Keywords:
knowledge sharing
team performance
workplace efficiency
high-risk industries

  • Abstract

    Intergenerational communication within the coal mining industry poses significant challenges because employees from diverse age groups must collaborate effectively in environments characterized by high risk and limited physical interaction. This study examines how instrumental and emotional support from coworkers influences team cohesion and collaboration within a transactive memory system, while also examining the moderating influence of positive intergenerational affect. Data were collected from 349 employees across the plant, engineering, and operations departments and analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). The results show that instrumental support consistently exerts a positive impact on both team cohesion and collaboration, underscoring its role as a reliable mechanism for promoting coordination in technical and safety-sensitive industries. Interestingly, this positive effect remains stable even when moderated by intergenerational affect, suggesting that practical support is universally valued regardless of emotional conditions. In contrast, emotional support does not significantly enhance team cohesion or collaborative processes, and when moderated by positive intergenerational affect, its effect may even become negative, indicating that excessive emotional involvement can complicate team dynamics in multigenerational contexts. These findings address a notable gap in the literature by demonstrating that emotional support, often considered beneficial, can in fact hinder collaboration when overemphasized in environments where efficiency and accuracy are critical. Conversely, instrumental support proves to be a resilient driver of knowledge sharing and coordination. The study contributes theoretically by integrating social mindfulness theory and socioemotional selectivity theory into the mining context and provides practical implications for managers, who should prioritize structured, task-oriented support while managing emotional exchanges carefully. Ultimately, the research offers new insights into intergenerational work dynamics, emphasizing that balancing cognitive and emotional resources is crucial to enhancing team performance and organizational resilience in high-risk industries.

  • References

    1. Aggarwal, A., Sadhna, P., Gupta, S., Mittal, A., & Rastogi, S. (2022). Gen Z entering the workforce: Restructuring HR policies and practices to foster task performance and organizational commitment. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(3), e2535. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2535
    2. Alshurideh, M. T., & Al Kurdi, B. (2023). Factors affecting social network acceptance: An extension to the technology acceptance model using PLS-SEM and machine learning approach. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 7(1), 489–494. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2022.8.010
    3. Aziz, F., Md Rami, A., Razali, F., & Mahadi, N. (2020). The influence of leadership style towards technology acceptance in the organization. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(7 Special Issue), 218–225.
    4. Baumler, R. J., & Piercy, C. W. (2024). Crystallized trans identity: How authenticity and identity communication affect job and life satisfaction. Communication Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502241234840
    5. Becker, A., Waldner, C. J., Nitsch, L. J., & Trautwein, S. (2023). Communicating social value: An experimental study on credible communication and social enterprises. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 33(3), 511–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.21529
    6. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.01.019
    7. Carstensen, L. L. (2021). Socioemotional selectivity theory: The role of perceived endings in human motivation. Gerontologist, 61(8), 1188–1196. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnab116
    8. Darke, I. D., Mensah, P. O., Antwi, F. A., & Swanzy-Krah, P. (2024). Co-worker support and affective commitment during a global crisis: Evidence from an emerging economy. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2298225. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2298225
    9. De Clercq, D., & Pereira, R. (2021). “Hey everyone, look at me helping you!”: A contingency view of the relationship between exhibitionism and peer-oriented helping behaviors. Australian Journal of Management, 46(4), 717–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962211009581
    10. Diehl, M., Brothers, A. F., & Wahl, H. W. (2021). Self-perceptions and awareness of aging: Past, present, and future. In Handbook of the psychology of aging (pp. 155–179). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816094-7.00001-5
    11. Dietz, L., Burmeister, A., & Fasbender, U. (2022). Age and knowledge exchange: Ability, motivation and opportunities. In U. Fasbender & C. Truxillo (Eds.), Age and work (pp. 259–276). Routledge. https://wirtschaftspsychologie.uni-hohenheim.de/fileadmin/einrichtungen/wirtschaftspsychologie/Verschiedenes/Publikationen/Dietz__Burmeister___Fasbender_2022_Preprint_Age_and_Knowledge_Exchange.pdf
    12. Doesum, N. J. V., Van Lange, D. A. W., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). Social mindfulness: Skill and will to navigate the social world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(1), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032540
    13. Dulebohn, J. H., & Hoch, J. E. (2017). Virtual teams in organizations. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 569–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.004
    14. El Khawli, E., Keller, A. C., & Scheibe, S. (2023). Goldilocks work conditions for all ages: Age-conditional effects of work design profiles on well-being. Work, Aging and Retirement, 9(3), 262–279. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waac011
