Collaborative Product Development - Dissertation Example

Collaborative Product Development Question 1, a: Collaboration and coordination Collaboration is the bringing together of resources in an attempt to achieve efficiency in taking up a certain task. It is based I the fact that most large-scale task or projects require the knowledge, experiences and skill of various people and teams (Stewart, 2001). As a result, collaboration brings together knowledge, experience and skills of various teams or team members to contribute to one goal such as developing a new product. Coordination on the other hand is the process of making collaboration to work. The initial attempt to bring people and resources together to achieve teamwork does not necessarily lead to a successful collaboration. It therefore requires coordination skills in order to for any bottlenecks, misunderstandings and even problems to occur during the working. Coordination works the same way as a traffic control; it determines who is given what opportunities, who goes where and who does what. Any collaboration therefore requires proper coordination in order for it to work properly and to be successful. As a result, it can be sais that coordination is a component of collaboration since collaboration cannot be effective unless there is a sensible level of coordination. Coordination is the art of getting thing done while collaboration is one of the philosophies of doing things. While coordination is a matter of determining the logistics of operations, collaborations has to be with the issue of scale of doing things. This means that these two have an impact on each other, especially in a production environment. Usually in collaborative product development, some team members will naturally have coordination skills while others will have other kinds of skills. Question 1, b: Collaboration tools Collaboration is something that must be well planned to be successful. Collaboration tools have also changed as technological development has been achieved. As Mills (2012) argues, unlike older days when the collaboration tools included such things as fax, today’s collaboration tools that enables teams and team members to collaborate even when they are not physically located together are the technology-based. These tools come in various forms. The tools for collaboration can be divided into synchronous and asynchronous tools. This classification into either synchronous or asynchronous is determined on the nature of the tools with regard to how it is able to support communication and collaboration in teams. Synchronous Synchronous are the collaboration tools that offer a way for the teams and team members to get immediate feedback from each other. These tools include the telephone and mobile phone. These communication tools are able to give the team members ability to communicate and to also collaborate. Mobile phones for instance helps the team members to be able to have a communication device with them anywhere they go which makes them flexible. The team members therefore do not have to be in office for them to be able to collaborate with the of the team. Other team collaboration tools that have been availed by technology include audio-conferencing and video-conferencing. Audio-conferencing Audio-conferencing makes it possible for users to collaborate even when they are far art. Team members can carry out meetings even if they are geographically dispersed. In Audio-conferencing, the team members are connected in a conference call where each member can be able to hear what all the other members are talking and he can also be able to contribute. Audio-conferencing can be achieved in two main ways. The first one is the one to one Audio-conferencing which includes each member having his or her won device and the team members do not have to be in one group. Most modern mobile phones and phone networks provide this capability. In this kind of Audio-conferencing, one call can accommodate more than two people, with each one of them able to participate in the call. This technology however has its challenges. To begin with, due to the fact that each member has his own device, communication can be broken. The second kind of Audio-conferencing involves the special Audio-conferencing devices. The device is created in such a way that it can serve a number of people. Various team meet in a conference room and they are able to communicate with the other teams. For instance, if a certain project has five teams each of which is located in different geographical location, each of the teams meet in a room and use their device to communicate with the others. Audio-conferencing breaks the geographical barriers between two or more teams and they are able to communicate at the same time. Audio-conferencing however has its own challenge. For instance, there is the issue of the fact there are certain aspects of commutation that are lost. Audio conferencing does not for instance allow the team members to be able to read emotional cues from the other team members and so the communication may not be very effective. As a result, some communication can be lost. At the same time, Audio-conferencing fails to give the people the emotional closeness that is necessary for people to start trusting with each other. In this regard, if the team, or various team know that they are going to be using Audio-conferencing a lot, they need to first find q way to help the team to bond. If possible, they should be able to come together in a physical environment where they are able to meet face to face. Humans have for a long time been used to face to face communication and therefore the technological solutions that have come today are not entrenched in the psychology of commutation for humans. Communication is more than just speaking and it involves a lot of emotional expressions. These emotion expressions are not able to be captured by the technological tools such as Audio-conferencing fail to capture these factors. Video-conferencing Video-conferencing