2013 proposal document: facilitating creation of ad-hoc cross-functional teams for designing...

J.Jancsics 6.12.2013

Summer 2013 | Joseph Jancsics

PROPOSAL FACILITATING CREATION OF AD-HOC CROSS-FUNCTIONAL TEAMS FOR DESIGNING INNOVATION WITH A RAPID TURNAROUND


Table of Contents

Abstract ______________________________________________________________________ 1

Introduction __________________________________________________________________ 2

Literature Review ______________________________________________________________ 3

Design Prototyping _________________________________________________________________ 3

Social Innovation ___________________________________________________________________ 3

Group Creation and Personality Factors ________________________________________________ 8

Holistic Problem Analysis and Integrative Thinking _______________________________________ 9

IBM and their 'Innovation Jam' _______________________________________________________ 11

Glossary of Terms __________________________________________________________________ 16

Research Questions ___________________________________________________________ 17

Method ______________________________________________________________________ 18

A: Approach to Answer and Research Question _________________________________________ 18

B: Technical and Logistical Issues Involved _____________________________________________ 18

C. Timeframe for Work ______________________________________________________________ 19

D. Documenting Results _____________________________________________________________ 19

E. Validating Results________________________________________________________________ 19

References ___________________________________________________________________ 20


Table of Contents

Abstract

Research is proposed to understand “design jams” - events with a social and

collaborative design-based approach to problem solving and creating new value. It is

proposed that by researching such events, some of the unique value attributed might be

discerned and made applicable to areas of organizational development and problem-

solving. Research is summarized and methods are identified as a means for answering the

question of how to develop a system for an organization to create and manage teams

focused on designing innovation.

1


Table of Contents

Introduction

The general area of this thesis is to evaluate the process, social dynamics and

outcomes of collaborative “design-jamming” methods used for social, team-based

innovation, and to explore ways of transferring the benefits of such an approach to intact

organizational teams. Ad hoc, collaborative design “jam” groups have been shown to be

highly effective at turning around valuable innovations within short cycles. However, as

of yet no one has developed an effective means for transferring such an approach to a

more formalized organization.

The significance of this study relates to the rising demand for innovation in

offerings, and designers are faced with the challenge to deliver successful new products

and service in short order. A lengthy or inefficient design process can lead to significant

missed opportunities. The increased global competition and shorter product cycles are

creating competitive pressure for organizations to significantly shorten development

cycles and also improve the hit-rate of successful innovations.

I will try to address this problem by studying how diverse ad hoc teams assemble

and work together in social jam events, such as Global Service Jam (etc), to develop and

prototype often remarkable design ideas in short order, often less than 48 hours. From

this study I will explore how to translate or transfer such an approach to the ongoing

practice of an intact organization.

2


Table of Contents

Literature Review

Design Prototyping

"Everyone designs who devises courses of action aimed at changing existing

situations into preferred ones." (Simon, 1996, Kindle Locations 1880-1881) A powerful

method of design representation is prototyping. Moggridge (2006) defined prototyping as

"A representation of a design, made before the final solution exists." (p. 685) Schrage

(1996) defined the role of prototyping when he stated, "Prototypes are designed to answer

questions. The quantity and kind of questions that generate prototypes are at the heart of

prototyping culture." (p.10) Prototypes present incomplete solutions, and allow a starting

point for refinement through iteration, before moving a product into production.

According to Suri, Coughlan, & Canales, (2007) three primary objectives of prototyping

were identified in the realm of organizational change: building to think, rather than

discussing; learning faster by failing early; and giving permission to explore new

behaviors, where the presence of the prototype will encourage new behaviors. (p. 127)

Social Innovation

The value of social components related to design work has been recognized

formally for decades. In the first issue of Task Magazine, published by architecture

students in Cambridge, MA in 1941, they began the editorial section with an emphasis on

a lack of awareness and training towards the rapidly changing needs of society and

collective work principles for architects. (Hull, E., et al., 1941) The students established

Task Magazine in an effort close that gap, for both academic and professional purposes.

