New Product Development Project Teams Research Articles

Learning from Failure, Collective Efficacy and New Product Performance

Although the virtues of the learning from failure in breeding innovation have been widely promoted, teams are still an under-researched objective when it comes to learning from failure. Moreover, much less is known about how team learning from failure affects innovation performance especially under the influence of collective cognition. Incorporating social learning theory and social cognitive theory, our study examines how experiential learning from failure (ELFF) and vicarious learning from failure (VLFF) affect new product performance (NPP) in new product development (NPD) teams. We further explore the moderating role of collective efficacy. Survey data from 152 paired NPD project teams in high-tech firms illustrates that both ELFF and VLFF facilitate NPP in terms of NPD speed to market and new product creativity. Further, a high level of collective efficacy intensifies the positive relationship between ELFF and NPD speed to market, but attenuates the positive relationship between VLFF and new product creativity. Our results illustrate that both ELFF and VLFF should be encouraged to promote innovation performance in the NPD team. However, the NPD team should hold a fine-grained view regarding the double-edged sword effect of collective efficacy on the relationship between learning from failure and NPP at the team level.

The moderating effects of job design on human capital and NPD performance

PurposeIn response to calls for the extension of job design research for the strategic team particularly in high-velocity environment, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the moderating roles of job design in the relationships between project team viewed as human capital resources and new product development (NPD) performance in the short and long run. Based on survey data from 117 NPD project teams in high-technology multinational companies (MNCs) in Thailand, this research finds that job design (i.e. autonomous, task identity and feedback) moderates the effects of human capital resources on NPD project success. In addition, job design works in concert with human capital resources to affect managing NPD project-to-project in the long run. Designing jobs by providing autonomy, identity and feedbacks could trigger the stronger contribution not only for fostering knowledge creation in the NPD project team, but also encouraging intrinsic motivation to commit extra effort to achieve NPD goals. This research contributes to the job design literature of how job design works for NPD project team to achieve short-and long-run NPD performance. Implications for these results are discussed.Design/methodology/approachBased on survey data from 117 NPD projects in high-technology MNCs in Thailand, this research uses hierarchical regression to do analyses.FindingsThis research finds that job design (i.e. autonomous, task identity and feedback) moderates the effects of human capital resources on the short-run project performance. In addition, job design works in concert with human capital resources to affect managing project-to-project in the long run.Research limitations/implicationsThis research contributes to the job design literature of how job design works for NPD project team to achieve short-and long-run NPD performance.Originality/valueInvestigating the moderating roles of job design in the relationship between human capital resources and NPD performance in the short and long run.

Investigating the Effects of Reward Interdependence and Nonfinancial Incentives on NPD Collaboration in Diverse Project Teams

New product development (NPD) collaboration is an essential trigger for new product success. Many scholars have emphasized the reward system as an effective tool to manage NPD collaboration. Yet, our understanding about what types of rewards should be used for NPD collaboration is still unclear. This research examines the effects of reward interdependence and nonfinancial incentives on NPD collaboration, as well as the moderating roles of team size and deep-level heterogeneity. Findings from a field study involving 83 NPD project teams in China showed that both nonfinancial incentives and reward interdependence promoted NPD collaboration. Specifically, team size negatively moderated the relationships between incentive mechanisms and NPD collaboration. The reward interdependence–NPD collaboration relationship was negatively moderated by deep-level heterogeneity. Finally, suggestions for further research and project management practices are discussed.

The negative consequences of knowledge hiding in NPD project teams: The roles of project work attributes

Knowledge hiding, a unique concept distinct from knowledge sharing, occurs frequently in NPD project teams. Although knowledge hiding has been proven to cause distrust and reduce individual creative performance, little is known about the negative influences of knowledge hiding on team performance in new product development (NPD) projects. Drawing on organizational learning theory and job characteristic theory, this study investigates how knowledge hiding influences project team performance through team learning and the contingent roles of project-based work attributes (i.e. cross-functionality and team stability). Data were collected from a sample of 92 NPD project teams in China. The results revealed that knowledge hiding was negatively associated with project team performance. This linkage was partially mediated by team learning. Team stability played a moderating role in the relationship between knowledge hiding and team learning. Moreover, as team stability increased, the negative indirect impact of knowledge hiding on project team performance was weakened. Finally, theoretical implications, practical guidelines and limitations were discussed.

