Transformational leadership,team climate,and team performance within the NPD team: Evidence from China

This study analyzes the impact of team transformational leadership on team performance during the new product development (NPD) process and the mediating role of team climate. Data were collected from 184 NPD projects of Chinese high-tech firms. The results show that NPD team transformational leadership is positively related to team performance. In addition, team climate mediates the relationship between most dimensions of NPD team transformational leadership (charisma, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration) and team performance.     

Can Quality‐Oriented Firms Develop Innovative New Products?

Research suggests that a strong focus on quality improvement can adversely affect exploration and thus the development of innovative new products. The focus on quality improvement including total quality management (TQM) has been termed quality orientation. The literature suggests that one way to reduce the adverse effect of a quality orientation on innovativeness is to adopt ambidextrous or dual organizational forms. However, dual organizational forms are cumbersome and expensive to implement. This paper argues that a less demanding structural arrangement for developing innovative products in quality‐oriented organizations involves the creation of cross‐functional teams that are explicitly encouraged to take risk and granted autonomy. In this model, the two dimensions of innovativeness—namely, novelty and appropriateness— are treated separately because quality orientation and encouragement to take risk can have differential effects on these two dimensions. A survey of 141 new product development projects reveals that quality orientation does not adversely affect product novelty in cross‐functional product development teams. However, encouragement given to cross‐functional teams to take risk leads to more novel products. On the other hand, while a quality orientation improves product appropriateness, encouragement to take risk affects it adversely. Quality orientation is able to mitigate the adverse effect of encouragement to take risk on appropriateness. But encouragement to take risk does not influence the relationship between a quality orientation and novelty. Autonomy improves the positive effect of encouragement to take risk on new product novelty but does not influence the effect of a quality orientation on novelty. Both novelty and appropriateness enhance a new product's performance, and both these dimensions of innovativeness partially mediate the effect of quality orientation and fully mediate the effect of encouragement to take risk on new product performance.     

Determinants of New Product Development Team Performance: A Meta‐analytic Review

New product development (NPD) has become a critical determinant of firm performance. There is a considerable body of research examining the factors that influence a firm's ability to successfully develop and introduce new products. Vital to this success is the creation and management of NPD teams. While the evidence for the use of NPD teams and the factors that determine their success is accumulating, there is still a lack of clarity on the team‐level variables that are most impactful on NPD success. This meta‐analytic study examines the effects of NPD team characteristics on three different measures of success: effectiveness (market success), efficiency (meeting budgets and schedules), and speed‐to‐market, requiring incorporation of a broader set of team variables than previous studies in order to capture more factors explaining NPD outcomes. Unlike a typical empirical study that considered no more than two team variables to predict NPD performance, this study combines research spanning eight team variables including team input variables (team tenure, functional diversity, team ability, and team leadership) and team process variables (internal and external team communication, group cohesiveness, and goal clarity). Results from 38 studies were aggregated to estimate the meta‐analytic effect sizes for each of the variables. Using the meta‐analytic results, a path analytic model of NPD success was estimated to isolate the unique effects of team characteristics on NPD effectiveness and efficiency. Results indicate that team leadership, team ability, external communication, goal clarity, and group cohesiveness are the critical determinants of NPD team performance. NPD teams with considerable experience and led by a transformational leader are more successful at developing new products. Effective boundary spanning within and outside the organization and a shared understanding of project objectives are paramount to success. Group cohesiveness is also an important predictor of NPD outcomes confirming the importance of esprit de corps within the team. The findings provide product development managers with a blueprint for creating high‐performance NPD teams.     

Diversity is strategy: the effect of R&D team diversity on innovative performance

Diversity in the workplace has attracted significant interest in organisations that want to attract and retain talented employees. Breakthrough innovation requires a wider knowledge base, and organisations increasingly rely on multidisciplinary R&D teams to identify scientific developments that bridge gaps and reduce time to market. However, research on the performance implications of R&D team diversity remains limited and the empirical evidence inconsistent. This paper investigates the impact of surface and deep-level diversity on R&D teams’ innovative performance and how diversity dimensions interact to drive innovation. We find supportive evidence that R&D team characteristics influence innovation outcomes, confirming our hypothesising that diversity is a valuable strategy for an organisation to pursue as it provides greater cognitive ability. Each diversity facet however has its own distinct effects depending on the novelty of innovation and industry. Yet, diversity is not solely positive and excessive heterogeneity could be detrimental to R&D team performance. Our findings suggest that high diversity in gender or skills in cognitively diverse teams might be negative attributes to take into consideration. Senior managers and organisations should therefore consider the appropriate mix of capabilities to benefit from creativity in diverse R&D teams and avoid possible conflict and distrust associated with diversity.     

