1. Collaborative Design through Boundary Objects

2. MULTIPLE PERSPECTIVES LOCAL INTERESTS GLOBAL MARKETPLACE IMPLEMENT LOCALLY COMPLEX PROBLEMS KNOWLEDGE CREATION & TRANSFER Ex: Far-Flung Teams: Diversity

3. Ex: SLICE Team

4. Example: Automotive Engine Manufacturer AIM: Design New Engine at New Location for a New Customer Customer Location Customer Main Office Co. Design Engineering Group Co. Team Members U.S. Germany Brazil U.K. Mexico

5. Example: Electronics Manufacturer AIM: Improving Virtual Team Processes in the Enterprise Tokyo Bangalore Italy Berlin Cambridge Boston Montreal Beaverton

6. Example: BMW Singapore Munich Newbury Park Oxnard Palo Alto HQ Design Studios Advanced technology Engineering Center

7. The Challenges of Emergent Teams  Communications challenged (different specialists  different language)  Decision Process challenged (different decision-making criteria & styles)  Culturally challenged (different cultures about how to evaluate ideas)  Task challenged (problem definitions change so relevant specialty may change)  Familiarity challenged (don’t know each other very well)  Time challenged (need to be productive quickly)  Reciprocity challenged (may not work together again)

8. Problem How do we help these teams overcome these challenges?

9. It is possible: Case of SLICE team Thermal Engineer Stress Analyst Injector Engineer Manufacturing Engineer Propulsion design

10. It is possible: SLICE Designed new rocket engine in –1/10 th time (10 mos vs. 6 years) –1/10 th labor (<15% time of 8 people vs. 50-100 people fulltime) –First unit cost: $47K instead of $4.5M –Predicted quality level of 9 sigma (not 6) –6 parts (instead of normal 1200) –Est. engine mfg cost: $0.5M instead of $7M –Never met face-to-face

11. Proposed Model to Explain Success: Value of Boundary Objects at SLICE Thermal Engineer Stress Analyst Injector Engineer Manufacturing Engineer Propulsion design Boundary Objects TMS

12. Different Way to Show Model TMS Boundary Objects Innovative Problem-Solving

13. Boundary Objects: What are they? Definition: physical or mental models team members use to share knowledge that enables them to bridge different areas of expertise and learn from each other without all having to become equally expert in each other’s specialty. We are first focusing on prototypes as an example of physical boundary objects. In short, they could be seen as anything that helps people to communicate with each other

14. But are all boundary objects equally effective? TMS Development Faster Project Innovation Characteristics of Effective Boundary Objects Characteristics of Effective Process in Which Boundary Objects are used

15. Effective Boundary Objects Boundary Object Attributes Process of Boundary Object Use Effective Ineffective ? ?

16. Exercise 1 You are to be in groups of 3 role-playing designing an information system to help people to cook at home. One person plays the cook specialist One person plays the database specialist One person plays the home/kitchen design specialist Go ahead and start the design process to create a prototype

17. Exercise 1 debrief Ask yourselves: –What characteristics of the prototype as a boundary object made it work for communicating across the specialties? –What characteristics of your design process made it work for communicating? –What didn’t work We’ll share these results

18. Our hypotheses Sharing knowledge between specialists with boundary objects is like a learning-by- doing process Guided Discovery Theory distinguishes better vs.. worse learning-by-doing

19. Our Hypotheses - continued Boundary Objects –Force participants to pay attention to detail in the multi- dimensional problem and possible solutions –Make clear the boundaries on the problem space and those boundaries include team members’ expertise –Make clear the concrete consequences of alternative actions while leaving room for alternative interpretations Learning Processes –Rapid frequent feedback in small chunks focused on problem solving strategies rather than the solution –Feedback and discussion that transfers generalized knowledge to specific examples and from the specific back to general again –Feedback that provides constructive action-oriented guidance about possible next steps that encourages innovation given the guidance.

20. Exercise 2 (if time permits) Design in a new group of 3 a kiosk to facilitate the purchase of professional suits One person plays the customer One person plays the database specialist One person plays the retail owner who must be able to maintain the kiosk Use our propositions when role-playing

21. Research Plan Year 1: Comparative case studies of from 8-12 emergent teams to identify characteristics of effective boundary objects and team processes Year 2: Survey of 50 emergent teams each month for 12 months focused on temporal sequences and generality of principles from case studies Year 3: Action research experiment to identify cause-effect linkages for matching boundary object and team process characteristics for fast innovative outcomes. Would you like to participate?

22. Contact Info Phil Birnbaum-More, phbmore@marshall.usc.edu phbmore@marshall.usc.edu 213-740-0744 Ann Majchrzak majchrza@usc.edu 213-740-4023

23. Exercise 2 Debrief Now evaluate the use of the propositions: –Which ones worked –Which ones didn’t –New propositions you would suggest Share your responses; Share your prototype if time permits!