Assignment:
Write a 7 page paper in APA format. The research paper should include the following sections.
Cover page
Introduction - (Thesis statement and Purpose of paper)
Background - Background and History on the concept
Discussion - Discuss current issues, innovation, and future use. Support the topic with any necessary sources. Be sure to include in-text citations.
Conclusion - Summary of main points
References - Formatted using APA
Virtual International R&D Teams
Gassman and von Zedtwitz build on the transnational corporation model discussed in Chapter Ten by examining how such firms coordinate their international innovation efforts via virtual teams. As in some of the arguments made in Chapter Ten about loosely coupled R&D activities, virtual international R&D teams may jointly work on a single development project, utilizing information technologies (rather than geographical proximity) to achieve coordination. However, while information technology decreases the need to collocate R&D activities, it does not readily solve problems related to building trust and transferring tacit knowledge. The type of innovation project being undertaken and the type of knowledge that must be shared should influence the degree to which firms rely on decentralized, virtual coordination processes. Gassman and von Zedtwitz studied 37 technology-intensive multinationals and identified four patterns of teams:
(1) decentralized self-coordination,
(2) system integrator as coordinator,
(3) core team as system architect, and
(4) centralized venture team. In the decentralized self- coordinating teams, there was no single source of power or authority over the teams. Teams communicated primarily through telephone, the Internet, shared databases, and groupware. Coordination was relatively weak and relied largely on a strong corporate culture. Decentralized self-coordination was more likely to arise if there were well-developed standard interfaces between components being developed in different locales; thus, it tended to be suited to modular innovation as opposed to architectural innovation (see Chapter Three). In teams with a system integrator as R&D coordinator, a single individual or office takes responsibility for helping different divisions coordinate.
The system integrator helps to build a common understanding of the project among each of the divisions, translates knowledge from one division to another, and tracks progress and contributions. While the overall project is decentralized, the system integrator enables some centralized coordination. In the core team as system architect model, a core team of key decision makers from all of the decentralized R&D groups meets regularly to coordinate the otherwise decentralized groups.
The core team often includes a strong project manager, leaders from each of the decentralized groups, and occasionally external customers or consultants. The core team constructs the overall architecture of the development project and maintains its coherence throughout its development. Because the core team has more direct authority over the individual divisions than the system integrator described above, the core team is better able to resolve conflict and enforce standards across the divisions. Because core teams can provide a significant level of integration across the divisions, core teams are often able to conduct architectural innovation. In the centralized venture team, R&D personnel and resources are relocated to one central location to enable maximum integration and coordination.
The team is likely to have a very powerful senior project manager with significant authority to allocate resources and define the responsibilities of individual team members. Gassman and von Zedtwitz describe two examples of centralized venture teams-Asea Brown's "High Impact Projects" and Sharp's "Golden Badge" projects.
Because of their high expense, such teams are likely to be used only for strategic innovations of the utmost importance. Gassman and von Zedtwitz's model is summarized. Overall, Gassman and von Zedtwitz argue that innovations that are radical, are architectural, or require the intensive transfer of complex or tacit knowledge will require greater centralization. Innovations that are incremental, are modular, and do not require the frequent transfer of complex or tacit knowledge can be more decentralized.