Collaborative Product Development: The Effect of Project Complexity on the Use of Information Technology Tools and New Product Development Practices

Collaboration is an essential element of new product development (NPD). This research examines the associations between four types of information technology (IT) tools and NPD collaboration. The relationships between NPD practices and NPD collaboration are also examined. Drawing on organizational information processing theory, we propose that the relationships between IT tools and NPD collaboration will be moderated differently by three project complexity dimensions, namely, product size, project novelty, and task interdependence, due to the differing nature of information processing necessitated by each project complexity dimension. Likewise, the moderation effects of the project complexity dimensions on the relationship between NPD practices and NPD collaboration will also be different. We test our hypotheses using data from a sample of NPD projects in three manufacturing industries. We find that IT tools are associated with collaboration to a greater extent when product size is relatively large. In contrast, IT tools exhibit a smaller association with collaboration when project novelty or task interdependence is relatively high. NPD practices are found to be more significantly associated with NPD collaboration under the contingency of high project novelty or high task interdependence. The findings provide insights about circumstances where several popular IT tools are more likely to facilitate collaboration, thus informing an NPD team's IT adoption and use decisions.

[1]  R. Daft,et al.  Language and Organization , 1979 .

[2]  Marco Iansiti,et al.  Envisioning IT-Enabled Innovation , 1998 .

[3]  Jianxin Jiao,et al.  Virtual prototyping for customized product development , 1997 .

[4]  Christoph H. Loch,et al.  Exchanging Preliminary Information in Concurrent Engineering: Alternative Coordination Strategies , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[5]  Weidong Li,et al.  Collaborative Computer-Aided Design - Research and Development Status , 2004 .

[6]  Deborah Compeau,et al.  Assessing Between-Group Differences in Information Systems Research: A Comparison of Covariance-and Component-Based SEM , 2009, MIS Q..

[7]  Edward G. Anderson,et al.  A Hierarchical Product Development Planning Framework , 2005 .

[8]  Avan R. Jassawalla,et al.  An Examination of Collaboration in High‐Technology New Product Development Processes , 1998 .

[9]  Maurizio Sobrero,et al.  The Trade-Off between Efficiency and Learning in Interorganizational Relationships for Product Development , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[10]  P. Murmann Expected development time reductions in the German mechanical engineering industry , 1994 .

[11]  A. Sánchez,et al.  Cooperation and the Ability to Minimize the Time and Cost of New Product Development within the Spanish Automotive Supplier Industry , 2003 .

[12]  Linda Moffat,et al.  Tools and teams: competing models of integrated product development project performance , 1998 .

[13]  R. Rice Task Analyzability, Use of New Media, and Effectiveness: A Multi-Site Exploration of Media Richness , 1992 .

[14]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Product development performance : strategy, organization, and management in the world auto industry / Kim B. Clark, Tahahiro Fujimoto , 1991 .

[15]  J. Hauser,et al.  The House of Quality , 1988 .

[16]  D. Tony Liu,et al.  A review of web-based product data management systems , 2001 .

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

[18]  Roger G. Schroeder,et al.  Linking Routines to Operations Capabilities: A New Perspective , 2008 .

[19]  Satish Nambisan,et al.  Information Systems as a Reference Discipline for New Product Development , 2003, MIS Q..

[20]  Kathrin M. Möslein,et al.  Overcoming Mass Confusion: Collaborative Customer Co-Design in Online Communities , 2005, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[21]  Debasish N. Mallick The Design Strategy Framework , 2010 .

[22]  Jay R. Galbraith Organization Design: An Information Processing View , 1974 .

[23]  Christian Terwiesch,et al.  Product Development and Concurrent Engineering , 2000 .

[24]  Ali A. Yassine,et al.  Investigating the role of IT in customized product design , 2004 .

[25]  M. Lindell,et al.  Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[26]  Wynne W. Chin,et al.  A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic - Mail Emotion/Adoption Study , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[27]  Christoph H. Loch,et al.  A Retrospective Look at Production and Operations Management Articles on New Product Development , 2009 .

[28]  A. Nerkar,et al.  Beyond local search: boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry , 2001 .

[29]  Lisa Z. Song,et al.  The Role of Information Technologies in Enhancing R&D–Marketing Integration: An Empirical Investigation , 2010 .

[30]  Carol Stoak Saunders,et al.  Information Processing View of Organizations: An Exploratory Examination of Fit in the Context of Interorganizational Relationships , 2005, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[31]  Jong-min Choe,et al.  The effect of environmental uncertainty and strategic applications of IS on a firm's performance , 2003, Inf. Manag..

