International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 13, Issue 4 (April 2026), Pages: 138-154

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

The mediating role of artificial intelligence in the relationship between production team productivity, quality management, and digital content production efficiency

 Author(s): 

Mohanad Amin Salhab *, Nadia Sohai

 Affiliation(s):

School of Business and Management, Lincoln University College, Kota Bharu, Malaysia

 Full text

    Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

   Corresponding author's ORCID profile:  https://orcid.org/0009-0003-0832-6785

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 
https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2026.04.014

 Abstract

This study investigates the role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in improving team productivity, quality management, and production efficiency in 3D game animation. The study aims to examine how AI influences workflows, team skill levels, and overall production outcomes in the animation industry. A quantitative survey was conducted among professionals working in medium- and large-sized animation companies, and the collected data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). The results indicate that AI significantly improves quality management by automating quality control processes and providing real-time insights, which enhance production standards. However, AI shows a limited direct effect on production efficiency, suggesting that its full potential has not yet been fully realized in current workflows. The findings also highlight the importance of team skill levels, as highly skilled teams are better able to integrate AI tools into their workflows and gain greater benefits from AI adoption. The study is limited to medium- and large-sized animation companies, and therefore the findings may not fully represent smaller firms. In addition, the cross-sectional research design limits the ability to establish causal relationships. Future research could apply longitudinal designs and include objective performance data to provide more comprehensive insights. The results suggest that animation companies should prioritize training and professional development to effectively utilize AI technologies, while ensuring that human expertise remains central to the creative process. The integration of AI in animation production may lead to more efficient workflows, reduced operational costs, and improved product quality, which can support innovation, improve the working environment, and contribute to the creation of high-quality digital content for global audiences.

 © 2026 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

Artificial intelligence, 3D Game animation, Team productivity, Quality management, Production efficiency

 Article history

Received 6 October 2025, Received in revised form 9 March 2026, Accepted 12 April 2026

 Acknowledgment

No Acknowledgment. 

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations:

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of Lincoln University College. All participants were fully informed about the study's objectives, their right to confidentiality, and their ability to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. Informed consent was secured from each participant prior to inclusion in the research. This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines outlined in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent amendments. 

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

Salhab MA and Sohai N (2026). The mediating role of artificial intelligence in the relationship between production team productivity, quality management, and digital content production efficiency. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 13(4): 138-154

  Permanent Link to this page

---------------------------------------------- 

 References (65)

  1. Adhikari PR (2020). Impact of teamwork on organizational productivity in Nepalese commercial banks. Management Dynamics, 23(2): 75-84. https://doi.org/10.3126/md.v23i2.35810   [Google Scholar]

  2. Ametova B, Boboyev G, and Djumaniyazova N (2023). Implementation of an integrated management system in calcium soda production. E3S Web of Conferences, 434: 02029. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202343402029   [Google Scholar]

  3. Azouza O and Masaud K (2023). The effect of production process management on quality control in the iron and steel industry in Libya. American Journal of Economics and Business Innovation, 2(3): 25-31. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajebi.v2i3.1655   [Google Scholar]

  4. Ballangrud R, Aase K, and Vifladt A (2020). Longitudinal team training programme in a Norwegian surgical ward: A qualitative study of nurses’ and physicians’ experiences with teamwork skills. BMJ Open, 10(7): e035432. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035432   [Google Scholar] PMid:32641327 PMCid:PMC7348475

  5. Burtscher MJ, Nussbeck FW, Sevdalis N, Gisin S, and Manser T (2020). Coordination and communication in healthcare action teams. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 79(3-4): 123-135. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185/a000239   [Google Scholar]

  6. Byrne BM (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. 3rd Edition, Routledge, New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315757421   [Google Scholar]

  7. Caskurlu B, Kizilkaya FE, and Ozen B (2024). Hedonic expertise games. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 92: 671-690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10472-023-09900-y   [Google Scholar]

  8. Chen C, Gu T, Cai Y, and Yang Y (2019). Impact of supply chain information sharing on performance of fashion enterprises: An empirical study using SEM. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 32(6): 913-935. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-04-2019-0104   [Google Scholar]

  9. Chen CH (2024). Influence of employees’ intention to adopt AI applications and big data analytical capability on operational performance in the high-tech firms. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15: 3946-3974. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01293-x   [Google Scholar] PMid:40478985 PMCid:PMC10039443

