Research Papers

Assembling Creative Teams in New Product Development Using Creative Team Familiarity

[+] Author and Article Information
Manuel E. Sosa

Associate Professor of Technology and Operations Management,
1 Ayer Rajah Avenue,
Singapore 138676, Singapore
e-mail: manuel.sosa@insead.edu

Franck Marle

Associate Professor of Project Management,
Laboratoire Genie Industriel,
École Centrale Paris 92290, France
e-mail: franck.marle@ecp.fr

The answer to this question was relevant because the design exercise involved talking to “customers” in a French marketplace in Fontainebleau (for the 2010 class) and a fresh market in Singapore's Chinatown (for the 2011 class).

Formally, the following expression to estimate expected profits per team was used [42]: E[Profit per team] = MarketPotential × MarketShare × [0.70 × UnitRetailPrice − UnitCost]. The revenue side of this equation assumes that the team gets 70% of the retail price (set by the team) for each unit sold while 30% of the retail price goes to the retailer. To calculate the product's unit cost it is assumed that 1 g = 1 cent.

Using peers as judges to evaluate the novelty and appropriateness of creations is also common in the academic community when determining the material to be published in journals and conference proceedings.

Note that in most cases Ni equals team size. Otherwise, our variables also exclude the input from nonrespondents on the numerator so that the variables remain unbiased.

One of these development groups was further divided into two small subgroups, but for the purpose of our analysis we consider it as a single functional group.

Contributed by the Design Theory and Methodology Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received February 17, 2013; final manuscript received May 17, 2013; published online June 25, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Janet K. Allen.

J. Mech. Des 135(8), 081009 (Jun 25, 2013) (13 pages) Paper No: MD-13-1087; doi: 10.1115/1.4024763 History: Received February 17, 2013; Revised May 17, 2013

