ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Mit einer simplen Idee hat der Dachfensterhersteller Roto die Arbeit seiner Entwicklungsabteilung verbessert. Dem Hilferuf eines einzelnen Ingenieurs folgt die prompte Problemlösung durch die Gruppe. Die positiven Folgen: Weniger Verzögerungen, höhere Motivation und bessere Zusammenarbeit mit anderen Abteilungen, Zulieferern und Kunden.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Project management approaches derived from best practices in the defence/aerospace, construction and pharmaceutical industries during the early 1970s have proven effective for managing small numbers of large projects in the relatively stable political, economic and technological context of the post-World War II period. However, the detailed, centralized planning, decentralized execution and centralized control of large projects that are the basis of these ‘PM 1.0’ methods and tools have proven burdensome and unresponsive for a new generation of workers who have grown up in a Web 2.0 world and who are now working on cutting-edge projects with rapidly evolving technologies in today's extremely dynamic global markets and political economies. A new set of ‘PM 2.0’ methods, tools and governance arrangements were pioneered for rapid product development and have recently been adapted for agile software development. They are based on a radically different project management philosophy for dealing with these new contingencies. This paper reviews the origins of PM 1.0 to explain why it was a valid approach for the latter half of the twentieth century; explains why the key assumptions underlying this method are frequently no longer valid; describes some of the key elements of evolving PM 2.0 approaches to project management in industries ranging from ‘software in the cloud’ development to special operations in the US military and discusses the kinds of tools, employee training and human resources practices that will need to evolve to support PM 2.0 for the ever more dynamic and unpredictable projects of the twenty-first century. This paper concludes with a discussion of the limitations of PM 2.0 and a set of key questions that will need to be answered through future research before the PM 2.0 approach can become more widely adopted for managing engineering project organizations.
Article
Full-text available
This paper presents a model of team learning and tests it in a multimethod field study. It introduces the construct of team psychological safety—a shared belief held by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking—and models the effects of team psychological safety and team efficacy together on learning and performance in organizational work teams. Results of a study of 51 work teams in a manufacturing company, measuring antecedent, process, and outcome variables, show that team psychological safety is associated with learning behavior, but team efficacy is not, when controlling for team psychological safety. As predicted, learning behavior mediates between team psychological safety and team performance. The results support an integrative perspective in which both team structures, such as context support and team leader coaching, and shared beliefs shape team outcomes.
Article
Full-text available
Tested 3 hypotheses concerning people's predictions of task completion times: (1) people underestimate their own but not others' completion times, (2) people focus on plan-based scenarios rather than on relevant past experiences while generating their predictions, and (3) people's attributions diminish the relevance of past experiences. Five studies were conducted with a total of 465 undergraduates. Results support each hypothesis. Ss' predictions of their completion times were too optimistic for a variety of academic and nonacademic tasks. Think-aloud procedures revealed that Ss focused primarily on future scenarios when predicting their completion times. The optimistic bias was eliminated for Ss instructed to connect relevant past experiences with their predictions. Ss attributed their past prediction failures to external, transient, and specific factors. Observer Ss overestimated others' completion times and made greater use of relevant past experiences. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
Whether you're a manager, company psychologist, quality control specialist, or involved with motivating people to work harder in any capacity—Locke and Latham's guide will hand you the keen insight and practical advice you need to reach even your toughest cases. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Book
Erfolg ist kein Zufall. Die Autoren zeigen, wie es Porsche schaffte, zu einem Vorzeigeunternehmen der deutschen Wirtschaft zu werden. Weder Wirtschaftsflaute noch Börsenabsturz gingen dem Unternehmen an die Substanz - Lean Thinking sei Dank.
Article
Managing the Unknown offers a new way of looking at the problem of managing projects in novel and unknown environments. From Europe's leading business school, this book shows how to manage two fundamental approaches that, in combination, offer the possibility of coping with unforeseen influences that inevitably arise in novel projects: Trial-and-Error Learning allows for redefining the plan and the project as the project unfolds Selectionism pursues multiple, independent trials in order to pick the best one at the end Managing the Unknown offers expert guidelines to the specific project mindsets, infrastructures, and management methods required to use these project management approaches and achieve success in spite of unforeseen obstacles. This book equips readers with: Causal explanations of why unforeseeable factors in novel projects make traditional project planning and project risk management insufficient Directly applicable management tools that help managers to guide novel and high-uncertainty projects Real-world case studies of both successful and unsuccessful approaches to managing high uncertainty in novel projects.
Article