Toward a framework for mixed-gender selling teams and the impact of increased female presence on team performance: Thought development and propositions

Team selling and the increasing representation of women in the sales force are two current trends contributing to the complexity of managing the sales environment, yet little work exists investigating the impact of women on selling team performance. This paper anchors on cognitive resource diversity theory and integrates relevant prior research to propose a new proposition-driven framework that explains why gender diversity of team members improves team performance. Specifically, we provide evidence to suggest that the addition of females to all-male selling teams should positively impact team performance by reducing the average turnover rate of high performers within the team; by enhancing relational skills, organizational citizenship behaviors, and shared leadership within the team; and by building on the favorable effects associated with team heterogeneity. We also consider the moderating effects that potentially deeply ingrained connections among members of all-male teams may have on changes in team gender composition, as well as the importance of a culture of organizational inclusion on the favorable effects of team heterogeneity overall. Managerial implications of increased female presence on teams are proffered, along with suggested next steps in research and limitations of the present conceptualization.     

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.     

The roles of R&D team leaders in Korea: a contingent approach

This study empirically examines the relationship between the role of R&D project leaders and their team performance using data from 87 project teams in 6 R&D organizations in Korea. The results reveal that:
(1) R&D project leaders played five different roles in performing their jobs – strategic planner, team builder, gatekeeper, technical expert, and champion;
(2) All but the champion role of a leader is positively related with project team performance;
(3) However, this relationship between the role of leader and project team performance varies according to the characteristics of R&D project teams and their tasks.
Specifically, it becomes important for a leader to focus less on the team building role as the team gets older. The team building role of a leader, however, is more important for higher performance of relatively certain R&D projects, while for uncertain R&D projects, the strategic planning role appears to be more crucial. Based on these results, this study discusses several managerial and theoretical issues related to the role of a leader in R&D project teams.     

Self-managing selling teams and team performance: The complementary roles of empowerment and control

This work is the first to examine systematically the influence of empowerment and control on the degree to which selling teams engage in desired self-managing behaviors. Further, this work is the first to propose the construct of desired self-managing behaviors in a selling team context, and empirically examine its influence on selling team performance. Our investigation indicates that control of team self-management provides a complementary positive influence to that of empowerment on the degree to which selling teams exhibit desired self-managing behaviors. In addition, we find a positive relationship between the degree to which teams exhibit desired self-managing behaviors and selling team performance; moreover, this relationship explains, to a large degree, selling team performance. These findings are consistent with our thesis that control of teamwork facilitates performance on the selling team level, just as control of selling skills facilitates performance on the individual sales rep level.     

Moderating effects of transformational leadership between external team learning and research team performance outcomes

A growing body of empirical research examines the effects of external team learning on team performance. While previous studies suggest that external learning activities enhance team performance, the contingencies of such activities have received less research attention. This study examines the moderating effects of transformational team leadership between external team learning and two team performance outcomes: (1) accepted and published articles in peer‐reviewed scientific journals, and (2) project occupancy rate. The study was conducted with 124 research teams. Supporting the hypotheses, the findings show that transformational leadership has a positive moderating effect between external team learning and both team performance outcomes.     

The role of sales team intragroup conflict on critical job outcomes

Sales teams are often structured into groups by territories, product categories, or hierarchical levels of salespeople which provide support to one another while counter-intuitively competing for individual resources, rewards, and promotions. We posit that the impact of conflict within the sales team (sales team intragroup conflict) on critical individual-level job outcomes (job satisfaction and intent to turnover) is contingent upon two loci of influences: individually-influenced goal orientations (learning and performance) and managerially-influenced justice perceptions (procedural and distributive). We empirically examine sales team intragroup conflict through a primary data collection of 195 distributor salespeople organized into 20 geographically dispersed teams. Our results largely support our hypotheses that there are nuanced effects across the loci of influences, such that in conflict-laden environments, having a performance orientation or perception of organizational distributive justice enhance job satisfaction, while a perception of organizational procedural justice decreases job satisfaction. Thus, we answer the call to better understand the role of conflict in marketing exchanges.     

