The Experts below are selected from a list of 300003 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Gary S Lynn - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the role of personality in new product Development Team performance
Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 2002Co-Authors: Richard R Reilly, Gary S Lynn, Zvi H AronsonAbstract:Although the role of personality in Team performance is not well understood, research suggests that personality plays a critical role in the effective performance of Teams. Personality variables should be especially important for new product Development (NPD) Teams which typically include highly coordinated activities among multidisciplinary members. The five-factor model provides a consistent structure for understanding how personality relates to different kinds of behavior and is used as a framework for reviewing literature related to Team performance. The same model is then used to form a set of research propositions that can serve to guide future research on the role of personality in NPD Teams. Because the literature suggests that the role of personality is dependent upon the type of task involved, we differentiate our research propositions for two specific types of new product Development: incremental innovation and radical innovation. We offer research propositions for the average level of each of the five-factor model variables and performance in the two types of Teams. Finally, we suggest a set of research propositions for the effect of heterogeneity of personality on performance in radical and incremental innovation Teams. © 2002 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.
-
new product Development Team improvisation and speed to market an extended model
European Journal of Innovation Management, 2002Co-Authors: Ali E. Akgün, Gary S LynnAbstract:Speed‐to‐market is cited as being vital in today’s competitive, uncertain and turbulent environments. To help companies in their quest for speed in new product Development, many tools and techniques have been developed. One of the these techniques – Team improvisation – is receiving a great deal of attention in both practice as well as theory. However, we know surprisingly little about improvisation in a new product Development context. In this paper, we extend previous Team improvisation models and test them in a new product Development context. By studying 354 new product projects, we found that Team improvisation has a positive impact on speed‐to‐market under turbulent markets and technology conditions, and there are some mechanisms that can facilitate a Team’s ability to improvise, such as Team stability and Teamwork. We also found that having a clear project goal will detract from a Team’s ability to improvise.
C Lassenius - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of pair programming at the Development Team level: an experiment
2005 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering 2005., 2005Co-Authors: J. Vanhanen, C LasseniusAbstract:We studied the effects of pair programming in a Team context on productivity, defects, design quality, knowledge transfer and enjoyment of work. Randomly formed three pair programming and two solo programming Teams performed the same 400-hour fixed-effort project. Pair programming increased the Development effort of the first tasks considerably compared to solo programming, but later the differences were small. Due to this learning time the pair programming Teams had worse overall project productivity. Task complexity did not affect the effort differences between solo and pair programming. The pair programming Teams wrote code with fewer defects, but were less careful in system testing, and therefore delivered systems with more defects. They may have relied too much on the peer review taking place during programming. Knowledge transfer seemed to be higher within the pair programming Teams. Finally, we also found weak support for higher enjoyment of work in the pair programming Teams.
-
an experience in combining flexibility and control in a small company s software product Development process
International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, 2003Co-Authors: Kristian Rautiainen, L Vuornos, C LasseniusAbstract:This paper presents a longitudinal case study at Smartner Information Systems, a small software product company operating in a dynamic and uncertain environment. Smartner successfully combines flexibility and control in their product Development process. Flexibility is gained with monthly sprints, after which new decisions about project scope can be made in planning the following sprint. Control is achieved through mapping the sprints to management decision points, where the management Team makes decisions concerning the whole project portfolio. The Development Team and other stakeholders of the product participate in sprint planning, facilitating communication of business/customer needs to Development. Product roadmapping and sprint demonstrations give visibility of Development plans and progress to the whole organization. Freezing the Development scope for a month at a time helps in giving the Development Team a chance to work on their assigned tasks and creates a more relaxed atmosphere.
David Wilemon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a process of identifying solving barriers to product Development Team success picmet 2010 conference
Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, 2010Co-Authors: Murray R. Millson, David WilemonAbstract:Developing major new products is a major corporate undertaking. As a general rule, the more complex the product the more likely difficult issues will develop which can retard Development success. This presentation is a case study of one Development Team in the medical device industry and how the numerous problems it faced were identified and resolved. We employed a survey of the key Team members containing both closed and open-ended questions. The results were tabulated and then presented to the Team for their additional comments/suggestions. The Team and the authors then devised a plan for resolving the major issues identified. Upon completion of the project, follow up interviews were conducted with the Team to assess how the Team process assessment performed and how it contributed to the successful Development of the new product. Suggestions were also made regarding how to improve the process. The authors conclude with suggestions how the Team improvement process can be used with other Development Teams.
