Concurrent collaboration in research and development

Integration is the essence of current research and development (R&D) activity in many organizations. Integration can be established in various ways depending on the type, size and intricacy in organizational functions and products. Nevertheless, research and development (R&D) has become an inevitable function in most manufacturing companies in order to develop their own product niches for their survival in the prevailing highly completion market environment. Research and development functions are fundamental drivers of value creation in technology based enterprises. Of creating and maintaining a vibrant R&D environment, organizations individually or collectively need to incorporate virtual R&D team. A virtual R\&D team can introduce new product in less lead time than by conventional R\&D working. Therefore, how to increase the possibility of having more successful R\&D is a critical issue for enterprises. This paper examines the current approach of collaboration in R\&D issues from the perspective of their impact on virtual R\&D team in enterprises and compares the findings with the other concepts of concurrent collaboration. By reviewing literature and theories, the paper firstly presents the definition and characteristics of virtual R&D teams. A comparison of different types of virtual R&D teams along with the strengths and limitations of the preceding studies in this area are also presented. It is observed that most of the research activities encourage and support virtual R\&D teams applicable to enterprises. Distinctive benefits of establishing virtual R&D team have been enumerated and demand future attention has been indicated in the paper

Working at the Speed of Innovation: Impedance Mismatch in Rapid and Innovation Projects

In this paper we report on the results of an ethnographic study of a rapid design innovation (RDI) experiment in NASA Aeronautics. This work is based on the study of the Aeronautics Autonomy Testbed Capability (AATC) team in the Convergent Aeronautics Solutions (CAS) project. This paper focuses on and summarizes one of the key over-arching findings from the study: there is a significant mismatch in the organizational culture in the rest of the organization compared with that required for RDI. And, if this organizational cultural mismatch is not addressed, the likelihood of any organization being able to advance a new and different type of work (such as RDI) will be jeopardized. We delineate several aspects of the two different cultures identified in order to enable leaders and practitioners to better understand what contributes to the cultural dissonance and the implications of the differences in the cultures. As well, we identify ways in which those differences can be addressed. Research from organization and other social sciences are incorporated to highlight the differences. The implications of the research suggest that the significant cultural differences trigger a strong and resistive response from the dominant culture that may negate leaderships strategy to build the new capacity for RDI. While the research results noted the pervasive nature of innovation throughout the workplace, the type of innovation envisioned in RDI is a rare type of innovation that requires significantly new methods, work processes, tools, and skills such that approaches used in the dominate culture cannot be adopted by expediting the existing approaches. Examples include: innovation teaming and leadership; the need for adaptive leadership that changes the relationship of a research leader to the other researchers; and, an interdisciplinary teaming approach which shapes team relationships and activities. Each of these aspects requires new teaming, tools, and skills in order to succeed. Thus, when introducing RDI activities where there is a different dominant culture, teams need to be: well trained; protected; recognized and rewarded. And, team leaders must also be trained in the unique types of teaming and innovation tools used in RDI. Both RDI teaming and team leadership must be sanctioned, supported, and rewarded by leadership. Because of the cultural mismatch, in some organizations looking to add RDI to their existing and established organizations, sep to avoid or mitigate the negative impact of the culture mismatch

Virtual teams: A literature review

In the competitive market, virtual teams represent a growing response to the need for fasting time-to-market, low-cost and rapid solutions to complex organizational problems. Virtual teams enable organizations to pool the talents and expertise of employees and non-employees by eliminating time and space barriers. Nowadays, companies are heavily investing in virtual team to enhance their performance and competitiveness. Despite virtual teams growing prevalence, relatively little is known about this new form of team. Hence the study offers an extensive literature review with definitions of virtual teams and a structured analysis of the present body of knowledge of virtual teams. First, we distinguish virtual teams from conventional teams, different types of virtual teams to identify where current knowledge applies. Second, we distinguish what is needed for effective virtual team considering the people, process and technology point of view and underlying characteristics of virtual teams and challenges they entail. Finally, we have identified and extended 12 key factors that need to be considered, and describes a methodology focused on supporting virtual team working, with a new approach that has not been specifically addressed in the existing literature and some guide line for future research extracted.Virtual team, Literature review, Effective virtual team,

Unpacking capabilities underlying design (thinking) process

Engineering graduates must know how to frame and solve non-routine problems. While design classes explicitly teach problem framing and solving, it is lacking throughout much of the rest of the engineering curriculum and is often relegated to capstone classes at the end of the students’ educational experience. This paper explores problem framing and solving through the lens of experiential learning theory. It captures core problem framing and solving approaches from critical, design and systems thinking and concludes with a table of learning outcomes that might be drawn upon in designing an engineering curriculum that more fully develops the problem framing and solving capabilities of its students

An Integrated EMBA for an Integrated World

Internal and external stakeholders to the academic community have expressed concern about the MBA and have urged systemic transformation in curriculum content and course delivery. Corporations want business leaders who can provide creative solutions for problems that cut across business functions. Organizations want business graduates who have been taught how to think about business not as a series of functional smokestacks but as an integrated whole

