在跨功能部門別的產品開發團隊中，團隊成員彼此的整合與互動一直是過去研究關注的焦點。然而過去研究在探討跨部門團隊的新產品開發績效多從組織學習與知識觀點來闡述，很少有從權力結構的角度出發探討。除了少數探討權力間不對稱性「差距」的研究外，本研究更進一步的從跨部門開發團隊中，探討研發與行銷人員間相互依賴、共生互惠的「總合」對團隊集體學習的影響。
即使過去已經有許多研究探討新產品開發團隊成功的要素，但是這中間的轉換機制還是有許多潛在的因素尚未被發掘，所以本研究將理論與實務結合，區分權力不對稱、相互依賴性分別探討其透過團隊集體學習對新產品開發績效的影響，其中將新產品開發績效區分為產品效用、流程效率與產品開發能力進行分析，並加入以集體利益為出發點的「社會導向」權力，像是專案負責人的投入程度，視其為影響跨部門團隊間權力結構轉變的重要議題。
本研究針對台灣大型製造業廠商為研究主體，並且以曾經參與過新產品開發的專案人員為研究對象，所得有效樣本為258份。經實證研究結果發現，權力不對稱對團隊集體學習有負向影響，相互依賴性對團隊集體學習有正向影響，而「社會導向」權力的使用，能削弱權力不對稱對團隊集體學習的負向影響。另外，研究也發現團隊集體學習對產品效用、專案的流程效率以及產品開發的能力皆有正向影響。
因此，本研究建議跨功能部門別的新產品開發團隊若欲提升其產品開發績效，可以關注團隊成員間是否具朝共同目標努力的共識、鼓勵冒險與實驗精神、建立開放且互惠的知識交換環境等團隊集體學習行為來促進新產品開發績效；此外，有別於以個人利益為前提目標的權力使用，團隊領導者若能善用以集體利益為目標的「社會導向」權力，將能削弱權力不對稱等帶來的負面影響。

Previous research focused on integration and interaction within cross-functional NPD Team. Yet, few studies have investigated from the view of power structure among these actors. In addition, few power-related research highlight even more on power imbalance rather than interdependence.
This paper combines both practical and theoretical implication among successful new product development team. We distinguished power structure into dependence asymmetry and Joint dependence, addressing both structural statuses’ impacts on new product performance through collective learning process. What’s more, product effectiveness, project efficiency and product development capabilities are also separately examined from new product performance. Socialized use of power (e.g Leaders’ Involement) is especially introduced to investigate the relation between power structure and collective learning.
Our data mainly collected from 129 projects’ team members of massive manufacturing companies in Taiwan. The empirical results demonstrate that there lies a stifling effect between dependence asymmetry and collective learning process, whereas positive influence on joint dependence. In addition, collective learning process improves product, project performance as well as the product development proficiency. Moreover, socialized use of power fosters as a key catalyst for learning, mitigating the negative effects between dependence asymmetry and collective learning process.
Our Research therefore suggest those pursuing well-performed cross-functional teams should deploy their resources through collective learning process, such as anchoring on shared goals, engaging in encouraged experimentation and risk-taking, as well as establishing openly atmosphere for knowledge transfer. What’s more, the role of project leader is particularly important because whether the leader is carrying a goal towards collective interest can effectively mitigate the stifling effect between asymmetry dependence and learning.

1. Acur, N., Kandemir, D., Weerd‐Nederhof, D., Petra, C., & Song, M. (2010). Exploring the impact of technological competence development on speed and NPD program performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(6), 915-929.
2. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (1992). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization science, 3(3), 321-341.
3. Argote, L. 1999. Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring Knowledge. Kluwer, Norwell, MA.
4. Atuahene-Gima, K., & Li, H. (2004). Strategic decision comprehensiveness and new product development outcomes in new technology ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 583-597.
5. Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005). Resolving the Capability–Rigidity Paradox in New Product Innovation. Journal of Marketing 69(4): 61–83.
6. Bagozzi and Yi (1988). "On the Evaluation for Structural Equation Models." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.
7. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
8. Baumgartner, H., & Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: a review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139-161.
