Positive and Negative Effects of Team Stressors on Job Satisfaction and New Product Performance^*

Abstract

The subject of stress and its impact on performance has received limited empirical attention in the new product development field. The present study examines the impact of three work stressors (i.e., role ambiguity, role conflict, and pressure for performance) on team job satisfaction and three dimensions of new product performance: adherence to budget and schedule, product quality, and market success. Data were collected using a cross sectional, Webbased survey among Spanish innovative firms. A total of 197 questionnaires was received. Findings from this research suggest that role conflict and role ambiguity are negatively related to team job satisfaction. Results, however, show a lack of association between pressure for performance and job satisfaction. Regarding the effect of work stressors on new product performance, findings indicate that different stressors have different relationships with performance. Concerning role ambiguity, findings provide empirical evidence of a U-shaped relationship between role ambiguity and adherence to budget and schedule and between role ambiguity and product quality. Thus, intermediate levels of role ambiguity are hurtful, but low and high levels of role ambiguity are helpful. Nonetheless, given that the levels of ambiguity measured in this study are not high enough, the findings regarding the impact of moderate to high levels of ambiguity on new product performance should be viewed as tentative. Role conflict has a negative linear relationship with adherence to budget schedule and an inverted U-shaped relationship with product quality. For pressure for performance, findings indicate a triphasic effect on product quality. Specifically, the initial phase is characterized by increasingly lower levels of product quality owing to increasing levels of pressure for performance. As pressure for performance keeps further increasing, a positive effect on product quality begins to manifest. Beyond some threshold, however, a new phase starts in which product quality decreases with increasing amounts of performance pressure. Finally, results show a lack of association between pressure for performance and adherence to budget and schedule. All three stressors were found to have an indirect, rather than a direct, effect on market success via job satisfaction, adherence to budget and schedule, or product quality. Several managerial implications follow from these results. First, product managers should make every effort to reduce role ambiguity to minimal levels, ensuring that team members fully understand their role requirements and have adequate information about their job. Second, rather than reducing the level of role conflict to zero, managers must take into account the positive effect that moderate levels of role conflict have in product quality. Finally, management should put some pressure on the team members and make sure they understand that there is a sense of urgency.

How Do Financial Constraints Affect Creativity?

“…This result has multiple implications for the human resources selection and development processes. While in fact creativity may well be enhanced by resource constraints or by stressors in general (Rodriguez‐Escudero, Carbonell, and Munuera‐Aleman, ), the ability to exploit the opportunity provided by the constraints may well be available only to those who are able to meet the challenge, i.e., novelty seekers, whose creativity is heightened by the constraints. Novelty seekers may also be more productive under these constraints, because they can focus better on the creative task, without being overwhelmed by information overload.…”

A multilevel review of stressor research in teams

“…Applying a team‐stressor lens to these behaviors will give rise to substantial progress that would otherwise be overlooked. Taken together, we contribute to the existing literature by explicitly focusing on stressors in collective entities (e.g., Maruping et al, ; Rodríguez‐Escudero, Carbonell, & Munuera‐Aleman, ; Savelsbergh, Gevers, Van der Heijden, & Poell, ), and we advance related streams of team research that center on stressful stimuli jeopardizing the proper functioning of teams and their members.…”

Effects of Collaborative Communication on NPD Collaboration Results: Two Routes of Influence

“…Specifically, the focus is placed on product quality as well as adherence to budget and schedule, two variables traditionally related to project management (Blindenbach-Driessen et al, 2010) and which are not only project execution outcomes but also key product-intrinsic characteristics-product superiority, cost, and timely availability to the marketplace-which, individually or collectively, might impact market success (Tatikonda and Montoya-Weiss, 2001). Product quality refers to the product's perceived superiority relative to competitive products (Tatikonda and Montoya-Weiss, 2001) and is a typical NPD performance measure (Blindenbach-Driessen et al, 2010;Hoegl and Wagner, 2005;Rodr ıguez-Escudero, Carbonell, and Munuera-Aleman, 2010). Adherence to budget and schedule address the extent to which the project has been developed on time and within budget and is also a common NPD performance measure (Blindenbach-Driessen et al, 2010;Knudsen and Mortensen, 2011;Rodr ıguez-Escudero et al, 2010).…”

“…Product quality refers to the product's perceived superiority relative to competitive products (Tatikonda and Montoya-Weiss, 2001) and is a typical NPD performance measure (Blindenbach-Driessen et al, 2010;Hoegl and Wagner, 2005;Rodr ıguez-Escudero, Carbonell, and Munuera-Aleman, 2010). Adherence to budget and schedule address the extent to which the project has been developed on time and within budget and is also a common NPD performance measure (Blindenbach-Driessen et al, 2010;Knudsen and Mortensen, 2011;Rodr ıguez-Escudero et al, 2010).…”