    15. Estrich, C., DeSisto, C. L., Pliska, E., Mackie, C. N., Velonis, A., Uesugi, K., Waddell, L. F., & Rankin, K. M. (2022). Roles of social networking in complex multi-agency implementation efforts. SAGE Open, 12(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221123303
    16. Fasbender, U., & Gerpott, F. H. (2022). Knowledge transfer between younger and older employees: A temporal social comparison model. Work, Aging and Retirement, 8(2), 146–162. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waab017
    17. Fasbender, U., & Wang, M. (2017). Intergenerational contact and hiring decisions about older workers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 32(3), 210–224. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-11-2016-0339
    18. Fasbender, U., Baltes, B., & Rudolph, C. W. (2023). New directions for measurement in the field of work, aging and retirement. Work, Aging and Retirement, 9(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waac028
    19. Fasbender, U., Burmeister, A., & Wang, M. (2020). Motivated to be socially mindful: Explaining age differences in the effect of employees’ contact quality with coworkers on their coworker support. Personnel Psychology, 73(3), 407–430. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12359
    20. Fasbender, U., Gerpott, F. H., & Rinker, L. (2023). Getting ready for the future, is it worth it? A dual pathway model of age and technology acceptance at work. Work, Aging and Retirement, 9(4), 358–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waac035
    21. Fasbender, U., Gerpott, F. H., & Unger, D. (2021). Give and take? Knowledge exchange between older and younger employees as a function of generativity and development striving. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(10), 2420–2443. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-11-2020-0856
    22. Fasbender, U., Vignoli, M., & Topa, G. (2022). Understanding how aging experiences shape late career development. Career Development Quarterly, 70(3), 174–189. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12301
    23. Fasbender, U., Wöhrmann, A. M., Wang, M., & Klehe, U. C. (2019). Is the future still open? The mediating role of occupational future time perspective in the effects of career adaptability and aging experience on late career planning. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 111, 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.10.006
    24. Finsel, J. S., Venz, L., Wöhrmann, A. M., Wilckens, M. R., & Deller, J. (2024). Worlds apart: Does perceptual congruence between leaders and older employees regarding age-friendly organizational climate, management, and work design matter? Work, Aging and Retirement, 10(2), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waad009
    25. Gonzalez-Mulé, E., Cockburn, B. S., McCormick, B. W., & Zhao, P. (2020). Team tenure and team performance: A meta-analysis and process model. Personnel Psychology, 73(1), 151–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12319
    26. Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80519-7
    27. Han, J., Han, J., & Brass, D. J. (2014). Human capital diversity in the creation of social capital for team creativity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(1), 54–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1853
    28. Harris, A., Davenport, M. K., & Fasbender, U. (2024). Exploring the role of uncertainty regulation strategies to demystify the link between person–environment misfit and late-career outcomes. Work, Aging and Retirement. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waae008
    29. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
    30. Hundschell, A., Backmann, J., Tian, A. W., & Hoegl, M. (2024). Leader inclusiveness and team resilience capacity in multinational teams: The role of organizational diversity climate. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 1–16. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2829
    31. Iweins, C., Desmette, D., Yzerbyt, V., & Stinglhamber, F. (2013). Ageism at work: The impact of intergenerational contact and organizational multi-age perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22(3), 331–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.748656
    32. Kaur Bagga, S., Gera, S., & Haque, S. N. (2023). The mediating role of organizational culture: Transformational leadership and change management in virtual teams. Asia Pacific Management Review, 28(2), 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2022.07.003
    33. King, S. P., & Bryant, F. B. (2017). The workplace intergenerational climate scale (WICS): A self-report instrument measuring ageism in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(1), 124–151. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2118
    34. Kipfelsberger, P., Raes, A., Herhausen, D., Kark, R., & Bruch, H. (2022). Start with why: The transfer of work meaningfulness from leaders to followers and the role of dyadic tenure. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 43(8), 1287–1309. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2649
    35. Kurdi, B. A., Alshurideh, M. T., Akour, I., Alzoubi, H. M., Obeidat, Z. M., Hamadneh, S., & Joghee, S. (2023). Factors affecting team social networking and performance: The moderation effect of team size and tenure. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 9(2), 100047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100047
    36. Kurdi, B. A., Alshurideh, M. T., & Alnaser, A. (2020). The impact of employee satisfaction on customer satisfaction: Theoretical and empirical underpinning. Management Science Letters, 10(15), 3561–3570. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.6.038
    37. Leo, F. M., Filho, E., López-Gajardo, M. A., García-Calvo, T., & González-Ponce, I. (2023). The relationship among intra-group communication, transactive memory systems, collective efficacy and team performance: A structural equation model analysis with elite footballers. European Journal of Sport Science, 23(4), 599–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2022.2049373
    38. Leo, F. M., González-Ponce, I., Sánchez-Oliva, D., Pulido, J. J., & García-Calvo, T. (2018). Adaptation and validation of the Transactive Memory System Scale in Sport (TMSS-S). International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 0(0), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954118767509
    39. Lyngdoh, T., El-Manstrly, D., & Jeesha, K. (2023). Social isolation and social anxiety are drivers of Generation Z’s willingness to share personal information on social media. Psychology and Marketing, 40(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21744
    40. Mărginean, A. E. (2021). Gen Z perceptions and expectations upon entering the workforce. European Review of Applied Sociology, 14(22), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/eras-2021-0003
    41. Mariano, J., Marques, S., Ramos, M. R., Gerardo, F., & de Vries, H. (2020). Too old for computers? The longitudinal relationship between stereotype threat and computer use by older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(October), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.568972
    42. Mathieu, M., Eschleman, K. J., & Cheng, D. (2019). Meta-analytic and multiwave comparison of emotional support and instrumental support in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 24(3), 387. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000135
    43. Matsunaga, M. (2022). Uncertainty management, transformational leadership, and job performance in an AI-powered organizational context. Communication Monographs, 89(1), 118–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2021.1952633
    44. McKee, K. M., Dahl, A. J., & Peltier, J. W. (2024). Gen Z’s personalization paradoxes: A privacy calculus examination of digital personalization and brand behaviors. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 23(2), 405–422. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2199
    45. Oh, Y. T., & Yoo, J. I. (2023). Communication and team cohesion moderate the relationship between transformational leadership and athletic performance. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231195196
    46. Pfrombeck, J., Burmeister, A., & Grote, G. (2024). Older workers’ knowledge seeking from younger coworkers: Disentangling countervailing pathways to successful aging at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2751
    47. Pugliese, E., Bonaiuto, M., Livi, S., Theodorou, A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2024). Team identification more than organizational identification predicts counterproductive work behavior and organizational citizenship behavior and mediates influences of communication climate and perceived external prestige. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 54(2), 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.13017
    48. Rahmani, D., Zeng, C., Chen, M. H., Fletcher, P., & Goke, R. (2023). Investigating the effects of online communication apprehension and digital technology anxiety on organizational dissent in virtual teams. Computers in Human Behavior, 144(February), 107719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107719
    49. Rudolph, C. W., & Zacher, H. (2021). Age inclusive human resource practices, age diversity climate, and work ability: Exploring between- and within-person indirect effects. Work, Aging and Retirement, 7(4), 387–403. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waaa008
    50. Sallay, V., Wieszt, A., Varga, S., & Martos, T. (2024). Balancing identity, construction, and rules: Family relationship negotiations during first-generation succession in family businesses. Journal of Business Research, 174(January 2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114483
    51. Salthouse, T. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review, 103(3), 403–428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.403
    52. Schei, G. S., Høigaard, R., Erikstad, M. K., Ivarsson, A., & Haugen, T. (2023). Identity leadership and cohesion in elite sport: The mediating role of intra-team communication. Heliyon, 9(7). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17853
    53. Shin, Y., Hur, W. M., & Choi, W. H. (2020). Coworker support as a double-edged sword: A moderated mediation model of job crafting, work engagement, and job performance. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(11), 1417–1438. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1407352
    54. Shin, Y., Kim, M., Choi, J. N., & Lee, S.-H. (2015). Do team culture matter? Roles of team culture and collective regulatory focus in team task and creative performance. Group & Organization Management, 40(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601115584998
    55. Sullivan, P. J., & Short, S. (2011). Further operationalization of intra-team communication in sports: An updated version of the Scale of Effective Communication in Team Sports (SECTS-2). Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(2), 471–487. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00722.x
    56. ter Hoeven, C. L., & van Zoonen, W. (2023). Helping others and feeling engaged in the context of workplace flexibility: The importance of communication control. International Journal of Business Communication, 60(1), 62–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488419898799
    57. Thomas, C. L., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2023). Development and initial validation of a word fragment completion task to measure age metastereotype activation. Work, Aging and Retirement, 9(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waac005
    58. Tolan, C., Cai, D. A., & Fink, E. L. (2023). Expectations, conflict styles, and anchors in negotiation. Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 16(3), 247–266.