"New Trends in Design" was an article in the same issue where Moholy-Nagy (1941)

3


Table of Contents

stated, "Thus design is dependent not alone on function, science and technological

processes, but upon social implications as well." (p. 28) He points out division of labor

and other relationships that changed the outlook and approach to design. This social

structure of design work supports the application of Activity Theory to the working

process of design, in this case architects. Kaptelinin and Nardi (2006) explain that

activity theory is an approach used in social sciences that aims to understand individuals

and the social entities they compose in their natural environments and activities.

Engestrom (2000) presented the activity theory framework is in a way to which it

can be adjusted to apply a team-based design structure (Fig. A). In figure A the designers

are focused on rapid innovation, their skills and specialties are instruments used but not

the central element. The rules they adhere to involve constraints of a user's goals and time

limits applied to the project, the collaborators on the team find their roles through the

4


Table of Contents

division of labor. Activity theory is a cultural and historical model, shown to be relevant

through research within the social sciences, and based on the material presented up to this

point we can hypothesize that these patterns apply when designers are working

collaboratively.

Tuckman's group development model (as cited in Robbins and Judge, 2011)

suggests working in groups generally gives members the benefits of increased security,

status, self-esteem, social affiliation, power, and goal achievement. Robbins and Judge

(2011) detail the five

stages of group

development (fig. B).

During the forming stage

there is a large amount

of uncertainty about the

purpose, structure, and

leadership of the group.

After members begin to

think of themselves as

members of the group

they enter the storming

stage. This is when "Members accept the group but resist the constraints it imposes on

their individuality. Furthermore, there is conflict over who will control the group."

(Robbins and Judge, 2011, Kindle Locations 3453-3454) The third stage is called

5


Table of Contents

norming, and it consists of the group members agreeing on expectations and defining

behavior. The performing stage is evident when the structure is fully accepted and the

group's energy has transitioned focus onto performing their assignment. The norming and

performing stages both relate back to the division of labor outlined in the aforementioned

activity theory model (fig. A). The adjourning stage is where the group prepares to part

ways; at this point the focus has shifted to finishing activities and wrapping up tasks.

Robbins and Judge (2011) defined a work team as something that "generates

positive synergy through coordinated effort. The individual efforts result in a level of

performance greater than the sum of those individual inputs." (Kindle Locations 3871-

3876) They identify work teams with diverse member specialization as a cross-functional

team, focusing on problem solving, coordination of complex projects, and the creation of

new ideas. (Robbins & Judge, 2011) A model provided in the text (fig. C) compares a

'work group' and a 'work team'. The most notable distinction is the primary goal; work

6


Table of Contents

groups share information, and work teams focus on collective performance. A performing

group and a work team both rely on a social component to increase performance.

Johnson and Bate (2003) identify a different five-stage process, relating to the

strategy innovation discovery process and teams: staging, aligning, exploring, creating,

and mapping. They point out that the staging phase involves selecting the right members

for a focus on strategy innovation. The aligning phase relates to directing the team toward

the best new business opportunities. The exploring phase consumes the most time and

energy as it involves the process of discovering new value and insights through activities.

The creativity phase is, "a creative activity where imagination is used to envision and

define businesses of the future." (Johnson & Bate, 2003, p. 186) Lastly, the mapping

stage is the implementation planning process of the new business opportunity. (Johnson

& Bate, 2003)

Johnson and Bate (2003) emphasized diversity on teams, "cross-functional teams

greatly enhance the internal alignment process." (p. 76) They also stated the advantage of

support for complexity, "In this complex and often ambiguous journey, a team of people

can offer support and problem-solving ideas to each other where an individual would

have to shoulder the entire burden alone." (Johnson & Bate, 2003, p. 75) A commonly

referenced model for an organizational framework is AEIOU; which refers to activities,

environments, interactions, objects, and users. Martin and Hanington (2011) clarify that

the AEIOU framework is originally credited to Rick Robinson, Ilya Prokopoff, John

Cain, and Julie Pokorney, from 1991 when they practiced at the Doblin Group in

Chicago. (pp. 10-11) When coding observations of designers (or anyone for that matter)

7


Table of Contents

working in teams, the AEIOU framework can help identify critical interactions. Activities

involve the pathways people take to accomplish goals. Environments play a significant

role to influence the way people behave, or how a team will collaborate. Interactions can

be between people, the environment, or objects. In this case objects can be artifacts

within the environment, tools, and prototypes. Lastly, users are the team members, or the

people whose behaviors are being observed.

