Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Erfolgsfaktoren von Innovationsteams: Der Einfluss der übereinstimmenden Wahrnehmung zwischen Teammitgliedern und unternehmensinternen Stakeholdern

  • Innovationsteams
  • Published:
Schmalenbachs Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die Zusammenarbeit zwischen Mitgliedern von Innovationsteams und unternehmensinternen Stakeholdern aus verschiedenen Organisationsbereichen eines Unternehmens wird als entscheidender Erfolgsfaktor von Innovationsteams angesehen. Wenige Studien analysieren allerdings die Voraussetzungen einer erfolgreichen Zusammenarbeit. In Anlehnung an das Konzept der mentalen Teammodelle zeigt dieser Artikel, dass die Übereinstimmung der Wahrnehmung zwischen Teammitgliedern und unternehmensinternen Stakeholdern eine Voraussetzung für eine effiziente Zusammenarbeit und den Erfolg von Innovationsteams ist. Die Überlappung der Wahrnehmungen erleichtert die Zusammenarbeit, da eine gemeinsame Interpretationsgrundlage existiert, womit sich das Verhalten der Kollegen antizipieren lässt. Es wurde überprüft, inwieweit die Wahrnehmung der Teammitglieder und der unternehmensinternen Stakeholder bezüglich der Faktoren Kunden- und Zielorientierung des Teams sowie der unternehmerischen Teamkultur einen signifikant positiven Einfluss auf den Erfolg von Innovationsteams haben.

Summary

We investigated innovation teams within a mature chemical company to explore the link between team success and cooperation between team members and organizational stakeholders. While previous team innovation work primarily concentrates on team members, our research extends this work by pointing towards the importance of interaction across the team. We based our model of cooperation on team mental model literature which suggests that perceptual agreement is a necessary condition for cooperation. Perceptual agreement between the team and its stakeholders on the teams goals and its entrepreneurial culture were significantly linked to team effectiveness. These findings support the notion that innovation only occurs if innovation teams have access to resources and consensus from organizational stakeholders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literaturangaben

