Concurrent Team Execution Of Development Projects

CPD front loads cross-functional teams by engaging all stakeholders in value creation from concept to service delivery. The term “cross-functional team” is bandied about so frequently that enactment seems widespread. However, some cross-functional teams are only nominal and many are incompletely formed. Much remains unknown as to how to organize and lead cross-functional teams to improve product development performance.Product development systems provide support the execution of multitudinous projects for bringing new products to life. Enterprise systems provide resources, structure, and guidance for executing project tasks to produce outputs for integration into holistic customer offerings. This chapter profiles concurrent practices enacted by project teams engaged in product development.Best practices for teaming are identified by correlating 44 SPOT measures with indicators of project performance. Performance is measured as requirement, schedule, and budget. SPOT practices predict over half of the variance in project performance which explains why some product development teams are more successful than others. Many diverse practices provide a foundation for teaming behaviors proven to be associated with successful performance.Two case examples exemplify teaming practices. 3M used concurrent methods for developing a disruptive product. The deployment of fusion cells at Black & Decker illustrates practices that proved extraordinarily successful in building teams that shared leadership responsibilities for developing new products in half the time.Teaming practices may be grouped based on the extent to which behaviors are relatively more overt or covert. The overt grouping is listed in Appendix Table 18A. Readers may benchmark teaming practices in their enterprise against BIC standards and assess potential improvement actions which are enhanced by system level norms permitting development teams to execute their projects adaptively. Appendix Table 18B provides a list of relatively more tacit behaviors for evaluation.