  10. Colicchia C, Creazza A, Noè C, and Strozzi F (2019). Information sharing in supply chains: A review of risks and opportunities using the systematic literature network analysis (SLNA). Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 24(1): 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-01-2018-0003   [Google Scholar]

  11. Czerwińska K and Pacana A (2022). Analysis of the maturity of process monitoring in manufacturing companies. Production Engineering Archives, 28(3): 246-251. https://doi.org/10.30657/pea.2022.28.30   [Google Scholar]

  12. Darban M (2024). Navigating virtual teams in generative AI-led learning: The moderation of team perceived virtuality. Education and Information Technologies, 29: 23225-23248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12681-4   [Google Scholar]

  13. Davenport TH (2018). From analytics to artificial intelligence. Journal of Business Analytics, 1(2): 73-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/2573234X.2018.1543535   [Google Scholar]

  14. Dmitrieva E, Thakur G, Prabhakar PK, Prakash A, Vyas A, and Prasanna YL (2024). Edge computing and AI: Advancements in Industry 5.0- An experimental assessment. BIO Web of Conferences, 86: 01096. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20248601096   [Google Scholar]

  15. El Achi S (2024). Leadership skills and virtual team performance – The case of Lebanese multinational companies. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 12(1): e2645. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v12i1.2645   [Google Scholar]

  16. Elshan E, Siemon D, De Vreede T, De Vreede GJ, Oeste-Reiß S, and Ebel PA (2022). Requirements for AI-based teammates: A qualitative inquiry in the context of creative workshops. In the Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, USA: 164-173. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2022.020   [Google Scholar] PMid:36033346 PMCid:PMC9402481

  17. Fang Q, Despeisse M, and Johansson B (2025). Review of resource efficiency assessments in manufacturing: An integration model for production information systems. Cleaner Environmental Systems, 18: 100318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2025.100318   [Google Scholar]

  18. Fenwick A, Molnar G, and Frangos P (2024). The critical role of HRM in AI-driven digital transformation: A paradigm shift to enable firms to move from AI implementation to human-centric adoption. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 4: 34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44163-024-00125-4   [Google Scholar]

  19. Flathmann C, Schelble BG, and Galeano A (2024). Empirical impacts of independent and collaborative training on task performance and improvement in human-AI teams. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 68(1): 1447-1453. https://doi.org/10.1177/10711813241274425   [Google Scholar]

  20. Fuller CM, Simmering MJ, Atinc G, Atinc Y, and Babin BJ (2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8): 3192-3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008   [Google Scholar]

  21. Geng H, Mousavi A, Markatos NG, Chen K, and Gou X (2024). Reliable cost prediction and control for intelligent manufacture: A key performance indicator perspective. International Journal of Network Dynamics and Intelligence, 3(1): 100001. https://doi.org/10.53941/ijndi.2024.100001   [Google Scholar]

  22. Georganta E and Ulfert AS (2024). My colleague is an AI! Trust differences between AI and human teammates. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 30(1-2): 23-37. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-07-2023-0053   [Google Scholar]

  23. Gonzalez-Garcia A, Pérez-González S, Benavides C, Pinto-Carral A, Quiroga-Sánchez E, and Marqués-Sánchez P (2024). Impact of artificial intelligence–based technology on nurse management: A systematic review. Journal of Nursing Management, 2024: 3537964. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/3537964   [Google Scholar] PMid:40224848 PMCid:PMC11919197

  24. Han Z, Lu H, Liu Z, Vong CM, Liu YS, Zwicker M, Han J, and Chen CP (2019). 3D2SeqViews: Aggregating sequential views for 3D global feature learning by CNN with hierarchical attention aggregation. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 28(8): 3986-3999. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2019.2904460   [Google Scholar] PMid:30872228

  25. Handke L, Klonek F, O’Neill TA, and Kerschreiter R (2022). Unpacking the role of feedback in virtual team effectiveness. Small Group Research, 53(1): 41-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964211057116   [Google Scholar]

  26. Hong S, Zhong D, and Um KH (2026). The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) adoption on operational performance in manufacturing. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 37(2): 295-317. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-03-2025-0227   [Google Scholar]

  27. Huang X (2024). Dynamics of labor and capital in AI vs. non-AI industries: A two-industry model analysis. PLOS ONE, 19(1): e0295150. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295150   [Google Scholar] PMid:38266016 PMCid:PMC10807838

