Antecedents and Consequences of Cross‐Functional Cooperation: A Comparison of R&D, Manufacturing, and Marketing Perspectives

Abstract

By breaking down the walls among the R&D, manufacturing, and marketing functions, techniques such as concurrent engineering and quality function deployment can pave the way to more effective new product development (NPD). Recognizing the benefits of such cross‐functional efforts, practitioners and researchers have examined the interrelationships among various groups in the NPD process, paying particularly close attention to the R&D–marketing interface. However, manufacturing also plays an important role in NPD. Consequently, any thorough exploration of the relationship between cross‐functional cooperation and NPD success must consider manufacturing's perspective. X. Michael Song, Mitzi M. Montoya‐Weiss, and Jeffrey B. Schmidt provide such a balanced perspective in a study of cross‐functional cooperation during NPD in Mexican high‐tech firms. Notwithstanding the differing functional goals, objectives, and reward systems present in R&D, manufacturing and marketing, they hypothesize that all three functions recognize that successful NPD requires crossfunctional cooperation. In particular, they expect that representatives of these three functional groups will share similar perceptions, regarding both the drivers and the consequences of cross‐functional cooperation. The survey results support the hypothesis that R&D, manufacturing, and marketing professionals share the same perceptions, regarding the drivers and the consequences of cross‐functional cooperation. Respondents from all three groups view internal facilitators as the drivers of cross‐functional cooperation. In other words, regardless of their functional area, the survey respondents believe that the strongest, most direct effects on cross‐functional cooperation and NPD performance come from a firm's evaluation criteria, reward structures, and management expectations. Respondents perceive these internal facilitators as having a greater effect on cross‐functional cooperation than that of external forces such as market competitiveness and technological change. In fact, contrary to expectations, the respondents do not view these external forces as having a significant effect on cross‐functional cooperation or NPD performance. And contrary to persistent reports about friction between technical and nontechnical personnel, all three groups perceive a strong, positive relationship between cross‐functional communication and NPD performance.

Fairness from the Top: Perceived Procedural Justice and Collaborative Problem Solving in New Product Development

“…Contributing to research on product innovation, our results are noteworthy for two reasons. First, product innovation literature has documented the role of collaboration in new product development processes, and several studies have examined the factors affecting successful collaboration (Dougherty 1992, Jassawalla and Sashittal 1998, Song et al 1997. In this study, we bring a procedural justice perspective into this line of research by examining the linkage between perceived procedural justice in top management decisions and collaborative problem solving among project members.…”

“…The complexities inherent in new product development processes have prompted researchers to look closely at the interactions among project members as they strive to meet common goals (Brown and Eisenhardt 1995, Dougherty 1992, Song et al 1997. Various concepts characterize problem-solving approaches to accomplishing specific tasks such as cooperation (Pinto et al 1993), coordination (Argote 1982), interdependence (Stewart and Barrick 2000), integration (Kahn 1996), and collaboration (Liedtka 1996).…”

The organisation of innovation: collaboration, cooperation and multifunctional groups in UK and German manufacturing

“…Both innovation networks and multifunctional working, however, also feature significantly in other debates about organisational and industrial flexibility and moves towards leaner and more flexible production systems (e.g. Womack et al, 1991;Levine, 1995;Finegold and Wagner, 1998;Song et al, 1997). Freeman (1991, p. 501), for example, comments "... both empirical and theoretical research has long since demonstrated the importance for successful innovation of both external and internal networks of information and collaboration".…”

“…Rosenberg, 1982;Song et al, 1997) and their adoption is a key feature of lean production (e.g. Levine, 1995;Finegold and Wagner, 1998).…”

Systems thinking benefits in supply change management: an illustration of the viable systems model in a Supply Chain

“…Research shows that building bridges between functions and to suppliers and customers increases the likelihood of success for the company. These bridges can take the form of cross-functional teams with R&D/manufacturing/marketing integration (Song, Montoya-Weiss and Schmidt, 1997), strategic partnerships (Magrath and Hardy, 1994), which can be with both suppliers (Swink and Mabert, 2000) and customers (Campbell and Cooper, 1999). It is stated that collaboration can speed up the technological progress within the company, but it requires an increasing amount of resources to fully handle and control the product development process (Sobrero and Roberts, 2002).…”