Group Creation and Personality Factors

Mandate from senior management is essential to the aforementioned staging

phase. (Johnson & Bate, 2003) One key challenge in the first step of staging involves

selection of the best members for an innovation team. Johnson and Bate (2003) made

reference to Dan Buchner of Moen and the importance placed on finding the proper

balance of perspectives. They quoted Buchner, "It was also very important to me that

team members be open-minded and have the ability to change. But there weren't a lot of

people like that in our organization at the time." (Johnson & Bate, 2003, p. 84) They went

into detail about how Buchner worked directly with department leaders and requested

their best person; often times he needed to return and ask for a different person. At times

he would present the vision of the team to specific individuals, building up the level of

excitement, and this would lead to their request to join. (Johnson & Bate, 2003, p. 84)

Self-determination theory proposes "people prefer to feel they have control over their

actions, so anything that makes a previously enjoyed task feel more like an obligation

than a freely chosen activity will undermine motivation." (Robbins & Judge, 2011,

Kindle Locations 2612-2613) By evoking volunteerism Buchner was able to create a

8


Table of Contents

situation where individuals comfortable with uncertainty, those who can thrive on an

innovation team, were identifying themselves to him. Part of assembling an innovation

team involves seeking out people with desirable attributes or facilitating a process where

they can identify themselves.

Holistic Problem Analysis and Integrative Thinking

"The process of discovering new business opportunities requires both right-brain

creative skills to identify a new customer need and left-brain rational skills to create the

appropriate business model to meet that need." (Johnson & Bate, 2003, p. 75) Tovey

(1984) wrote about the hemispheres of the human brain, where the left hemisphere

handles sequential analytic abilities and the right hemisphere has an association with

visuo-spatial thinking. Using both hemispheres, known as lateralization, is most evident

in simple tasks; it is under more significant load that one hemisphere will take a leading

role. (Tovey, 1984) This explains that one side of the brain will take a leading role when

an individual is challenged. The objective for a team with a blend of left and right-brain

thinkers is to cumulatively represent a lateral thinking model when dealing with

complicated problems.

The article "The Art of Integrative Thinking" begins with a description of "today's

climate of constant change and relentless competition." (Martin & Austen, 1999,

Introduction section) They stress the importance to understand problems in their entirety

through a process of integrative decision making. The choice cascade model (Fig. D)

shows the four steps related to integrative decision making. Higher-order choices set the

context for and put constraints on lower-order choices. There is an element of

9


Table of Contents

interrelatedness, where higher-order choices are revisited if lower-order choices cannot

be constructed, the model promotes an iterative process. The first part of the choice

cascade is salience; this involves consideration of important requirements, normally the

start of any development or design process. The next step is causality; this is the

understanding of relationships and variables of the requirements from the prior choice.

Sequencing is the step

where an integrative

thinker will recognize

the salient and causal

choices to build a

scenario that moves

towards creative

solutions. Resolution

is the final step where

all salience, causality, and sequencing are all considered. This step of resolution relates to

making decisions that will deliver innovation in a way that considers all variables.

10


Table of Contents

IBM and their 'Innovation Jam'

IBM held their first Innovation Jam in 2001 as a method to unite the organization.

(Bjelland & Wood, 2008) "The executives conceived the idea of a 'Jam' to promote

innovation. 'Jam' was IBM’s term for a 'massively parallel conference' online." (Bjelland

& Wood, 2008, p. 32) The 2001 jam effort and subsequent events were focused on

improving IBM's operations. "Values Jam in 2003 gave IBM's workforce the opportunity

to redefine the core IBM values for the first time in nearly 100 years." ("Welcome to the

IBM Jam," n.d., The history of Jams) The 2001-2005 jams were "drawing employees into

discussion about everything from management to company values." (Helander et al., n.d.,

Section 1.1 Innovation Jam Background) Interlinked bulletin boards were the primary

vehicle to answer questions like "How do you work in an increasingly mobile

organization? and "How do we get IBM Consulting into the C-suite?" (Bjelland & Wood,