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF THE USMC FUTURE VERTICAL LIFT (FVL) LIVING LAB

The United States Marine Corps (USMC) is developing the Future Vertical Lift (FVL) system that will rely heavily on Marine-machine teaming, a complex process that requires further development. The development of a living lab (LL)—a multi-function network of simulators that will serve as the platform for testing, experimenting, and training new technologies and ideas for how the FVL will operate—will help mitigate Marine-machine collaboration and trust issues. This capstone studies the options and requirements for developing a LL through interviews, research that focuses on existing technologies and operational concepts, and Model-Based Systems Engineering tools using a systems engineering approach. The report includes a detailed needs and requirements analysis, stakeholder analysis, and functional design. The team presents a conceptual design, that includes the system architecture, comprising of system, function and physical views, system lifecycle, and the evaluation criteria for a LL. The final product is a set of use cases and concepts of operation. The USMC needs a new approach that supports rapid and relevant upgrades that optimizes the system lifecycle and keeps the Marine in mind. This team recommends the USMC consider these findings and continue researching and developing a LL.ONR Arlington, VA 22203Civilian, Department of the NavyCivilian, Department of the NavyCivilian, Department of the NavyCivilian, Department of the NavyCivilian, Department of the NavyCivilian, Department of the NavyApproved for public release. Distribution is unlimited

Using Google Docs to Support Work Flow Management in Teams of Engineering Students

The purpose of the present study was to investigate how teams of engineering students integrated Google Docs to support their workflow management process. ABET criteria dictate that engineering students need to learn how to work together and practice effective ways of communication. Learning how to work well as a team is linked to the development of positive interdependence, which is at the core of the cooperative learning model and is based on social interdependence theory. A “sink or swim together” attitude in students is an important component of a successful teamwork experience (Smith, 1996). One of the important aspects of supporting interdependence in teams is to provide multiple opportunities for interaction in and outside the classroom

Rethinking the Dutch Innovation Agenda: Management and Organization Matter Most

In this essay, we challenge the present dominant emphasis in the Dutch Innovation Debate on the creation of technological innovations, the focus on a few core technologies, and the allocation of more financial resources. We argue that managerial capabilities and organizing principles for innovation should have a higher priority on the Dutch Innovation Agenda. Managerial capabilities for innovation deal with cognitive elements such as the capacity to absorb knowledge, create entrepreneurial mindsets, and facilitate managerial experimentation and higher-order learning abilities. These capacities can only be developed by distinctive managerial roles that enhance hierarchy, teaming and shared norms. Utilizing these unique managerial capabilities requires novel organizing principles, such as managing internal rates of change, nurturing self-organization and balancing high levels of exploration and exploitation. These managerial capabilities and organizing principles of innovation create new sources of productivity growth and competitive advantage.The dramatic fall back of the Netherlands in the league of innovative and high productivity countries of the World Economic Forum-Report can be mainly attributed to the present lack in the Netherlands of these key managerial and organizational enablers of innovation and productivity growth. We provide various levers for building unique managerial capabilities and novel organizing principles of innovation. Moreover, we describe the necessary roles that different actors have to play in this innovation arena. In particular, we focus on the often neglected but important role of strategic regulations that speed up innovation and productivity growth. They are the least expensive way to boost innovation in organizations in both the Dutch private and public sector. Finally, we discuss the implications for the Dutch Innovation Agenda. It should start with setting a challenging ambition, namely the return of The Netherlands within the WEF- league of the top-ten most innovative and productive countries of the world. Considering the under-utilization of available knowledge stemming from technological innovations, managerial and organizational determinants of innovation should receive first priority. These determinants have a high strategic relevance and should receive more public recognition. We suggest to organize an annual innovation ranking of the most outstanding Dutch firms, to develop an innovation audit that measures firms’ non-technological innovation capacity, and to create an overall innovation policy for fast diffusion of new managerial capabilities and adequate organizing principles throughout the Dutch private and public sector.In conclusion, we add five new items to the Dutch Innovation Agenda:1. Prioritize administrative innovationsInvestments in management and organization determinants of absorption of knowledge and its successful application (administrative innovation) should have a higher priority than investments in technological innovations.2. Build new managerial capabilities and develop novel organizing principlesFor these administrative innovations to succeed, firms have to build managerial capabilities (broad knowledge-base, absorptive capacity, managerial experimentation, higher-order learning) and various management roles (hierarchy, teaming, shared norms) to increase the assimilation of external knowledge and the utilization for innovation. Moreover, they have to develop novel organizing principles that increase internal rates of change, nurture self-organization and synchronize high levels of exploration and exploitation.3. Set levers of innovation by creating selection environments that favor innovation and by redefining the roles of key actors Management has to create a proper organizational context to foster entrepreneurship and innovation (internal selection environment). Governmental agencies have to focus on innovation and productivity enabling strategic regulations (external selection environment). Moreover, research institutes, business schools, and consulting firms should not only focus on technological knowledge, but also on managerial and organizational knowledge for innovation. In the end, private small and large firms and public institutions have to recognize that they all must contribute to the national goal of increasing innovation and productivity growth.4. Create a new challenging national ambition: return of the Netherlands within the top-10The Netherlands has to return to the top-ten most innovative and productive countries in the world as reflected in international rankings such as the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index.5. Proliferate an awareness and passion for innovation:Create public awareness and recognition of the societal relevance of outstanding managerial capabilities and organizing principles to innovation and productivity growth:o Initiate a Dutch innovation ranking in terms of management and organization;o Develop proper assessment tools for innovations in management and organization;o Enhance reporting on the progress on managerial and organizational innovation as part of modern corporate governance and as part of outstanding annual reports.These issues may contribute to rethinking the fundamental sources of innovation, productivity growth and sustainable competitive advantage of the Dutch economy.dynamic capabilities;knowledge transfer;exploitation;exploration;mANAGEMENT;mindsets;organizing pinciples;srategic rgulation;strategy innovation