-
factors influencing product Development Team satisfaction
European Journal of Innovation Management, 2001Co-Authors: Gloria Barczak, David WilemonAbstract:The increasing use of cross‐functional Teams for new product Development (NPD) belies the difficulty managers face in creating Teams that are truly effective. Effectiveness depends, in part, on having members who are satisfied with their Team and their project. This article reports the results of 71 interviews with members of NPD Teams, with a particular focus on the drivers of Team member satisfaction. These drivers include: Team characteristics, clear project goals, clarity about evaluation and rewards, effective leadership, management support, and manageable levels of conflict and stress. To create satisfied Team members, we discuss actions that can be taken at the senior management, project leader and Team member level.
Corinne Faure - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
attribution biases in the evaluation of new product Development Team members
Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2009Co-Authors: Corinne FaureAbstract:Managers are often concerned with the potential negative reputation impact of being assigned to a new product Development project. Social psychology theories, and in particular the group attribution error theory, suggest that their worries might be justified, with individual Team members being evaluated on the basis of the overall project performance, without regard for the processes by which the Team outcome was reached. The objective of this paper is to empirically test for the existence of such biases in the evaluation of new product Development Team members. For this purpose, three independent experiments based on scenarios test the extent to which the group attribution error is at play in the evaluation of new product Development Team members and the extent to which it can be removed. Overall, this paper indicates that this bias does indeed affect the evaluation of new product Development Team members as well as decisions based on these evaluations. In the studies presented in this paper, analysis of variance showed that subjects inferred that Team members' attitudes were consistent with the decision made and failed to adjust adequately for the decision rule used. Subjects then used these summary judgments as the basis for deciding on reward allocations and making competence attributions about the Team members. In Study 1, the decision rule used was either a vote or a Team leader decision, and therefore the bias might have been explained by the lack of information available. Study 2, however, provided unambiguous information about Team members' positions, yet subjects did not adequately take this information into account. Study 3 replicated these results with experienced new product Team managers, suggesting that theses biases are likely to be at play in the workplace. Moreover, subjects in Studies 2 and 3 felt quite confident that their judgments were being fair, even in the cases where these judgments truly were not, which suggests a lack of awareness of the bias on their part. The robustness of this bias should be cause for concerns for managers working in new product Development Teams or involved in the evaluation of the performance of such Teams. The studies conducted in this paper suggest that Team members can get unfairly rewarded or punished for decisions over which they have little or no control and that their reputation can also get affected by these decisions. Moreover, the fact that the group attribution error affected evaluations even in the case where experienced participants had specific information about Team members' positions suggests that this bias will not be easy to remove.
Ali E. Akgün - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
new product Development Team intelligence antecedents and consequences
Information & Management, 2008Co-Authors: Ali E. Akgün, Mumin Dayan, Anthony Di BenedettoAbstract:Our study investigated the effect of Team knowledge on new product Development (NPD). By investigating 207 NPD projects, we found that the declarative and procedural knowledge of the Team and their use of IT had a positive influence on the Team's knowledge base; and that the higher the functional diversity of the project Team, the greater their overall knowledge. We also found that Team knowledge positively impacted new product creativity and success in the market place.
-
new product Development Team improvisation and speed to market an extended model
European Journal of Innovation Management, 2002Co-Authors: Ali E. Akgün, Gary S LynnAbstract:Speed‐to‐market is cited as being vital in today’s competitive, uncertain and turbulent environments. To help companies in their quest for speed in new product Development, many tools and techniques have been developed. One of the these techniques – Team improvisation – is receiving a great deal of attention in both practice as well as theory. However, we know surprisingly little about improvisation in a new product Development context. In this paper, we extend previous Team improvisation models and test them in a new product Development context. By studying 354 new product projects, we found that Team improvisation has a positive impact on speed‐to‐market under turbulent markets and technology conditions, and there are some mechanisms that can facilitate a Team’s ability to improvise, such as Team stability and Teamwork. We also found that having a clear project goal will detract from a Team’s ability to improvise.
