Description
Action Required: Read chapter 12 of your book Test your Knowledge (Question): Question 1 Discuss in detail, the factors that affect the new product development team’s performance? Instructions: 1- No plagiarism, No match, please. 2- 250 – 350 words
Unformatted Attachment Preview
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OF
Technological
Innovation
Sixth Edition
Melissa A. Schilling
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. Authorized only for instructor use in the classroom. No reproduction or further distribution permitted without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Chapter 12
Managing New Product Development
Teams
12-2
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Innovation Teams at the Walt Disney
Company
1
In the early stages of generating and refining an idea for a movie
the small incubation team includes a director, a writer, some
artists, and some storyboard people.
Once approved, a movie enters production using computer-aided
design (CAD) systems that apply mathematical models to simulate
lifelike textures, movement, and lighting.
The process was managed by small, collocated, autonomous
teams that had great discretion over their work routines.
Artists showed their ongoing work to directors and peers in
“dailies,” in order to receive regular and honest feedback.
12-3
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Innovation Teams at the Walt Disney
Company
2
Discussion Questions:
1. Why does Disney keep its development teams small?
2. What are the pros and cons of the teams being so
autonomous?
3. Is Disney’s team approach mostly suited to creative
projects, or would it work equally well in other kinds
of industries?
12-4
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Overview
Many organizations now use cross-functional teams to
lead and manage the NPD process.
There is considerable variation in how these teams are
formed and managed.
The chapter will look at size, composition, structure,
administration, and leadership of teams.
12-5
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Constructing New Product
Development Teams
1
Team Size.
• May range from a few members to hundreds.
• Bigger is not always better; large teams create more
administrative costs and communication problems.
• Large teams have higher potential for social loafing.
Team Composition.
• Including members from multiple functions of firm ensures
greater coordination between functions.
• Firms around the world rely heavily on cross-functional
teams for their new product development efforts.
12-6
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Constructing New Product
Development Teams
2
• Diversity in functional backgrounds increases breadth of
knowledge base of team.
• Other types of diversity (for example, organizational tenure,
cultural, gender, age, etc.) can be beneficial as well.
• Provides broader base of contacts within and beyond firm.
• Ensures multiple perspectives are considered.
• However, diversity can also raise coordination costs.
• Individuals prefer to interact with those they perceive as similar
(“homophily”).
• May be more difficult to reach shared understanding.
• May be lower group cohesion.
• Extended contact can overcome some of these challenges.
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
12-7
Research Brief
1
Why Brainstorming Teams Kill Breakthrough Ideas.
• Dozens of laboratory studies have shown that brainstorming groups
produced fewer ideas and ideas of less novelty than the sum of the ideas
created by the same number of individuals working alone.
• Three main reasons:
• Fear of Judgment – people self-censor many of their most creative ideas for
fear of being judged.
• Production Blocking – when one person is talking, others are blocked from
ideating.
• Feasibility Trumps Originality – groups tend to weight “feasible” more highly
than “original”.
• Indicates that people should brainstorm alone first and elaborate their
ideas before moving into team development.
12-8
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Research Brief
2
Boundary-Spanning Activities in NPD Teams.
•
Ancona and Caldwell studied 45 NPD teams to identify the roles team
members engage in to collect information and resources within and
beyond the firm. Found three primary types:
• Ambassador activities: representing team to others and protecting from
interference.
• Task coordination activities: coordinating team’s activities with other groups.
• Scouting activities: scanning for ideas and information that might be useful to
the team.
•
Scouting and ambassador activities more beneficial early in development
cycle; task coordination activities beneficial throughout life of team.
12-9
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Structure of New Product
Development Teams
1
One well-known
typology of team
structure classifies
teams into four
types:
• Functional.
• Lightweight.
• Heavyweight.
• Autonomous.
Access the text alternative for these images
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
12-10
Structure of New Product
Development Teams
2
Functional Teams.
•
Members report to functional manager.
•
Temporary, and members may spend less than 10% of their time on
project.
•
Typically no project manager or dedicated liaison personnel.
•
Little opportunity for cross-functional integration.
•
Likely to be appropriate for derivative projects.
Lightweight Teams.
•
Members still report to functional manager.
•
Temporary, and member may spend less than 25% of their time on
project.
12-11
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Structure of New Product
Development Teams
3
• Typically have a project manager and dedicated liaison personnel.
• Manager is typically junior or middle management.
• Likely to be appropriate for derivative projects.
• Heavyweight Teams.
• Members are collocated with project manager.
• Manager is typically senior and has significant authority to command
resources and evaluate members.
• Often still temporary, but core team members often dedicated fulltime to project.
• Likely to be appropriate for platform projects.
12-12
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Structure of New Product
Development Teams
4
• Autonomous Teams.
• Members collocated and dedicated full-time (and often permanently)
to team.
• Project manager is typically very senior manager.
• Project manager is given full control over resources contributed from
functional departments and has exclusive authority over evaluation
and reward of members.
• Autonomous teams may have own policies, procedures and reward
systems that may be different from rest of firm.
• Likely to be appropriate for breakthrough and major platform
projects.
• Can be difficult to fold back into the organization.
12-13
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
The Management of New Product
Development Teams
1
Team Leadership.
• Team leader is responsible for directing team’s activities,
maintaining alignment with project goals, and
communicating with senior management.
• Team leaders impact team performance more directly than
senior management or champions.
• Different team types need different leader types:
• Lightweight teams need junior or middle manager.
• Heavyweight and autonomous teams need senior manager with high
status, who are good at conflict resolution, and capable of influencing
engineering, manufacturing, and marketing functions.
12-14
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
The Management of New Product
Development Teams
2
Team Administration.
• Many organizations now have heavyweight and autonomous
teams develop a project charter and contract book.
• Project charter encapsulates the project’s mission and provides
measurable goals. May also describe:
• Who is on team.
• Length of time members will be on team.
• Percentage of time members spend on team.
• Team budget.
• Reporting timeline.
• Key success criteria.
12-15
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
The Management of New Product
Development Teams
3
• Contract book defines in detail the basic plan to achieve
goals laid out in charter. It provides a tool for monitoring
and evaluating the team’s performance. Typically
provides:
• Estimates of resources required.
• Development time schedule.
• Results that will be achieved.
• Team members sign contract book; helps to establish
commitment and sense of ownership over project.
12-16
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
The Management of New Product
Development Teams
4
Managing Virtual Teams.
• In virtual teams, members may be a great distance from
each other, but are still able to collaborate intensely via
videoconferencing, groupware, email, and internet chat
programs.
• Enables people with special skills to be combined without disruption to
their personal lives.
•
However, may be losses of communication due to lack of proximity and
direct, frequent contact.
•
Requires members who are comfortable with technology, have strong
interpersonal skills and work ethic, and can work independently.
12-17
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Research Brief
Virtual International R&D Teams.
• Gassman and von Zedtwitz studied 34 technology-intensive
multinationals and identified four patterns of virtual international R&D
teams:
Access the text alternative for these images
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
12-18
Discussion Questions
1. Why are the tradeoffs in choosing a team’s size and level of
diversity?
2. What are some of the ways that managers can ensure that a
team reaps the advantages of diversity while not being
thwarted by some of the challenges team diversity raises?
3. Can you identify an example of a development project, and
what type of team you believed they used? Do you think this
was the appropriate type of team given the nature of the
project?
4. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of colocation? Are there some types of projects for which “virtual
teams” are inappropriate?
12-19
©2020 McGraw-Hill Education
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
