IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v15y2004i1p38-55.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interteam Coordination, Project Commitment, and Teamwork in Multiteam R&D Projects: A Longitudinal Study

Author

Listed:
  • Martin Hoegl

    (Institute of Organization and Information Systems, Bocconi University, Viale Isonzo 23, 20135 Milano, Italy)

  • Katharina Weinkauf

    (Technical University of Berlin, Hardenbergstr. 4-5, HAD 29, 10623 Berlin, Germany)

  • Hans Georg Gemuenden

    (Technical University of Berlin, Hardenbergstr. 4-5, HAD 29, 10623 Berlin, Germany)

Abstract

Organizations increasingly set up multiteam projects for the development of highly complex products. While team research has emphasized the importance of team-internal processes for smaller scale projects, we know little about collaborative processes (especially between teams) in such large-scale projects. This study utilizes a multi-informant longitudinal research design on a product development project (39 teams, 36 months) in the European automotive industry investigating collaboration between and within teams. The results of the study demonstrate that interteam coordination, project commitment, and teamwork quality as rated by the team members at Time 1 (Month 12; end of concept phase) are significantly correlated to project managers’ ratings of overall team performance at Time 3 (Month 36; end of project). The process variables measured at Time 2 (Month 24; end of design phase) display generally weaker correlations with team performance at Time 3. Multiple regression analyses further detail the effects of collaborative processes within and between teams on different measures of team performance (i.e., overall performance, quality, budget, schedule). The results show that collaborative processes during the project have predictive properties in regard to later team performance and can serve as early warning indicators. Furthermore, the results of this study provide support for our hypotheses predicting positive relationships between interteam coordination, project commitment, and teamwork quality. Theoretical and practical implications of this study are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin Hoegl & Katharina Weinkauf & Hans Georg Gemuenden, 2004. "Interteam Coordination, Project Commitment, and Teamwork in Multiteam R&D Projects: A Longitudinal Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 38-55, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:15:y:2004:i:1:p:38-55
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1030.0053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1030.0053
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1030.0053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 590-607, May.
    2. William E. Souder & Rudy K. Moenaert, 1992. "Integrating Marketing And R&D Project Personnel Within Innovation Projects: An Information Uncertainty Model," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 485-512, July.
    3. Martin Hoegl & Hans Georg Gemuenden, 2001. "Teamwork Quality and the Success of Innovative Projects: A Theoretical Concept and Empirical Evidence," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(4), pages 435-449, August.
    4. Christoph H. Loch & Christian Terwiesch, 1998. "Communication and Uncertainty in Concurrent Engineering," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(8), pages 1032-1048, August.
    5. Klein, Howard J. & Mulvey, Paul W., 1995. "Two Investigations of the Relationships among Group Goals, Goal Commitment, Cohesion, and Performance," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 44-53, January.
    6. Van de Ven, Andrew R., 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Agricultural Research Policy Seminar 139708, University of Minnesota Extension.
    7. von Hippel, Eric, 1990. "Task partitioning: An innovation process variable," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 407-418, October.
    8. Paul S. Adler, 1995. "Interdepartmental Interdependence and Coordination: The Case of the Design/Manufacturing Interface," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 147-167, April.
    9. Samer Faraj & Lee Sproull, 2000. "Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(12), pages 1554-1568, December.
    10. Pamela Hinds & Sara Kiesler, 1995. "Communication across Boundaries: Work, Structure, and Use of Communication Technologies in a Large Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 373-393, August.
    11. Mary Beth Pinto & Jeffrey K. Pinto & John E. Prescott, 1993. "Antecedents and Consequences of Project Team Cross-Functional Cooperation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1281-1297, October.
    12. Seers, Anson, 1989. "Team-member exchange quality: A new construct for role-making research," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 118-135, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blazevic, Vera & Lievens, Annouk, 2004. "Learning during the new financial service innovation process: Antecedents and performance effects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 374-391, April.
    2. Blazevic, V. & Lievens, A., 2003. "Learning during the new financial service innovation process: antecedents and performance effects," Research Memorandum 023, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    3. Hoegl, Martin & Proserpio, Luigi, 2004. "Team member proximity and teamwork in innovative projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1153-1165, October.
    4. Rajiv D. Banker & Indranil Bardhan & Ozer Asdemir, 2006. "Understanding the Impact of Collaboration Software on Product Design and Development," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 352-373, December.
    5. Haberstroh, Martin & Wolf, Joachim, 2005. "Individuelle Autonomie in Projektteams," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 585, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    6. Sylvain Lenfle & Jonas Söderlund, 2019. "Large-Scale Innovative Projects as Temporary Trading Zones: Toward an Interlanguage Theory," Post-Print hal-02390158, HAL.
    7. Taewon Suh & Omar J. Khan & Benedikt Schnellbächer & Sven Heidenreich, 2019. "Strategic Accord And Tension For Business Model Innovation: Examining Different Tacit Knowledge Types And Open Action Strategies," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-29, July.
    8. Iansiti, Marco, 1995. "Technology integration: Managing technological evolution in a complex environment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 521-542, July.
    9. Dedy Dewanto Soeprapto, 2021. "Correlation between knowledge exchange & combination (KEC) and leader member exchange (LMX)," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 10(4), pages 169-182, June.
    10. Breidenthal, Amy P. & Liu, Dong & Bai, Yuntao & Mao, Yina, 2020. "The dark side of creativity: Coworker envy and ostracism as a response to employee creativity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 242-254.
    11. Rosenbusch, Nina & Brinckmann, Jan & Bausch, Andreas, 2011. "Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 441-457, July.
    12. John W. Boudreau, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Organizational Behavior, Strategy, Performance, and Design in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(11), pages 1463-1476, November.
    13. West, Jonathan, 2000. "Institutions, information processing, and organization structure in research and development: evidence from the semiconductor industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 349-373, March.
    14. Runsten, Philip, 2017. "TEAM INTELLIGENCE: THE FOUNDATIONS OF INTELLIGENT ORGANIZATIONS - A Literature Review," SSE Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2017:2, Stockholm School of Economics.
    15. Staudenmayer, Nancy A. (Nancy Ann), 1997. "Interdependency : conceptual, empirical, & practical issues," Working papers 162-97. Working paper (Sl, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    16. Dedy Dewanto, 2020. "The characteristic of Leader-member Exchange (LMX) relationship between leader and follower: A case in construction industry," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 9(6), pages 77-90, October.
    17. Johansson Magnus & Rani Jeanne Dang & Rick Middel, 2012. "Actions driving and legitimizing radical innovations in a large firm," Post-Print halshs-00727515, HAL.
    18. Laura B. Cardinal & Scott F. Turner & Michael J. Fern & Richard M. Burton, 2011. "Organizing for Product Development Across Technological Environments: Performance Trade-offs and Priorities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 1000-1025, August.
    19. Hoegl, Martin & Gibbert, Michael & Mazursky, David, 2008. "Financial constraints in innovation projects: When is less more?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1382-1391, September.
    20. Liu, Zhiqiang & Yan, Miao & Fan, Youqing & Chen, Liling, 2021. "Ascribed or achieved? The role of birth order on innovative behaviour in the workplace," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 480-492.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:15:y:2004:i:1:p:38-55. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.