9. Berger, J., & Webster Jr, M. (2006). Expectations, status, and behavior. Contemporary social psychological theories, 268-300.
10. Benson, J. K. (1975). The interorganizational network as a political economy. Administrative science quarterly, 229-249.
11. Blau, P. M., & Scott, W. R. (1962). Formal organizations: A comparative approach. Stanford University Press.
12. Bollen (1989). "Structural Equation Modeling with Latent Variables." New York: John Wiley.
13. Brooks, A. K. (1994). Power and the production of knowledge: Collective team learning in work organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 5(3), 213-235.
14. Bunderson, J. S. (2003). Recognizing and utilizing expertise in work groups: A status characteristics perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(4), 557-591.
15. Bunderson, J. S., & Boumgarden, P. (2010). Structure and learning in self-managed teams: Why “bureaucratic” teams can be better learners. Organization Science, 21(3), 609-624.
16. Bunderson, J. S., & Reagans, R. E. (2011). Power, status, and learning in organizations. Organization Science, 22(5), 1182-1194.
17. Calantone, R. J., Schmidt, J. B., & Song, X. M. (1996). Controllable factors of new product success: a cross-national comparison. Marketing Science, 15(4), 341-358.
18. Chen, S., Lee-Chai, A. Y., & Bargh, J. A. (2001). Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80(2), 173-187.
19. Cheung, M. S., Myers, M. B., & Mentzer, J. T. (2010). Does relationship learning lead to relationship value? A cross-national supply chain investigation. Journal of Operations Management, 28(6), 472-487
20. Chin and Todd (1995). "On the Use, Usefulness, and Ease of Use of Structural Equation Modeling in MIS Research: A Note of Caution." MIS Quarterly, 19(2): 237-246.
21. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative science quarterly, 128-152.
22. Cooper, R., Edgett, S., and Kleinschmidt, E.J. (2004). Benchmarking NPD Practices—II. Research Technology Management 47(3):50–59.
23. Coopey, J., & Burgoyne, J. (2000). Politics and organizational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 869-886.
24. Cousins, P. D., Lawson, B., Petersen, K. J., & Handfield, R. B. (2011). Breakthrough scanning, supplier knowledge exchange, and new product development performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(6), 930-942.
25. Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of management review, 284-295.
26. Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management science, 32(5), 554-571.
27. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147-160.
28. Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of management review, 23(4), 660-679.
29. Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American sociological review, 31-41.
30. Edmondson, A. C. 1999. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2) 350–383.
31. Edmondson, A. C., Bohmer, R. M., & Pisano, G. P. (2001). Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(4), 685-716.
32. Edmondson, A. C. (2002). The local and variegated nature of learning in organizations: A group-level perspective. Organization Science, 13(2), 128-146.
33. Fernandez, R. M., & Gould, R. V. (1994). A dilemma of state power: Brokerage and influence in the national health policy domain. American Journal of Sociology, 1455-1491.
34. Gaskin, J., (2012), " Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Structural equation modeling, Interaction", Gaskination's StatWiki. http://statwiki.kolobkreations.com
35. Gaskin, J., (2012), "SEM Series Part 10: Interactions; SEM Series Part 5a: Confirmatory Factor Analysis ", Gaskination's Statistics. http://youtube.com/Gaskination
36. Griffin, A. and Hauser, J.R. (1996). Integrating R&D and Marketing: A Review and Analysis of the Literature. Journal of Product Innovation Management 13(3):191–215.
37. Gruenfeld, D. H., Inesi, M. E., Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Power and the objectification of social targets. Journal of personality and social psychology, 95(1), 111.
38. Gulati, R., & Sytch, M. (2007). Dependence asymmetry and joint dependence in interorganizational relationships: Effects of embeddedness on a manufacturer's performance in procurement relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 32-69.
39. Guinote, A. (2007). Power and goal pursuit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(8), 1076-1087.
40. Haas, M. R. (2006). Knowledge gathering, team capabilities, and project performance in challenging work environments. Management Science, 52(8), 1170-1184.
41. Hansen, M. T., Mors, M. L., & Løvås, B. (2005). Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 776-793.
42. Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1974). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. Defense Technical Information Center.