2008, p. 32) In 2006 the "Innovation Jam" had a budget allocated and it became a

company initiative towards designing new products, aiming for results more central to

IBM's future and customers. (Bjelland & Wood, 2008)

This initiative was supported due to the excitement around finding new ways,

through cross-collaboration and open discussion, to uncover breakthrough ideas. The

IBM Innovation Jam was a large-scale format held in two three-day phases. Bjelland and

Wood (2008) reported, "150,000 IBM employees, family members, business partners,

clients (from 67 companies) and university researchers. Participants Jammed from 104

countries, and conversations continued 24 hours a day." (para. 6) The event was viewed

as successful to a considerable degree based on data used to track projects that later went

11


Table of Contents

on to receive $100 million in funding. (Bjelland & Wood, 2008) They also elaborated on

a few various impractical and irrelevant ideas produced, mainly attributing their

emergence as a result of brainstorming without heavy guidance or moderation. The

authors pointed out that online communication played a significant role, and that

moderation was low as to not interfere with the creative process.

Bjelland and Wood (2008) provided the steps that IBM worked through in

creating and managing the process. The steps they list involve details about review

phases, setting up discussion websites, and other concepts related to managing new ideas,

but they do not involve detail about prototyping or refinement. The IBM Innovation Jam

has led to new ideas that have later continued on to become new businesses, such as

smart health care payment systems, 3-d Internet using gaming environments for

navigation, and a "Digital Me" service to simplify storage of personal files, just to name a

few. (Bjelland & Wood, 2008, p.36) The 2006 Innovation Jam "led to the creation of Big

Green Innovations, a new IBM business unit that applies IBM’s advanced expertise and

technologies to emerging and global-scale environmental issues." (A Global Innovation

Jam, n.d., Transforming the World Section)

This open-format large-scale virtual brainstorm gives IBM the ability to explore

new ideas and extract information, it is during a review processes that ideas are sorted

and aligned with a vision. Bjelland and Wood (2008) quoted a former IBM scientist Paul

Horn where he said:

Jamming is a form of brainstorming. And the first thing you have to learn in

brainstorming is: Take in all the ideas. Even if the ideas are crazy, take ’em all in.

12


Table of Contents

That means you’re going to get a lot of garbage. But it forces you to think out of

the box. You do it on this scale, you come out, and you’re just completely

saturated with stuff and you have to come up with some way to winnow those

things down. (p. 38)

The IBM Innovation Jam has time constraints within phases, cross-collaboration through

discussion, and personality and task ownership elements fall into place naturally with the

open and voluntary format.

The IBM innovation jams facilitate a collaborative process that accelerates the

emergence of new ideas. "As their name suggests, these jams are like jazz

improvisations, connecting people who might otherwise never meet, allowing them to

formulate and build on each other's thoughts, and in the process, create something

entirely new." ("A Global Innovation," n.d., Overview Section) Bjelland and Wood

(2008) pointed out that the IBM jam achieved two primary types of progress:

First, it had enabled people with big ideas to articulate them to a wider audience,

including skeptics, to hear others’ complementary ideas and to win funding.

Second, and probably more important, it had allowed people whose ideas weren't

quite so big and who hadn't been able to find the place for their ideas within IBM

to present them in ways that senior people could understand. Related ideas could

then be combined in major new initiatives. (p.38)

In 2007 IBM launched a service that runs jams for other organizations, one event

involved bringing auto component makers and manufacturer customers together for an

Automotive Supplier Jam. (Bjelland & Wood, 2008, p.38) There is also an IBM website

13


Table of Contents

where they hosted a Service Jam event. "The Service Jam will engage leaders, subject

matter experts, organizations and individuals in this field to generate breakthrough ideas

that will redefine service and social innovation." ("Service Jam," n.d., FAQ Section -

What is the goal of Service Jam?) The Service Jam took place on October 10-12, 2010

and was hosted online using IBM’s Innovation Jam™ solution platform, "which is

especially adept at bringing communities together to discuss social issues." ("Service

Jam," n.d., FAQ Section - About Jam Platform Tech...) The total impact of the IBM