Top management team turnover as an adaptation mechanism: The role of the environment

Based on an organizational adaptation framework, this study examines the influence of three environmental dimensions–munificence, stability, and complexity–on top management team turnover. In addition to investigating the direct influence of these environmental dimensions, indirect effects through firm performance and strategic change are also examined; the indirect effect of environmental complexity through demographic heterogeneity is also studied. Path analysis indicates that the direct effects of the three environmental dimensions predominate. Indirect effects were nonsignificant except for the effect of instability and munificence through strategic change. By expanding the team turnover context to include environmental and strategic dimensions, in addition to previously examined performance and heterogeneity factors, this study enhances our understanding of managerial turnover as a form of organizational adaptation.     

Innovation Performance in New Product Development Teams in China's Technology Ventures: The Role of Behavioral Integration Dimensions and Collective Efficacy

In emerging markets, technology ventures increasingly rely on new product development (NPD) teams to generate creative ideas and to mold these innovative ideas into streams of new products or services. However, little is known about how behavioral integration (a behavioral team process) and collective efficacy (a motivational team process) jointly facilitate or inhibit team innovation performance in emerging markets—especially in China, the world's largest emerging‐market setting with collectivist and high power distance cultures. Drawing on social cognitive theory and behavioral integration research, this article elucidates the relationships between behavioral integration dimensions (i.e., collaborative behavior, information exchange, and joint decision‐making) and innovation performance and also examines how collective efficacy moderates these relationships in China's NPD teams. Results from a sample of 96 NPD teams in China's technology ventures reveal that information exchange is positively associated with innovation performance. Collaborative behavior positively but marginally influences innovation performance, whereas joint decision‐making does not relate to innovation performance. Moreover, collective efficacy demonstrates an important moderating role. Specifically, both collaborative behavior and joint decision‐making are more positively associated with innovation performance when collective efficacy is higher. In contrast, information exchange is less positively associated with innovation performance when collective efficacy is higher. This study makes important theoretical contributions to the literature on team innovation and behavioral integration in emerging markets by offering a better understanding of how behavioral and motivational team processes jointly shape innovation performance in China's NPD teams. This study also extends social cognitive theory by identifying collective efficacy as a boundary condition for the overall effectiveness of behavioral integration dimensions. In particular, this study highlights the condition under which behavioral integration dimensions facilitate or inhibit NPD team innovation performance in China.     

An analysis of predictors of team satisfaction in product development teams with differing levels of virtualness

The purpose of this study is to empirically examine and assess the moderating effects of extent of virtualness on a variety of well-established predictors of new product development team satisfaction. We focus our study on 178 different new product development teams from a variety of industries and use extent of virtualness as a structural characteristic of the teams, measuring it on a continuum. The predictors of team satisfaction we studied are relationship conflict, familiarity, goal clarity and preference for group work. Primary findings include: (1) relationship conflict has a more deleterious effect on team member satisfaction as teams become more virtual, mainly because it is very difficult for team members of virtual teams to resolve their interpersonal disputes; (2) the relationship between preference for group work and team satisfaction is moderated by extent of virtualness, such that preference for group work increases team satisfaction more as virtualness increases; (3) goal clarity and familiarity are not moderated by extent of virtualness, but have a significant direct effect on team satisfaction. Managerial and research implications of these findings relative to new product development teams are also discussed.     

Procedural Justice Climate in New Product Development Teams: Antecedents and Consequences