43. Hair (1998). "Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings." Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
44. Heide, J. B., & Miner, A. S. (1992). The shadow of the future: effects of anticipated interaction and frequency of contact on buy-seller cooperation. Academy of management journal, 35(2), 265-291.
45. Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization science, 12(4), 435-449.
46. Hoetker, G., & Mellewigt, T. (2009). Choice and performance of governance mechanisms: matching alliance governance to asset type. Strategic Management Journal, 30(10), 1025-1044.
47. Hu, L. T., Bentler, P. M., & Kano, Y. (1992). Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be trusted?. Psychological bulletin, 112(2), 351.
48. Jeffrey H. Dyer, (1996), "Specialized Supplier Networks as a Source of Competitive Advantage: Evidence from the Auto Industry", Strategic Management Journal, Vol 17 (4), pp. 271-291.
49. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative science quarterly, 256-282.
50. Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Administrative science quarterly, 44(4), 741-763.
51. Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software.
52. Jöreskog and Sörbom (1996). "LISREL: A Guide to the Program and Applications." Scientific Software International Inc, Chicago.
53. Kelley, H. H. (1979) Personal Relationships: Their Structures and Processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
54. Kahn, K. B. (1996). Interdepartmental integration: a definition with implications for product development performance. Journal of product innovation management, 13(2), 137-151.
55. Keltner, D., Van Kleef, G. A., Chen, S., & Kraus, M. W. (2008). A reciprocal influence model of social power: Emerging principles and lines of inquiry. Advances in experimental social psychology, 40, 151-192.
56. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of international business studies, 625-645.
57. Kusunoki, K., Nonaka, I., & Nagata, A. (1998). Organizational capabilities in product development of Japanese firms: a conceptual framework and empirical findings. Organization Science, 9(6), 699-718.
58. Larson, A. (1992). Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of the governance of exchange relationships. Administrative science quarterly, 76-104.
59. Larson, J. R., Foster-Fishman, P. G., & Franz, T. M. (1998). Leadership style and the discussion of shared and unshared information in decision-making groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(5), 482-495.
60. Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (1993). Power and the emergence of commitment behavior in negotiated exchange. American Sociological Review, 465-481.
61. Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (1996). Commitment in exchange relations: Test of a theory of relational cohesion. American Sociological Review, 89-108.
62. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative science quarterly, 1-47.
63. Lawrence, T. B., Mauws, M. K., Dyck, B., & Kleysen, R. F. (2005). The politics of organizational learning: integrating power into the 4I framework. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 180-191.
64. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology.
65. Marsden, P. V. (1981). Introducing influence processes into a system of collective decisions. American Journal of Sociology, 1203-1235.
66. Martin, X., & Salomon, R. (2003). Tacitness, learning, and international expansion: A study of foreign direct investment in a knowledge-intensive industry. Organization Science, 14(3), 297-311.
67. McClelland, D. C. (1975). Power: The inner experience. Irvington Pub.
68. Mizruchi, M. S. (1989). Similarity of political behavior among large American corporations. American Journal of Sociology, 401-424.
69. Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Griffin, D. W. (1996). The benefits of positive illusions: Idealization and the construction of satisfaction in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(1), 79.
70. Nelson, R. R., & Sidney, G. (2005). Winter (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Belknap
71. Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7), 941-966.
72. Overbeck, J. R., & Park, B. (2006). Powerful perceivers, powerless objects: Flexibility of powerholders’ social attention. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 99(2), 227-243.
73. Palmatier, R. W., R. P. Dant, et al. (2007). "A comparative longitudinal analysis of theoretical perspectives of interorganizational relationship performance." Journal of marketing. 71(4): 171-194
74. Paul R. Lawrence Ranjay Gulati, Phanish Puranam, (2005), "Adaptation in Vertical Relationships: Beyond Incentive Conflict ", Strategic Management Journal, Vol 26, pp. 415-440.
75. Pavlou, P. A., & El Sawy, O. A. (2011). Understanding the elusive black box of dynamic capabilities. Decision Sciences, 42(1), 239-273.
76. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organisations. New York.
77. Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations (Vol. 33). Marshfield, MA: Pitman.
78. Provan, K. G., Beyer, J. M., & Kruytbosch, C. (1980). Environmental linkages and power in resource-dependence relations between organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 200-225.