  28. Hysong SJ, Francis J, and Petersen LA (2019). Motivating and engaging frontline providers in measuring and improving team clinical performance. BMJ Quality & Safety, 28(5): 405-411. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008856   [Google Scholar] PMid:30824492

  29. Javaid M, Haleem A, Singh RP, and Suman R (2022). Artificial intelligence applications for Industry 4.0: A literature-based study. Journal of Industrial Integration and Management, 7(1): 83-111. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424862221300040   [Google Scholar]

  30. Khinvasara T, Ness S, and Shankar A (2024). Leveraging AI for enhanced quality assurance in medical device manufacturing. Asian Journal of Research in Computer Science, 17(6): 13-35. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajrcos/2024/v17i6454   [Google Scholar]

  31. Kirkman BL and Rosen B (1999). Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1): 58-74. https://doi.org/10.2307/256874   [Google Scholar] PMid:22761606

  32. Kline RB (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 3rd Edition, Guilford Press, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]

  33. Li B, Chen J, and Lv X (2023). Analysis of influencing factors of agricultural products supply chain quality risk based on ISM. In the Second International Conference on Green Communication, Network, and Internet of Things, SPIE, Xiangtan, China, 12586: 279-286. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2670199   [Google Scholar]

  34. Li Q and Wang C (2022). An evaluation of Chinese rapeseed production efficiency based on three-stage DEA and Malmquist index. Sustainability, 14(23): 15822. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315822   [Google Scholar]

  35. Li W, Cai J, Wang C, Chen Y, Xu J, Zhao J, and Chen Y (2024). Research on the evaluation index system of enterprise production efficiency. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 14(3): 312-326. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2024.143016   [Google Scholar]

  36. Mashmool A, Khosravi S, Joloudari JH, Inayat I, Gandomani TJ, and Mosavi A (2021). A statistical model to assess the team’s productivity in agile software teams. In the 2021 IEEE 4th International Conference and Workshop Óbuda on Electrical and Power Engineering (CANDO-EPE), IEEE, Budapest, Hungary: 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1109/CANDO-EPE54223.2021.9667902   [Google Scholar]

  37. Naik N, Hameed BM, Shetty DK, Swain D, Shah M, Paul R, and Somani BK (2022). Legal and ethical consideration in artificial intelligence in healthcare: Who takes responsibility? Frontiers in Surgery, 9: 862322. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.862322   [Google Scholar] PMid:35360424 PMCid:PMC8963864

  38. Ochsner M (2024). The mis‐conceptualisation of societal impact: Why the Swiss approach to societal impact is productive and not inexistent. Swiss Political Science Review, 30(3): 223-243. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12618   [Google Scholar]

  39. Olan F, Arakpogun EO, Suklan J, Nakpodia F, Damij N, and Jayawickrama U (2022). Artificial intelligence and knowledge sharing: Contributing factors to organizational performance. Journal of Business Research, 145: 605-615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.008   [Google Scholar]

  40. Ononokpono NJ, Osademe GC, and Olasupo AR (2023). Artificial intelligence milieu: Implications for corporate performance in the Nigerian banking industry. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science, 8(5): 131-135. https://doi.org/10.51584/IJRIAS.2023.8515   [Google Scholar]

  41. Osazevbaru HO and Oyibo F (2023). Conceptualising total quality management as a predictor of performance in Nigerian microfinance institutions. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 8(1): 86-92. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2023.8.1.1689   [Google Scholar]

  42. Perera N, Tsey K, Heyeres M, Whiteside M, Baird L, McCalman J, and Udah H (2022). “We are not stray leaves blowing about in the wind”: Exploring the impact of family wellbeing empowerment research, 1998–2021. International Journal for Equity in Health, 21: 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-021-01604-1   [Google Scholar] PMid:35012602 PMCid:PMC8744228

  43. Peters U, Honeycutt N, De Block A, and Jussim L (2020). Ideological diversity, hostility, and discrimination in philosophy. Philosophical Psychology, 33(4): 511-548. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2020.1743257   [Google Scholar]

  44. Peytcheva E and Yan T (2025). A practical guide to survey questionnaire design and evaluation. Taylor and Francis, Oxfordshire, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003367826   [Google Scholar]

  45. Piorkowski D, Park S, Wang AY, Wang D, Muller M, and Portnoy F (2021). How AI developers overcome communication challenges in a multidisciplinary team: A case study. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1): 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449205   [Google Scholar] PMid:36651067

  46. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, and Podsakoff NP (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1): 539-569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452   [Google Scholar] PMid:21838546