  • Ancona, Deborah (1990), Outward Bound: Strategies for Team survival in an organization, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 32, S. 334–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ancona, Deborah/Caldwell, David (1992), Bridging the boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams, in: Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 37, S. 634–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ancona, Deborah/Caldwell, David (1992a), Demography and Design: Predictors of New Product Team Performance, in: Organization Science, Vol. 3, S. 321–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima, Kwaku/Ko, Anthony (2001), An empirical investigation of the Effect of Market Orientation and Entrepreneurship Orientation Alignment on Product Innovation, in: Organization Science, Vol. 12, S. 54–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, Robert (1976), Structure of decision: the cognitive maps of political elites, Princeton, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barczak, Gloria/Ellen, Pam/Pilling, Bruce (1997), Developing typologies of customer motives for use of technologically based banking services, in: Journal of Business Research, Vol. 38, S. 131–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettenhausen, Kenneth L. (1991), Five years of Groups Research: What we have learned and what needs to be addressed, in: Journal of Management, Vol. 17, S. 345–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Shona L./Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1995): Product Development: Past research, present findings, and future directions, in: Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, S. 343–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannon, Mark D./Edmondson, Amy C. (2001), Confronting failure: antecedents and consequences of shared beliefs about failure in organizational work groups, in: Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 22, S. 161–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cannon-Bowers, Janis A./Salas, Eduardo/Converse, Sharolyn A. (1993), Shared mental models in expert team decision making, in: Castellan, N. John (Hrsg.), Individual and group decision making, American Psychological Assotiation, S. 221–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, Hee-Jae (2000), The Validity and Reliability of the Organizational Culture Questionnaire, Working Paper, International Institute for Management Development, Lausanne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, Kim/Fujimoto, Takahiro (1991), Product development performance: Strategy, organization and management in the world auto industry, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Susan G./Bailey, Diane E. (1997), What makes team work. Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite, in: Journal of Management, Vol. 23, S. 239–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, James (1996), Analysis and design of multitrait-multirater performance appraisal studies, in: Journal of Management, Vol. 22, S. 139–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, Robert/Kleinschmidt, Elko (1995), Benchmarking the firm’s critical success factors in new product development, in: Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 12, S. 374–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, Robert/Kleinschmidt, Elko (1996), Winning businesses in product development. The critical success factors, in: Research Technology Management, Vol. 39, S. 18–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denison, Daniel R./Hart, Stuart L./Kahn, Joel A. (1996), From chimneys to cross-functional teams: Developing and validating a diagnostic model, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39, S. 1005–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denison, Daniel R./Mishra, Aneil K. (1995), Towards a theory of organizational culture and effectiveness, in: Organization Science, Vol. 6, S. 204–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, Deborah (1992), Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation in large firms, in: Organization Science, Vol. 3, S. 179–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, Deborah/Hardy, Cynthia (1996), Sustained Product Innovation in Large, Mature Organizations: Overcoming Innovation-to-Organization Problems, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 5, S. 1120–1153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druskat, Vanessa U./Pescosolido, Anthony T. (2002), The content of effective teamwork mental models in self-managing teams: Ownership, learning and heedful interrelating, in: Human Relations, Vol. 55, S. 283–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, Holger (2002), Success factors of new product development: a review of the empirical literature, in: International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 4, S. 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fey, Carl/Denison, Daniel (2003) Organizational Culture and Effectiveness: Can American theory be applied in Russia?, in: Organization Science, Vol. 14, S. 686–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, Andy (2000), Discovering statistics using SPSS for Windows, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, Susan T./Taylor, Shelly E. (1991), Social cognition, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladstein, Deborah L. (1984), Groups in Context: A Model of Task Group Effectiveness, in: Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, S. 499–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, Richard A./Dickson, Marcus W. (1996), Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness, in: Annual Journal of Psychology, Vol. 47, S. 307–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Högl, Martin (1998), Teamarbeit in innovativen Projekten: Einflussgrössen und Wirkungen, Wiesbaden.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Högl, Martin/Gemünden, Hans G. (1999), Determinanten und Wirkungen der Teamarbeit in innovativen Projekten: Eine theoretische und empirische Analyse, in: Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Ergänzungsheft 2/99, S. 35–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janis, Irving (1982), Groupthink: Psychological Studies of policy decisions and fiascoes, 2. Aufl., Boston u.a.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, Philip N. (1983), Mental Models, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, Rosabeth (1983), The changemasters, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, Robert T. (1994), Technology-Information Processing Fit and Performance of R&D Project Groups: A Test of Contingency Theory, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, S. 167–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, Robert T. (2001), Cross-functional project groups in research and new product development: Diversity, Communications, Job Stress, and Outcomes, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44, S. 547–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klimoski, Richard/Mohammed, Susan (1994), Team metal model: Construct or Metaphor?, in: Journal of Management, Vol. 20, S. 403–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, Dorothy (1988), Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization, in: Research Policy, Vol. 17, S. 251–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, Dorothy (1991), Inanimate integrators: A block of wood speaks, in: Design Management Journal, Vol. 2, S. 61–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, Edwin A./Latham, Gary P. (1990), A theory of goal setting and task performance, Englewood Cliffs, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindell, Michael K./Brandt, Christina J./Whitney, David J. (1999), A Revised Index of Interrater Agreement for Multi-Item Ratings of a Single Target, in: Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 23, S. 127–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, Robert A. (1994), Implementing technology change with cross-functional teams, in: Research-Technology Management, Vol. 37, S. 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu, John E./Goodwin, Gerald F./Heffner, Tonia S./Salas, Eduardo/Cannon-Bowers, Janis A. (2000), The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance, in: Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85, S. 273–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Danny (1983), The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms, in: Management Science, Vol. 29, S. 770–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed, Susan/Dumville, Brad C. (2001), Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries, in: Journal of Organizational Behavoir, Vol. 22, S. 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nambisan, Satish (2002), Designing virtual customer environments for new product development: Toward a theory, in: Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27 S. 392–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary-Kelly, Anne M./Martocchio, Joseph J./Frink, Dwight D. (1994), A review of the influence of group goals on group performance, in: Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 37, S. 1285–1301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouse, William/Morris, Nancy (1986), On looking into the black box: Prospects and limits in the search for mental models, in: Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 100, S. 359–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling, Melissa A./Hill, Charles W. L. (1998), Managing the new product development process: Strategic imperatives, in: Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 44, S. 67–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, Peter (1990), The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheremata, Willow (2000), Centrifugal and Centripetal Forces in Radical New Product Development Under Time Pressure, in: Academy of Management Review, Vol. 2, S. 389–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skiera, Bernd/Albers, Sönke (2000), Regressionsanalyse, in: Herrmann, Andreas/Homburg, Christian (Hrsg.), Marktforschung, Wiesbaden, S. 205–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souder, William (1987), Managing new product innovations, Lexington, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, Leigh/Fine, Gary A. (1999), Socially Shared Cognition, Affect, Behavior: A review and Integration, in: Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 3, S. 278–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tinsley, Howard E./Weiss, David J. (1975), Interrater Reliability and agreement of subjective judgments, in: Journal of Counseling Psychology, Vol. 22, S. 358–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toegl, Ginka/Conger, Jay A. (2003), 360-Degree Assessment: Time for Reinvention, in: Academy of Management Learning and Education, Vol. 2, S. 297–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, Anne/Ohlott, Patricia (1988), Multiple assessment of managerial effectiveness: Interrater agreement and consensus in effectiveness models, in: Personnel Psychology, Vol. 41, S. 779–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, Andrew (1986), Central problems in the management of innovation, in: Management Science, Vol. 32, S. 590–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vivwesvaran, Chockalingam/Schmidt, Frank/Ones, Deniz (1996), Comparative analysis of the reliability of job performance ratings, in: Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 81, S. 557–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, Eric (1998), Economics of product development by users: The impact of ‘sticky’ local information, in: Management Science, Vol. 44, S. 629–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, Karl E./Bougon, Michel G. (1986), Organizations as Cognitive Maps: Charting Ways to Success and Failure, in: Sims, Henry P. Jr./Gioia, Dennis A. (Hrsg.), The Thinking Organization, San Francisco, S. 102–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, Karl E./Roberts, Karlene H. (1993), Collective Mind in Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Deck, in: Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 38, S. 357–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl für Strategie und Organisationslehre, IMD - International Institute for Management Development, Chemin de Bellerive 23, PO Box 915, CH-1001, Lausanne, Schweiz

    Bettina Büchel (Professorin)

  2. Fraunhofer - Institut für System- und Innovationsforschung (ISI), Breslauerstr., 48, 76138, Karlsruhe, Deutschland

    Heidi Armbruster (Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin)

Authors
  1. Bettina Büchel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Heidi Armbruster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bettina Büchel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Büchel, B., Armbruster, H. Erfolgsfaktoren von Innovationsteams: Der Einfluss der übereinstimmenden Wahrnehmung zwischen Teammitgliedern und unternehmensinternen Stakeholdern. Schmalenbachs Z betriebswirtsch Forsch 58, 506–524 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03371663

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03371663

JEL-Classification

Keywords

Search

Navigation