An Exploratory Model of Interpersonal Cohesiveness in New Product Development Teams Beverly K. Brockman, Melissa E. Rawlston, Michael A. Jones, and Diane Halstead There has been a heavy emphasis in new product development (NPD) research on intrateam issues such as com- munication, trust, and conflict management. Interpersonal cohesiveness, however, has received scant attention. In addition, there are conflicting findings regarding the effects of close-knit teams, which seem to have a beneficial effect up to a point, after which the tight bond becomes a detriment. This paper addresses these issues by introducing an exploratory model of interpersonal cohesiveness ! NPD performance that includes antecedents, consequences, and moderating factors. Antecedents of interpersonal cohesiveness include clan culture, formalization, integration, and political dominance of one department, while consequences are groupthink, superordinate identity, and, ulti- mately, external/internal new product (NP) performance. The relationships among interpersonal cohesiveness, groupthink, and superordinate identity appear to be influenced by two moderating factors: team norms and goal support. Additionally, product type is identified as a moderator on the effects of both groupthink and superordinate identity on external NP performance. The model is built from two sources: a synthesis of the literature in small group dynamics and NPD, and qualitative research conducted across 12 NPD teams. Individual team leaders were interviewed first, followed by interviews with two additional members on each team, for a total of 36 interviews. In keeping with the goals of qualitative research, the interviews and analysis were used to identify and define aspects of interpersonal cohesiveness rather than to test a preconceived model. Representation of different industries and product types was sought intentionally, and variance in NP innovativeness as well as in NP market success/prof- itability became key criteria in sample selection. The exploratory model and propositions developed in this study provide a framework for understanding the role of interpersonal cohesiveness in NPD teams and its direct and indirect effects on NP performance. Although a significant amount of research on cohesiveness has been conducted in previous studies of small groups, the narrow laboratory settings of that research have limited the generalizability of the findings. This study therefore serves as a useful starting point for future theory development involving in- terpersonal cohesiveness in NPD. It also provides a guide for managers in dealing with team cohesiveness. Introduction N ew product development (NPD) research in the last 25 years has heavily emphasized the role of the team. Accordingly, traditional issues such as intrateam communication, trust, and conflict management have been studied extensively (e.g., Brown and Eisenhardt, 1995; Lovelace, Shapiro, and Weingart, 2001; Montoya-Weiss and Calantone, 1994). Factors that encourage team closeness and bonding positively impact new product (NP) success up to a certain point (Brown and Eisenhardt; Keller, 1986). For example, Adams, Day, and Dougherty (1998) encourage the development of a ‘‘shared men- tal model’’ to overcome compartmentalized thinking. This model incorporates common goals, clarifies each team member’s role in the NPD effort, and appreci- ates both the contributions and constraints of various organizational departments. Despite findings in support of close-knit teams, however, some negative effects can occur. Dyer and Song (1998) discuss how excessive teamwork and har- mony can suppress the creative tension needed for NPD vitality. And Souder (1988) points out that too much harmony often results in missed information— information vital to successful innovation. He de- scribes this as ‘‘too-good friends’’ in the NPD pro- cess. It appears that close-knit NPD teams have a beneficial effect up to a point, after which the tight bond becomes a detriment. The NPD factors relating to close-knit teams (har- mony, appreciation of other departments) bear a strong resemblance to a construct that has received Address correspondence to: Beverly K. Brockman, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga College of Business Administration, De- partment of Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Dept 6156 615 McCallie Avenue, Chattanooga, TN 37403-2598. Tel.: (423) 425-5252. Fax: (423) 425-4158. E-mail: bev-brockman@utc.edu. J PROD INNOV MANAG 2010;27:201–219 r 2010 Product Development & Management Association