Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:34:16.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Distributed team design in small- and medium-sized enterprises: How to get it right

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2007

Avril Thomson ,
Angela Stone  and
William Ion
Avril Thomson
Affiliation:
Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland
Angela Stone
Affiliation:
Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland
William Ion
Affiliation:
Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Readily available and affordable technologies such as the Internet, groupware, and Web conferencing mean that sharing information and data within teams is simple and affordable. However, many small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) struggle to implement or perform distributed collaborative design effectively or even at all. As part of the extended design team of large multinational companies it is not uncommon for SMEs to have collaborative working tools and practice imposed on them to meet the requirements of the multinational. However, many SMEs need to develop their own working practices to support effective, collaborative team design within their own organization or their extended design team. Through a series of case studies, this paper describes how a typical SME achieved successful distributed team design within their organization. A “strategy for effective distributed team design” encompassing the processes, methods, and tools developed and implemented within the company to achieve this success, is presented. In total, four live case studies, spanning a 2-year period, are described; two initial studies focus on current distributed design team practice clearly highlighting issues and areas for improvement, leading to the development of processes, methods, and tools to support distributed collaborative team design. A strategy for effective distributed team design encapsulating these processes methods and tools is presented together with its evaluation through two further live industrial case studies. The case studies themselves, together with the processes, methods, and tools developed by this company, could be adopted by other SMEs directly to achieve the same success. Generic and transferable findings drawn from this study aimed at helping others achieve this success form the conclusion of the paper.

Keywords

Collaborative Team DesignDistributed Design TeamsSmall- and Medium-Sized EnterprisesStrategy for Effective Distributed Team Design
Type
Research Article
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , August 2007 , pp. 203 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, T.J. (1977). Managing the Flow of Technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Anderl, R., Lindemann, U., Thomson, B., Gaul, H.-D., Gierhardt, H., & Ott, T. (1999). Investigation of distibuted product design and development processes. Int. Conf. Engineering Design (ICED'99), Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
Bradner, E., & Mark, G. (2002). Why distance matters: effects on cooperation, persuasion and deception. CSCW 2002, November 16–20. New Orleans, LA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
Bucciarelli, L. (1984). Reflective practices in engineering design. Design Studies 3(5), 185–190.Google Scholar
Cheng, N.Y., & Kvan, T. (2000). Design Collaboration Strategies. Rio de Janeiro: Constructing the Digital Space.Google Scholar
Chiu, M.-L. (2002). An organisational view of design communication in design collaboration. Design Studies 23, 187–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crabtree, R.A., Fox, M.S., & Baid, N.K. (1997). Case studies of coordination activities and problems in collaborative design. Research in Engineering Design 9 70–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gay, G., & Lentini, M. (1995). Use of communication resources in a networked collaborative design environment. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 1(1)Google Scholar
Gierhardt, H., Gaul, H.-D., & Ott, T. (1999). Distribution in product design and development processes. ASME Design Engineering Technical Conf., Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
Henry, M., & Greehalgh, S. (1999). The reality of virtual teams. Time Compression Technologies 7 18–19.Google Scholar
Herbsleb, J.D., Mockus, A., Finholt, T.A., & Grinter, R.E. (2000). Distance, dependencies and delay in a global collaboration. CSCW 2000, December 1–6. Philadelphia, PA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
Imai, M. (1997). Gemba Kaizen: A Common Sense, Low Cost Approach To Management. New York: McGraw–Hill.Google Scholar
Jagodzinski, P., Reid, F., & Culverhouse, P. (2000). A study of electronics engineering design teams. Design Studies 21(4), 375–402.Google Scholar
Jarvenpaa, S.L., & Leidner, D.E. (1998). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 3(4).Google Scholar
Klein, M. (1997). Capturing geometry rationale for collaborative design. Sixth Int. Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET-ICE ’97), MIT. Cambridge, MA: IEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
Klein, M. (2000). Towards a systematic repository of knowledge about managing collaborative design conflicts. 6th Int. Conf. Artificial Intelligence in Design ’00. Worcester, MA: Worcester Polytechnic Institute.Google Scholar
Lipnack, J., & Stamps, J. (2000). Virtual Teams—People Working Across Boundaries With Technology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
MacGregor, S.P., Thomson, A.I., & Juster, N.P. (2002). A multi-level process based investigation of distributed design. In Proc. Engineering Design Conf. 2002 (EDC 2002), Kings College London, July 9–11.Google Scholar
Maher, M.L., & Rutherford, J.H. (1997). A model for synchronous collaborative design using CAD and database management. Research in Engineering Design 9(1), 85–98.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W.J., & Hofman, J.D. (1997). An improvisational model of change management: the case of groupware technologies. Sloan Management Review 38(2), 11–21.Google Scholar
Peña-Mora, F., & Hussein, K. (1999). Interaction dynamics in collaborative design discourse. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering 14 171–185.Google Scholar
Petrie, C. (n.d.). Madefast home page. Accessed at http://www.madefast.stanford.eduGoogle Scholar
Rocco, E. (1998). Trust breaks down in electronic contexts but can be repaired by some initial face to face contact. In Proc. CHI’98, pp. 496–502. Los Angeles: ACM Press.Google Scholar
Top Gear. (1996). Ford Motor Company case study. Computer Weekly March 7th.Google Scholar
Williams, E. (1977). Experimental comparisons of face to face and mediated communication: a review. Psychological Bulletin 84(5), 963–976.Google Scholar
Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design Methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 5, 2nd ed.London: Sage.Google Scholar
Zheng, J., Veinott, E., Bos, N., Olson, J.S., & Olson, G.M. (2002). Trust without touch: jumpstarting long distance trust with initial social activities. CHI 2002, April 20–25. Minneapolis, MN: ACM Press.Google Scholar