  47. Rahman HM, Malarvizhi CAN, and Khan N (2025). Decoding turnover intention in Malaysia’s ICT industry: The mediating role of employee loyalty in the nexus between exploring the recruitment and selection, training and development, and work-life balance. Cogent Business & Management, 12(1): 2536672. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2536672   [Google Scholar]

  48. Rai R, Tiwari MK, Ivanov D, and Dolgui A (2021). Machine learning in manufacturing and Industry 4.0 applications. International Journal of Production Research, 59(16): 4773-4778. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2021.1956675   [Google Scholar]

  49. Robinson SB and Leonard KF (2024). Designing quality survey questions. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, USA.   [Google Scholar]

  50. Schmutz JB, Meier LL, and Manser T (2019). How effective is teamwork really? The relationship between teamwork and performance in healthcare teams: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open, 9(9): e028280. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028280   [Google Scholar] PMid:31515415 PMCid:PMC6747874

  51. Schwarzer M, Gautam UK, Makki K et al. (2023). Microbe-mediated intestinal NOD2 stimulation improves linear growth of undernourished infant mice. Science, 379(6634): 826-833. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade9767   [Google Scholar] PMid:36821686

  52. Seňová A, Štofová L, Szaryszová P, and Dugas J (2021). Superstructure of ISO/TS 16949 for the measurement of material-technological parameters of the products in automotive production. Management Systems in Production Engineering, 29(3): 178-183. https://doi.org/10.2478/mspe-2021-0022   [Google Scholar]

  53. Shchepkina N, Ramnarayan R, Dhaliwal N, and Nangia R (2024). Human-centric AI adoption and its influence on worker productivity: An empirical investigation. BIO Web of Conferences, 86: 01060. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20248601060   [Google Scholar]

  54. Siemon D (2022). Elaborating team roles for artificial intelligence-based teammates in human-AI collaboration. Group Decision and Negotiation, 31: 871-912. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-022-09792-z   [Google Scholar]

  55. Svensson G, Ferro C, Høgevold N, Padin C, Varela JCS, and Sarstedt M (2018). Framing the triple bottom line approach: Direct and mediation effects between economic, social and environmental elements. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197: 972-991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.226   [Google Scholar]

  56. Tavakoli F and Gandomani TJ (2018). A novel team productivity model for XP teams. Journal of Cases on Information Technology, 20(4): 93-109. https://doi.org/10.4018/JCIT.2018100106   [Google Scholar]

  57. Tourangeau R, Rips LJ, and Rasinski K (2000). The psychology of survey response. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819322   [Google Scholar]

  58. Trakadas P, Simoens P, Gkonis P et al. (2020). An artificial intelligence-based collaboration approach in industrial IoT manufacturing: Key concepts, architectural extensions and potential applications. Sensors, 20(19): 5480. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20195480   [Google Scholar] PMid:32987911 PMCid:PMC7583943

  59. Tummala VS, Burris‐Melville TS, and Eskridge TC (2025). AI as a team member: Redefining collaboration. Journal of Leadership Studies, 18(4): 67-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70003   [Google Scholar]

  60. Uribe J, Carnahan S, Meluso J, and Austin‐Breneman J (2022). How do managers evaluate individual contributions to team production? A theory and empirical test. Strategic Management Journal, 43(12): 2577-2601. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3433   [Google Scholar]

  61. Verbruggen F, Sutherland J, van der Werf JM, and Brinkkemper S (2019). Process efficiency-adapting flow to the agile improvement effort. In the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, USA: 6981-6987. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2019.837  [Google Scholar]

  62. Woodland L, Blignault I, O’Callaghan C, and Harris-Roxas B (2021). A framework for preferred practices in conducting culturally competent health research in a multicultural society. Health Research Policy and Systems, 19: 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00657-y   [Google Scholar] PMid:33602261 PMCid:PMC7893969

  63. Yan B and Gurkan N (2023). It depends on the timing: The ripple effect of AI on team decision-making. In the 56th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, USA: 312-321. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2023.039   [Google Scholar]

  64. Yoon K and Zhu Y (2022). Social media affordances and transactive memory systems in virtual teams. Management Communication Quarterly, 36(2): 235-260. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189211032639   [Google Scholar]

  65. Yu Y and Huo B (2018). Supply chain quality integration: Relational antecedents and operational consequences. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 23(3): 188-206. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-08-2017-0280   [Google Scholar]