- 11 Dec 2006
- Working Paper Summaries
Three Perspectives on Team Learning: Outcome Improvement, Task Mastery, and Group Process
Organizations increasingly rely on teams to carry out critical strategies and operational tasks. How do teams learn, and what factors are most important to team learning? This paper reports on current perspectives and findings that address these questions, looking at empirical studies on team learning from three areas of research: outcome improvement, task mastery, and group process. Overall, Edmondson and coauthors characterize the nature of research to date and assemble what is known and unknown about the theoretically and practically important topic of team learning. Key concepts include: Team learning has value for organizations; learning in teams is seen as a key mechanism through which learning organizations become strategically and operationally adaptive and responsive. Research on team learning is at a crossroads. How the learning of individual work teams translates into organizational learning is not well understood, and management literature to date offers few insights. One avenue for future research is the durability and utility of team-based networks for the organization as a whole. Learning in teams almost necessarily plays a role in developing the knowledge and skills of individuals who compose the team. Another avenue for future research is how individuals benefit from their team learning experiences in terms of intellectual, career, and personal development goals. Organizations stand to benefit when ideas are cross-fertilized and diverse individuals learn to work together. "Outsiders" can introduce valuable ideas. Learning and execution are often at odds: Learning by its nature involves uncertainty, false starts, and occasional dead ends. Team learning in organizations must be recognized as a strategy for tolerating forays into the unknown. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 27 Nov 2006
- What Do You Think?
What’s to Be Done About Performance Reviews?
What can we do to make performance reviews more productive and less distasteful? Should their objectives be scaled back to just one or two? Should they be disengaged from the determination of compensation and, if so, how? Closed for comment; 93 Comment(s) posted.
- 13 Nov 2006
- Research & Ideas
Science Business: What Happened to Biotech?
After thirty years the numbers are in on the biotech business—and it's not what we expected. The industry in aggregate has lost money. R&D performance has not radically improved. The problem? In a new book, Professor Gary Pisano points to systemic flaws as well as unhealthy tensions between science and business. Key concepts include: The biotech industry has underperformed expectations, caught in the conflicting objectives and requirements between science and business. The industry needs to realign business models, organizational structures, and financing arrangements so they will place greater emphasis on long-term learning over short-term monetization of intellectual property. A lesson to managers: Break away from a strategy of doing many narrow deals and focus on fewer but deeper relationships. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 01 Sep 2006
- What Do You Think?
Are We Ready for Self-Management?
On its face, self-management looks like a "win-win" answer to the scarcity of good managers and the predominance of low-involvement entry-level jobs. But are sufficient numbers of entry-level employees ready for self-management? And is management ready? Closed for comment; 94 Comment(s) posted.
- 14 Aug 2006
- HBS Case
On Managing with Bobby Knight and “Coach K”
Bobby Knight and Mike Krzyzewski are arguably the two most successful college basketball coaches in the country. But their leadership styles could not be more different. Professor Scott Snook wonders: Is it better to be loved or feared? Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 05 Jul 2006
- Working Paper Summaries
Improving Corporate Governance with the Balanced Scorecard
The authors review the key roles of corporate boards and recommend a Balanced Scorecard approach to help boards work smarter, not harder. Kaplan and Nagel recommend a three-part Balanced Scorecard program: Part 1: An Enterprise Scorecard that includes enterprise-wide strategic objectives, performance measures, targets, and initiatives; Part 2: A Board Scorecard that defines and clarifies the strategic contributions and requirements of the board, and provides a tool to manage the board's performance; Part 3: Executive Scorecards, which define strategic contributions of top management and are used to select, evaluate, and reward senior executives. Key concepts include: Reforms such as Sarbanes-Oxley have increased the amount of work that boards need to do. A Balanced Scorecard approach can help boards use their limited time effectively. An enterprise strategy map and enterprise Balanced Scorecard should be the primary documents distributed to the board in advance of meetings. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 05 Jul 2006
- Working Paper Summaries
Geographically-Colocated Subgroups in Globally Dispersed Teams: A Test of the Faultline Hypothesis
