Product Development Teams’ Performance from Selected Electronic Companies in Laguna

Abstract

There is an abundance of literature discussing the importance of dealing with people as a critical factor in product development. Since it is the people that accomplish the work, merely using methodologies as tools, effective teamwork is a crucial factor that should be given focus. Using Texas Instruments’ best practice model – that centers on the recognition of people as the accelerators of project success - the study’s main objective was to assess product development teams’ level of performance in four success areas namely: Understanding and Trust (UT), Sanctioned Direction (SD), Accountability (Acc), and Logistics (Log). This undertaking aimed at understanding how the local electronic industries’ performs against this renowned best practice standard, providing baseline data for further research, and helping participating companies improve effective teamwork efforts. The study is a mixed method research that employed a survey questionnaire and interview as its data gathering tools. Respondents are engineers and managers, from five electronic companies in Laguna, working closely in product development. Data were interpreted as qualitative comparisons using simple statistics: frequency and percentage variance, mean, difference, and point tallying. The study found out that the overall performance level on the success areas of UT, SD, and Log is “Average”; while for Acc it is “Below Average”. Problematic indicators identified are: admitting weaknesses and mistakes; and asking and offering help (UT); active participation (SC), availability of key people; pointing out problems without hesitation; and depending on the leader as the sole source of discipline (Acc); and having too much documentation/communication; open, frank and timely communication; and readily sharing information, ideas, and feelings (Log). Interviews with some respondents affirmed the results and gave more insight on the probable cause of the problems. In terms of individual company performance, while the result is reflective of the overall trend, there are evident company dependent variations on the specific areas of Acc and Log. Such variations were interpreted as dependent on the implemented organizational culture of the company concerned. In terms of demographic profiles (Gender, Length of Service, Number of Team Members worked with), it was found out the profiles have no effect on the levels of performance. The study also touched on the respondent’s perception of how important each success area is, and how it compares to TI’s pyramid model. While all companies ranked the success areas differently, they did show a degree of similarity (among themselves and against TI’s pyramid model) wherein UT and SC were ranked in the top tier (most important) and Acc and Log in the bottom tier. On a special note, Company C is the only company that ranked the success areas importance the same as TI. Based on the findings, it was concluded that the overall performance of the participating five electronic companies is “Average” for the areas of UT, SC, and Log; and“Below Average” for Acc. Individual company performance is generally the same with the overall trend, with some minor company dependent variation in Acc and Log. Profile grouping did not affect the overall performance result and indicator trends. The success areas’ level of importance was perceived differently by the companies but still closely resembles the TI’s success pyramid. Participating companies are encouraged to look deeper into the identified problem areas relevant to their company, and that improvement efforts directed at these points. Overall, the researcher recommends all organizations to regularly perform team performance assessments so as identify desired behaviors (to strengthen) and problematic ones (to correct). Learning experiences, team-building activities, and/or team enhancement programs should be carried out, following examples and programs cited by the study. Employing an effective feedback mechanism will make sure that improvement efforts are sustained. And finally, rewards and recognitions should be given to further motivate team member involvement.