    59. Umar, M., & Ko, I. (2022). E-learning: Direct effect of student learning effectiveness and engagement through project-based learning, team cohesion, and flipped learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031724
    60. van der Voet, J., & Steijn, B. (2021). Team innovation through collaboration: How visionary leadership spurs innovation via team cohesion. Public Management Review, 23(9), 1275–1294. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1743344
    61. van Zoonen, W., Sivunen, A., Rice, R. E., & Treem, J. W. (2023). Organizational information and communication technologies and their influence on communication visibility and perceived proximity. International Journal of Business Communication, 60(4), 1267–1289. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884211050068
    62. Vickerstaff, S., & Van der Horst, M. (2021). The impact of age stereotypes and age norms on employees’ retirement choices: A neglected aspect of research on extended working lives. Frontiers in Sociology, 6(June), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2021.686645
    63. Voci, A., & Hewstone, M. (2003). Intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants in Italy: The mediational role of anxiety and the moderational role of group salience. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430203006001011
    64. Wang, J., Kim, T. Y., Bateman, T. S., Jiang, Y., & Tang, G. (2024). A paradox theory lens on proactivity, individual ambidexterity, and creativity: An empirical look. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(6), 896–911. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2786
    65. Wion, R. K., Hill, N. L., Reed Bell, T., Mogle, J., Yates, J., & Bhang, I. (2022). The role of cognitive self-report measure type in predicting cognitive decline among older adults: A systematic review. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 35(4), 487–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/08919887211023591
    66. Xu, S., Martinez, L. R., Van Hoof, H., Tews, M., Torres, L., & Farfan, K. (2015). The impact of abusive supervision and co-worker support on hospitality and tourism student employees’ turnover intentions in Ecuador. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(14), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2015.1076771
    67. Xu, S., Van Hoof, H., Serrano, A. L., Fernandez, L., & Ullauri, N. (2017). The role of coworker support in the relationship between moral efficacy and voice behavior: The case of hospitality students in Ecuador. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, 16(3), 252–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332845.2017.1253431
    68. Yan, B., Hollingshead, A. B., Alexander, K. S., Cruz, I., & Shaikh, S. J. (2021). Communication in transactive memory systems: A review and multidimensional network perspective. Small Group Research, 52(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496420967764
    69. Yang, H., & Lin, Y. T. (2022). How knowledge sharing and cohesion become keys to a successful graduation project for students from design college. SAGE Open, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221121785
    70. Yetkili, O., Abrams, D., Travaglino, G. A., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2018). Imagined contact with atypical outgroup members that are anti-normative within their group can reduce prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 208–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.004
    71. Zhang, J., Chen, Y., Xu, Y., & Li, Y. (2024). Hindrance stressors and turnover intentions among preschool teachers: The mediating role of work engagement and the moderating effect of meaningful work. Heliyon, 10(15), e35366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e35366
    72. Zhang, J., Zhao, M., & Wang, L. (2024). Exploring the transactive relationships of influence factors for online asynchronous learning transactive memory system. Heliyon, 10(16), e36441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2025 The Authors

How to cite

Sari, E. A. P., Pradana, K. A., & Simanjuntak, E. R. (2025). The impact of coworker support toward team cohesion and transactive memory system collaboration: Moderating roles of intergenerational affect in the mining industry. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 8(4), 2026253. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2026253
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC
  • Article viewed - 469
  • PDF downloaded - 370