Team diversity can harness strengths or drive a team apart. Troublesome faultlines appear when team members identify with a subgroup more strongly than with the larger team. Previous research, conducted on teams who worked face-to-face, has shown that these faultlines can be based on demographic factors (such as differences in nationality). The authors of this paper conducted a study on faultlines that arise between subgroups in different geographic locations. They found that faultline dynamics did indeed occur in teams with subgroups in different locations, and that their geographic diversity caused disruptive group relations, diminished trust, and increased conflict between subgroups. Key concepts include: Geographic diversity is becoming increasingly important as more organizations rely on dispersed work teams to perform their core work activities. The existence of subgroups in different locations creates an "us versus them" mentality, which leads to misunderstandings and negative feelings between team members. When managing geographically dispersed teams, build relationships and instill a collective identity to integrate subgroups in different locations, and be aware of the very real potential for disruptive group dynamics. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 24 Apr 2006
- Research & Ideas
Managing Alignment as a Process
"Most organizations attempt to create synergy, but in a fragmented, uncoordinated way," say HBS professor Robert S. Kaplan and colleague David P. Norton. Their new book excerpted here, Alignment, tells how to see alignment as a management process. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 09 Jan 2006
- Research & Ideas
When Benchmarks Don’t Work
Benchmarks have their virtues, but professor Robert S. Kaplan argues they should be saved for surveys of commoditized processes or services. From Balanced Scorecard Report. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 28 Nov 2005
- Research & Ideas
Unilever: Transformation and Tradition
In a new book, professor Geoffrey Jones looks at Unilever's decades-old transformation from fragmented underperformer to focused consumer products giant. This epilogue summarizes the years 1960 to 1990. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 22 Aug 2005
- Research & Ideas
The Hard Work of Failure Analysis
We all should learn from failure—but it's difficult to do so objectively. In this excerpt from "Failing to Learn and Learning to Fail (Intelligently)" in Long Range Planning Journal, HBS professor Amy Edmondson and coauthor Mark Cannon offer a process for analyzing what went wrong. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 08 Aug 2005
- Research & Ideas
A Balanced Scorecard Approach To Measure Customer Profitability
Happy customers are good, but profitable customers are much better. In this article, professor and Balanced Scorecard guru Robert S. Kaplan introduces BSC Customer Profitability Metrics. From Balanced Scorecard Report. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 08 Aug 2005
- Research & Ideas
Decision Rights: Who Gives the Green Light?
Four steps to ensure that the right decisions are made by the right people. HBS professor emeritus Michael C. Jensen explains in Harvard Management Update. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 09 Aug 2004
- Research & Ideas
A Diagnostic for Disruptive Innovation
You have three potential innovations, but resources to develop just one. Here are diagnostics to help you make the best decision. From Strategy & Innovation newsletter. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 07 Jun 2004
- Research & Ideas
What Drives Supply Chain Behavior?
Surprise: Managers are not always rational decision makers. In this interview, professors Rogelio Oliva and Noel Watson discuss how human behavior affects supply chain coordination. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 31 May 2004
- Research & Ideas
How Team Leaders Show Support–or Not
What does a team leader do so that employees know they are being supported? A Q&A with HBS professor and creativity expert Teresa Amabile about new research. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 12 Apr 2004
- Research & Ideas
Operations and the Competitive Edge
Many managers expect operations organizations to fulfill only a support role. But an effective operations strategy can give you a competitive advantage. An interview with professor Robert Hayes. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 02 Feb 2004
- Research & Ideas
Mapping Your Corporate Strategy
From the originators of the Balanced Scorecard system, Strategy Maps is a new book that explores how companies can best their competition. A Q&A with Robert S. Kaplan. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
- 11 Aug 2003
- Research & Ideas
Why Budgeting Kills Your Company
Why doesn’t the budget process work? Read what experts say about not only changing your budgeting process, but whether your company should dispense with budgets entirely. Closed for comment; 0 Comment(s) posted.
Is There Too Little “Know Why” In Business?
There's know-how in business and then there's "know why." Purpose is a powerful motivator on many levels, says Jim Heskett. Can we aspire to a strong sense of "know why" even if our organization is not out to change the world? What do you think? Online forum now open. Closed for comment; 83 Comment(s) posted.