Project Management Journal

Product innovation and the trend to globalization are two important and interrelated dimensions driving business today. In this article, the results of five published research articles on the topic of global new product development (NPD) are summarized to provide an integrated overview of the factors that impact global NPD program performance. The overall conceptual framework is based on three types of literature—NPD, globalization, and organization. The main theoretical approach for establishing relationships between factors is the dynamic capability/resource-based view. Accordingly, factors linked to outcome are seen as operating on different organizational levels, with more actionable initiatives or ‘capabilities’ largely mediating the softer and longer term background ‘resources’ of the firm. The analyses are based on a broad cross-industry sample of 467 firms (North America, Europe, B2B, goods/services). Three global NPD-related background resources (global innovation culture, resource commitment, and senior management involvement), labeled the ‘behavioral environment’ of the firm, are identified and shown to be linked to global NPD program performance via the mediated effect of four specific NPD capabilities (NPD process, strategy, team, and IT/communication). A qualitative synthesis of the findings is provided, along with recommended management initiatives with which firms can enhance their performance in the global NPD effort. Both sets of factors are found to be essential and highly interrelated, but it is the strength of the behavioral environment resources that distinguish the best performing firms, setting the stage for success in global NPD.

Many researchers have suggested that meeting time, scope, and budget goals, sometimes called ‘project efficiency,’ is not the comprehensive measure of project success. Broader measures of success have been recommended; however, to date, nobody has determined empirically the relationship between efficiency and overall success or indeed shown whether efficiency is important at all to overall project success. Our aim in this article is to correct that omission. Through a survey of 1,386 projects we have shown that project efficiency correlates moderately strongly to overall project success (correlation of 0.6 and R² of 0.36). Efficiency is shown through analysis to be neither the only aspect of project success nor an aspect of project success that can be ignored.

Communities of practice are a possible mechanism for improving knowledge sharing among project managers, both within and between organizations. Based on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, we theorize a model of participation intensity in communities of practice by project managers and explore the use of Web 2.0 technologies to increase this participation. Using structural equation modeling, we test the research model and find that the factors of reputation, enjoyment, and management support impact the participation intensity of project managers in communities of practice. However, we do not find support for the impact of Web 2.0 technologies on participation intensity. This study provides evidence that participation in communities of practice can result in individual benefits for the project manager, as well as in more far-reaching organizational benefits.

This article investigates the process of knowledge sharing between project teams and uses a case study approach. This is especially relevant, as organizations face both the needs for separating work into projects and integrating knowledge created in projects into the organization. The results provided by the analysis technique of GABEK® indicate that, although projects create boundaries, employees and project team leaders use formal mechanisms and develop informal practices for knowledge sharing between project teams. Furthermore, the article identifies organizational cultural characteristics enacted in these practices that can stimulate the discussion in “knowledge culture research” regarding the relationship of organizational cultural characteristics and (specific) knowledge processes.

There is an obvious need in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry for improved project team integration through project delivery to ensure improved project outcomes. The literature reports that, among other methods, project partnering, when followed successfully, provides a great opportunity to improve project performance via improved collaboration among key project stakeholders (e.g., owner, designer, contractor) and reduce claims as a result while letting all project members stay in their traditional roles and work under any contractual framework, including design-bid-build. Despite its potential and history in the United States since the late 1980s and being classified as one of the best practices by the Construction Industry Institute in 1996, partnering continues to be underutilized. Existing research on partnering is mostly limited to public projects such as mega roadway and bridge projects. Guided by the literature, the aim of this research is to understand and report barriers to project partnering in the United States from both vertical/horizontal and public/private construction sectors. Via a comprehensive literature review, followed by a Delphi survey of partnering experts, this study systematically classified barriers to project partnering. In study results, implementation barriers to partnering during project delivery are more frequently pronounced than the barriers to its adoption. Of the top reported barriers to project partnering, the majority are cultural; project team related barriers show the greatest area of potential for improvement; and contrary to the literature, none is legislative. The study contributes to the body of knowledge by drawing attention to project delivery and management practices in the AEC industry to improve team collaboration and chances of successful implementation and adoption of integrative practices.

Implementing any innovation successfully is a challenge. In addition to commonly reported climate and values-fit constructs, this study proposes that communication behaviors (i.e., monitoring, challenging, managing, and negotiating) are also vital for innovation implementation. Via an in-depth literature review, the study first defines these metrics. Second, a content analysis of an integrated project delivery (IPD) case study report enables the study to explore if these communication behaviors exist in inter-organizational architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) project teams. Results provide four key communication metrics for innovation implementation, supported by evidence and examples that illustrate these metrics in AEC teams implementing IPD as an innovation.