Creativity is strongly influenced by the way individuals are organized. One of the most difficult and important challenges when managing innovation is to identify the individuals within an organization who must work closely with each other to maximize the generation of creative ideas. This paper aims to inform managers of new product development (NPD) organizations about forming creative teams. To do so, we extend the notion of team familiarity (i.e., the extent to which team members have worked together before becoming members of a team) by considering the quality of past interactions. We define creative team familiarity as the degree to which team members have triggered the generation of creative ideas in one another during task-related interactions prior to joining the team. This paper argues that a high level of creative team familiarity (rather than simply a high level of team familiarity) is positively associated with a team's capability to produce innovative outcomes. We test this hypothesis in a unique empirical setting involving participants in an international executive MBA program. We also illustrate the implications of our findings by identifying members in a real NPD organization who would form a creative task force with maximum level of creative team familiarity.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Topics: Teams , Design
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Cagan, J., 2008, “Cognitive Based Engineering Design: An Emerging Direction of Engineering Research (Editorial),” ASME J. Mech. Des., 130(6), p. 060201. [CrossRef]
Papalambros, P., 2010, “The Human Dimension (Editorial),” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(5), p. 050201 [CrossRef].
Dong, A., Hill, A., and Agonino, A., 2004, “A Document Analysis Method for Characterizing Design Team Performance,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 126(3), pp. 378–386. [CrossRef]
Olson, J., Cagan, J., and Kotovsky, K., 2009, “Unlocking Organizational Potential: A Computational Platform for Investigating Structural Interdependence in Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 131(3), p. 031001. [CrossRef]
Fu, K., Cagan, J., and Kotovsky, K., 2010, “Design Team Convergence: The Influence of Example Solution Quality,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(11), p. 111005. [CrossRef]
Takai, S., 2010, “A Game-Theoretic Model of Collaboration in Engineering Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(5), p. 051005. [CrossRef]
Hackman, J. R., 2002, Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Guimera, R., Uzzi, B., Spiro, J., and Nunes Amaral, L., 2005, “Team Assembly Mechanisms Determine Collaboration Network Structure and Team Performance,” Science, 308, pp. 697–702. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Thompson, L. L., 2011, Making the Team: A Guide for Managers, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hargadon, A., and Sutton, R., 1997, “Technology Brokering and Innovation in a Product Development Firm,” Adm. Sci. Q., 42, pp. 716–749. [CrossRef]
Bhavani, R., and Sosa, M., 2008, IDEO: Service Design (A).
Reagans, R., Argote, L., and Brooks, D., 2005, “Individual Learning Experience and Experience Working Together: Predicting Learning Rates From Knowing Who Knows What and Knowing How to Work Together,” Manage. Sci., 51(6), pp. 869–881. [CrossRef]
Huckman, R., Staats, B., and Upton, D., 2009, “Team Familiarity, Role Experience, and Performance: Evidence From Indian Software Services,” Manage. Sci., 55(1), pp. 85–100. [CrossRef]
Huckman, R., and Staats, B., 2011, “Fluid Tasks and Fluid Teams: The Impact of Diversity in Experience and Team Familiarity on Team Performance,” Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manage, 13(3), pp. 310–328. [CrossRef]
Choi, H., and Thompson, L., 2005, “Old Wine in a New Bottle: Impact of Membership Change on Group Creativity,” Org. Behav. Human Decis. Process., 98, pp. 121–132. [CrossRef]
Skilton, P., and Dooley, K., 2010, “The Effects of Repeat Collaboration on Creative Abrasion,” Acad. Manage. Rev., 35(1), pp. 18–134. [CrossRef]
McCord, K., and Eppinger, S., 1993, “Managing the Integration Problem in Concurrent Engineering,” MIT Sloan Working Paper.
Morelli, M. D., Eppinger, S. D., and Gulati, R. K., 1995, “Predicting Technical Communication in Product Development Organizations,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., 42(3), pp. 215–222. [CrossRef]
Sosa, M. E., Eppinger, S. D., and Rowles, C. M., 2003, “Identifying Modular and Integrative Systems and Their Impact on Design Team Interactions,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 125(2), pp. 240–252. [CrossRef]
Sosa, M. E., Eppinger, S. D., and Rowles, C. M., 2004, “The Misalignment of Product and Organizational Structures in Complex Product Development,” Manage. Sci., 50(12), pp. 1674–1689. [CrossRef]
Sosa, M. E., 2008, “A Structured Approach to Predicting and Managing Technical Interactions in Software Development,” Res. Eng. Des., 19(1), pp. 47–70. [CrossRef]
Sternberg, R. B., 1999, Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Amabile, T., 1996, Creativity in Context, West View Press, Inc., Boulder, CO.
Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1996, Creativity, HarperCollins, New York, NY.
Amabile, T., 1997, “Motivating Creativity in Organizations: On Doing What You Love and Loving What You Do,” California Manage. Rev., 40(1), pp. 39–58. [CrossRef]
Simonton, D. K., 1988, Scientific Genius: A Psychology of Science, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.
Burt, R. S., 2004, “Structural Holes and Good Ideas,” Am. J. Sociol., 110, pp. 349–399. [CrossRef]
Sutton, R., and Hargadon, A., 1996, “Brainstorming in Groups in Context: Effectiveness in a Product Design Firm,” Adm. Sci. Q., 41, pp. 685–718. [CrossRef]
Kavadias, S., and Sommer, S., 2009, “The Effects of Problem Structure and Team Diversity on Brainstorming Effectiveness,” Manage. Sci., 55(12), pp. 1899–1913. [CrossRef]
Hargadon, A., and Bechky, B., 2006, “When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives: A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work,” Org. Sci., 17(4), pp. 484–500. [CrossRef]
Sosa, M. E., 2011, “Where do Creative Interactions Come From? The Role of Tie Content and Social Networks,” Org. Sci., 22(1), pp. 1–21. [CrossRef]
Edmonson, A., 1999, “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams,” Adm. Sci. Q., 44(2), pp. 350–383. [CrossRef]
McEvily, B., Perrone, V., and Zaheer, A., 2003, “Trust as an Organizing Principle,” Org. Sci., 14(1), pp. 91–103. [CrossRef]
Singh, V., Dong, A., and Gero, J., 2009, “Effects of Social Learning and Team Familiarity on Team Performance,” Proceedings of the 2009 Spring Simulation Multiconference, pp. 1–8.
Staats, B., 2012, “Unpacking Team Familiarity: The Effects of Geographic Location and Hierarchical Role,” Prod. Oper. Manage., 21(3), pp. 619–635. [CrossRef]
Obstfeld, D., 2005, “Social Networks, the Tertius Iungens Orientation, and Involvement in Innovation,” Adm. Sci. Q., 50, pp. 100–130.
Edmonson.A., 2012, Teaming: How Organizations Learn, Innovate, and Compete in the Knowledge Economy, John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, CA.
Wasserman, S., and Faust, K., 1994, Social Networks Analysis: Methods and Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Reagans, R., and McEvily, B., 2003, “Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range,” Adm. Sci. Q., 48, pp. 240–267. [CrossRef]
Tortoriello, M., 2005, “The Social Underpinnings of Absorptive Capacity: External Knowledge, Social Networks, and Individual Innovativeness,” CMU Working Paper.
Ulrich, K., and Eppinger, S. D., 2012, Product Design and Development, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.
Ulrich, K., 2004, “PDQ: Product Development Quick,” Teaching Note.
Stein, M. I., 1974, Stimulating Creativity, Academic Press, New York.
Steward, D. V., 1981, “The Design Structure System: A Method for Managing the Design of Complex Systems,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., 28(3), pp. 79–83.
Eppinger, S., Whitney, D., Smith, R., and Gebala, D., 1994, “A Model-Based Method for Organizing Tasks in Product Development,” Res. Eng. Des., 6, pp. 1–13. [CrossRef]
LovejoyW., 2000, “Integrated Operations,” University of Michigan Working Manuscript.
Marle, F., and Sosa, M. E., 2010, “Forming Creative Teams Using Clustering Algorithms,” Ecole Centrale Paris. Working Paper.
Reagans, R., Zuckerman, E., and McEvily, B., 2004, “How to Make the Team: Social Networks vs. Demography as Criteria for Designing Effective Teams,” Adm. Sci. Q., 49, pp. 101–133.
Ancona, D., and Bresman, H., 2007, X-Teams: How to Build Teams That Lead, Innovate, and Succeed, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Marle, F., Vidal, L., and Bocquet, J., 2013, “Interactions-Based Risk Clustering Methodologies and Algorithms for Complex Project Management,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., 142(2), pp. 225–234. [CrossRef]
Marle, F., and Vidal, L.-A., 2011, “Project Risk Management Processes: Improving Coordination Using a Clustering Approach,” Res. Eng. Des., 22(3), pp. 189–206. [CrossRef]
Doepker, P. E., and Dym, C. L., 2007, “Design Engineering Education,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(7), pp. 657–658. [CrossRef]
Kadlowec, J., Bhatia, K., Chandrupata, T., Chen, J., Constants, E., Hartman, H., Marchese, A., Von Lockette, P., and Zhang, H., 2007, “Design Integrated in the Mechanical Engineering Curriculum: Assessment of the Engineering Clinics,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(7), pp. 682–691. [CrossRef]
Keefe, M., Glancey, J., and Cloud, N., 2007, “Assessing Student Team Performance in Industry Sponsored Design Projects,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(7), pp. 692–700. [CrossRef]
Hey, J., Van Pelt, A., Agonino, A., and Beckman, S., 2007, “Self-Reflection: Lessons Learned in a New Product Development Class,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 129(7), pp. 668–676. [CrossRef]
Maier, J. R., Troy, T., Jud Johnston, P., Bobba, V., and Summers, J. D., 2010, “Case Study Research Using Senior Design Projects: An Example Application,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(11), p. 111011. [CrossRef]
Sosa, M. E., 2013, “Strategies for Product and Service Development (Art Center),” course website: http://faculty.insead.edu/manuel-sosa/teaching
Linsey, J. S., Tseng, I., Fu, K., Cagan, J., Wood, K. L., and Schunn, C., 2010, “A Study of Design Fixation, its Mitigation and Perception in Engineering Design Faculty,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(4), p. 041003. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Key milestones in our empirical setting

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Scatter plots of creative team familiarity and product concept design quality

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Past interaction matrix of the firm studied

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Creative interaction matrix of the firm studied

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Teams of 11 actors: (a) proposed creative task force and (b) current quality assurance group

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Clustered creative interaction matrix of the firm studied



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In