A team-based (People, Product, Process—P3) approach is a streamlined, integrated, concurrent approach to designing products and their related processes (see Fig. 6.1.1). The unique strength of this approach is speed to market. Furthermore, the product teams that have adopted this approach became more responsive to the needs of the customers. All these qualities are essential to total customer satisfaction.
Traditional product development lacked upfront involvement among affected functional disciplines. The functional approach to design and project activity often led to disjointed interfaces and rocky transitions in a project’s later stages. Because of this inefficient approach, personnel had to resolve conflicts after they received their work assignments, a situation that led to lower quality, increased overall costs, and poor performance vis-à-vis the schedule.
A team-based approach required a paradigm shift from traditional operations [1,2]. Successful implementation of the team-based approach called for policy definition, resources, training, and team formation. Product team leaders needed empowered staff members to participate in decision making and to form self-managed work teams that took responsibility for managerial duties, such as scheduling, training, hiring, and discipline. The team defined the integrated schedule and negotiated the handoff points for each discipline. One outcome of a successful implementation of the team-based approach was increased awareness of what other teammates do functionally and of their needs. This awareness resulted in an increase in meaningful, cross-functional communication. Elimination of functional compartmentalization increased enterprise-wide adoption of the team-based approach philosophy.
Team communication was essential for successful product design and a successful product development life cycle. Design changes were costly, and the later the changes, the more costly their implementation. The traditional sequential product development process versus the team-based approach is depicted in Fig. 6.1.2. The overlapped concurrent segments in this figure represent the time savings in the various program phases. Speed to market stretched the stream of income before technological obsolescence caught up. A team-based approach created opportunities in market share, market leadership, and profits. Teammates who regularly saw one another communicated best; therefore, to maximize communication and minimize design changes, locating each project’s team members near each other was desirable.
Moving a product to market quickly gives any company a competitive advantage. Compared to the integrated team-based approach, the traditional, sequential product development process was expensive and took too long to complete; consequently, the tangible benefits of an integrated team-based approach were potentially astonishing. For example, the time required for the total product development cycle could be reduced by 30%–70%. The data in Table 6.1.1 suggest that productivity increases if an integrated team-based approach is applied.
Table 6.1.1
| Areas of concern | Improvement |
|---|---|
| Development time | 30%–70% less |
| Engineering changes | 65%–90% fewer |
| Time to market | 20%–90% faster |
| Overall quality | 200%–600% higher |
| White-collar productivity | 20%–110% higher |
| Dollar sales | 5%–50% higher |
| Return on assets | 20%–120% higher |
If the goals of the integrated team-based approach were met, then impressive financial payback could be anticipated. A relatively large amount of resources invested in the early phases of a team-based approach program minimized rework at later stages of the product development lifecycle. The investment decreased as the program matured, but because of the larger investment up front, the program required heavy involvement by many people from the affected disciplines. Investing a little more money up front, however, saved tremendous time and costs later when design concerns were expressed and engineering changes were necessary to incorporate new design requirements. Any rework or recall of products at the later stages of development had a negative impact on a company’s profit.
A multidisciplined team with a clear vision was essential to focus on speed in engineering, production, sales response, and customer service. To this end, the institutions’ management reevaluated existing procedures and reexamined product development processes. The emphasis on the team-based approach kept products from becoming commodities. From a team-based standpoint, this integrated approach addressed all the right issues up front and coordinated all possible actions so that they occurred in parallel periods.
An examination of the most effective practices of the top Fortune 100 companies in the United States may lead to recommendations for improved product development [3]. US corporations needed to improve in the areas of customer satisfaction, strategic planning, teamwork, staff development, quality control, and production techniques. The use of best practices acquired from the top Fortune 100 companies has led US companies to increased market share and heightened global competitiveness.
A team-based approach was derived that may help companies to achieve global competitiveness. The survey results may be used to foster product improvement, a better-informed workforce, faster product development, and higher customer satisfaction [1]. Given the global market, the findings of the study, including feedback from experts, were expected to have theoretical, methodological, and practical significance.
Leadership
A leader needs to provide the team with a vision that incorporates shared values and is able to accomplish its mission. The function of leadership is to motivate, persuade, force, inspire, and negotiate with followers to work for common goals. A group without leadership is a collection of different interests.
Winners in global markets today produce high quality at relatively low cost through concurrent engineering and integrated product teams, and they gain new markets by customizing products and services. Success calls for continual improvement and innovation, which in turn requires new competencies from leaders. A successful leader is one who leads well, implements sound strategy, and demonstrates an effective leadership style.
Leave a Reply