Antecedents and Consequences of Project Team Cross-Functional Cooperation

Abstract

Cross-functional teams can greatly facilitate the successful implementation of projects. This study examined the influence of a set four antecedent constructs (superordinate goals, accessibility, physical proximity and formalized rules and procedures) on the attainment of both cross-functional cooperation and perceived project outcomes. Through the use of path analysis, the results indicated that superordinate goals, physical proximity and project team rules and procedures have significant direct and/or indirect effects on project outcomes through influencing cross-functional cooperation. Further, cross-functional cooperation was a significant predictor of both perceived task and psychosocial project outcomes. Directions for management practice and future research are discussed.project management, project implementation, cross-functional cooperation, team building and development

Determinants of the Success of Information Techology Project Management in Thailand

“…In the study of project management two models are widely recognized: a model of team effectiveness (Hackman, 1987) and a model of project team cross functional cooperation (Pinto et al, 1993). Both models use three phases for assessing team performance: inputs; team processes; and outputs.…”

“…Leadership influences a team's cognitive, motivational, and affective processes and the attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of team members (Zaccaro et al, 2001;Ensley et al, 2003). Thus, leadership processes and team processes are closely linked (Solansky, 2008) and the roles played by leaders are incorporated in the models by Hackman (1987) and Pinto et al (1993) through the constructs of team design and team synergy, and superordinate goals and project rules and procedures, respectively. Most leadership theory at the organizational or project team level is approached from a leader-to-follower performance direction of causality (Strang, 2005) and this approach was adopted in this study.…”

“…Team Processes were based on the concept of cross-functional cooperation in the model by Pinto et al (1993) which refers to the degree, extent, and nature of interpersonal relationships among team members from multiple functional areas. Previous studies have identified three constructs that are related to cross-functional cooperation: cohesion; cooperation; and conflict.…”

“…As a result of these different meanings for project success it was not used in this study. Instead, based on the models by Hackman (1987) and Pinto et al (1993) and studies by Jiang et al (2001), Piccoli et al (2004), and Horwitz and Horwitz (2007) this study examined the project outcomes using two constructs: performance outcomes (adherence to: time; budget; and project objectives); and psychosocial outcomes (the level of satisfaction of team members with the quality of team interaction and the productivity of the team). The measurement of these outcomes was restricted to the individual and team levels as it is logistically difficult to assess outcomes at the organizational level where there are likely variations in the integrity of internal data related to projects (Henderson and Lee, 1992).…”

“…The extent to which projects adhere to the time schedule, the project budget, and the project objectives (Pinto et al, 1993).…”