ادغام عملکرد متقابل به عنوان یک مکانیسم تحول دانش : مفاهیم برای توسعه محصول جدید
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|2762||2010||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 10898 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Industrial Marketing Management, Volume 39, Issue 4, May 2010, Pages 650–660
The importance of cross-functional integration (CFI) teams involving workers with multiple forms of functional expertise to work on new product development cannot be overemphasized. CFI is an organic structure and it allows the team members' tacit knowledge embedded in individuals to be realized in the new product development team's collective knowledge – a holistic appreciation and understanding about how to achieve new product development goals. Specifically, despite the pivotal role of CFI and knowledge appreciation in new product development teams, scholars appear to have overlooked the integration of individual level factors, team level factors, individual tacit knowledge, and group collective knowledge within the context of achieving the new product development objectives. Adopting knowledge, CFI, and socialization theories, we propose a conceptual framework that stipulates that the factors at the team level (goal congruence, task cohesion, interpersonal cohesion, and transformational leadership) and the qualification of team members (common knowledge, functional expertise, and their positions in the network) influence the effectiveness of tacit-to-collective knowledge transformation.
The integration of diverse disciplines or cross-functional integration (“CFI”) to develop new products has attracted much interest from scholars and has become popular among many organizations (Adler, 1995 and Brown and Eisenhardt, 1995). CFI is defined as “the magnitude of interaction and communication, the level of information sharing, the degree of coordination, and the extent of joint involvement across functions in specific new product development tasks” (Song & Montoya-Weiss, 2001, p. 65; see also Clark and Fujimoto, 1990, Clark and Fujimoto, 1991, Wheelright and Clark, 1992 and Song et al., 2000).3 CFI facilitates communications, interaction, information sharing, coordination, and collaboration between functions in new product development (Song & Montoya-Weiss, 2001). This organic structure provides a collaborative and interactive forum for different functions within a firm (Kahn, 1996). Review of the literature shows that the success of many new product development tasks depends upon the interaction among a firm's different functional areas (Cooper, 2001). The latter's practical effect in the context of capabilities of CFI has been reported at several new product development best-practice companies (see Di Benedetto, 1999 and Griffin, 1997). A recent quantitative literature review of the CFI- new product development success relationship during the past two decades appears to corroborate CFI's benefits over its costs (Troy, Hirunyawipada, & Paswan, 2008). Moreover, the impact of CFI on new product development success has been emphasized in several studies (see Table 1) leading to at least three CFI research streams emerging. These include (1) CFI impacts on new product development (e.g., Di Benedetto, 1999, Im and Workman, 2004 and Li and Calantone, 1998, etc.), (2) influences of some relevant factors on CFI effectiveness (e.g., Leenders and Wierenga, 2002 and Song et al., 1997, etc.), and (3) impacts of functional types and development phases on CFI effectiveness (e.g., Gomes et al., 2003 and Song et al., 1998). In broad terms, while CFI is considered a practical arrangement of task integration and communication among functions assigned to new product development, the success of new products is not only enhanced by employing CFI but also by how much knowledge is actually integrated and transformed to usable knowledge in this setting (De Luca and Atuahene-Gima, 2007 and Madhavan and Grover, 1998). CFI can enhance the integration of diverse functional knowledge (e.g., technology, marketing), and this integration tends to incorporate essential product attributes (Marsh & Stock, 2006; see also Clark and Fujimoto, 1991, Cooper and Kleinschmidt, 1986 and Souder, 1987). Incidentally, what seems to be apparent is that most previous studies tend to focus on the sharing of information rather than attempt to articulate CFI as a knowledge transformation tool. Knowledge differs from information. Information is a flow of messages while knowledge is the information embedded with commitment and belief of its holder who can process, make sense of, and use information (Machlup, 1983 and Nonaka, 1994). In addition, in view of the fact that new product development involves creation, acquisition, dissemination, and utilization of new knowledge (Calantone et al., 2002, Damanpour, 1991, Johnson et al., 1997 and Verona, 1999), treating CFI as information sharing is tantamount to providing limited insight. Rather, the implementation of CFI should aim at the transformation of knowledge (e.g., Madhavan & Grover, 1998) for the benefit of new product development. The paucity of studies geared toward knowledge transformation in CFI (see Table 1) leaves important research questions unanswered. These include (1) how individual team members' knowledge is disseminated and transformed to CFI team knowledge, (2) how knowledge from different disciplines is fully harnessed using CFI team, (3) which type of knowledge is more effective for the success of product development, and finally, (4) which factors can enhance the knowledge transformation in a CFI team. The existence of these questions has given impetus for this paper. Our primary aim is to develop a conceptual framework of knowledge transformation in CFI and then suggest how this knowledge could be effectively exploited. In this article, we review the literature on knowledge sharing and socialization as the important facets of cross-functional integration in new product development. We particularly focus on CFI at the team level in which most new product development activities occur (e.g., Brown & Eisenhardt, 1995). We look at CFI as a dynamic configuration facilitating the transformation of knowledge necessary for new product development (e.g., Adams, Day, & Dougherty, 1998). Thus, by focusing on knowledge transformation, this paper contributes to the marketing literature by providing insights concerning the factors that influence the effectiveness of knowledge management in a new product development team. Additionally, we explicate the criteria for CFI team building and the CFI team management approach to achieve the successful knowledge transformation. We assert that our proposed conceptual framework could serve as theoretical platform for future empirical research.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The goal of this paper is to propose a conceptual framework delineating the importance and implications of tacit and collective knowledge in a new product development CFI team. We develop the proposal based on the theoretical integration between team and knowledge management in new product development context. We note that central to the underlying mechanism of knowledge transformation in a CFI team configuration is socialization. The effectiveness of knowledge transformation in a CFI team depends upon the extent to which team socialization can be enhanced. Against this backdrop, we propose that the factors at the team level (e.g., goal congruence, task cohesion, interpersonal cohesion, and transformational leadership) and the qualification of team members (e.g., common knowledge, functional expertise, and their network positions) influence team socialization and thus, increase the effectiveness of tacit-to-collective knowledge transformation. In addition, we show how the proposals can benefit CFI team configuration in different stages, including selecting team members, setting team direction, and facilitating the team. We conclude our paper with guidelines for further empirical research aimed at expanding knowledge transformation in new product development.