Search results

The primary objective of this paper is to propose a theoretical framework for assessing the role and influence of technology in creating an effective field service organization. We examine the role of technology in the context of managing relationships among the company, its employees and customers. Using the analogy of a country managing its foreign affairs, we suggest that consistent and concurrent attention to carrying out Diplomacy, Preparedness and Engagement responsibilities with the aid of Technology (DPEAT) would result in superior service outcomes. We illustrate implementing our framework in a field service organization and use a published case study to demonstrate the application of our model.

The purpose of this study is to conduct a meta-analytic review based on a theoretical framework developed for investigating new product development (NPD) teams in the first two decades of the research stream.

This study contributes to literature by investigating the presence of publication bias and synthesizing correlation effect sizes of 27 factors influencing three NPD team performance dimensions: overall, market-based (e.g. sales, profitability), process-based (e.g. budget adherence, schedule adherence) outcomes. Further, this study presents a path analytical model that uses the aggregate study effects to identify significant drivers of NPD team performance.

First, examination of extant literature shows no publication bias. Next, analyses show that three internal team dynamic variables have the most significant positive effect on overall NPD team performance: team member job satisfaction, cross-functional integration and superordinate identity. For market-based performance, three goal-related contextual factors exert the most positive influence, namely, goal stability, goal clarity and goal support, in respective order. Further, for process-based performance, cross-functional integration’s strong positive effect is followed by team and goal stability. Moreover, physical distance, interpersonal and task conflict have significant negative effects on NPD team performance. Finally, both market- and process-based NPD team performance are significantly influenced by NPD team’s cohesion, which acts a mediator between two contextual factors: physical distance and team tenure.

This meta-analysis contributes to literature by providing a comprehensive model of NPD team performance predictors, their definitions, along with their corresponding effects in predicting performance. While team cohesion is found to be a strong predictor of both market- and process-based performance, future research can examine if too much cohesion has a detrimental effect, especially on market-based performance.

The results assist managers in shifting their priorities to ensure optimal support of NPD teams. For example, team leadership competence externally has a larger effect on overall performance compared to team leadership for internal team dynamics. Hence, team leaders should make sure that they manage the team’s relationships with external parties (e.g. other functional units) with more caution.

This study provides a guiding framework for analyzing NPD team performance as well as identifies and then addresses many knowledge gaps on NPD team performance.