Managing Task Interdependencies in Multi-Team Projects: A Longitudinal Study

In this article we examine project-level and team-level managerial functions aimed at managing inter-team task interdependencies and investigate their effect on the performance of teams in a multi-team product development project. We hypothesize that team interface management (a team-level function) performed in the concept phase of a project, rather than the later development phase, is positively related to team performance at the project's conclusion (i.e. product quality, product cost, development budget, development time). Furthermore, we argue that project structuring and support (a project-level function) is important in both the concept and the development phases. We test our hypotheses empirically based on a 36 months longitudinal study of a product development project in the European automotive industry comprising 39 teams. The results show that team interface management is particularly important during the concept phase of the project. Project structuring and support is most important in the development phase of the project, while hindering team performance in the concept phase. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2005.

[1]  David Wilemon,et al.  The Hidden Side of Leadership in Technical Team Management , 1994 .

[2]  M. Hoegl,et al.  Teamwork Quality and the Success of Innovative Projects , 2001 .

[3]  T. Mitchell,et al.  Building Better Theory: Time and The Specification of When Things Happen , 2001 .

[4]  Gloria Barczak,et al.  Communications patterns of new product development team leaders , 1991 .

[5]  Mary Ann Glynn,et al.  Creativity and technological learning: the roles of organization architecture and crisis in large-scale projects , 2000 .

[6]  David Wilemon,et al.  Leadership Differences in New Product Development Teams , 1989 .

[7]  R. Cooper,et al.  Determinants of Timeliness in Product Development , 1994 .

[8]  Hans J. Thamhain,et al.  Building high performing engineering project teams , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

[9]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: PAST RESEARCH, PRESENT FINDINGS, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS , 1995 .

[10]  George B. Graen,et al.  Individual Self-Management: Analysis of Professionals' Self-Managing Activities in Functional and Cross-Functional Work Teams , 1998 .

[11]  D. Mansour-Cole,et al.  Innovation project technology, information processing and performance: A test of the Daft and Lengel conceptualization , 1992 .

[12]  D. Denison,et al.  From Chimneys to Cross-Functional Teams: Developing and Validating a Diagnostic Model , 1996 .

[13]  C. Gersick.  Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development , 1988 .

[14]  K. Pavitt,et al.  Knowledge Specialization, Organizational Coupling, and the Boundaries of the Firm: Why Do Firms Know More than They Make? , 2001 .

[15]  D. Gerwin,et al.  Authorizing processes changing team autonomy during new product development , 1997 .

[16]  M. Hoegl,et al.  When teamwork really matters: task innovativeness as a moderator of the teamwork–performance relationship in software development projects , 2003 .

[17]  HoeglMartin,et al.  Teamwork Quality and the Success of Innovative Projects , 2001 .

[18]  S. Scott.  Social identification effects in product and process development teams , 1997 .

[19]  R. Katz.  The Effects of Group Longevity on Project Communication and Performance. , 1982 .

[20]  J. Pinto,et al.  Variations in Critical Success Factors Over the Stages in the Project Life Cycle , 1988 .

[21]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

[22]  Deborah G. . Ancona.  Outward Bound: Strategic for Team Survival in an Organization , 1990 .

[23]  Avan R. Jassawalla,et al.  Strategies of Effective New Product Team Leaders , 2000 .

[24]  L. James,et al.  Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. , 1984 .

[25]  Deborah G. . Ancona,et al.  Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams. , 1992 .

[26]  Gina J. Medsker,et al.  RELATIONS BETWEEN WORK GROUP CHARACTERISTICS AND EFFECTIVENESS: IMPLICATIONS FOR DESIGNING EFFECTIVE WORK GROUPS , 1993 .

[27]  Merle Crawford.  Communication patterns of new product development team leaders , 1992 .

[28]  Ron Sanchez,et al.  Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design , 1996 .

[29]  B. J. Zirger,et al.  A conceptual model of product development cycle time , 1994 .

[30]  Nicole A. Steckler,et al.  Building team leader effectiveness: A diagnostic tool , 1995 .

[31]  S. Brusoni,et al.  Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products and Organizations , 2001 .

[32]  David H. Gobeli,et al.  Improving the Process of Product Innovation , 1993 .

[33]  D. Dougherty.  Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms , 1992 .

[34]  Michael A. Cusumano,et al.  How Microsoft Makes Large Teams Work Like Small Teams , 1997 .

[35]  D. L. Gladstein.  Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. , 1984 .

[36]  C. Alderfer.  An Intergroup Perspective on Group Dynamics. , 1983 .

[37]  L. James.  Aggregation Bias in Estimates of Perceptual Agreement. , 1982 .