Innovation Jams has resulted in over $700 million in revenues from innovations created

through open collaboration. ("A Global Innovation," n.d.) "In a world where innovation is

global, multidisciplinary and open, you need to bring different minds and different

perspectives together to discover new solutions to long-standing problems. Therein lies

the essence of collaborative innovation." ("Welcome to the IBM Jam," n.d., Collaborative

Innovation)

Helander et al. (n.d.) collected and analyzed data from the IBM Innovation Jams,

and then published a findings to "discuss the results of supervised and unsupervised

learning applied this data." (Abstract, P. 1) Among their findings is a summary of 31

ideas from the 2006 jam and indication that 10 of these were selected for funding as new

business initiatives. (Helander et al., n.d., Table 4) Some of these ideas, such as the

Electronic Health Record System, were funded but later put on hold after further

exploration. (Bjelland & Wood, 2008, p.36) Helander et al. (n.d.) concluded "Much work

is left in extending our use of the different data types in both supervised and unsupervised

14


Table of Contents

learning, and in identifying the key characteristics - or a combination of characteristics -

that lead to success." (Section 6- Conclusion)

15


Table of Contents

Glossary of Terms

Definitions are provided to clarify key terms associated with the literature review.

Ad hoc team - "team assembled for a one time purpose and disbanded when that

purpose has been served." (Answers, n.d., What is an ad-hoc team?)

Design jams - Events aimed to get designers to learn and collaborate with each

other while working on actual problems. ("Design Jam," n.d.)

Design-jamming - The use of design methods with the collaborative jam process.

Global Service Jam - An international event, made up of multiple jams.

("Global,” n.d., Glossary section)

IBM Innovation Jam - IBM’s term for a 'massively parallel conference' online."

(Bjelland & Wood, 2008, p. 32)

Jam - A collaborative process of working that involves the creation of unique

results, often involving a short deadline. ("Global", n.d., Glossary section)

Lateral thinking - "a heuristic for solving problems; you try to look at the

problem from many angles instead of tackling it head-on." ("The free," n.d., Lateral

Thinking- thesaurus.) I.e., the process of using both halves of the brain to understand

problems.

Kansas City Service Jam - The Kansas City local iteration of the Global Service

Jam. (Schreiber, 2013) "Focuses on collaboration and designing services related to a

shared theme" ("Forty-Eight hour event," 2013, par .2)

16


Table of Contents

Research Questions

-What social and collaborative elements can stimulate the creation of innovative ideas in

a short amount of time?

-What methods can guide a manager through the creation of a highly-motivated cross-

functional team focused on streamlined innovation?

17


Table of Contents

Method

A: Approach to Answer and Research Question

Kansas City Service Jam, the local iteration of the Global Service Jam, was

convened on March 1-3. Over a 48-hour period event participants formed two teams and

designed prototypes inspired by the theme that was announced at the kickoff. Primary

research methods consisted of recorded observation, staggered-survey distribution

(before, during, and 30 days after), and interviews. Other cities from around the world

participated in research activity and interacted with the KC team.

The literature review is based on a framing the topic of collaborative innovation

with an initial focus on building the team. Diversity in thinking is cited for the value

added in understanding problems holistically. The IBM Innovation Jams are referenced to

provide an existing model for collaborative innovation. The management sources cover in

detail the concepts to benefit structure of teams, and the design sources are about the

actual processes, way of thinking, and activities.

B: Technical and Logistical Issues Involved

The primary logistical issue is to find a reasonable stopping point. The topic was

weak and now it is strong, but like many design challenges the layers get peeled back as

you try to find the underlying problem. Without much time left I will need to spend it

wisely to prepare for my presentation date.

18


Table of Contents

C. Timeframe for Work

June 12th- Proposal revision submitted

June 13th- July 15th- Take research data and build presentation along with

proposed model or solution.

July 16th- 26th- Present to a committee within these dates.

D. Documenting Results

Results will be documented in a presentation including qualitative and

quantitative information, participant personas, a needs cluster matrix, and overviews of

recorded activities. Comparison to prior local Jam events will be presented; sequences

and activities will be compared along with output from teams. General strategies, useful

tactics, and practical techniques will be identified as they apply to the design jam process.

E. Validating Results

Results will be validated through analysis of data from event participants and

output from the teams involved. Application of behavioral concepts to a system, or

model, for delivering streamlined innovation will provide further validation. The

deliverable will be research findings and a vision document of a streamlined innovation

system. Results will also be validated with coverage of follow-up comments from

participants, including agreements and disagreements.

19


Table of Contents

References A global innovation jam. (n.d.). Retrieved May 12, 2013, from http://www-

03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/innovationjam/ Answers (n.d.) What is an ad-hoc team?. Retrieved from

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_ad-hoc_team Bjelland, O. M., & Wood, R. C. (2008, Oct 1). An inside view of IBM's 'Innovation

Jam'. MIT Sloan Management Review, 50 (1), 31-41. Retrieved March 5, 2013, from MIT Sloan Management website: http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/an-inside-view-of-ibms-innovation-jam/

Design jam (n.d.). Come together to tackle user experience challenges. Retrieved May

12, 2013, from http://www.designjams.org/ Engestrom, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning

work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960 - 974. Forty-Eight hour event produces innovative ideas. (2013, March 3) In KCPT Kansas City

public television blog. Retrieved from http://kcpt.org/blog/2013/03/03/48_hour_event_produces_innovative_ideas/

Global Service Jam. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://planet.globalservicejam.org Helander, M., Lawrence, R., Liu, L., Perlich, C., Reddy, C., & Rosset, S. (n.d.). Looking

for great ideas: Analyzing the innovation jam. Retrieved March 5, 2013, from http://dmkd.cs.wayne.edu/Papers/WEBSNAKDD07.pdf

Johnson, R. E., & Bate, J. D. (2003). The power of strategy innovation: a new way of linking creativity and strategic planning to discover great business opportunities. New York, NY: AMACOM. Kindle Edition.

Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and

interaction design (Acting with Technology) (pp. 31-39). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hull, E., Radford, W. H., Rosenberg, R. H., Snibbe, R. W., Turner, J., Bayley, J. B., &

Metzger, G. (Eds.), (1941) Editorial: Social usefulness of the architect's education. Task: a magazine for the younger generation in architecture, Issue 01, 5-9. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/45295213

20


Table of Contents

Martin, B., & Hanington, B. (2012). Universal methods of design. (pp. 10-11) Beverly, MA: Rockport Publishers.

Martin, R., & Austen, H. (1999) The art of integrative thinking. Retrieved April 25, 2013, from http://rogerlmartin.com/library/articles/integrative-thinking/

Moggridge, B. (2007). Designing interactions. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Moholy-Nagy, L. (1941) New trends in design. Task: a magazine for the younger generation in architecture, Issue 01, 27-31. Retrieved April 15, 2013, from http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/45295213

Robbins, Stephen P.; Judge, Timothy A. (2011-05-18). Essentials of organizational behavior (11th Edition): Pearson HE, Inc.. Kindle Edition. Schreiber, D. (2013, February 26). KC event that kicks off Friday gives teams 48

hours to design a service. Silicon Prairie News. Retrieved from http://www.siliconprairienews.com/2013/02/kc-event-that-kicks-off-friday-gives-teams-48-hours-to-design-a-service

Service jam: Making the world work better through service. (n.d.). Retrieved May 12,

2013, from http://www.ibm.com/ibm/responsibility/minijam/overview.html Simon, Herbert A. (1996-10-01). The Sciences of the artificial, 3rd edition: MIT Press. Kindle Edition. Suri, J. F., Coughlan, P., & Canales, K. (2007). Prototypes as (design) tools for

behavioral and organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(1), 1-13.

Schrage, M. (1996). Cultures of prototyping. Bringing design to software, 191–205. The Free Dictionary (n.d.). Lateral thinking. Retrieved from

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lateral+thinking Tovey, M. (1984). Designing with both halves of the brain. Design studies, 5(4), 219-

228. Tuckman, W. (1965, June). Developmental sequences in small groups. Psychological

Bulletin, 384-399. Welcome to the IBM jam events page. (n.d.). Retrieved May 12, 2013, from

https://www.collaborationjam.com/

21