is an improvement of the audio-conferencing technology. It is like the audio-conferencing but with video included. This can mean that the users are able to see each other as they meet in a virtual conference room. In this regard, video-conferencing has many advantages over the audio-conferencing because the people can be able to see each other and so emotional cues such as facial expressions can be seen. At the same time, since people can see each other, they are able to bond faster and easier than in audio-conferencing. However, the disadvantage of the video-conferencing is that it is resource intensive and very expensive. To be able to transmit this video is very expensive especially where internet connectivity is being used. At the same time, it has the tendency to fail while the meeting is going on and this can be detrimental to the success of the collaboration. If the video-conferencing continues failing, this can have a negative impact on the moral of the team and the team members. Instant messaging Instant messaging is also another collaboration tool tat be used to help team with virtual co location. It works much like the audio conferencing but sues text based communications as opposed to using audio and video. Just as the name suggests, Instant messaging is an instant way of sending messages. The parties involved are able to send and receive the messages in real time and there is continued (synchronous) feedback. Some instant messaging tools support multi users (which mean that more than two people at a time can be involved in a chat). This can be used by teams and even team members to enhance communication when they are geographically apart. However, instant messaging has the same challenges as audio conferencing with regard to creating communication rapport. This is because the people who are involved do not communicate face to face, or they do not see each other during communication. Application sharing Application sharing is one of the ways in which teams working in a collaborative product development can utilize to aid them meet their goals (Li, Ong & Nee, 2006). Unlike the other collaboration tools that have been discussed so far, this tool is mainly designed for this particular purpose. It is an advanced synchronous collaboration tool that groups of teams or team members can use to collaborate on a project. Application sharing use shared resources such as servers to help users to be able to edit and develop documents and other application simultaneous (Linthicum, 1999). The shared application can be accessed by the team members from a central point and the users use their client computers to be able to access the application. Several users can aces the application and edit its content simultaneously and the other users will be able to see the updates and then be able to contribute. As Linthicum (2003) says, application sharing is a very important tool in the context of collaborative product development. Team, members with different skill and experiences can contribute in real time about the concepts and the initial models, regardless of the fact that they are in different geographical locations. In this regard, an application such as the modeling tools can be shared and the different teams and team members can have real time access to other people’s contribution (Ould, 1995). Shared white boards Shared white boards are also very useful ways to collaborate. The users share their data and also are able to see other documents that are shared by other team members (Bloor & Owen, 1995). They are also able to annotate the documents and therefore real time data and document sharing is enabled. Collaboration servers and 3D viewers These are also good collaboration tools that enhance the way geographically dispersed teams can use to collaborate and be able to work together in a project. They are also synchronous in nature and allows for immediate feedback. Asynchronous tools Teams who are in collaborative product development can also use asynchronous tools. Asynchronous tools refer to tool that do not necessarily offer direct or immediate feedback. These tools include email, list servers, bulletin boards, portals, discussion groups, wikis and blogs. These tools are able to offer the team and team members with ways to help them to collaborate with each other. However, instead of aiding direct collaboration, these tools provide the team members to be able to share their resources as well as ideas with each other. Experts can for instance write a blog about a certain issue and the other members can aces the blog. A major different between synchronous and asynchronous tools is that asynchronous tools do not allow the users to directly collaborate with each together. They however, help them to be able to share knowledge and expertise that can be very useful in enhancing he way the team works. Like synchronous tools, asynchronous tools also help to get rid of the geographical barriers. For instance, when an expert posts a blog on a bluffing site or sends an update of a list server, all the concerned people are able to aces it regardless of where they are located. This is very useful for collaboration. Question 1, c: benefits and issues associated with creating physically co-located teams with using virtually co-located teams. Developing rapport Physically co-located teams have a number of advantages over virtually co-located teams. One of the best advantages has to do with rapport development. As has been discussed, people have for over millions of years been evolved to communicate better in face to face communication. In this regard, when a team is physically co-located, the advantage is the fact that they are going to develop faster along the team development process from the forming stage to the most productive stage of the team lifecycle. However, with regard to the physically co-located teams, this is not usually possible. With physically co-located teams, people find it hard to be able to develop communicational rapport and this