From Experience: Linking Projects to Strategy

There is a dramatic rise in the use of project management as organizations shift to provide customer-driven results and systems solutions. Some implementations of project management have been successful, whereas others are spectacular failures. A common occurrence in many organizations is too many projects being attempted by too few people with no apparent link to strategy or organizational goals. Research and experience indicate that the support of upper management is critical to project success. This article reviews actions that upper managers can take to create an environment for more successful projects in their organizations. Specifically, the authors discuss practices for upper manager teamwork and offer a complete model for selecting projects that support a strategic emphasis. The article includes experiences from within Hewlett-Packard Company. © 1999 Elsevier Science Inc.     

Network dynamics and knowledge transfer in virtual organisations

Employing a model of knowledge spillovers, we find empirical evidence consistent with both direct and indirect spillovers among open source software projects. We further find that programmers who work on many other projects have a positive effect on the success of a project beyond the effect they have on connectivity of the network. We also find that, both “modifications” and “additions” are positively associated with project success.     

Investigation of Factors Contributing to the Success of Cross-Functional Teams

Although recent empirical research shows that most firms have implemented cross‐functional teams for the majority of the new product development projects undertaken, they are still finding it hard to ensure that these teams are successful in completing the new product development task. In this article, the author first reviews the vast literature on cross‐functional new product development teams to uncover the array of factors that have previously been demonstrated or hypothesized to relate to cross‐functional team success, when measured at the project level. He then analyzes the responses of 112 new product development professionals to determine which factors are more frequently mentioned as leading to project success. In looking at how to achieve successful teams, many factors have been suggested in the literature by a number of different researchers. The author suggests a model of these factors that divides them into three categories that help achieve success. Setting the stage for product development by developing appropriate project goals, empowering the team with the needed decision‐making power, assigning the appropriate human resources, and creating a productive climate should be related to fostering team success. Of these four factors, appropriate project goals is mentioned most often as being associated with success, followed by empowerment. Several specific team behaviors, including cooperation, commitment to the project, ownership of the project, and respect and trust among team members, also have been posited to contribute to team success. Of these, this research finds that cooperation is mentioned most often as being associated with success, followed by commitment and ownership. Finally, a number of researchers have suggested that team leaders, senior managers, and champions provide enabling support to cross‐functional teams in achieving success. Team leadership is the most frequently mentioned enabler, according to these findings, followed by senior management support. The author's results also show that increased use of cross‐functional teams in new product development is related to higher project success. However, achieving cross‐functional team success appears to be more complicated than previously thought. For example, across the set of factors identified in this research, the most frequently mentioned is obtaining the team behavior of cooperation. Setting appropriate project goals, a stage‐setting step that is completed early in the project, follows closely in relative importance. Finally, providing good team leadership as an enabler is the third most frequently mentioned factor in achieving success. This suggests that companies must work in all dimensions to maximize the probability of achieving team success.     

基于因特网的工程项目环境信息库研究

在工程项目建设过程中，项目经理（业主方）需要查阅和使用项目所处的环境信息。本的目的是探讨利用当代信息技术如何建立一个信息库，为项目经理及时提供全面和准确的环境信息，通过访问专业人士，查阅献，分析典型工程实例，并结合作的工程实践经验，从系统的角度定义了工程项目经理所需用的环境信息，确定了它的分类，建立了它的概念模型，并且详细地介绍了该信息库的技术实现途径。     

R&D Project Termination Decisions: Processes, Communication, and Personnel Changes

The decision to terminate a project can demoralize project managers and team members, and increase concerns about job security. For these reasons, managers tend to delay project termination decisions. However, delaying project termination diverts scarce R&D resources from higher potential projects. Ramaiya Balachandra, Klaus K. Brockhoff, and Alan W. Pearson describe the results of a study that explores the manner in which managers inform staff of the decision to terminate or continue a project. Survey respondents are the highest ranking R&D managers in 78 large German, British, and U.S. companies. Respondents were asked to describe the procedures they use for monitoring R&D projects and deciding whether to continue a project. Underlying this research is the belief that more effective management of these processes can improve project team effectiveness, employee relations, and morale. All survey respondents use project monitoring procedures. Most use formal procedures, often supplemented with informal procedures. More than one person usually monitors projects. Project managers, their immediate superiors, and project staff typically have these responsibilities, but respondents also indicate that marketing managers often monitor projects. Compared to U.S. companies, European firms typically involve fewer people in project monitoring. U.S. firms involve more non-R&D personnel in these tasks. Most firms focus on monitoring such variables as time, technical success, and probability of technical success. Staff motivation is the least used monitoring variable. Cost control was mentioned more frequently by German respondents than by respondents from other countries. Decisions regarding the fate of a project usually come from individuals not directly involved with the project. Termination decisions are typically communicated in writing; no respondents use staff meetings to relate such decisions. Following the decision to terminate a project, management faces the difficult task of finding suitable jobs for project team members. Rather than assign an entire team to a new project, management typically disbands a team and assigns its members to other teams. The inherently uneven progress of R&D projects complicates these scheduling problems, and thus compounds the career uncertainty caused by project termination decisions.     

Justifying CRM projects in a business-to-business context: The potential of the Benefits Dependency Network

Customer Relationship Management (CRM) projects often fail. We focus on the project justification process as one way of improving project success rates. We review how the typical combination of an Return On Investment (ROI) calculation and a project plan can have flaws as a project justification approach, and we propose the use of the Benefits Dependency Network (BDN) as an additional tool. The second part of the paper reports on an exploratory study of the BDN's use in five business-to-business CRM projects, inductively deriving propositions regarding its benefits and factors for success in its use. Further research on the tool's efficacy is encouraged.     

Building Dynamic Capabilities in New Product Development through Intertemporal Integration

Although successful development of a given product may help explain the current success of a firm, creating longer‐term competitive advantage demands significantly more attention to developing and nurturing dynamic integration capabilities. These capabilities propel product development activities in ways that build on and develop technological and marketing capabilities for future product development efforts and create platforms for future product development. In this article, we develop a conceptual model of a dynamic integration process in product development, which we call intertemporal integration (ITI). In its most general form ITI is defined as the process of collecting, interpreting, and internalizing technological and marketing capabilities from past new product development projects and incorporating that knowledge in a systematic and purposeful manner into the development of future new products. Research propositions outlining the relationship of ITI to performance are presented. We provide specific examples of managerial mechanisms to be used in implementing ITI. We conclude with implications for research and practice. Effective management of ITI can increase new product development success and long‐term competitive advantage. This implies that management needs to engage in activities that gather and transform information and knowledge from prior development projects so that it can be used in future development projects. Project audits, design databases in computer‐aided design (CAD) systems, engineering notebooks, collections of test and experimental results, market research and test market results, project management databases, and other activities will all be important in the acquisition of knowledge from prior new product development (NPD) projects. Managers also should initiate the creation and maintenance of databases of technical and marketing information from prior projects, job performance reports, seminars and workshops related to technological issues and advances, and publication of technical journals to assist in the process of knowledge acquisition. Similarly, techniques such as assigning project managers from earlier development projects, reusing key components and technologies, and developing a company‐wide methodology for managing projects can be used to boost the application and use of knowledge.     

New product success factors: A comparison of 'kills' versus successes and failures

The paper reports an analysis of the characteristics of those new projects that are killed, that is, terminated before commercialisation. Such projects constitute the majority of new product projects. The authors' aim was to learn from the differences between 'kills' and those that are commercialised. The latter may, of course, turn out to be successes or failures.
Their sample consisted of 250 new projects of which 123 were ultimately successful, 80 failed and 47 were kills. Two hypotheses were tested: that kills and failures had similar characteristics and that kills differed from successes in the way that failures differed from successes. Four groups of multidimensional project characteristics were measured: product advantage, market attractiveness, competitive situation, and synergy/familiarity.
The results showed that neither hypothesis was generally supported, The patterns of characteristics observed were complex but were unravelled through a computer model simulating how managers perform the evaluation process. It showed that the results could be explained on the basis that errors could be made in evaluation. For example, it is difficult to evaluate product advantage. Surprisingly, competitive situation is not a discriminator between successes, failures and kills but managers treat it as if it were. Some characteristics are perceived by managers to be negative although they are, in fact, favourable to project success.
The authors claim that these results should lead to better allocation of R&D resources among proposed projects.     

Managing tensions related to information in coopetition

This study seeks to provide insights into the management of tensions related to information in coopetition. The literature on coopetition management recommends a separation principle, an integration principle or a combination of both. Focusing on tensions related to information in coopetition at the project level, we consider which principle is most appropriate. We theoretically discuss the control mechanisms used to address information criticality and information appropriability. In addition, we conduct an in-depth case study of a space project involving two competitors, Astrium and Thales Alenia Space. First, we describe the tensions related to information that arose in the context of this coopetitive project. In particular, financial and technical information presented dilemmas. Second, we explain how the coopetitors used formal control mechanisms to separate critical information from non-critical information. Specifically, information that was critical to the project's success was shared through a common information system specially designed for the project, whereas non-critical information was withheld from the partner. Third, because formal control mechanisms were insufficient to address critical information that was also appropriable, we show how project managers implemented informal control mechanisms. For example, project managers transformed appropriable information into non-appropriable information by aggregating data and withholding details such as calculation methods and cost structures. Our findings suggest that the management of tensions related to information in coopetitive projects requires a combination of formal control mechanisms (to manage information criticality) and informal control mechanisms (to manage information appropriability).     

Leadership Style: Its Impact on Cross-Functional Product Development

This article reports the results of a study in which cross-functional product development projects in six companies were analyzed. The study was conducted as part of an interdisciplinary research involving technological, organizational, and behavioral analysis. The article draws on an excerpt of the data collected on leadership styles among project managers as well as some data on organizational climate and team learning. Leadership style, especially the leaders' employee orientation, co-varied significantly with how members of the cross-functional teams perceived their work climate and possibilities for innovative learning. The results of the analyses point to the leader's behavior, rather than his power, as an important factor determining the work climate in successful cross-functional product development projects.     

Coordination at different stages of the product design process

This paper addresses the following question: how does the coordination challenge faced by managers change over the life of time bound projects such as product design. We use coordination structure, an approach to modeling organizational situations that highlights concurrent responsibility interdependencies rather than the more traditional task interdependencies. We explain coordination structure and use it to capture the responsibility interdependencies in a sample of complex system design projects drawn from two different organizations. We use this data: to illustrate the differences possible in the responsibility interdependencies that can exist within design projects from different organizations and at different project key points; to identify a set of four basic modules, or groupings, of responsibility interdependencies useful for modeling design organizations; and to generate a set of testable hypotheses on how the coordination challenge faced by project managers can vary between organizations and over project key points.     

Antecedents and Consequences of Unlearning in New Product Development Teams

Unlearning, which first appeared almost 30 years ago as a subprocess of the organizational learning process, has received only limited attention in the literature. Rather than building on empirical research, the existing scholarship is largely anecdotal, aimed at reviewing the literature and generating new insights. Further, unlearning studies tend to analyze the organizational level and neglect smaller units such as work groups and teams. To address this gap in the understanding of unlearning, this article empirically investigates unlearning in work groups in general and new product development (NPD) teams in particular. This study, based on the literature of organizational memory and change, operationalized team unlearning as changes in beliefs and routines during team‐based projects and then discussed the importance of unlearning behavior in NPD teams. Specifically it was argued that unlearning guards beliefs and routines against rigidity to cope with environmental turbulence. This is of particular note when rigid product development procedures and group beliefs inhibit the reception and evaluation of new market and technology information and reduce the value of perceived new information. To test the antecedents and consequences of the team unlearning model, 319 NPD teams were investigated. Using structural equation modeling, it was found that (1) team crisis and anxiety have a direct impact on team unlearning; (2) environmental turbulence also has a direct impact on both team crisis and anxiety and team unlearning; and (3) after team beliefs and project routines have changed, implementing new knowledge or information positively affects new product success. Specifically, the findings revealed that changes in team members' collective beliefs in accordance with environmental changes and the in‐process planning or adjustment of project work activities and procedures as the projects evolve enable teams to develop and launch new products successfully. Also, results indicated that team crisis and anxiety in NPD projects assist team members in revising their previous beliefs and routines when project teams are performing in turbulent environments. This article suggests that managers can enhance team unlearning by (1) creating a sense of urgency by introducing an artificial crisis; and (2) avoiding the groupthink phenomena by bringing in an outsider to challenge existing policies and procedures, and training the team on lateral thinking. In addition, managers can plan project activities in a flexible manner that allows changes as the project evolves to facilitate team unlearning. However, managers should also be cautious when promoting team unlearning. Without careful and considerable evaluation, change in beliefs and routines can cause information/knowledge loss.     

Upper management control of new product development projects and project performance

While some degree of freedom and flexibility is an essential ingredient to productive cross‐functional NPD teams, upper‐managers are faced with the challenge of instituting effective control mechanisms which head projects in the right strategic direction, monitor progress toward organizational and project goals, and allow for adjustments in the project if necessary. But too much or the wrong type of control may constrain the team's creativity, impede their progress, and injure their ultimate performance. Therefore, this study examines formal and interactive control mechanisms available to upper‐managers in controlling new product development (NPD) projects, and the relationship between these mechanisms and NPD project performance. Formal output and process controls are examined which consist of the setting and monitoring of outcomes, such as goals, schedule and budgets, and of processes and procedures, respectively. This study also looks at how the effectiveness of these control mechanisms may be contingent upon the degree of innovativeness in the project and the degree to which the project is part of a broad product program. In addition, the use of formal rewards for achieving team performance as opposed to rewards for individual achievement is investigated. Lastly, interactive controls are examined which consist of upper‐managers interacting directly with project members in the development of strategy and operational goals and procedures prior to the start of the project, and upper‐managers intervening in project decision‐making. Questionnaire data are collected on 95 projects across a variety of industries. The findings suggest that while NPD projects teams need some level of strategic direction concerning the objectives to be accomplished and the procedures to be followed, upper‐level managers can exert too much control. In particular, the findings showed a negative association between the use of upper manager‐imposed process controls and project performance. The findings also indicated that the degree to which upper‐managers intervened in project‐level decisions during the project was negatively related to project performance. However, the results showed support for the notion that early and interactive decision‐making on control mechanisms is important for effective projects. In particular, early team member and upper‐management involvement in the setting of operational controls, such as goals and procedures for monitoring and evaluating the project, was positively associated with project performance. This study provides additional insight into our understanding of upper‐management support in new product development. The study suggests that upper‐managers can over control with the wrong type of controls, and suggests effective ways of implementing participative and interactive control mechanisms.     

Empirically testing ES success factors in business process reengineering

Previously proposed success factors for Expert Systems implementation are field tested in the context of business process reengineering (BPR) projects. Due to its nature mimicking human expert behavior, ES technology applications in BPR provide a unique opportunity to study major organization changes within a relatively short time. Using Pearson correlations and multivariate regression analysis, eight ES implementation success factors proposed in the literature were empirically tested in this study in terms of their importance to the BPR benefits derived from the application. Sixty-two ES applications within E.I. Dupont de Nemours and Company dealing with business process changes significant enough to be called BPR were used. Despite the relatively small sample size, six of the eight success factors were corroborated: user satisfaction with the ES, the importance and difficulty of the business problem addressed, user attitudes toward ES technology and the particular ES project, the degree of user involvement in the ES implementation process, and the ES developer(s) skills.     

Management of development projects: how to meet corporate business goals?

Two contradictory elements affect development projects in the modern era. New advanced development projects require huge resources and long schedules. On the other hand, the resources available for development projects are decreasing, and intensive competition between companies results in increased required performance and new products which must be developed with short schedules. Development projects have a significant effect on a company's business goals, and therefore attract the attention of corporate managers. A significant part of managers' time is devoted to the control of development projects. Support tools are therefore developed and used to assist managers in controlling their projects. This paper describes a control tool to help managers make decisions on development projects. The tool described is based on Microsoft's 'Project' software package, and was developed in-house. The package performs real-time calculations and simultaneously presents several control parameters. These parameters provide a comprehensive picture of project status. The major benefits of the control tools described are: (1) The 'Project' package provides the ability to work with small and combined work packages. It allows attention to be focused on small programs as well as on entire programs. (2) It complies fully with modern decentralised computer systems consisting of a central computer, local computerised networks, parallel PCs and work stations. It provides an interactive quick response ability to follow changes in project status, which result from design changes or progress updates. The control system was implemented by RAFAEL's Missiles Division two years ago, and impressive results in terms of project efficiency were achieved. These achievements play a major role in meeting the Division's business goals. The control tools described are general and can fit a large variety of projects and companies.     

Exploring the Motivational and Behavioral Foundations of External Technology Experts’ Knowledge Sharing in Collaborative R&D Projects: The Contingency Role of Project Formalization

High‐tech manufacturers increasingly rely on the knowledge contributions of external technology experts (ETEs), who contribute to collaborative R&D projects on behalf of suppliers. Many scholars have considered knowledge sharing in R&D collaborations from a firm‐level or project‐level perspective and focused on formalization as a potential remedy. While individual supplier employees at the operative level make the decision to share critical knowledge, the individual‐level perspective in literature on knowledge sharing in collaborative R&D projects is virtually nonexistent. Because knowledge sharing in collaborative R&D is a largely discretionary act on behalf of the supplier employee, personal motivations rather than inter‐firm relationship elements (e.g., network position or dependency) become the primary determinant of one’s sharing behavior. Abstracting from or ignoring these motivations of supplier employees in studies on collaborative R&D may obscure important insights for R&D managers. This study is an important first step in providing the empirical evidence needed to uncover the motivational and behavioral foundations for ETEs’ knowledge sharing in a collaborative R&D setting. Building on theories of gift and social exchange, this article identifies customer stewardship and distributive fairness as two important personal motivations of ETEs to share knowledge. Project formalization is considered as a key contingency condition. Analyzing survey responses of 186 ETEs, a multilevel regression‐based moderated‐mediation analysis of direct and indirect effects shows that customer stewardship predicts an ETE’s knowledge sharing behavior under (very) low levels of project formalization, and distributive fairness predicts knowledge sharing behavior under medium to high levels of formalization. Together, the results provide R&D project managers who aim to leverage external knowledge contributions with valuable insights that have been obscured in past firm‐level collaborative R&D studies.     