EVALUATING BARRIERS TO KNOWLEDGE SHARING AFFECTING NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT TEAM PERFORMANCE

Manufacturing and service organisations have repeatedly stressed the importance of knowledge management and sharing as an integral part of their growth and business strategy. Unfortunately, knowledge sharing (KS) barriers or factors can have a negative influence on a new product development (NPD) project team performance can make it difficult for the organisation to achieve sustained superior performance. The purpose of this research is to identify and explore a set of important KS barriers that might negatively affect the performance of a NPD project team. Specifically, this research focussed on identifying and evaluating the barriers to development and to offer guidelines to decision makers to improve KS to foster effective processes. This research can be utilised by decision-makers to design and develop effective processes and mitigation strategies to ensure effective KS.

The Relationships Among Environmental Turbulence and Socio-Technical Risk Factors Affecting Project Risks and Performance in NPD Project Teams

This study proposes a research framework to empirically examine the relationships among environmental turbulence, socio-technical risk factors, project risk, and project performance for a New Product Development (NPD) project team in the telecommunications industry. In addition, the moderating effect of communication on the relationship between project risk and project performance is also analyzed. The samples were collected from NPD team projects in 17 of Taiwan's telecommunication public firms. Our results indicate a positive relationship between: (1) environmental turbulence and social-related risks, (2) social-related risks and technical-related risks, (3) socio-technical related risks and project risks, and (4) a strong negative relationship between project risks and project performance. Meanwhile, although statistically insignificant, the moderating effect of communication could weaken the relationship between project risk and project performance.

Selecting new product development team members with knowledge sharing approach

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a method for selection of the new product development (NPD) project team members, in such a way to maximize the expertise level of team members and at the same time, optimize knowledge sharing in the organization. Design/methodology/approach – According to the motivation-opportunity-ability framework, knowledge sharing antecedents were determined. Then, the problem of selecting appropriate members of the project team was formulated as a bi-objective integer non-linear programming model. Due to the uncertainty conditions in the evaluation of candidates, the fuzzy sets approach was used for modeling. To solve the problem, first, the non-linear programming model was converted to a linear model. Subsequently, the fuzzy bi-objective linear programming problem was solved by using an approximate algorithm. Findings – Results of applying the proposed method to an Iranian ship-building company showed its effectiveness in selecting appropriate members of the project team. Practical implications – With the aid of the proposed approach, project managers will be able to form effective project teams that while increasing the success probability of the project, facilitate the maintenance of knowledge acquired during the project lifecycle. Originality/value – This paper, for the first time, has tried to provide a method for selecting the NPD project team members, in a way that while selecting candidates with highest expertise, maximizes the sharing of knowledge among them.

An integrative model for knowledge transfer between new product development project teams

Knowledge transfer (KT) between new product development (NPD) project teams is considered by many authors as a process. A variety of works in literature have proposed models to elucidate such a KT process and its stages. However, the nomenclature used to describe these models and the proposed KT stages present large heterogeneity. Researchers from different fields have studied the KT processes; hence, there have been different interpretations or approaches for the same problem. This study presents a comparison of 14 KT models organized in two main research approaches: the emergent approach (which considers the dynamics and integration of the team) and the engineering approach (which considers the organization and management of knowledge). The comparison is based on content analysis. The main contribution of this paper is the proposition of a new model for KT between NPD project teams, integrating the previous models so as to provide a more complete and consistent KT framework.

"Implicit Coordination in NPD Project Teams: Exploring its Dimensions, Antecedents and Consequences"

Cross-functional teams cope with the complexity and uncertainty of new product development (NPD) projects by coordinating the activities of their members. Recent research on team cognition suggests that effective teams are able to implicitly coordinate without overt communication or formal planning (traditional coordination mechanisms that are often associated with project delays and cost overruns). In this conceptual paper, we review the extant literature on NPD, team cognition, and proactive behavior to conceptualize implicit coordination (IC) in NPD projects. First, we propose a two-dimensional IC construct suggesting that IC is the result of both a complex cognitive process (anticipation, which refers to expectations about team members’ needs and constraints and the demands of the current task) and a behavioral process (dynamic adjustment, referring to the actions that team members choose based on their anticipations). Second, we identify factors that facilitate or impede the ability of team members to transform their anticipations into actions. We explain how these two processes contribute to improving NPD project performance. We discuss the theoretical and managerial implications and limitations of this approach; suggesting IC as a complementary method for coordinating tasks and activities rather than the sole coordination mechanism for the NPD project teams.