can have a big impact with regard to how well the team will be able to collaborate with each other. Cost of set up The other issue with team development is the issue of cost. Physically co-located teams are less expensive with raged to setting them up. This is unlike the virtually co-located teams which require a lot of technology for them to be able to work. For instance, building a virtual conference room can be very expense. For this team to be able to communicate and collaborate well, they would need video conferencing which is very expensive not only to set up but also to maintain. Video conferencing needs a lot of data connectivity and this is usually very expensive. A single meeting session an cost the firm a lot in terms of the data costs that are going to be incurred. However, this cost is not necessary for the physically co-located teams. Flexibility Physically co-located teams are not as flexible as the virtually co-located teams. Due to the fact that physically co-located teams have to be geographically together in order for them to perform, this brings in a problem if inflexibility. If the team requires the contribution of some experts who are far, the experts will need to travel and be there physically with the other teams or team members. In such a case, the costs involved in transporting these team members can be very high. However, the even more critical issue may not be the financial resources needed to transport these team members but the time lost. With regard to product lifecycle, it is necessary for the lead time (the time it takes a product from the initial concept to the finished product) is very critical to the success of the product (Smith, Reinertsen, 1997). When there is a lot of time wasted during the time of product development, the product will end up losing on so many grounds. Yet, physically co-located teams do not have the advantage of saving time since the many hours used for traveling leads to a lot of time wanted (Grieves, 2005). The only time when a physically co-located team does not have this disadvantage is when all the team members are within a close geographical range. With geographically dispersed teams, the advantage of the virtually co-located teams is saving time and other resources. Time is especially very critical and virtually co-located teams can be very useful in saving time since the travelling time is not required. This is very critical especially product development and it helps the team members to be able to save on time and make it possible to deliver the end product as soon as it is possible. Inconveniences There several issues that come up with regard to both physically co-located teams and virtually co-located teams. The issue of inconveniences comes up with regard to this. For physically co-located teams, the challenge there are likely to go through is the limitation of resources. This issue is not faced with regard to virtually co-located teams. However, virtually co-located teams have their own challenges. For instance, if the teams are in a virtual meeting and the technology tools fail, this meeting will fail and this can have a fundamental impact on their success and the process of the project (Ould, 2005). For virtually co-located teams to be successful therefore, the technological tools such as audio and video conferencing have to be near perfect with regard to their functionality. Failure to this, this will mean that the team will be affected in a negative way. However, this is not usually easy to achieve due to the technical expertise needed to make these work. Saving overhead costs With physically co-located teams, the overhead costs are more because these teams have to get office space to be working from. However, some virtually co-located teams do not need office space and this means that the firm will save on office rent as well as well as other cost that go with renting an office such as paying for utilities. The time zone problems Some virtually co-located teams can be so geographically dispersed that they are in different time zones and this can bring in a problems with regard to how they are able to work with each other. If one team or team member is so far from the other teams that their time zone is differ to the point that when the other teams are meeting in the day time the time in his location is at night, this can be an inconvenient to him, or the entire team. However, physically co-located teams do not have to content with this kind of problem because they are geographically together and there is no problem of the time zone. This can be a big advantage to the team. References Mills, A, (2012). Collaborative Engineering and the Internet: Linking Product Development Partners Via the Web. New York, NY: Society of Manufacturing Engineers Smith, P.G., Reinertsen, D.G. (1997). Developing Products in Half the Time: New Rules, New Tools. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Stewart, T.A. (2001). The Wealth of Knowledge: Intellectual Capital and the Twenty first Century Organization. London, UK: Doubleday Ould, M.A. (1995). Business processes: Modeling and analysis for re-engineering and improvement. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons Ltd. Ould, M.A., (2005). Business Process Management: A Rigorous Approach. Meghan-Kiffer Press Li, W.D., Ong, S. K., Nee, A. Y. C. (2006). Integrated and Collaborative Product Development Environment: Technologies and Implementations (Series on Manufacturing Systems and Technology). New York, NY: World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd, Linthicum, D.S. (1999). Enterprise Application Integration. London, UK. Addison Wesley Linthicum, D.S. (2003). Next Generation Application Integration: From Simple Information to Web Services. London UK; Addison Wesley Bloor, S. Owen, J. (1995). Product Data Exchange. London, UK: Routledge Grieves, M. (2005). Product Lifecycle Management: Driving the Next Generation of Lean Thinking. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional Read More