Leveraging ties: the contingent value of entrepreneurial teams' external advice networks on Indian software venture performance

This study investigates the impact of entrepreneurial teams' external networks on their ventures' performance. We first argue that ventures whose entrepreneurial teams span many structural holes in their external advice networks experience higher performance. We then propose that network ties are not uniform in their effect, but rather are contingent on two distinct features of entrepreneurial teams: (i) their strategic consensus—extent of agreement on key goals and strategies within the team—and (ii) internal cohesion—extent of interpersonal friendships within the team. Finally, we propose that team demographics and team networks complement (rather than substitute) each other. Data from Indian software ventures provide support for these arguments. We extend entrepreneurship research by highlighting how venture teams' internal processes and external networks jointly shape performance outcomes. We also add to the literature on team networks by drawing attention to the role of strategic consensus as a distinct pathway through which teams can leverage their external networks.     

Antecedents and consequences of team sensemaking capability in product development projects

With the increasing popularity of organizational sensemaking in the literature, sensemaking capability of firms attracts many researchers and practitioners from different fields. Nevertheless, sensemaking capability is rarely addressed in the new product development (NPD) project teams in the technology and innovation management literature. Specifically, we know little about what team sensemaking capability is, its ingredients and benefits, and how it works in NPD projects (e.g., its antecedents and consequences). By investigating 92 NPD project teams, we found that (1) team sensemaking capability, which is composed of internal and external communication, information gathering, information classification, building shared mental models, and taking experimental actions, has a positive impact on the information implementation and speed‐to‐market; (2) information implementation and speed‐to‐market mediate the relationship between team sensemaking capability and new product success; and (3) team sensemaking capability mediates the relationship between team processes and information implementation and partially mediates the relationship between team processes and speed‐to‐market. We also found that team autonomy, interpersonal trust among team members, and open‐mindedness of team members positively influence the development of team sensemaking capability. Theoretical and managerial implications of the study findings are discussed.     

Team reflexivity in innovative projects

In this article, we provide a theoretical extension and empirical test of team reflexivity. Building on West's (1996) conceptual discussions of team reflexivity, we argue that in the context of teams with innovative projects (e.g. product development teams), team reflexivity will be positively related to team effectiveness and efficiency. Furthermore, we specify social skills and project management skills as important determinants of team reflexivity. Using data from 575 members, leaders, and team external managers referring to 145 software development teams, we find that team reflexivity is positively related to team effectiveness but not efficiency. Furthermore, both social skills and project management skills are positively related to team reflexivity. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

The impact of structural and contextual factors on trust formation in product development teams

This study examines antecedents of trust formation in new product development (NPD) teams and the effects of trust on NPD team performance. A theoretical framework relating structural and contextual factors to interpersonal trust and project outcomes was built, including task complexity as a moderating variable. Hypotheses from this model were tested with data on 93 product development projects carried out in Turkey. The findings showed that structural factors such as moderate level of demographic diversity, proximity of team members, team longevity, and contextual factors (procedural and interactional justices) were positively related to the development of interpersonal trust in NPD teams. The findings also revealed that interpersonal trust had an impact on team learning and new product success, but not on speed-to-market. Further, the findings showed that the impact of interpersonal trust on team learning and new product success was higher when there was higher task complexity. Theoretical and managerial implications of the study findings are discussed.     

Reflexivity,stress, and unlearning in the new product development team: the moderating effect of procedural justice

The success of new product development (NPD) depends on a team's abilities to integrate, build, and reconfigure internal and external competences and the flexibility to address rapidly changing environments. To develop innovative products it is desirable that these processes should not be constrained by current beliefs and routines. NPD teams therefore need to engage in an unlearning process to overcome any resistance to new ideas and to facilitate a fresh approach. The paper recognizes that the controlled experience of stress plays a part in unlearning (e.g., confusion about technology or market change can encourage changes) and argues that teams should systematically reflect on the progress they are making in projects and in unlearning. The fairness of procedures used by the management moderates the proposed relationships. Two hundred and ninety eight team members and 77 NPD team leaders participated in the study. The results indicate that team reflexivity positively influences unlearning and product innovation, while team stress has a negative effect. The perceived fairness of management procedures strengthens the positive effects of team reflexivity on unlearning and product innovation, and reduces negative effect of team stress.     

创业成长中双重网络嵌入的演化规律研究——以正泰集团和温氏集团为例

新企业在创建、存活和成长过程中,需要通过嵌入社会关系网络获得资源支持,嵌入产业网络获得产业链分工协作收益。创业网络是社会网络和产业网络的有机统一体,创业成长过程同时也是对社会网络与产业网络双重嵌入的过程。基于创业网络中信任关系从情感性信任到认知性信任再到复合信任的演进,新创企业的双重网络嵌入性关系演化呈现出以下规律性:一是由社会网络嵌入向社会网络和产业网络双重嵌入演化;二是由"交易性嵌入"方式向"关系性嵌入"方式演化;三是由双重网络分离式嵌入向叠加式嵌入演化。新创企业双重网络嵌入演化对创业成长有促进作用,但同时也会形成"创业网络经营成本",政府需要对此加以重视。     

同事监督对团队绩效的影响——团队信任和努力的双中介模型

根据情境强度理论，本研究探讨了中国情境下同事监督对团队绩效的直接影响，并分析了团队信任和努力的双重中介作用。采用来自我国东部的10家企业的69个工作团队共571份调查数据，其中包括主管和团队成员两个不同来源，应用中介检验方法，结果表明：同事监督会促进团队绩效；同事监督积极影响团队信任和努力；团队信任和努力同时在同事监督对团队绩效的影响中起到部分中介作用。本研究的发现有利于拓展同事监督在中国组织情境中的作用效果研究。     

The Moderating Effects of Virtuality on the Antecedents and Outcome of NPD Team Trust

The fundamental dynamics of virtual and traditional face-to-face teams may be very different. The purpose of this study is to empirically examine and assess the moderating effects of virtuality on the antecedents and outcome of trust, where virtuality is measured along a continuum from face to face (no virtuality) to fully virtual rather than the more common approach of dichotomizing teams into two groups (i.e., face to face and virtual). The sample includes 116 different new product development teams from a variety of industries. The antecedents of trust that are studied are familiarity, goal clarity, training, relationship conflict, and process conflict. The outcome of trust is analyzed by determining how the impact of trust on cooperation changes as the level of virtuality changes. Primary findings are as follows: (1) Relationship conflict can be more detrimental to virtual teams than face-to-face teams because it is very difficult for team members of virtual teams to resolve their interpersonal disputes; (2) goal clarity is more important for face-to-face teams and less important for virtual teams in creating trust among team members; and (3) the impact of trust on cooperation is less for virtual teams than face-to-face teams. The primary implication for researchers and practice of these findings is that the role and importance of trust in virtual teams needs to be reevaluated. Managers using virtual teams need to realize that interpersonal relationships in virtual teams do not evolve in the same manner as face-to-face teams and may require different management techniques to be successful.     

Team control mode,workers' creativity,and new product innovativeness

Scholars of creativity and innovation argue that successful innovations originate from the creative ideas of workers. However, few studies have empirically examined how management mechanisms, such as the control mode adopted by the new product development team, may work together with workers' creativity to deliver a successful new product. Drawing on the theory of opposing action strategies of team innovation, we propose that different team control modes may work together with team members' creativity to jointly influence the innovativeness of teamwork outcomes. With survey data collected from different sources in new product development teams, we find that restrictive control can effectively help teams composed of very creative members to successfully develop innovative new products. Conversely, promotive control can effectively help teams composed of less creative members to deliver innovative new products.     

Antecedents and Consequences of Creativity in Product Innovation Teams

The generation of creative ideas and their manifestation as new products (NPs) are fundamental innovation activities of product innovation teams. Despite the importance of generating creative ideas at the fuzzy front end of the product innovation process, our understanding of antecedents and consequences of creativity of product innovation teams is limited. Drawing on Shane and Ulrich's organization design perspective of innovation, this study aims at examining the intermediary role of creativity as a critical link between team dynamics and product competitive advantage. In this study, the authors focus on NP and marketing program (MP) creativity in product innovation teams. They develop and empirically test a model that examines how internal and external team dynamics influence NP and MP creativity, and how NP and MP creativity affect product competitive advantage as a strategic innovation outcome. The study uses 206 matched responses from senior managers and product team leaders in high‐tech manufacturing firms in the United States to avoid common‐method bias. The authors use maximum likelihood estimation in a structural equation model to empirically test the proposed model. They find that two separate dimensions of creativity—novelty and meaningfulness—are differentially affected by team dynamics. For example, NP novelty as a result of divergent process is predominantly influenced by external team factors such as market‐based reward system and planning process formalization. On the other hand, NP meaningfulness as a result of convergent process is dominantly influenced by internal team factors such as social cohesion and superordinate identity. In addition, MP novelty is determined by social cohesion, superordinate identity, planning process formalization, and encouragement to take risks, while MP meaningfulness is influenced by social cohesion and planning process formalization. Our findings also suggest that NP novelty and meaningfulness, but not MP novelty and meaningfulness, play important intermediary roles in determining product competitive advantage. This study contributes to narrowing the important gap in the literature by examining the effect of team dynamics on creativity and by linking creativity to strategic innovation outcomes. Our study suggests that a firm's ability to manage team dynamics toward generating creative NPs and MPs constitutes a dynamic capability that can provide a competitive advantage over the competition.     

创新团队公平感知与知识共享行为关系研究——以成员信任为中介变量

创新团队组织形式的蓬勃发展使得团队成员的绩效激励方式成为众多管理者的研究课题。团队中掌握独特隐性知识的成员往往不愿意共享自身的有利于团队的创新知识,从而给团队的发展带来困难。如何针对这类员工做出有利于团队整体绩效提升的激励活动,是创新团队管理者和所有创新团队工作模式研究者的共同目标。通过数据模型的回归,得出如下结论:创新团队的成员公平感知与成员知识共享行为正向相关,成员对互动公平的感知对知识共享行为的影响最为显著。验证了创新团队成员信任在成员公平感知与知识共享行为之间的中介效用。     

Incorporating non-academics in academic spin-off entrepreneurial teams: the vertical diversity that can make the difference

To enhance the development of academic spin-offs, surrogate (external) entrepreneurs are often added to the entrepreneurial team comprising academics. Existing research focused on entrepreneurial team diversity (horizontal member differences) and has mixed results. Vertical member differences (i.e., inequality) between academics and non-academics are not addressed. However, strategic decision making is one of the main responsibilities of an entrepreneurial team. Decision-making power, as reflected in ownership, in particular, is thus of the essence. Based on a sample of 164 Italian academic spin-offs, this article investigates the impacts of both horizontal and vertical heterogeneity of entrepreneurial teams on the firms’ performance. The findings confirm that surrogate entrepreneurs generally make a positive contribution to academic spin-off performance but become counter-productive when their presence overpowers that of academics.     

Autonomous Teams and New Product Development

An autonomous team is an emerging tool for new product development (NPD). With its high degree of autonomy, independence, leadership, dedication, and collocation, the team has more freedom and stronger capabilities to be innovative and entrepreneurial. Several anecdotal cases suggest that autonomous teams are best when applied to highly uncertain, complex, and innovative projects. However, there is no empirical study to test such a notion. Moreover, autonomous teams are not a panacea, and implementing them can be costly and disruptive to their parent organization. When should this powerful, yet costly tool, be pulled out of the new product professional's toolbox? This paper attempts to answer this question. The objective of this study is to explore under which circumstances an autonomous team is the best choice for NPD. Based on contingency and information‐processing theories, autonomous teams are hypothesized to be more effective to address projects with: (1) high technology novelty and (2) radical innovation. To test these hypotheses, the relative effectiveness of four types of team structures: autonomous, functional, lightweight, and heavyweight are compared. The effectiveness measures include development cost, development speed, and overall product success. Vision clarity, resource availability, and team experience are the controlled variables. The empirical results based on the data from 555 NPD projects generally support the research hypotheses. Relative to other team structures, autonomous teams are more effective in addressing projects with high technology novelty or radical innovation. The results also suggest that heavyweight teams perform better than other teams in developing incremental innovation. These results provide some evidence to support contingency and information‐processing theories at the project level. Given the importance of the development of novel technology and radical innovation in establishing new businesses and other strategic initiatives, the findings of this study may not only have some important implications for NPD practices but may also shed some light on other important topics such as disruptive innovation, strategic innovation, new venture, corporate entrepreneurship, and ambidextrous organization.     

An Exploratory Model of Interpersonal Cohesiveness in New Product Development Teams

There has been a heavy emphasis in new product development (NPD) research on intrateam issues such as communication, trust, and conflict management. Interpersonal cohesiveness, however, has received scant attention. In addition, there are conflicting findings regarding the effects of close‐knit teams, which seem to have a beneficial effect up to a point, after which the tight bond becomes a detriment. This paper addresses these issues by introducing an exploratory model of interpersonal cohesiveness→NPD performance that includes antecedents, consequences, and moderating factors. Antecedents of interpersonal cohesiveness include clan culture, formalization, integration, and political dominance of one department, while consequences are groupthink, superordinate identity, and, ultimately, external/internal new product (NP) performance. The relationships among interpersonal cohesiveness, groupthink, and superordinate identity appear to be influenced by two moderating factors: team norms and goal support. Additionally, product type is identified as a moderator on the effects of both groupthink and superordinate identity on external NP performance. The model is built from two sources: a synthesis of the literature in small group dynamics and NPD, and qualitative research conducted across 12 NPD teams. Individual team leaders were interviewed first, followed by interviews with two additional members on each team, for a total of 36 interviews. In keeping with the goals of qualitative research, the interviews and analysis were used to identify and define aspects of interpersonal cohesiveness rather than to test a preconceived model. Representation of different industries and product types was sought intentionally, and variance in NP innovativeness as well as in NP market success/profitability became key criteria in sample selection. The exploratory model and propositions developed in this study provide a framework for understanding the role of interpersonal cohesiveness in NPD teams and its direct and indirect effects on NP performance. Although a significant amount of research on cohesiveness has been conducted in previous studies of small groups, the narrow laboratory settings of that research have limited the generalizability of the findings. This study therefore serves as a useful starting point for future theory development involving interpersonal cohesiveness in NPD. It also provides a guide for managers in dealing with team cohesiveness.     

Soaking It Up: Absorptive Capacity in Interorganizational New Product Development Teams

Prior research has acknowledged the importance of an organization's absorptive capacity—the ability to acquire new knowledge and information, assimilate, transform, and exploit it—for innovation purposes. Because innovations are usually developed by project teams, this suggests that absorptive capacity, as a construct, may also be usefully applied at the team level. Consequently, this study developed a measure for team‐level absorptive capacity, investigated the potential influencing factors, and examined its relationship to team effectiveness in terms of product innovativeness in an interorganizational context. Specifically, building on the theory of homophily and information and decision‐making theories, three factors (social‐category similarity, work‐style similarity, and knowledge complementarity between the recipient and the partner organization teams) were identified as likely antecedents of team absorptive capacity. The hypotheses were tested on data from 98 interorganizational new product development teams and included responses from team members, team leaders, and team‐external managers. With regard to the antecedents of team absorptive capacity in interorganizational settings, the results showed a significant positive association with partners' work‐style similarity and an inverted U‐shaped relationship with partners' knowledge complementarity. Social‐category similarity was not significantly associated with team absorptive capacity. We also examined whether team absorptive capacity was related to interorganizational team effectiveness and found a significant positive relationship between team absorptive capacity and product innovativeness. The study demonstrates that absorptive is indeed related to team effectiveness outcomes in an interorganizational context, which underlines the importance of team‐level absorptive capacity for product innovation management and suggests paying more attention to the lower levels of absorptive capacity.     

Vertical and Horizontal Cross‐Ties: Benefits of Cross‐Hierarchy and Cross‐Unit Ties for Innovative Projects

Social networks are an important driver for successful innovation, both at the individual level as well as the organizational level. Recent research has also shaped that networks within teams can enhance performance. Innovative project teams are embedded in an organizational context, however, and teams typically consist of people with expertise from diverse backgrounds, and from different units. Team members may have ties to other teams, business units, and hierarchical levels. Although it seems clear that such ties can influence team performance, remarkably little research has focused on what is here referred to as vertical and horizontal cross‐ties. Previous research may have ignored the possibility that vertical and horizontal bridging ties may have different performance outcomes. Although the literature suggests that diversity of input, or horizontal cross‐unit ties will benefit team performance and innovativeness, there is reason to believe that ties to higher levels in the organization might have an effect on project team performance and innovativeness too. This article in particular studies the role of vertical cross‐hierarchy ties. In an exploratory analysis combining quantitative and qualitative results, it is distinguished between horizontal cross‐unit and vertical cross‐hierarchy ties and their contribution to new business development (NBD) project performance, thereby making a substantial contribution to both academic literature and managerial practice. Our study is based on a multiple case‐study approach of several NBD project teams in a large European financial service provider. Our results show that successful innovation project teams are characterized by a large number of cross‐unit ties in combination with a large number of cross‐hierarchical ties compared with less successful project teams. Additionally, proof is found that vertical cross‐hierarchy ties should be concentrated rather than scattered across project members.     

The Dark Side of Team Social Cohesion in NPD Team Boundary Spanning

Although team boundary spanning is conducive to achieving new product (NP) competitive advantage, these actions may not always deliver the expected performance. The current study makes an initial attempt to examine factors that undermine team boundary spanning positive effects on NP competitive advantage by proposing and testing a negative moderating effect of team social cohesion on the relationship between team boundary spanning and NP competitive advantage. Furthermore, the current study expects team social cohesion to have a stronger negative moderating effect on the relationship between team boundary spanning and NP competitive advantage when external task interdependence and project newness are high than when they are low. Data for this study come from 140 NPD projects developed and commercialized by Spanish manufacturing firms in high‐ and medium‐high‐technology sectors. The study’s results reveal a positive effect of team boundary spanning on NP competitive advantage. Furthermore, high levels of team social cohesion are shown to reduce the positive effect of team boundary spanning on NP competitive advantage. Finally, we found that project newness and external task interdependence accentuate the negative moderating effect of team social cohesion on the relationship between team boundary spanning and NP competitive advantage. The current study makes several contributions to the literature. First, findings from this study give us new insights into the significance of team boundary spanning to the success of NPs by revealing that boundary‐spanning activities are beneficial to achieving NP competitive advantage. Second, the study departs from existing research in that it exposes a dark side of team social cohesion for NPD teams engaged in boundary spanning activities. Last, the study expands extant research by proposing and demonstrating that project newness and external task interdependence bring about situations in which external groups present a threat to the collective identity of socially cohesive groups.     

When do structural holes in employees' networks improve their radical creativity? A moderated mediation model

Previous research has found a relationship between structural holes of knowledge networks, tie strength of knowledge networks, and creativity. Our study extends these findings by proposing that characteristics of R&D employees' team knowledge networks influence their acquired diversified knowledge from the team, which is critical to creativity. Our results based on 558 members of 92 R&D teams demonstrated that, in order to benefit from their broker position in acquiring diversified knowledge, R&D employees should maintain their tie strength toward the team members with whom they are connected.     

When do we really need interpersonal trust in globally dispersed new product development teams?

Interpersonal trust refers to the willingness to make oneself vulnerable to the actions of another party. Trust is generally acknowledged as fostering knowledge exchange and thus contributing to new product development (NPD) team effectiveness. However, the conditions under which NPD teams come to rely more heavily on trust to facilitate effectiveness remain unclear. With burgeoning global collaboration on new product development, we analyze how the characteristics of global NPD teams, i.e., geographic dispersion, computer‐mediated communication (e.g., e‐mail, video‐conferencing), team membership flexibility, and national diversity moderate the trust–effectiveness relationship. Our results show that trust is more important under the condition of geographic dispersion, computer‐mediated communication, and national diversity. By specifying when trust influences NPD team effectiveness in globally dispersed teams, we discuss the theoretical implications and provide recommendations for management.     

How Teamwork Matters More as Team Member Dispersion Increases*

Product development teams become increasingly dispersed because innovative project tasks require the input of specialized knowledge at multiple locations. Prior analyses indicate that as team member dispersion increases teams find it more difficult to perform high‐quality teamwork. Moreover, the literature has largely assumed that the performance effect of teamwork in innovative projects would be driven by the nature of the project task and that this would be true regardless of the degree to which team members were co‐located. The present study argues, however, that teamwork affects team performance more strongly as team member dispersion increases. Two main reasons for this are discussed: (1) High‐quality teamwork can leverage the increased knowledge potential of dispersed teams; and (2) team leaders in more dispersed teams have little possibility to compensate low‐quality teamwork through hands‐on leadership. Responses from 575 managers, team leaders, and team members of 145 new product development (NPD) projects in the software industry were used to analyze the moderating effect of team member proximity on the relationship between teamwork quality and team performance. Using regression analysis, support is found for the initial hypothesis that team member dispersion moderates the relationship between teamwork quality and team performance, that is, that increasing team member dispersion increases the positive impact of teamwork quality on team performance. As such, the present analysis advances understanding of dispersed teams, showing that teamwork quality not only is more difficult to achieve but also is more critical to team performance as team dispersion increases. Furthermore, low‐proximity teams can reach higher levels of effectiveness and efficiency than co‐located ones if they manage to achieve high levels of teamwork over distance. Thus, team dispersion may well be an opportunity and should not just be regarded as a liability to be overcome or avoided. This research recognizes that the vast majority of teams are neither perfectly co‐located nor perfectly virtual. There are many shades of gray between these two extremes, and various individual, team, task, and contextual characteristics may have an effect on how decreases—however small—in geographical proximity affect the process and performance of teams. Future research is encouraged to address such factors at different levels of analysis aimed at providing managers with recommendations for dispersed teamwork.