With the increasing interest in the concept of justice in the group behavior literature, the procedural justice (PJ) climate attracts many researchers and practitioners from different fields. Nevertheless, the PJ climate is rarely addressed in the new product development (NPD) project team literature. Specifically, the technology and innovation management (TIM) literature provides little about what the PJ climate is, its nature and benefits, and how it works in NPD project teams. Also, few studies investigate the antecedents and consequences of the PJ climate in NPD teams enhancing the understanding of this concept from a practical perspective. This paper discusses the PJ climate theory in a NPD team context and empirically demonstrates how team members' positive collective perceptions of a PJ climate can be developed and how a PJ climate influences a project's performance in NPD teams. In particular, team culture values including employee orientation, customer orientation, systematic management control, innovativeness, and social responsibility were investigated as antecedents, and team learning, speed to market, and market success of new products were studied as outcomes of PJ climate in this paper. By studying 83 NPD project teams it was found on the basis of using partial least squares (PLS) method that (1) the level of employee, customer and innovativeness orientation as well as systematic management control during the project had a positive impact on developing a PJ climate in an NPD team; (2) a PJ climate positively affects team learning and product development time (i.e., speed to market); and (3) team learning and speed to market mediate the relations between the PJ climate and new product success (NPS). Based on the findings, this paper suggests that managers should enhance the PJ climate and team culture in the project team to enhance team learning and to develop products faster. In particular, managers should (1) open a discussion forum among people and create a dialogue for people who disagree with the other project team members rather than dictating or emposing others ideas to them, (2) facilitate information searching and collecting mechanisms to make decisions effectively and to clarify uncertainties, and (3) allow team members to challange project‐related ideas and decisions and modify them with consensus. Also, to enhance the PJ climate during the project, managers should (1) respect and listen to all team members' ideas and try to understand why they are sometimes in opposition, (2) define team members' task boundaries and clarify project norms and project goals, and (3) set knowledge‐questioning values by facilitating team members to try out new ideas and seek out new ways to do things.     

Teams,Autonomy, and the Financial Performance of Firms

I estimate a structural model of teams, autonomy, and financial performance, using a cross section of British establishments. My findings suggest that team production improves financial performance for the typical establishment but that autonomous teams do no better than closely supervised or nonautonomous teams. I find that unobserved factors increasing the propensity to adopt teams are positively correlated with unobserved determinants of financial performance, and that unobserved factors increasing the propensity to grant teams autonomy are negatively correlated with unobserved determinants of financial performance when teams are adopted.     

Architectural Redesign, Interpersonal Communication, and Learning in R&D

An effective R&D organization needs information from a complex web of sources, including customers, suppliers, sales and marketing, and company management. Within the R&D organization, information must flow into and among numerous teams. This network of interpersonal communications can go a long way toward determining the success of a company's innovation efforts. In an exploratory study of a Belgian company operating in the telecommunications industry, Rudy K. Moenaert and Filip Caeldries examine the effects of interpersonal communication on market and technological learning in R&D. Trying to improve the flow of information into and within its R&D organization, this company designed its new R&D facility with an eye toward improving both market and technological learning throughout the organization. By locating R&D personnel in closer proximity to one another, management hoped to provide them with improved access to market and technological information, and thus increase their innovativeness. Contrary to expectations, placing R&D professionals in closer proximity to one another did not increase technological learning in this organization. In fact, technological learning actually decreased slightly during the period studied, though the change is not statistically significant. On the other hand, market learning and product innovativeness improved significantly during the period studied. For an R&D professional in this company, members of other R&D teams seem to be more important as sources of market information than as sources of technological information. Surprisingly, the relocation of R&D personnel also did not increase the amount of communication that takes place, either within a project team, between members of different teams, or between R&D professionals and the management steering committee. However, the architectural redesign does appear to have improved the quality of communication. R&D team leaders report that since the relocation, the information flowing into R&D has been more customer focused. This is attributed to the company's ongoing efforts to provide the tools and structures necessary for supporting the objectives of the architectural redesign. For example, implementation of quality function deployment (QFD) has helped innovation team members to focus more clearly on relevant information. The success of the architectural design required approaching this effort as a complex, ongoing process, rather than a quick-fix solution.     

Development and use of organisational climate mapping in Research and Development teams

Team climate is a construct which easily fits with organisational diagnosis and R&D effectiveness and which has been found to be readily acceptable to team leaders. This paper briefly describes the construction and use of an organisation climate instrument which was developed as a diagnostic tool for team climate characteristics in R&D, and a springboard for initiating indepth discussions with R&O team leaders. A system of feedback was developed which comprised a computerized set of plots including (1) CLIMAP (Climate MAPping) intended to depict the individual and aggregate profiles of individual perceptions along relevant climate dimensions. (2) LOCMAT (LOCation MATrix) intended to portray in a matrix form, the location of members relative to each other regarding their perception of team climate and the extent of their agreement/disagreement therewith. The development and use of the instrument and its associated form of feedback is viewed as a potential method for increasing the awareness of team members, project managers and team leaders of their work environment, and as a useful tool for initiating planned change. To date, information has been collected from more than 300 scientific and technical personnel in R&D establishments; amongst these, more specific data have been collected in 18 teams. Implications for management and also for further research are discussed.     

Transformational leadership and gatekeeping leadership: The roles of norm for maintaining consensus and shared leadership in team performance

This study focuses on shared leadership in Japanese R&D teams. The effects of both transformational and gatekeeping leaderships of formal leaders on shared leadership are examined. Moreover, the effect of shared leadership on R&D team performance is examined. Hypotheses are tested with a sample of 654 researchers working in 119 R&D industrial research teams in Japan. Results show that transformational leadership has a negative effect on shared leadership through the norm for maintaining consensus such that it positively influences the norm, which in turn negatively influences shared leadership. In contrast, gatekeeping leadership has a direct as well as an indirect positive impact on shared leadership through the norm for maintaining consensus such that it negatively influences the norm, which in turn negatively influences shared leadership. In addition, this study finds that shared leadership positively influences R&D team performance. These results suggest that leadership displayed by team members and that by formal leaders significantly influences team performance. The results are discussed in the context of the unique Japanese work environment.     

Spurring Cross‐Functional Integration for Higher New Product Performance: A Group Effectiveness Perspective*

Spurring integration among functional specialists so they collectively create successful, or high‐performing, new products is a central interest of innovation practitioners and researchers. Firms are increasingly assembling cross‐functional new product development (NPD) teams for this purpose. However, integration of team members' divergent orientations and expertise is notoriously difficult to achieve. Individuals from distinct functions such as design, marketing, manufacturing, and research and development (R&D) are often assigned to NPD teams but have contrasting backgrounds, priorities, and thought worlds. If not well managed, this diversity can yield unproductive conflict and chaos rather than successful new products. Firms are thus looking for avenues of integrating the varied expertise and orientations within these cross‐functional teams. The aim of this study is to address two important and not fully resolved questions: (1) does cross‐functional integration in NPD teams actually improve new product performance; and if so, (2) what are ways to strengthen integration? The study began by developing a model of cross‐functional integration from the perspective of the group effectiveness theory. The theory has been used to explain the performance of a wide range of small, complex work groups; this study is the first application of the theory to NPD teams. The model developed from this theory was then tested by conducting a survey of dual informants in 206 NPD teams in an array of U.S. high‐technology companies. In answer to the first research question, the findings show that cross‐functional integration indeed contributes to new product performance as long conjectured. This finding is important in that it highlights that bringing together the skills, efforts, and knowledge of differing functions in an NPD team has a clear and coveted payoff: high‐performing new products. In answer to the second question, the findings indicate that both intra‐ (or internal) and extra‐ (or external) team factors contribute and codetermine cross‐functional integration. Specifically, social cohesion and superordinate identity as internal team factors and market‐oriented reward system, planning process formalization, and managerial encouragement to take risks as external team factors foster integration. These findings underscore that spurring integration requires addressing the conditions inside as well as outside NPD teams. These specialized work groups operate as organizations within organizations; recognition of this in situ arrangement is the first step toward better managing and ensuring rewards from team integration. Based on these findings, managerial and research implications were drawn for team integration and new product performance.     

R&D team diversity and performance in hypercompetitive environments

Research summary : This article examines the effects of an R&D team's composition on its performance outcomes in hypercompetition. The fundamental feature of firms in hypercompetitive settings is that they are constantly challenged to improve their competitiveness in a relentless race to outperform one another. Analyzing a unique data set from the Formula 1 motorsport racing industry, we find an inverse U‐shaped relationship between team diversity in task‐related experience and performance an important result that diverges from well‐established theories developed in more stable environments. Fundamentally, we show that the role of R&D team experience diversity varies depending on the size of the organizations in which R&D teams operate. While we find a moderating effect for firm age, this effect is not as robust as that of firm size. Managerial summary : This article examines the relationship between R&D team composition and performance in fast‐moving environments. Firms in these environments are constantly challenged to improve their competitiveness by outperforming one another. Analyzing a unique data set from the Formula 1 motorsport racing industry, we find that a team's diversity in job‐related experience increases its performance up to a certain extent. Once R&D teams become too diverse, performance decreases because communication and coordination become more difficult. We also show that the role of R&D team diversity varies depending on the size of the organizations in which R&D teams operate. Overall, our findings provide several novel implications for the strategy, innovation, and team literatures. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.