory, and situated learning theory, this study investigates the interrelationships among team climate, two information-processing capabilities (i.e., team cognition and team intuition), and software quality. As well, this study explores the moderating effect of project complexity between the information-processing capabilities and the quality of the software. In studying the data from 139 software development projects using the partial least squares structural equation modeling methods, we found that team climate has a direct influence on team cognition. Moreover, the findings showed that team cognition was positively related to the quality of the software product in general; in particular, this relationship was found to be far more significant when project complexity was used as a moderator. This finding indicates that the software development team’s ability to process information logically in order to interpret situations effectively allows the team to launch superior software products when unexpected and undesirable events make a project complicated and challenging to perform. In particular, managers should encourage teams to benefit from new ideas and make collective efforts for reaching goals. Managers should also enable teams to specialize in their tasks and improve their collective information-processing capabilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajila SA, Wu D (2007) Empirical study of the effects of open source adoption on software development economics. J Syst Softw 80(9):1517–1529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgün AE, Lynn GS, Reilly R (2002) Multi-dimensionality of learning in new product development teams. Eur J Innov Manag 5(2):57–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgün AE, Keskin H, Byrne JC, Aren S (2007) Emotional and learning capability and their impact on product innovativeness and firm performance. Technovation 27(9):501–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akgün AE, Dayan M, Di Benedetto A (2008) New product development team intelligence: antecedents and consequences. Inf Manag 45(4):221–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aladwani AM (2002) An integrated performance model of information systems projects. J Manag Inf Syst 19(1):185–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Amabile TM, Gryskiewicz N (1989) The creative environment scales: The work environment inventory. Creativity Res J 2(4):231–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psycgol Bull 103(3):411–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson N, West MA (1998) Measuring climate for work group innovation: development and validation of the team climate inventory. J Organ Behav 19(3):235–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney JB (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Basaglia S, Caporarello L, Magni M, Pennarola F (2010) IT knowledge integration capability and team performance: the role of team climate. Int J Inf Manag 30:542–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechky BA (2003) Sharing meaning across occupational communities: the transformation of knowledge on a production floor. Organ Sci 14(3):312–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertels HMJ, Kleinschmidt EJ, Koen PA (2011) Communities of practice versus organizational climate: which one matters more to dispersed collaboration in the front end of innovation? J Prod Innovn Manag 28(5):757–772

    Google Scholar 

  • Betsch T, Glöckner A (2010) Intuition in judgment and decision making: extensive thinking without effort. Psychol Inquiry 21(4):279–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blazevic V, Lievens A (2004) Learning during the new financial service innovation process: antecedents and performance effects. J Bus Res 57(4):374–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi RP, Yi Y, Phillips LW (1991) Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Admin Sci Q 36(3):421–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen KA (1989) Structural Equations with Latent Variables. Wiley, Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics, New York

  • Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E (2001) Reflections on shared cognition. J Organ Behav 22(2):195–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin WW (1998) The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In: Marcoulides GA (ed) Modern business research methods. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 295–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin W, Marcolin BK, Newsted PR (2003) A partial least squares latent variable approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inf Syst Res 14(2):189–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke NJ, Salas E, Kiekel PA, Bell B (2004) Advances in measuring team cognition. In: Salas E, Fiore SM (eds) Team cognition: understanding the factors that drive process and performance. American Psychological Association, Washington, pp 83–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Cote M-A, Suryn W, Georgiadou E (2007) In search for a widely applicable and accepted software quality model for software quality engineering. Softw Qual J 15(4):401–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dane E, Pratt MG (2007) Exploring intuition and its role in managerial decision making. Acad Manag Rev 32(1):33–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawidson O, Karlsson M, Trygg L (2004) Complexity perception—model development and analysis of two technical platform projects in the mobile phones industry. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 3(3):493–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayan M, Di Benedetto A (2011) Team intuition as a continuum construct and new product creativity: the role of environmental turbulence, team experience, and stress. Res Policy 40(2):276–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayan M, Elbanna S (2011) Antecedents of team intuition and its impact on the success of new product development projects. J Prod Innov Manag 28(1):159–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’aveni RA (1994) Hypercompetition: managing the dynamics of strategic maneuvering. The Free Press, New York, With R Gunther