[32]  Martyn Pinfold,et al.  The application of KBE techniques to the FE model creation of an automotive body structure , 2001 .

[33]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations , 1976 .

[34]  Jeffrey K. Liker,et al.  Composite forms of organization as a strategy for concurrent engineering effectiveness , 1996 .

[35]  Paul S. Adler,et al.  From project to process management: an empirically-based framework for analyzing product development time , 1995 .

[36]  Mohan V. Tatikonda,et al.  Integrating Operations and Marketing Perspectives of Product Innovation: The Influence of Organizational Process Factors and Capabilities on Development Performance , 2001 .

[37]  Yoke San Wong,et al.  Collaborative computer-aided design - research and development status , 2005, Comput. Aided Des..

[38]  Mohan V. Tatikonda,et al.  Technology novelty, project complexity, and product development project execution success: a deeper look at task uncertainty in product innovation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[39]  Joe Tidd,et al.  The Influence of Project Novelty on the New Product Development Process , 2002 .

[40]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  Developing and Validating an Observational Learning Model of Computer Software Training and Skill Acquisition , 2003, Inf. Syst. Res..

[41]  Alan MacCormack,et al.  Managing the Sources of Uncertainty: Matching Process and Context in Software Development , 2003 .

[42]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Sourcing By Design: Product Complexity and the Supply Chain , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[43]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  Understanding the Impact of Collaboration Software on Product Design and Development , 2006, Inf. Syst. Res..

[44]  Dale Goodhue,et al.  Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance , 1995, MIS Q..

[45]  K. Weick The social psychology of organizing , 1969 .

[46]  Erik Jan Hultink,et al.  Antecedents and Consequences of Information Technology Usage in NPD: A Comparison of Dutch and U.S. Companies , 2008 .

[47]  Anne P. Massey,et al.  Can You Hear Me Now? Communication in Virtual Product Development Teams* , 2009 .

[48]  Monideepa Tarafdar,et al.  How do a company's information technology competences influence its ability to innovate? , 2007, J. Enterp. Inf. Manag..

[49]  D. Larcker,et al.  Product Development Cycle Time and Organizational Performance , 1997 .

[50]  Mark A. Vonderembse,et al.  Mediating effects of computer-aided design usage: From concurrent engineering to product development performance , 2006 .

[51]  Ben M. Bensaou,et al.  Inter-organizational relationships and information technology: a conceptual synthesis and a research framework , 1996 .

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

[53]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  From IT Leveraging Competence to Competitive Advantage in Turbulent Environments: The Case of New Product Development , 2006, Inf. Syst. Res..

[54]  John K. Gershenson,et al.  Product modularity: Definitions and benefits , 2003 .

[55]  Graham Jared,et al.  Complexity metrics for design (simplicity + simplicity = complexity) , 2003 .

[56]  Varun Grover,et al.  Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms , 2003, MIS Q..

[57]  S. Samavedam,et al.  Visualisation of rapid prototyping , 2001 .

[58]  H. J. Arnold Moderator variables: A clarification of conceptual, analytic, and psychometric issues , 1982 .

[59]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  Representing and testing organizational theories: A holistic construal. , 1982 .

[60]  Mark A. Vonderembse,et al.  Integrated product development practices and competitive capabilities: the effects of uncertainty, equivocality, and platform strategy , 2002 .

[61]  Donald Gerwin,et al.  An Evaluation of Research on Integrated Product Development , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[62]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Accelerating Adaptive Processes: Product Innovation in the Global Computer Industry , 1995 .

[63]  Michael E. McGrath,et al.  Product development : success through product and cycle-time excellence , 1992 .

[64]  Roger J. Calantone,et al.  Is more information technology better for new product development , 2006 .

[65]  Kenneth S. Colmen Benchmarking the Delivery of Technical Support , 1993 .

[66]  Morgan Swink,et al.  A tutorial on implementing concurrent engineering in new product development programs , 1998 .

[67]  R. Boutellier,et al.  Management of Dispersed Product Development Teams: The Role of Information Technologies , 1998 .

[68]  Kenneth B. Kahn,et al.  PERSPECTIVE: Trends and Drivers of Success in NPD Practices: Results of the 2003 PDMA Best Practices Study* , 2009 .

[69]  R. Shah,et al.  In union lies strength: Collaborative competence in new product development and its performance effects , 2009 .