Antecedents and consequences of team sensemaking capability in product development projects

With the increasing popularity of organizational sensemaking in the literature, sensemaking capability of firms attracts many researchers and practitioners from different fields. Nevertheless, sensemaking capability is rarely addressed in the new product development (NPD) project teams in the technology and innovation management literature. Specifically, we know little about what team sensemaking capability is, its ingredients and benefits, and how it works in NPD projects (e.g., its antecedents and consequences). By investigating 92 NPD project teams, we found that (1) team sensemaking capability, which is composed of internal and external communication, information gathering, information classification, building shared mental models, and taking experimental actions, has a positive impact on the information implementation and speed‐to‐market; (2) information implementation and speed‐to‐market mediate the relationship between team sensemaking capability and new product success; and (3) team sensemaking capability mediates the relationship between team processes and information implementation and partially mediates the relationship between team processes and speed‐to‐market. We also found that team autonomy, interpersonal trust among team members, and open‐mindedness of team members positively influence the development of team sensemaking capability. Theoretical and managerial implications of the study findings are discussed.

Knowledge transfer between NPD project teams

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to propose a method for the identification of improvement opportunities in the knowledge transfer (KT) process between new product development (NPD) project teams. This method helps to prioritize which KT mechanisms of the company have to be improved and which other new mechanisms have to be implanted to reduce KT barriers and foster the KT process.Design/methodology/approachThe proposed method follows a structure based on the QFD and FMEA quality tools approaches. Thus, a set of matrices for the KT barriers and mechanisms prioritization is used.FindingsThe presented results enabled the identification, inside the company, of the main points for the KT process improvement. The implementation of the suggestions was not started off until the conclusion of the present research. However, the problems identification and the generated discussions around these problems have already had an important repercussion in the project team. In this sense, the interviewees pointed out that the discussion helped to see existing problems that in the past were not considered as such.Research limitations/implicationsThis work has focused on NPD project teams. However, the addressed issues are highly common in any kind of projects. Therefore, this work might be a first step to a future extended research, in which KT between any types of project teams could be analyzed.Practical implicationsResults of this method could help to develop action plans to prevent or overcome possible existing barriers in the NPD project teams.Originality/valueThe paper provides a structured process for the identification of improvement opportunities in the NPD team context. The paper also provides a literature review of the main KT barriers and mechanisms; a set of matrices to help the analysis and prioritization of the information collected about a company's KT process, and an application of the proposal in a company manufacturing agricultural machinery.

A conceptual framework of the impact of NPD project team and leader empowerment on communication and performance: An alliance case context

New product development (NPD) in an alliance context crosses organizational boundaries and therefore makes team and leader empowerment and communication an ever more important topic for the successful accomplishment of NPD goals. We developed a conceptual model that addresses some key questions: Under what circumstances should the project team and leader be empowered? How much empowerment? And what effects does this have on communication and NPD performance?Using case study research, we developed a conceptual model portraying the impact of NPD project team and leader empowerment in the ‘alliance focal company’ (AFC — the lead company in the alliance) on the communication with a project's strategic partners, and the subsequent effects on project performance. Our model suggests that the efficiency of the development project (shortest, cheapest, and highest quality possible) is contingent upon how well the actual intensity level and the degree of media-richness of communication fit the required ones. Conversely, the actual intensity level and degree of media-richness of communication are enabled by a varying extent of team and leader empowerment, ranging from limited to significant.

Product Development Team Stability and New Product Advantage: The Role of Decision-Making Processes

Innovation scholars have long touted the value of cross-functional teams, and though firms have embraced a cross-functional design in their new product development (NPD) teams, these teams continue to face challenges. Stability in an NPD team may offer important advantages for decision making; however, its effectiveness as a structural coordination mechanism remains largely unexplored. Therefore, to offer insight into the value of NPD team stability, the authors develop a process-based model that examines the extent to which stability influences certain decision-making processes, which in turn influence new product advantage. They examine these relationships with a sample of cross-functional NPD project teams from 208 high-technology firms. The results reveal that the degree of stability in an NPD project team has a curvilinear relationship to team-level debate and decision-making comprehensiveness. In turn, whereas debate is positively related to decision comprehensiveness, decision comprehensiveness is positively related to new product advantage only at high levels. These curvilinear patterns shed light on anecdotal evidence that currently attributes success to both stable and unstable project teams.