  • Dickson MW, Resick CJ, Hanges PJ (2006) When organizational climate is unambiguous, it is also strong. J Appl Psychol 91(2):351–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi G, Faillo M, Marengo L (2008) Organizational capabilities, patterns of knowledge accumulation and governance structures in business firms: An introduction. Organ Stud 29(8/9):1165–1211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drach-Zahavy A (2004) Exploring team support: the role of team’s design, values, and leader’s support. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract 8(4):235–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson AC, Nembhard IM (2009) Product development and learning in project teams: the challenges are the benefits. J Prod Innov Manag 26(2):123–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekvall G, Britz A, Lauer KJ (2001) Perceptions of the best and worst climates for creativity: preliminary validation evidence for the situational outlook questionnaire. Creat Res J 13(2):171–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans JBT (2003) In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends Cogn Sci 7(10):454–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox S (1997) Situated learning theory versus traditional cognitive learning theory: why management education should not ignore management learning. Syst Pract 10(6):727–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García-Morales VJ, Jiménez-Barrionuevo MM, Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez L (2012) Transformational leadership influence on organizational performance through organizational learning and innovation. J Bus Res 65(7):1040–1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garvin DA (1984) What does ‘product quality’ really means? Sloan Manag Rev 26(1):25–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Geraldi JG (2009) What complexity assessments can tell us about projects: dialogue between conception and perception. Technol Anal Strateg Manag 21(5):665–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Romá V, Fortes-Ferreira L, Peiró JM (2009) Team climate, climate strength and team performance: a longitudinal study. J Occup Organ Psychol 82(3):511–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strateg Manag J 17(7):109–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graziano AM, Raulin ML (1997) Research methods: a process of inquiry. Addison-Wesley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Green GC, Hevner AR, Collins RW (2005) The impacts of quality and productivity perceptions on the use of software process improvement innovations. Inf Softw Technol 47(8):543–553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Günsel A, Açıkgöz A (2013) The effects of team flexibility and emotional intelligence on software development performance. Group Decis Negot 22(2):359–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman HH (1960) Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • He J, Butler BS, King WR (2007) Team cognition: development and evolution in software project teams. J Manag Inf Syst 24(2):261–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helfat CE, Peteraf MA (2003) The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles. Strateg Manag J 24(10):997–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgkinson GP, Langan-Fox J, Sadler-Smith E (2008) Intuition: a fundamental bridging construct in the behavioural sciences. Br J Psychol 99(1):1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgkinson GP, Sadler-Smith E, Burke LA, Claxton G, Sparrow PR (2009) Intuition in organizations: implications for strategic management. Long Range Plan 42(3):277–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang J-W, Li Y-H (2012) Slack resources in team learning and project performance. J Bus Res 65(3):381–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber GP, Power DJ (1985) Retrospective reports of strategic-level managers: guidelines for increasing their accuracy. Strateg Manag J 6(2):171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber GP (1991) Organizational learning: the contributing processes and the literature. Organ Sci 2(1):88–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley RF, Hult GTM (1998) Innovation, market orientation and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. J Mark 62(3):42–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC: FCD 9126–1.2. (2001) Information Technology - Software Product Quality. Part 1: Quality Model. Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=22749 [Retrieved 10 August 2011]

  • Jarvis CB, Mackenzie SB, Podsakoff PM (2003) A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. J Consum Res 30(2):199–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klimoski R, Mohammed S (1994) Team mental model: construct or metaphor? J Manag 20(2):403–437

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave J, Wenger E (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levesque LL, Wilson JM, Wholey DR (2001) Cognitive divergence and shared mental models in software development project teams. J Organ Behav 22(2):135–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynn GS, Akgün AE (1998) Innovation strategies under the uncertainty: a continence approach. Eng Manag J 10:11–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynn GS, Skov RB, Abel KD (1999) Practices that support team learning and their impact on speed to market and new product success. J Prod Innov Manag 16(5):439–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maruping LM, Magni M (2012) What’s the weather like? The effect of team learning climate, empowerment climate, and gender on individuals’ technology exploration and use. J Manag Inf Syst 29(1):79–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu JE, Heffner TS, Goodwin GF, Salas E, Cannon-Bowers JA (2000) The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. J Appl Psychol 85(2):273–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed S, Ferzandi L, Hamilton K (2010) Metaphor no more: a 15-year review of the team mental model construct. J Manag 36(4):876–910

    Google Scholar 

  • Moorman C (1995) Organizational market information processes: culture antecedents and new product outcomes. J Mark Res 32(3):318–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman C, Miner AS (1997) The impact of organizational memory on new product performance and creativity. J Mark Res 34(1):91–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nidumolu S (1995) The effect of coordination and uncertainty on software project performance: residual performance risk as an intervening variable. Inf Syst Res 6(3):191–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I (1994) A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organ Sci 5(1):14–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park HS, Baker C, Lee DW (2008) Need for cognition, task complexity, and job satisfaction. J Manag Eng 24(2):111–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton JR (2003) Intuition in decisions. Manag Decis 41(10):989–996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pee LG, Kankanhalli A, Kim HW (2010) Knowledge sharing in information systems development: a social interdependence perspective. J Assoc Inf Syst 11(10):550–575

