Do We Have to Get Along to Innovate? The Influence of Multilevel Social Cohesion on New Product and New Service Development

Abstract

In this study, based on the Comparative Performance Assessment Study survey conducted by the Product Development Management Association, the authors develop and test a model which considers the antecedents and performance outcomes of social cohesion, a seemingly critical organizational factor in new product development (NPD). Using a sample of over 450 innovation and product development professionals from North America, Europe, and Asia, social cohesion is conceptualized and tested across three levels—within team cohesion, between team cohesion, and between firm cohesion. The results of a structural equation model indicate several differences between the antecedents of the varying forms of social cohesion. A post hoc exploration of the difference between goods‐ versus service‐dominant firms provides a clearer picture of cohesion's influence on innovation outcomes. Specifically, within team and between team cohesion are positively associated with new services performance, while for traditional goods‐based NPD, within team, between team, and between firm cohesion all appear to be positively related to performance. The findings suggest that high social cohesion is not always optimal and that managers should focus on specific types or levels of social cohesion as opposed to thinking about social cohesion as a one‐dimensional construct. The findings also suggest that goods‐ and service‐centric firms can use different tactics or strategies to drive social cohesion and, ultimately, new product performance, and that innovation managers may need to allocate resources differently depending on the nature of the market offering being developed. The paper also presents several implications for theory and practice, as well as future research directions related to the various levels of social cohesion and their influence on new product and new service performance.

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

“…The current study makes an initial attempt to examine factors that can reduce team boundary spanning’s positives effect on new product competitive advantage by proposing and testing a negative moderating effect of team social cohesion on the relationship between team boundary spanning and new product competitive advantage. Team social cohesion has generally been considered a desirable criterion for team formation and a predictor of new product performance (Im et al, ; Nakata and Im, ; Shaner et al, ). Results from this study confirm the above findings by showing that team social cohesion has a positive effect on new product competitive advantage.…”

“…Second, by investigating how boundary spanning’s effectiveness is contingent on the level of team social cohesion, this study not only addresses recent calls to examine how team internal characteristics interact with team boundary spanning to affect team performance (Marrone, ) but also provides a new perspective into the impact of team social cohesion on NPD teams. Thus, within the field of NPD, social cohesion has been primarily viewed as a desirable criterion for team formation and a predictor of new product performance (Im, Montoya, and Workman, ; Nakata and Im, ; Shaner, Beeler, and Noble, ). The current study departs from existing research in that it exposes a dark side of team social cohesion for NPD teams engaged in boundary‐spanning activities.…”

The influence of shared R&D-project innovativeness perceptions on university-industry collaboration performance

“…1 High and low relationship quality between firms and universities in balanced social systems specification criteria and can determine the technological choices that will be most promising (Filiou and Massini 2018). This positive relationship may encourage partners to manage their R&D activities more systematically (Shaner et al 2016), because shared goals ensure that all of the parties understand what they are trying to achieve and how this path should be pursued Hoegl and Parboteeah 2006). This shared perception creates a sense of ownership and support, while limiting the number of inefficient deviations from the project goals (Salomo et al 2007).…”

“…A shared perception of an R&D project facilitates efficiency in managing the project as partners can focus on project-related challenges instead of on using their resources to deal with their different perceptions (Shaner et al 2016) and with the potential relational conflicts associated with these (Dougherty 1992). Mutual understanding will help smooth the collaboration and prevent the relationship from degenerating into distrust and distress ) as partners will show a higher level of tolerance of failures and mistakes.…”

Organisational Power, Cohesiveness and Culture of Taiwan’s Cosmetology Industry

“…Organisational culture affects organisational cohesiveness through the establishment of actions, norms and the standard policies and procedures which guide the employees' action and behaviour (Shaner, Beeler, & Noble, 2016). For example, employees under the innovative and supportive organisational culture are found to be more risk tolerant; they view the occasional failures as part of the learning process.…”