Product Development Team Stability and New Product Advantage: The Role of Decision-Making Processes

Innovation scholars have long touted the value of cross-functional teams, and though firms have embraced a cross-functional design in their new product development (NPD) teams, these teams continue to face challenges. Stability in an NPD team may offer important advantages for decision making; however, its effectiveness as a structural coordination mechanism remains largely unexplored. Therefore, to offer insight into the value of NPD team stability, the authors develop a process-based model that examines the extent to which stability influences certain decision-making processes, which in turn influence new product advantage. They examine these relationships with a sample of cross-functional NPD project teams from 208 high-technology firms. The results reveal that the degree of stability in an NPD project team has a curvilinear relationship to team-level debate and decision-making comprehensiveness. In turn, whereas debate is positively related to decision comprehensiveness, decision comprehensiveness is positively related to new product advantage only at high levels. These curvilinear patterns shed light on anecdotal evidence that currently attributes success to both stable and unstable project teams.

Team intuition as a continuum construct and new product creativity: The role of environmental turbulence, team experience, and stress

Although past research has reported the benefits of intuition in new product decision-making (i.e., higher quality product; enhanced customer satisfaction), intuition has largely been studied as an individual phenomenon and little work has examined the role of intuition on new product development (NPD) project teams. Furthermore, in a turbulent environment, NPD project teams may rely more on intuitive judgments, and other factors such as experience and stress may also influence the relationship between team intuition and team decision making. Drawing from the organizational design literature on creativity in decision making, this study builds a conceptual model of NPD team intuition and its effect on the team's ability to generate creative new products. We then derive hypotheses regarding team intuition, stress, environmental turbulence, and new product creativity, and test the hypotheses using data from a sample of 155 firms operating in Ankara and Istanbul, Turkey. We specifically test whether an inverted-U relationship exists between team intuition and new product creativity (that is, a balance of both intuitive and rational judgments is preferred), and whether this relationship is moderated by team experience and stress. Moreover, direct impact of turbulent conditions (i.e. market and technical turbulence) on intuition was also examined. The results of our empirical study with a sample of 310 new product/project developers and 155 project managers showed a positive and linear relation between turbulent conditions (both market and technical) and team intuition and an inverted U-shaped team intuition–new product creativity relation for teams with high experience and low stress. Finally, theoretical implications for future research and managerial implications for practitioners are discussed in the conclusion section.

Procedural Justice Climate in New Product Development Teams: Antecedents and Consequences

With the increasing interest in the concept of justice in the group behavior literature, the procedural justice (PJ) climate attracts many researchers and practitioners from different fields. Nevertheless, the PJ climate is rarely addressed in the new product development (NPD) project team literature. Specifically, the technology and innovation management (TIM) literature provides little about what the PJ climate is, its nature and benefits, and how it works in NPD project teams. Also, few studies investigate the antecedents and consequences of the PJ climate in NPD teams enhancing the understanding of this concept from a practical perspective. This paper discusses the PJ climate theory in a NPD team context and empirically demonstrates how team members' positive collective perceptions of a PJ climate can be developed and how a PJ climate influences a project's performance in NPD teams. In particular, team culture values including employee orientation, customer orientation, systematic management control, innovativeness, and social responsibility were investigated as antecedents, and team learning, speed to market, and market success of new products were studied as outcomes of PJ climate in this paper. By studying 83 NPD project teams it was found on the basis of using partial least squares (PLS) method that (1) the level of employee, customer and innovativeness orientation as well as systematic management control during the project had a positive impact on developing a PJ climate in an NPD team; (2) a PJ climate positively affects team learning and product development time (i.e., speed to market); and (3) team learning and speed to market mediate the relations between the PJ climate and new product success (NPS). Based on the findings, this paper suggests that managers should enhance the PJ climate and team culture in the project team to enhance team learning and to develop products faster. In particular, managers should (1) open a discussion forum among people and create a dialogue for people who disagree with the other project team members rather than dictating or emposing others ideas to them, (2) facilitate information searching and collecting mechanisms to make decisions effectively and to clarify uncertainties, and (3) allow team members to challange project‐related ideas and decisions and modify them with consensus. Also, to enhance the PJ climate during the project, managers should (1) respect and listen to all team members' ideas and try to understand why they are sometimes in opposition, (2) define team members' task boundaries and clarify project norms and project goals, and (3) set knowledge‐questioning values by facilitating team members to try out new ideas and seek out new ways to do things.