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips LW, Bagozzi RP (1986) On measuring organizational properties of distribution channels: methodological issues in the use of key informants. Res Mark 8(3):313–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirola-Merlo A (2010) Agile innovation: the role of team climate in rapid research and development. J Occup Organ Psychol 83(4):1075–1084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff PM, Organ DW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. J Manag 12(4):531–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88(5):879–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resick CJ, Dickson MW, Mitchelson JK, Allison LK, Clark MA (2010) Team composition, cognition, and effectiveness: examining mental model similarity and accuracy. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract 14(2):174–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringle CM, Wende S, Will A (2005) SmartPLS—Version 2.0. Universität Hamburg, Hamburg

  • Sadler-Smith E, Shefy E (2004) The intuitive executive: Understanding and applying ‘gut feel’ in decision-making. Acad Manag Executive 18(4):76–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauter VL (1999) Intuitive decision-making. Commun ACM 42(6):109–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayegh L, Anthony WP, Perrewé PL (2004) Managerial decision-making under crisis: the role of emotion in an intuitive decision process. Hum Resour Manag Rev 14(2):179–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segars AH (1997) Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: a paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. Omega 25(1):107–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge PM (1990) The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. Currency-Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinkula JM, Baker WE, Noordeweir T (1997) A framework for market-based organisational learning: linking values, knowledge, and behaviour. J Acad Mark Sci 25:305–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Škerlavaj M, Štemberger MI, Škrinjar R, Dimovski V (2007) Organizational learning culture—the missing link between business process change and organizational performance. Int J Prod Econ 35(3):346–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenenhaus VE, Vinzi Y-M, Chatelin CL (2005) PLS path modeling. Comput Stat Data Anal 48(1):159–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Standish Group International (2001) Extreme CHAOS. Available at: http://www.standishgroup.com/chaos/introduction.pdf [Retrieved 05 August 2011]

  • Tyre MJ, von Hippel E (1997) The situated nature of adaptive learning in organizations. Organ Sci 8(1):71–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhlenbruck K, Meyer KE, Hitt MA (2003) Organizational transformation in transitional economies: resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. J Manag Stud 40(2):257–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vlaar P, van Fenema P, Tiwari V (2008) Cocreating understanding and value in distributed work: how members of onsite and offshore vendor team give, make, demand, and break sense. MIS Q 32(2):227–255

    Google Scholar 

  • West MA (1990) The social psychology of innovation in groups. In: West MA, Farr JL (eds) Innovation and creativity at work: psychological and organizational strategies. Wiley, Chichester, pp 81–100

    Google Scholar 

  • West GP III (2007) Collective cognition: when entrepreneurial teams, not individuals, make decisions. Entrepreneurship Theory Pract 31(1):77–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams TM (1999) The need for new paradigms for complex projects. Int J Proj Manag 17(5):269–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xia W, Lee G (2005) Complexity of information systems development projects: conceptualization and measurement development. J Manag Inf Syst 22(1):45–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang J-S, Chen C-Y (2005) Systemic design for improving team learning climate and capability: a case study. Total Qual Manag 16(6):727–740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang C, Chen L-C (2007) Can organizational knowledge capabilities affect knowledge sharing behavior? J Inf Sci 33(1):95–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zander U, Kogut B (1995) Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: an empirical test. Organ Sci 6(1):76–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zellmer-Bruhn M, Gibson CB (2006) Team strategic context: implications for process and performance. Acad Manag J 49(3):501–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the three anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions and comments on earlier drafts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Fatih University, 34500, Büyükçekmece, Istanbul, Turkey

    Atif Açıkgöz, Nizamettin Bayyurt & Cemil Kuzey

  2. Kocaeli University, 41380, Umuttepe, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Ayşe Günsel

Authors
  1. Atif Açıkgöz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ayşe Günsel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nizamettin Bayyurt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cemil Kuzey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atif Açıkgöz.

Additional information

This work is supported by the Scientific Research Fund of Fatih University under the project number P54081202_B.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Açıkgöz, A., Günsel, A., Bayyurt, N. et al. Team Climate, Team Cognition, Team Intuition, and Software Quality: The Moderating Role of Project Complexity. Group Decis Negot 23, 1145–1176 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-013-9367-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-013-9367-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation