Relação entre características empresariais e fatores da transferência de conhecimentos entre projetos de produto

Abstract This paper presents an analysis of the relationship between company characteristics and the importance that companies attribute to the main factors that have influence on inter-product project knowledge transfer (KT). The analysis was based on a survey carried out on a sample of 58 companies that operate in Brazil. The studied characteristics of the companies were: (i) company size; (ii) project team size; (iii) team localization; (iv) number of concurrent projects; (v) project duration; (vi) project innovation and (vii) project complexity. It was possible to identify, using a cluster analysis, that project team size; number of concurrent projects and project complexity are statistically significant regarding the determination of attributed importance for the KT influence factors. The results revealed that companies that have a more complex management profile are more interested in influence factors of the external environment. On the other hand, companies that have a simpler management profile are more interested in influence factors of the internal environment.

[1]  Nicolette Lakemond,et al.  Co-locating NPD? The need for combining project focus and organizational integration , 2006 .

[2]  Lia Buarque de Macedo Guimar√£es.  The Practice of Ergonomics in the South of Brazil from a Sociotechnical Perspective , 2009 .

[3]  Torben Pedersen,et al.  MNC knowledge transfer, subsidiary absorptive capacity and HRM , 2002, Journal of International Business Studies.

[4]  Hal W. Hendrick,et al.  Macroergonomics: An Introduction to Work System Design , 2000 .

[5]  Morgan Swink,et al.  Toward a Theory of Competencies for the Management of Product Complexity: Six Case Studies , 2008 .

[6]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2003 .

[7]  K. Hewett,et al.  A Multi-Theoretical Model of Knowledge Transfer in Organizations: Determinants of Knowledge Contribution and Knowledge Reuse , 2006 .

[8]  Kentaro Nobeoka,et al.  INTER-PROJECT LEARNING IN NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT. , 1995 .

[9]  Amrit Tiwana,et al.  Supporting Collaborative Process Knowledge Management in New Product Development Teams , 1999, Decis. Support Syst..

[10]  M. Nieto,et al.  Beyond formal R&D: Taking advantage of other sources of innovation in low- and medium-technology industries , 2009 .

[11]  John Byrne,et al.  Knowledge Networks in New Product Development Projects: A Transactive Memory Perspective , 2005, Inf. Manag..

[12]  José Luis Duarte Ribeiro,et al.  Uma análise dos fatores de influência na transferência de conhecimentos entre projetos de produto , 2011 .

[13]  Maaike Kleinsmann,et al.  Understanding the complexity of knowledge integration in collaborative new product development teams: A case study , 2010 .

[14]  G. W. Milligan,et al.  Methodology Review: Clustering Methods , 1987 .

[15]  Anil K. Gupta,et al.  Knowledge flows within multinational corporations , 2000 .

[16]  Mariano Corso,et al.  Reusability and multi-product development policies: a comparison of approaches in the automotive, motorcycle and earthmoving machinery industries , 1999 .

[17]  青島 矢一.  Transfer of system knowledge across generations in new product development : empirical observations from Japanese automobile development , 1998 .

[18]  Laurent Bourgeon,et al.  Staffing approach and conditions for collective learning in project teams: The case of new product development projects , 2007 .

[19]  A. Prencipe,et al.  Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms , 2001 .

[20]  Paulo Carlos Kaminski,et al.  Knowledge transfer in product development processes: A case study in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) of the metal-mechanic sector from São Paulo, Brazil , 2008 .

[21]  Zou Yan,et al.  An Empirical Study on the Effect Mechanism of Knowledge Management on New Product Development in Aviation Industry , 2007, 2007 International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing.

[22]  Shikhar Sarin,et al.  The Effect of Team Leader Characteristics on Learning, Knowledge Application, and Performance of Cross-Functional New Product Development Teams , 2003, Decis. Sci..

[23]  Steven Henderson,et al.  The role of algorithm and result comprehensibility of automated scheduling on complacency , 2008 .

[24]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues , 2001, MIS Q..

[25]  O. Gassmann,et al.  Open R&D and Open Innovation: Exploring the Phenomenon , 2009 .

[26]  Mariano Corso,et al.  Continuous improvement and inter-project learning in new product development , 1997 .

[27]  Ross L Chapman,et al.  Complexity and learning behaviors in product innovation , 2004 .

[28]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[29]  Michael A. Cusumano,et al.  Multiproject strategy, design transfer, and project performance: a survey of automobile development projects in the US and Japan , 1995 .

[30]  Mary E. Zellmer-Bruhn,et al.  MULTINATIONAL ORGANIZATION CONTEXT: IMPLICATIONS FOR TEAM LEARNING AND PERFORMANCE , 2006 .

[31]  Rong Du,et al.  Relationship between knowledge sharing and performance: A survey in Xi'an, China , 2007, Expert Syst. Appl..

[32]  Jeffrey Cummings,et al.  Transferring R&D Knowledge : the Key Factors Affecting Knowledge Transfer Success , 2003 .

[33]  I-Chieh Hsu,et al.  Knowledge sharing practices as a facilitating factor for improving organizational performance through human capital: A preliminary test , 2008, Expert Syst. Appl..

[34]  I. Nonaka,et al.  SECI, Ba and Leadership: a Unified Model of Dynamic Knowledge Creation , 2000 .

[35]  Maria Adenfelt,et al.  Knowledge development and sharing in multinational corporations : The case of a centre of excellence and a transnational team , 2006 .

[36]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[37]  Ingrid M. Nembhard,et al.  Product Development and Learning in Project Teams: The Challenges Are the Benefits* , 2009 .

[38]  Ali E. Akgün,et al.  New product development team intelligence: Antecedents and consequences , 2008, Inf. Manag..

[39]  K. D. Joshi,et al.  Knowledge transfer in virtual systems development teams: an exploratory study of four key enablers , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[40]  Yaichi Aoshima,et al.  Transfer of System Knowledge Across Generations in New Product Development: Empirical Observations from Japanese Automobile Development , 2002 .

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

[42]  Mariano Corso,et al.  How management can foster continuous product innovation , 2000 .

[43]  Gabriel Szulanski.  The Process of Knowledge Transfer: A Diachronic Analysis of Stickiness , 2000 .

[44]  Gregory N. Stock,et al.  Creating Dynamic Capability: The Role of Intertemporal Integration, Knowledge Retention, and Interpretation , 2006 .

[45]  Mcdp Mathieu Weggeman,et al.  The Effect of IT and Co-location on Knowledge Dissemination , 2007 .

[46]  Klas Eric Soderquist,et al.  Organising Knowledge Management and Dissemination in New Product Development: Lessons from 12 Global Corporations , 2006 .

[47]  Rna Rudi Bekkers,et al.  Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter? , 2008 .

[48]  André Hardy,et al.  An examination of procedures for determining the number of clusters in a data set , 1994 .

[49]  Wesley M. Cohen,et al.  Firm Size and the Nature of Innovation within Industries: The Case of Process and Product R&D , 1996 .

[50]  Marc Antoni,et al.  Inter‐project improvement in product development , 2005 .