Managing integration and coordination in cross‐functional teams: an international study of Concurrent Engineering product development

Abstract

This study is about the influence of integration and coordination of organisational mechanisms on the effectiveness of the process of product development by cross-functional teams. The sample consists of 50 cross-national Concurrent Engineering (CE) project teams, from companies in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, UK, and USA, in the technology intensive industries of aerospace, automobile, chemical, computer, electronics, shipbuilding, and telecommunications. The study offers a diagnostic tool which measures the effectiveness of the Concurrent Engineering team's process in terms of the behaviours and attitudes of the engineeringaR&D and manufacturing representatives on the product development team: (a) two-way communication, (b) overlapping problems-solving, (c) readiness to use uncertain and ambiguous information released by team counterparts for decision-making, and (d) readiness to release uncertain and ambiguous information to team counterparts. The findings of the study are that integration mechanisms, such as team-based rewards and job rotation, and coordination mechanisms, such as project structure and information technology, and project leader's management style, support an effective team process, and overcome the negative effect of geographic distance and time-difference in cross-national teams. In addition, there are interesting implications for organisational learning in the practice of Concurrent Engineering for product development, and of the implications of these findings for practice and future research.

Developing and Managing Cross-Functional Teams: A Multi-Case Study of Brazilian Manufacturing Companies

“…Several authors have performed research about characteristics that promote CFT success (Proehl, 1997;Hauptman and Hirji, 1999;Katzenbach and Smith, 2003;Feng et al, 2010 Considering the responsibilities of MPP, IP and DP teams, their effectiveness may be perceived through achievement of accurate demand planning numbers, or as close to actual as possible.…”

“…These undesired effects can be avoided through integration mechanisms including reward systems based on team indicators, job rotation, information technology and power of the leader to support the team (Hauptman and Hirji, 1999). Pinto et al (1993) analyzed cross-functional project teams in U.S. hospitals and identified important factors to generate cooperation and task accomplishment, such as: alignment of goals, physical proximity and formalization of team rules and procedures.…”

The Persistent Effect of Geographic Distance in Acquisition Target Selection

“…While some interactions involve a costless transmission of information, other interactions involve teams working together closely, even as part of the target selection process. Research indicates that managers may face significant obstacles while implementing such interactions over long distances (Hauptman and Hirji, 1999;Kiesler and Cummings, 2002). Given that acquirers need to collect more extensive soft information about related targets, firms are likely to exhibit a stronger preference for geographic proximity while acquiring such targets.…”

Is more always better? An exploration of the differential effects of functional integration on performance in new product development

“…In the project management literature it is common to find terms such as concurrent or simultaneous engineering, integrated design and engineering, or design for manufacturing (e.g. Hauptman and Hirji, 1999). One common aspect between these terms is that they all stress the crucial interplay between human and organisational systems in NPD activities.…”