Knowledge integration at the edge of technology: On teamwork and complexity in new turbine development

International Journal of Project Management

Volumn 28, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 756-765

  Enberg, Cecilia ^a   Lindkvist, Lars ^a   Tell, Fredrik ^a  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Knowledge integration; Product development; Projects; Teamwork

Indexed keywords

COMPLEX PROJECTS; KNOWLEDGE INTEGRATION; POINT OF DEPARTURES; PROJECT WORK; PROJECTS; SPECIFIC TASKS; TEAM MEMBERS; TEAMWORK;

FELT; MARINE ENGINES; STEAM TURBINES;

PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT;

KNOWLEDGE; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT; TURBINE;

EID: 77956893955     PISSN: 02637863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.05.003     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Alvesson M., Deetz S. Doing Critical Management Research 2000, SAGE Publications, London.
2. Baccarini D. The concept of project complexity - a review. International Journal of Project Management 1996, 14(4):201-204.
3. Baiden B.K., Price A.D.F., Dainty A.R.J. The extent of team integration within construction projects. International Journal of Project Management 2006, 24:13-23.
4. Carlile P.R., Rebentisch E.S. Into the black box: the knowledge transformation cycle. Management Science 2003, 49(9):1180-1195.
5. Dyer W.G., Wilkins A.L. Better stories, not better constructs, to generate better theory: a rejoinder to Eisenhardt. Academy of Management Review 1991, 16(3):613-619.
6. Enberg, C., 2007. Knowledge Integration in product development projects. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Management and Engineering, Linköping University, Sweden.
7. Enberg C., Lindkvist L., Tell F. Exploring the dynamics of knowledge integration: acting and interacting in project teams. Management Learning 2006, 37(2):143-165.
8. Grandori A. Neither hierarchy nor identity: knowledge-governance mechanisms and the theory of the firm. Journal of Management and Governance 2001, 5(3-4):381-399.
9. Grant R.M. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 1996, 17:109-122. (Winter Special Issue).
10. Hoegl M., Gemuenden H.G. Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: a theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization Science 2001, 12(4):435-449.
11. Hoegl M., Parboteeah K.P. Creativity in innovative projects: how teamwork matters. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 2007, 24:143-166.
12. Hoopes D.G. Why are there glitches in product development?. R&D Management 2001, 31(4):381-389.
13. Janis I.L., Mann L. Decision Making: a Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice and Commitment 1977, Free Press, New York.
14. Katzenbach J.R., Smith D.K. The Wisdom of Teams - Creating the High-performance Organization 1993, McGraw-Hill, London.
15. Kratzer J., Gemuenden H.G., Lettl C. Balancing creativity and time efficiency in multi-team R&D projects: the alignment of formal and informal networks. R&D Management 2008, 38(5):538-549.
16. Lawrence P.R., Lorsch J.W. Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration 1967, Division of Research Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, Boston.
17. Lindkvist L. Knowledge communities and knowledge collectivities: a typology of knowledge work in groups. Journal of Management Studies 2005, 42(6):1189-1210.
18. Lindkvist L., Söderlund J., Tell F. Managing product development projects: on the significance of fountains and deadlines. Organization Studies 1998, 19(6):931-951.
19. Nationalencyplopedin (NE), 2010. http://www.ne.se/lang/segregration.
20. Nonaka I., Takeuchi H. The Knowledge-creating Company - How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation 1995, Oxford University Press, New York.
21. Orton J.D., Weick K.E. Loosely coupled systems: a re-conceptualization. Academy of Management Review 1990, 15:203-223.
22. Perrow C. Organizational Analysis: a Sociological Review 1970, Tavistock Publications, London.
23. Postrel S. Islands of shared knowledge: specialization and mutual understanding in problem-solving teams. Organization Science 2002, 13(3):303-320.
24. Rosenbloom R.S., Christensen C.M. Technological discontinuities, organizational capabilities, and strategic commitments. Industrial and Corporate Change 1994, 3(3):655-685.
25. Sauser B.J., Reilly R.R., Shenhar A.J. Why projects fail? How contingency theory can provide new insights - a comparative analysis of NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter loss. International Journal of Project Management 2009, 27(7):665-679.
26. Schmickl C., Kieser A. How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations?. Research Policy 2008, 37(3):473-491.
27. Shenhar A.J. One size does not fit all projects: Exploring classical contingency domains. Management Science 2001, 47(3):394-414.
28. Simon H. The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 1962, 106(6):467-482.
29. Thompson J.D. Organizations in Action 1967, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.
30. Tsoukas H., Hatch M.J. Complex thinking, complex practice. The case for a narrative approach to organizational complexity. Complex Knowledge - Studies in Organizational Epistemology 2005, Oxford University Press, Oxford. H. Tsoukas (Ed.).
31. Weick K.E. Sensemaking in Organizations 1995, SAGE Publications, London.
32. Weick K.E. Technology as Equivoque: sensemaking in new technologies. Making Sense of the Organization 2001, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford. K.E. Weick (Ed.).
33. Williams T.M. The need for new paradigms for complex projects. International Journal of Project Management 1999, 17(5):269-273.