Linking learning and knowledge creation to project success in Six Sigma projects: An empirical investigation

This study investigates the impact of two organizational antecedents, (1) Six Sigma resources (technical) and (2) team psychological safety (social), on learning behaviour and knowledge creation and, in turn, on the success of Six Sigma process improvement projects. The paper proposes an integrated model to explain process improvement implementation success through two learning activities undertaken by Six Sigma project teams: Knowing-what and Knowing-how. The conceptualization of these knowledge types in this research is different from usual conceptualization as it represents the knowledge brought into projects through various phases of Six Sigma projects. The three hypotheses proposed in the model were tested using the data collected from 52 Six Sigma project teams from a single organization. Regression analysis showed psychological safety affects project performance through knowing-how. Regression and bootstrapping analyses showed resources influence project performance through the combined mediation of knowing-what and knowing-how.The paper provides an interdisciplinary treatment of knowledge management in process improvement teams, and offers a research model demonstrating how Six Sigma project teams promote deliberate organizational learning. By doing so, this study empirically establishes the notion that technical and social supports jointly impact the success of operations management initiatives such as Six Sigma through learning. The limitations of the study along with the future research directions are highlighted.     

The Effect of Interactional Fairness on the Performance of Cross‐Functional Product Development Teams: A Multilevel Mediated Model*

Cross‐functional product development teams (CFPDTs) are receiving increasing attention as a fundamental mechanism for achieving greater interfunctional integration in the product development process. However, little is known about how team members' interactional fairness perception—fairness perception based on the quality of interpersonal treatment received from the project manager during the new product development process—affects cross‐functional communication and the performance of CFPDTs. This study examines the effects of interactional fairness on both team members' performance and team performance as a whole. It was predicted that interactional fairness in CFPDTs would significantly affect team members' task performance, both task‐ and person‐focused interpersonal citizenship behaviors, as well as team performance. Additionally, commitment would partially mediate the effects of interactional fairness on these performance outcomes. Analyzing survey responses from two student samples of CFPDTs with hierarchical linear modeling techniques, it was demonstrated that team members' task performance, interpersonal citizenship behavior, and team performance are enhanced when team members are dedicated to both the team and the project, and such dedication is fostered when project managers are fair to team members in an interpersonal way.     

Information acquisition and optimal project management

This paper provides a rationale for why an organization often generates a bias in favor of a new project even after learning that its profitability will be certainly below more conventional ones. We analyze a principal–agent model with two alternative projects, one of which is to be chosen by the principal. In our model, the profitability of a project is determined by the cost of implementation. All parties are familiar with one of the projects (the known project), and thus the implementation cost of this project is common knowledge. Information on the other project (the new project), however, must be acquired by the agent. We find that the new project may be chosen in the optimal contract even when it turns out to be more costly to implement than the known project, if acquiring information is costly enough and the realized implementation cost of the new project is below a particular level. We also discuss distortion in the new project's output schedule when it is selected.     

Definition of innovation projects in small firms: A Spanish study

Small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs) are the main holders of the European economy and innovation projects are essential tools for SMEs to ensure their growth. A high percentage of innovation projects implemented by SMEs lacks planning and initial management, which causes the appearance of important problems for the SMEs survival. The authors have confirmed with a field study of 72 Spanish small firms that a lot of these problems arise from an incomplete project definition, so it is necessary to help SMEs to have a specific methodology that is appropriate to their own characteristics and projects. The statistical analysis shows how the project management knowledge helps to a better project definition, contributing to the project alignment with the company strategy. Also, it reveals other problems related to the project definition as planning, budget, market and financing. Of this analysis, it concludes that the definition phase supports the other phases and is essential in order to achieve project success. This paper presents an ‘integration model of factors’ that helps SMEs in the management of the definition phase of their innovation projects. This model relates the various areas of analysis needed to ensure their integration at the project definition. The relationships between the different model areas have been defined, showing the way to integrate the technical, economic and strategic outlooks of project objectives management in the definition phase of the project. This model has been implemented in 21 new innovation project definitions. The users' valuation has been very positive with a 90.4% of success and all of the model users are interested in implementing the model again in next projects. The main advantages highlighted were user‐friendliness, intuitive model and easy application.