79. Reagans, R., & Zuckerman, E. (2009). Short-cut to efficiency? The implications of a small-stratified world. Working paper, The Sloan School of Management, MIT.
80. Ren, H., Gray, B., & Kim, K. (2009). Performance of international joint ventures: what factors really make a difference and how?. Journal of Management, 35(3), 805-832.
81. Sekaran, U. (2003), Research Methods For Business: A Skill-Building Approach, 4th ed., Wiley, New York, NY.
82. Scott, W. R. 1987. Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
83. Scott, S. G. (1997). Social identification effects in product and process development teams. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 14(2), 97-127.
84. Sherman, J. D., Souder, W. E., & Jenssen, S. A. (2000). Differential effects of the primary forms of cross functional integration on product development cycle time. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(4), 257-267.
85. Simon, H. A. (1991). Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization science, 2(1), 125-134.
86. Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. (1992). The R&D-marketing interface in Japanese high-technology firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9(2), 91-112.
87. Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. (1997). The determinants of Japanese new product successes. Journal of Marketing Research, 64-76.
88. Souder, W.E. (1981). Disharmony between R&D and Marketing. Industrial Marketing Management 10(1):67–73.
89. Souder, W.E. (1987). Managing New Product Innovations. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
90. Souder, W.E. (1988). Managing Relations between R&D and Marketing in New Product Development Projects. Journal of Product Innovation Management 5(1):6–19.
91. Souder, W.E., Sherman, J.D. and Davies-Cooper, R. (1998). Environmental Uncertainty, Organizational Integration, and New Product Development Effectiveness: A Test of Contingency Theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management 15(6):520–533.
92. Souder, W.E. (2005). New Product Development Performance and the Interaction of Cross-Functional Integration and Knowledge Management. Journal of Product Innovation Management 2(2):399-411
93. Stasser, G. (1999). The uncertain role of unshared information in collective choice. Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge, 49-69.
94. Stinchcombe, A. L. (1986). Norms of exchange. Stratification and organization: Selected papers, 231-67.
95. Takeishi, A. (2001). Bridging inter‐and intra‐firm boundaries: management of supplier involvement in automobile product development. Strategic management journal, 22(5), 403-433.
96. Teece, D., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal 18(7): 509–533.
97. Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Transaction Pub.
98. Tsang, E. W. K. (2002). Acquiring knowledge by foreign partners from international joint ventures in a transition economy: Learning-by-doing and learning myopia. Strategic Management Journal, 23: 835-854.
99. Turner, J. C., Brown, R. J., & Tajfel, H. (1979). Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9(2), 187-204.
100. Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American sociological review, 674-698.
101. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative science quarterly, 35-67.
102. Van der Vegt, G. S., B. J. M. Emans, E. Van de Vliert. (1998). Motivating effects of task and outcome interdependence in work teams. Group Organ. Management 23 124-143.
103. Van der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and Performance in Multidisciplinary Teams: The Importance of Collective Team Identification. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 532-547.
104. Van der Vegt, G. S., de Jong, S. B., Bunderson, J. S., & Molleman, E. (2010). Power asymmetry and learning in teams: The moderating role of performance feedback. Organization Science, 21(2), 347-361.
105. Vernon, R. (1977). Storm over multinationals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
106. Willer, R. (2009). Groups reward individual sacrifice: The status solution to the collective action problem. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 23-43.
107. Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., & Botero, I. C. (2004). From cooperative to motivated information sharing in groups: Moving beyond the hidden profile paradigm. Communication Monographs, 71(3), 286-310.
108. Zaheer, A., & Venkatraman, N. (1995). Relational governance as an interorganizational strategy: An empirical test of the role of trust in economic exchange. Strategic management journal, 16(5), 373-392.
109. Zhong, C. B., Magee, J. C., Maddux, W. W., & Galinsky, A. D. (2006). Power, culture, and action: Considerations in the expression and enactment of power in East Asian and Western societies. Research on managing groups and teams, 9, 53-73.
110. Zollo, M., Reuer, J. J., & Singh, H. (2002). Interorganizational routines and performance in strategic alliances. Organization Science, 13(6), 701-713.