Success Factors for Integrating Suppliers into New Product Development

Faster, better, cheaper—these marching orders summarize the challenge facing new product development (NPD). In other words, NPD teams must find the means for speeding time to market while also improving product quality and reducing product costs. Cross‐functional teams have proved effective for meeting these challenges, and such teams may extend beyond company boundaries to include key materials suppliers.Effective integration of suppliers into NPD can yield such benefits as reduced cost and improved quality of purchased materials, reduced product development time, and improved access to and application of technology. As Gary Ragatz, Robert Handfield, and Thomas Scannell point out, however, those benefits do not automatically accrue to any NPD team that includes representatives from a supplier's company. In a study of 60 member companies from the Michigan State University Global Procurement and Supply Chain Electronic Benchmarking Network, they explore the management practices and the environmental factors that relate most closely to successful integration of suppliers into the NPD process.The study identifies supplier membership on the NPD project team as the greatest differentiator between most and least successful integration efforts. Although the respondents reported only moderate use of shared education and training, the study cites this management factor as another significant differentiator between most and least successful efforts. Respondents listed direct, cross‐functional, intercompany communication as the most widely used technique for integrating suppliers into NPD.To integrate suppliers into NPD, a company must overcome such barriers as resistance to sharing proprietary information, and the not‐invented‐here syndrome. The results of this study suggest that overcoming such barriers depends on relationship structuring—that is, shared education and training, formal trust development processes, formalized risk/reward sharing agreements, joint agreement on performance measurements, top management commitment from both companies, and confidence in the supplier's capabilities. Overcoming these barriers also depends on assett sharing, including intellectual assets such as customer requirements, technology information, and cross‐functional communication; physical assets such as linked information systems, technology, and shared plant and equipment; and human assets such as supplier participation on the project team and co‐location of personnel.

Success factors for integrating suppliers into new product development

Faster, better, cheaper—these marching orders summarize the challenge facing new product development (NPD). In other words, NPD teams must find the means for speeding time to market while also improving product quality and reducting product costs. Cross-functional teams have proved effective for meeting these challenges, and such teams may extend beyond company boundaries to include key materials suppliers. Effective integration of suppliers into NPD can yield such benefits as reduced cost and improved quality of purchased materials, reduced product development time, and improved access to and application of technology. As Gary Ragatz, Robert Handfield, and Thomas Scannell point out, however, those benefits do not automatically accrue to any NPD team that includes representatives from a supplier's company. In a study of 60 member companies from the Michigan State University Global Procurement and Supply Chain Electronic Benchmarking Network, they explore the management practices and the environmental factors that relate most closely to successful integration of suppliers into the NPD process. The study identifies supplier membership on the NPD project team as the greatest differentiator between most and least successful integration efforts. Although the respondents reported only moderate use of shared education and training, the study cites this management factor as another significant differentiator between most and least successful efforts. Respondents listed direct, cross-functional, intercompany communication as the most widely used technique for integrating suppliers into NPD. To integrate suppliers into NPD, a company must overcome such barriers as resistance to sharing proprietary information, and the not-invented-here syndrome. The results of this study suggest that overcoming such barriers depends on relationship structuring—that is, shared education and training, formal trust development processes, formalized risk/reward sharing agreements, joint agreement on performance measurements, top management commitment from both companies, and confidence in the supplier's capabilities. Overcoming these barriers also depends on assett sharing, including intellectual assets such as customer requirements, technology information, and cross-functional communication; physical assets such as linked information systems, technology, and shared plant and equipment; and human assets such as supplier participation on the project team and co-location of personnel.

Team leader autonomy in new product development

Reports the results of a UK company survey on the strategic and operational autonomy of team leaders working on new product development (NPD). The data are based on returns from 194 manufacturing companies and were completed by either the director of R&D or a member of the board with overall responsibility for the management of NPD project team leaders. The management of NPD project team leaders was classified into task variables (six strategic and seven operational) and a member of top management was asked to rate on a seven‐point Likert scale the extent to which each task was the autonomous responsibility of the team leader as opposed to the responsibility of other managers. Subdivides the sample into high technology and low‐to‐medium technology companies and analyses the strategic and operational management of NPD team leaders according to the company′s performance (measured by annual sales turnover) and its market environment, using four measures of the market environment: product life cycle, market growth rate, market share and R&D spending on new product development. Finds annual sales turnover to be the most important and closely associated variable with high amounts of autonomy granted to team leaders working on new product development. In medium‐to‐low technology companies, the market growth rate and R&D spending are additional, significantly associated variables. Concludes that UK companies reduce their top management controls in order to facilitate the autonomy of NPD team leaders when company sales turnover is high. Additionally, it is arguable from the evidence of the data that medium‐to‐low technology companies are more influenced by recent market performance than are high technology companies because, in addition to sales, they facilitate more autonomy according to market growth rate, market share and R&D spending.