Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Creating Shared Understanding in Product Development Teams

Abstract

This chapter holds the introduction to the book. It identifies the context of the study in terms of interdisciplinary teams working in the early phases of innovation and identifies the challenges, which are facing these teams as well as present approaches toward these. It shows how this study approaches these challenges in a different way, unfolds the research questions, and outlines the structure of the book.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ancona DG, Caldwell DF (1992) Demography and design: predictors of new product team performance. Organ Sci 3(3):321–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bradford DL, Huckabay MA (1999) The interpersonal dynamics reader graduate school of business. Stanford University, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burns C, Cottam H, Vanstone C and Winhall J (2006). Transformation design council, UK available at http://www.designcouncil.info/mt/RED/transformationdesign/TransformationDesignFinalDraft.pdf

  4. Carless SA, DePaola C (2000) The measurement of cohesion in work teams. Small Group Res 31(1):71–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen SG, Bailey DE (1997) What makes teams work: group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. J Manag 23(3):239–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cooper RG (1998) Predevelopment activities determine new product success Industrial Marketing Management vol. 17, pp 237–247

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cooper R, Evans M (2006) Breaking from tradition: market research consumer needs, and design futures. Des Manag Rev 17:68–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Darsø L (2001) Innovation in the making. Samfundslitteratur, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  9. Eisenhardt KM (1999) Strategy as strategic decision making. Sloan Manag Rev 40(3):65

    Google Scholar 

  10. Eisenhardt KM, Tabrizi BN (1995) Accelerating adaptive processes: product innovation in the global computer industry. Adm Sci Q 40:84–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Friis SK (2007) Conscious design practice as a strategic tool. Dissertation, Danish School of Education, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hey JHG, Joyce CK, Beckman SL (2007) Framing innovation: negotiating shared frames during early design phases. J Des Res 6(1–2):79–99

    Google Scholar 

  13. Katzenbach JR, Smith DK (1993) The wisdom of teams: creating the high performance organization. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  14. Koen PA, Ajamian GM, Boyce S, Clamen A, Fisher E, Fountoulakis S, Johnson A, Puri P (2002) Fuzzy front end: effective methods, tools and techniques, in Belliveau P (ed.) The PDMA Tool book for new product development. Wiley, London

    Google Scholar 

  15. Krippendorff K (2006) The semantic turn—a new foundation for design CRC Press/Taylor and Francis Group, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Laurel B (2003) Design research methods and perspectives The MIT press, London

    Google Scholar 

  17. Leonard DA, Swap WC (1999) When sparks fly. Igniting Creativity in Groups Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lindsay C, Rocchi S (2004) Context-of-use co-research methodology. In: Manzini E, Collina L, Evans S (eds) Solution oriented partner ship–how to design industrialized sustainable solutions. Cranfield University, Cranfield

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lipman-Blumen J and Leavitt HJ (1999) Hot groups: seeding them, feeding them, and using them to ignite your organization Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ Sci 2(1):71–87

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Martin R (2004) The design of business. Rotman management (the alumni magazine), winter 2004, pp 7–10

    Google Scholar 

  22. Merholz P, Wilkens T, Schauer B and Verba D (2008) Subject to change: great products and services for an uncertain world O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol

    Google Scholar 

  23. Munnecke M and Van der Lugt R (2006) Bottom-up strategies in consumer-led markets. Second international Seville seminar on Future-Orient ed Technology analysis: Impact if FTA approaches on policy and decision making. Seville, September 28–29

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pelled LH, Eisenhardt KM, Xin KR (1999) Exploring the black box: an analysis of work group diversity, conflict and performance. Adm quart 44(1):1–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rocchi S, Lindsay C (2004) User in context-of-use. In: Manzini E, Collina L, Evans S (eds) Solution oriented partnership—how to design industrialized sustainable solutions. Cranfield University, Cranfield

    Google Scholar 

  26. Rosted J, Lau T, Høgenhaven C and Johansen P (2007) Concept design—how to solve complex challenges of our time FORA, Copenhagen. available at http://www.ebst.dk/file/7661/conceptdesign.pdf)

  27. Schein EH (1999) What to observe in a group, in N.T.L. Reading book for human relation training 8th edn. N.T.L Institute of applied behavioral science VA, pp 267–269

    Google Scholar 

  28. Sessa VI and Jackson SE (1995) Diversity in decision making teams: all differences are not created equal, in Chemers MM, Oskamp S, Costanzo MA (eds.) Diversity in organizations. New perspectives for a changing workplace Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  29. Snowden DJ and Boone ME (2007) A leaders framework for decision making—wise executives tailor their approach to fit the complexity of the circumstances they face Harvard Business Review (November), p 2

    Google Scholar 

  30. Takeuchi H and Nonaka I (1986) The new product development game. Harvard Business Review. (Jan–Feb.), pp 137–146

    Google Scholar 

  31. Ulrich KT, Eppinger SD (2005) Product design and development. Mcgraw-Hill Book Co, New York

    Google Scholar 

  32. Von Hippel E (2005) Democratizing Innovation. The MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aalborg University, Østeraagade 6, Aalborg, 9000, Denmark

    Louise Møller Nielsen & Christian Tollestrup

Authors
  1. Louise Møller Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Tollestrup
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Louise Møller Nielsen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Møller Nielsen, L., Tollestrup, C. (2013). Introduction. In: Creating Shared Understanding in Product Development Teams. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4180-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4180-8_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4179-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4180-8

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation