1
Master Thesis:
How can humour contribute to the quality of
collaboration between commercial and technical
disciplines in the process of new product
development?
Bart Jan van den Burg
1886819
University of Groningen
06-08-2014
MSc BA Strategic Innovation Management
2
Table of content
Abstract ... 3
Introduction ... 3
1. Theoretical background ... 6
1.1. Collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines ... 6
1.2 Defining humour ... 7
1.3 Humour theories... 8
1.4 Workplace humour ... 9
1.5 Humour styles ... 11
1.6 Humour and the commercial and technical interface ... 12
2. Identifying relevant organizational concepts ... 12
2.1 Criteria for relevant organisational concepts ... 13
2.1.1 Communication ... 14
2.1.2 Group Cohesiveness ... 16
2.1.3 Social distance ... 17
3. Research Method ... 17
3.1 Sample and Data Collection ... 18
3.2 Development of the interview ... 22
3.3 Data Analysis ... 22
4. Results ... 23
General contributions of humour ... 23
Humour and communication ... 24
Humour and Group Cohesiveness ... 27
Humour and Social Distance ... 29
5. Conclusion ... 31
5.1 Discussion ... 31
5.2 Limitations and future research suggestions ... 32
References ... 35
Appendix A: Variables related to both concepts ... 41
Appendix B: Variables criteria table ... 42
Appendix C: The interview protocol ... 43
3
Abstract
In the psychology field there is a lot of literature on humour and what effects it can have on people’s behaviour. In the business field research has indicated that humour contributes to several benefits in the workplace. For example, it has been observed that humour can reduce stress, improve group cohesiveness, and increase communication. New product development (NPD) related literature emphasizes that effective cross-functional working relationships between commercial and technical disciplines that play crucial but different roles in the process are crucial. In practice, however, successful integration or collaboration between these disciplines is hampered due to fundamental difference between the disciplines. Cross-functional collaborations in NPD and the role of humour in the workplace have been studied individual but not in combination. This research applies a grounded theory methodology approach to elucidate how humour can contribute to the quality of collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines in NPD. This research is grounded on 12 in depth interviews with a mix of commercial and technical respondents in four different industries. The findings show that humour contributes to the collaboration in general, improves communication, enhances group cohesiveness, and reduces social distance. For example in the case of perceived social distance the more dominant discipline uses self-defeating humour to lower their perceived dominance thus benefiting the collaboration. This research provides increased knowledge of the contribution of humour to the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines in NPD from interviews of relevant actor and by integrating theoretical perspectives from the business management/innovation literature and the psychology literature concerning humour.
Introduction
Humour is an integral part of every day’s life and it is considered a basic element of human interaction. It is experienced and perceived in all kinds of situations where people interact. Langston Hughes, an American poet and social activist once said “Like a welcome summer rain, humour may suddenly cleanse and cool the earth, the air and you”. The quote by Langston Hughes demonstrates the possibility of humour to act as a social lubricant (Thorson et al., 1997), which basically means that humour can ease tension in a certain situation, enforce social norms, and enhance the solidarity of a
group. Humour has a multifaceted nature, it is comprised of many styles and facets (Romero &Cruthirds, 2006). Within academic literature, humour is studied from several different points of view, e.g. related on the different humour styles that exist (Martin et al. 2003), with respect to the reason why humour is applied (Mindess, 1987), or to elucidate the effect of applying humour within organisations (Romero &Cruthirds, 2006; Mesmer-Magnus, 2012a).
4 has shown that humour can contribute to
several positive effects in the workplace (Ogunlana et al., 2006; Romero &Cruthirds, 2006), like the enhancement of communication and the increased bonding of group members. Romero & Cruthirds (2006) also argued that humour can be effectively applied by managers within organizations to establish the desired organisational benefits, implicating that when humour is fully understood, it can serve as a valuable management tool. When appropriately applied, humour can be used to reduce stress, enhance leadership, improve group cohesiveness, augment communication, boost creativity, and strengthen organizational culture. However, notwithstanding these numerous organisational benefits managers often are reluctant to take humour seriously and to apply humour as a multifunctional management tool (Romero & Cruthirds, 2006).
Within organisations, effective cross-functional working relationships between commercial and technical disciplines is said to be a key factor in successful new product development (NPD; Massey & Kyriazis, 2006; Brown & Eisenhardt, 1995; Griffin and Hauser, 1996). Some researchers even argue that the more innovative a project is, the larger is the need for successful integration of commercial and technical disciplines (Faine et al. 2011). Both disciplines play major roles in the process of new product development, but they focus on different aspects of the NPD process. The commercial disciplines (e.g. Marketing, Sales) are primarily focused on customers preferences, and fending off competitive
threats (Ruekert, 1987). On the other hand, the technical disciplines (e.g. R&D, Engineering) are primarily focused on technical aspects regarding products or processes. The fundamental differences between these disciplines often result in troublesome working relationships (Massey & Kyriazis, 2006). Several studies have researched the barriers that are accountable for the often troublesome working relationship between commercial and technical disciplines (Griffin & Hauser, 1996; Dechamps, 1994; Gupta et al., 1985; Dutton and Walton, 1966). Griffin and Hauser (1996) explained that hurdles to communication and cooperation between the two disciplines can be caused by differences in personality, cultural thought worlds, language, organisational responsibilities, and physical barriers between managers from the two disciplines.
Given the importance of an effective cross-functional working relationship between commercial and technical disciplines for successful new product development (NPD) and the studies that show that this working relationship is often troublesome, the question is raised if, and how, humour can contribute to improving the quality of this specific collaboration and, subsequently, advance NPD processes. More specifically, can there be a role for humour to cure some of the existing problems and can humour enhance social relations between the two disciplines by promoting and creating a more psychological healthy climate?
5 the effectiveness of cross-functional
working relationships between commercial and technical disciplines involved in NPD. To that goal, recent academic research will be reviewed. Furthermore, in-depth interviews with project-, commercial- and technical managers will be undertaken, to explore how humour contributes to the collaboration. In view of the often problematic working relationship between commercial and technical disciplines involved in NPD, it is of considerable interest to explore how humour can
contribute to the enhancement of communication, the improvement of cohesion, and the reduction of social distance between commercial and technical disciplines. Therefore, the central research question is:
6
1. Theoretical background
In this literature review multiple relevant concepts of this research will be described and discussed based on existing academic literature. First, the collaboration and related issues between commercial and technical disciplines will be described and discussed. Second, a general description of humour will be provided. Third, three traditional theories of humour will be presented. Fourth, workplace humour will be described. Finally, several humour classifications will be highlighted and explained. Literature is accessed through two databases; Business Source Premier and Google Scholar.
1.1. Collaboration between
commercial and technical disciplines Collaboration and New Product Development
Effective cross-functional working relationships between commercial managers and technical managers is a key factor in successful new product development and innovation in general (Massey & Kyriazis, 2006). However, there is unambiguous evidence that these cross-functional working relationships are often problematic (Massey & Kyriazis, 2006). According to Fain et al. (2011) the process of new product development (NPD) consists of several activities that are carried out by groups with different abilities, knowledge elements, resources, competences and cultures. More specifically, the marketing department
7
Integration and Collaboration Problems
It is obvious that for innovative NPD projects integration of the commercial and technical disciplines is very important and the need for integration has been widely recognised. Nevertheless, in practice the actual level of integration of these disciplines have proven to be low (Souder, 1981; Weinrauch and Anderson, 1982). There seem to be fundamental differences between the two disciplines that account for these low levels of integration. Fain et al. (2011) argued that managers from the commercial disciplines regard the technical disciplines as a subordinate discipline whereas the technical disciplines consider the commercial disciplines as a static or limited discipline.
Interfunctional conflicts are sometimes attributed to the strains produced by resource and workflow interdependencies between departments on the one hand and to differences in short-term objectives and the desires for autonomy on the other (Ruekert, 1987). This can result in strong strains in the relationship between for example marketing and R&D departments. It is recognized that both disciplines play key roles in the NPD process, but focus on different aspects of the task. The commercial disciplines are primarily concerned with identifying and catering to customers preferences and fending off competitive threats, whereas the technical disciplines focus on issues as technical feasibility and functional effectiveness. Obviously, both disciplines are heavily dependent on each other for information and support. Nevertheless, despite this dependency the different perspectives
often lead to conflicting objectives and struggle for influence (Ruekert, 1987). According to Griffin and Hauser (1996) the hurdles to communication and collaboration between the two disciplines can also be caused by differences in personality, cultural thought worlds, language, organisational responsibilities, and physical barriers between managers from the two disciplines.
The former sections enhanced the understanding of the different roles that the disciplines have in NPD and how important effective integration and collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines is for success in NPD and innovation in general. However, it is observed that this specific integration and collaboration is often troublesome for several reasons, for example due to differences in short-term objectives and differences in personality, cultural thought worlds, and language between the two disciplines. The question is raised if, and how, humour can contribute to improving the quality of this specific collaboration and, subsequently, advance NPD processes. To enhance the understanding about what humour actually is, and what role it can have in organizations, a literature review on the concept of humour is presented in the following sections.
1.2 Defining humour
8 perceived as humorous” (Martineau,
1972). According to Crawford (1994) humour can consist of nonverbal and verbal communications which ”produce a positive cognitive or affective response from listeners”. This study will focus on the use of humour by individuals within an organisational setting. For the purpose of this study the organisational setting must at least consist of commercial and technical disciplines, for example Marketing and R&D.
The present study will look at the application of two different types of humour, positive and negative humour, respectively. According to Romero & Cruthirds (2006, p.59) “positive humour consists of amusing communications that produce positive emotions and cognitions in the individual, group, or organization”. In comparison to positive humour, negative humour is rather underexposed in literature (Attardo, 2010). Dechesne (2012) argued that this underexposure of negative humour may be because humour is a positive phenomenon by nature. Dechesne (2012, p.5) proposed the following definition of negative humour: “any joke that passes for humour which is detrimental to others or oneself”.
1.3 Humour theories
There are three major theories on humour that are repeatedly described in academic literature (e.g. Perks, 2012; Lynch, 2002; Meyer, 1997; Meyer, 2000). These are the superiority-, incongruity-, and relief theory. These theories will be briefly described in the following section for the purpose of
understanding the complex and multi-faced nature of humour.
Superiority theory
The superiority theory is based on humour as a manner of mockery. The theory states that people may derive pleasure from someone else’s misfortune or inadequacies. By laughing about these things a feeling of superiority is achieved. According to Berger (1992) sarcasm, satire, irony, and imitation are forms of humour expression in line with the superiority theory. Humour that fits within the superiority theory can also serve as a way to correct people who are not behaving in line with established social norms (Morreal, 2009).
Incongruity theory
According to the incongruity theory, people laugh at things that are somewhat surprising, unexpected, or illogical (Meyer, 1997; Berger, 1976). Therefore, this theory is associated with the cognitive elements of humour (Martin, 1998). Koestler (1964) stated that biscosiation, which is described as the unexpected connection between two normally unconnected frames of reference, is what causes laughter.
Relief theory
9 The superiority-, incongruity-, and relief
theory suggest that humour can be used to achieve several goals, such as resulting in a feeling of superiority or relieving tension. These theories describe humour from different perspectives but they should be perceived as complementary theories (Meyer, 2000). The upcoming section will describe humour from an organizational perspective, explaining the different effects of humour in the workplace on employees. This will give insights in the relations between humour and the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines.
1.4 Workplace humour
Humour is an integral part of everyday life, including organisations where a lot of human interaction takes place. Romero & Cruthirds (2006) argued that employees are capable of achieving multiple goals by using humour, e.g. the reduction of tension, enhancement of leadership, increasing group cohesion, enhancing communication and strengthening organisational culture. According to Mesmer-Magnus et al. (2012) humour can also contribute to the physical and mental health of an employee. Employees who make use of positive humour in the workplace may experience enhanced satisfaction and job performance (Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2012). The same researchers associate positive humour use by employees with the effectiveness of coping, reductions of stress-levels, reduction of burnout, and enhanced health. Employees can reduce the perception of tension by using positive
humour to view stressful situations in a more bright/positive way (Lippit, 1982). The former stated effects of humour in the workplace indicate that humour can or might be a relevant organisational concept. Kahn (1989) identified five different functions of humour for groups and individuals in the workplace, that will be described below.
Coping
When an emotionally threatening situation is perceived, one can detach him or herself from the situation by joking about it. To actually perceive it as humorous, one has to be already somewhat detached from the specific situation. Further detachment is facilitated by coping humour. Besides coping through humour on the individual level, this coping mechanism can also be used by groups. For example, one could imagine a group of employees joking about an upcoming lay off of personnel. Employees can make use of this type of humour to maintain a positive attitude and to reduce stress (Martin, 2001).
Reframing
10
Communication
Humour can be part of communication and is capable of influencing the way a message is received. Using humour in communication can euphemise messages that are likely to make other individuals feel hurt. Humour can be used to indirectly assess an issue. The recipient is given the opportunity to receive a difficult message while at the same time it does not appear to be that. This specific use of humour can be beneficial when an employee wants to make his point without inflicting harm to the other. Because of humour the receiver of the message can respond directly to the joke, while he or she can deal with the seriousness of the message later.
Expressing hostility
This function describes humour as a means to express hostile or aggressive messages that are meant to hurt another individual. Expressing hostility can therefore be described as a negative function of humour. Addressing hostility or aggression with the use of humour can be a way to secure the person sending it instead of expressing these hostile and aggressive messages directly. This secure feeling of the sender is based on the ambiguity of the message because the sender can say that it is just a joke if the receiver replies seriously to it. This function of humour is somewhat similar to the communication function of humour, however the difference between the two functions is that the main motivator here is protection of the sender as opposed to the receiver.
Construct identity
The construct identify function describes humour as a means for people to identify with groups or individuals. In this case, humour can be used to construct and/or improve the identities of groups and individuals. Inside jokes, or jokes shared by group members within a specific group, can separate the ones who understand it from the ones that do not, which may result in establishment of an informal group. This function of humour highlights the importance of humour for the strengthening of bonds and the sustaining of identity and culture within an organisation.
11
1.5 Humour styles
In the preceding sections the following concepts were described; positive- and negative humour, major humour theories from academic literature, and the functions that humour can have in an organisational context. This section will further operationalize humour for the purpose of this research and to gain insight in the different humour styles which an manager or employee can use in the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines. Martin et al. (2003) provided an approach for categorizing the use of humour by an individual by developing the Humour Style Questionnaire (HSQ), which differentiates four different humour styles. These humour styles are; affiliative-, self-enhancing-, aggressive-, and self-defeating humour. The first two humour styles are considered to be positive while the latter two humour styles are considered negative.
Affilitative humour
This humour style is considered to be positive and non-hostile, and is used to initiate or enhance relationships (Martin et al., 2003). According to Vaillant (1977) people that use this humour style are usually perceived as non-threatening or non-hostile by others. This humour style is likely to be used to put others at ease, by saying funny things about oneself, while maintaining a sense of self-acceptance (Vaillant, 1977). More specifically, “this style of humour is expected to be related to extraversion, cheerfulness, self-esteem, intimacy, relationship satisfaction, and
predominantly positive moods and emotions”(Martin et al. 2003, p.6)
Self-enhancing humour
People who use self-enhancing humour probably have an humorous outlook on life, which enables them to laugh about themselves and the incongruities of life (Martin et al., 2003). This humour style is used as a coping mechanism for dealing with stress, by maintaining a positive perspective on life (Romero & Cruthirds, 2006). “Self-enhancing humour is negatively related to neuroticism and positively related to self-esteem and favourable emotions”(Romero & Cruthirds, 2006, p.2). These authors also argued that self-enhancing humour is used in organizations to enhance the image of the initiator relative to others in the group or organization. Moreover, this humour style is considered to be more individual than interpersonal focused (Martin et al., 2003). Self-enhancing humour is negatively associated with emotions such as depression, anxiety and neuroticism and positively associated with self-esteem, openness to experience and psychological well-being (Martin et al., 2003; Romero & Cruthirds, 2006).
Aggressive humour
12 without considering the potential
consequences or impact on others. Consequently, aggressive humour is positively associated with neuroticism, hostility, anger and aggression, and negatively associated with relationship satisfaction, agreeableness and conscientiousness (Martin et al., 2003).
Self-defeating humour
Self-defeating humour is considered to be a negative humour style that is used to amuse others or to gain acceptance by others at the expense of oneself (Martin et al., 2003). This humour style is used within organizations by people who often try to reduce their social status to become more approachable (Romero & Cruthirds (2006). Therefore, self-defeating humour is positively associated with neuroticism, depression, anxiety, and negatively associated with relationship satisfaction, psychological well-being and self-esteem (Martin et al., 2003).
1.6 Humour and the commercial and technical interface
The conducted literature review enriched our understanding of the different roles that commercial and technical disciplines play in the process of new product development, their interdependency and need for successful integration and communication for successful NPD. The functions that humour can have in the workplace and the different humour styles an manager or employee can use to address these functions have been identified. The clear distinction between four humour styles described by Martin et
al. (2003) paved the way to study how the use of different humour styles can contribute to the quality of collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines in the process of new product development.
2. Identifying relevant
organizational concepts
The goal of this research is to explore how humour can contribute to the quality of collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines in NPD. Therefore, it is necessary to identify organizational concepts that can be influenced by the use of humour and consequently influence the quality of collaboration between the disciplines. This identification process is executed through the reviewing of two different sources of academic literature. First, to identify variables that can be influenced by the use of humour the psychology literature is reviewed. Second, variables that influence collaboration in NPD will be identified by reviewing the business management and innovation literature.Identified variables that are related to humour and to collaboration in NPD are:
13 An overview of these 9 variables, including
relevant references is presented in Appendix A (Appendix A: Variables related to both concepts).
2.1 Criteria for relevant organisational concepts
The variables presented above and described in Appendix A are not necessarily equally important in the light of this study’s research question. Therefore, based on literature additional criteria have been defined to select the most relevant concepts in the context of this research:
1. There is a strong relation between the variable and one or more humour styles as proposed by Martin et al. (2003). In other words, literature states that one or more humour style(s) can be used to influence the variable;
2. There is a strong relation between the variable and the quality of collaboration in NPD;
3. There is a strong relation between the variable and problems occurring in the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines;
4. The variable has management relevance.
The highest rated concepts will be included in this research. Appendix B (Appendix B: Variables criteria table) gives an comprehensive overview of the rating and selection process. This overview gives insight in how the potential relevant
14 participants of the culture some kind of
feeling of unity, whereas Group cohesiveness has to do with the amount of bonds linking team members together, resulting in a feeling of unity as a group (Brentani & Kleinschmidt, 2004; Edmondson & Nembhard, 2009). In NPD intensive collaboration between teams or groups and bonding between the members is important to achieve success in team performance and innovation. Consequently, it is argued that the unity of the innovation group or team (Group cohesiveness) is more relevant in the light of this research in comparison to the unity of the total organisation (Organisational Culture). It is acknowledged that this ‘unity’ aspect of organisational culture does not describe this concept in all its aspects, but the emphasis of this research focussed on the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines in NPD, and the unity or cohesiveness between members of commercial and technical disciplines in such collaborations is beneficial for successful new product development, or innovation in general (Edmondson & Nembhard, 2009; Bettenhausen, 1991). Therefore, leadership and organizational culture will also be excluded from this research.
By defining criteria and rating the potential interesting organizational concepts along these criteria, the most relevant concepts for the purpose of this research have been identified and the least relevant concepts have been excluded. The potential interesting concepts that will be included in this research are:
Communication Group Cohesiveness Social distance
These will be the primary concepts to be included in this research. However, it is possible that, on the basis of the outcome of the semi-structured depth interviews to be performed, new insights are gained, that might result in redefinition of relevant concepts.
In the following sections the three relevant concepts will be described, discussed and operationalised. Arguments for the relevance of these concepts in the light of this research will be discussed.
2.1.1 Communication
15 between project managers and the
commercial and technical disciplines in terms of; formal/ informal, and verbal/ non-verbal ways.
Project teams or groups, consisting of commercial and technical employees can face communication problems that can be caused by differences in personality, cultural thought worlds, language, and organizational responsibilities between commercial and technical employees (Deschamps, 1994; Griffin & Hauser, 1996). Deschamps (1994) argued that a lack in exposure to each other’s skill and jargon is one of the causes for communication and subsequent collaboration problems between commercial and technical disciplines. Project teams or groups, consisting of commercial and technical employees can also face organisational stress when they communicate due to the differences between the disciplines. According to Schuler (1980) there are many definitions of stress in organizations. Schuler (1980, p.189) proposed the following definition of organizational stress based on multiple definitions from former research:
“Stress is a dynamic condition in which an individual is:
a) confronted with an opportunity for being/having/doing what (s)he desires and/or
b) confronted with a constraint on being/having/doing what (s)he desires and/or
c) confronted with a demand on being/having/doing what (s)he desires and for which the resolution of is perceived to
have uncertainty but which will lead (upon resolution) to important outcomes”. An example of organisational stress in the NPD collaboration is when group members of an innovation team face stress because the commercial and technical disciplines have somewhat dissimilar time horizons which leads to tension between the two disciplines (Gupta et al., 1985). It is argued by Gupta et al. (1985) that commercial disciplines regularly believe that the technical disciplines are pushing new products on them, while the technical disciplines believe that the commercial disciplines are destroying research and potential radical technological innovations by putting too much emphasis on short-term market opportunities. According to Griffin and Hauser (1996) the time orientation of commercial disciplines is rather short, whereas the time orientation of the technical disciplines is considered long.
16 over the situation (Henman, 2001). For
example, joking about tension caused by differences in time horizons in a meeting can help to reduce this tension and enhance communication. Romero & Cruthirds (2006) proposed that affiliative-, and self-enhancing humour can help to reduce stressful or tense situations. Affiliative humour use within a group can create a collective ‘we are in this together’ feeling so that tension-causing factors are managed and shared by the members of the group (Romero & Cruthirds, 2006). Self-enhancing humour applied at the individual level can help an employee to reframe tense situations in a manner that it becomes manageable (Abel, 2002).
2.1.2 Group Cohesiveness
Group cohesiveness was defined by Lott (1961) as: “That group property which is inferred from the number and strength of mutual positive attitudes among the members of a group”. Another definition for group cohesion by Lott & Lott (1965) is: “Interpersonal attraction among group members”. It can also be defined as the degree to which members are attracted and motivated to remain part of a group or team (Wang et al. 2005). The trend of these definitions seem to be that group cohesiveness has to do with the tendency of group members to stick together and work as an unity towards a common goal. Project teams or groups, consisting of commercial and technical employees can score low on cohesiveness. This also can be due to differences in personality, cultural thought worlds, language, and organizational responsibilities between commercial and technical employees
(Griffin & Hauser, 1996). For example, members of an innovation team that have conflicts concerning differences in organizational responsibilities, might face difficulties to bond and, as a result, group cohesiveness can be low.
self-17 enhancing humour can be applied at the
group/team level to enhance the emotional connection one is feeling with the group/team.
2.1.3 Social distance
Warner & DeFleur (1969) described social distance as based on sociological considerations of status position and role expectations in social relationships. Perception of social distance can exist because of a traditional predominance of one function (e.g. commercial, or technical) in an organization (Graham, 1995).
Project teams or groups, consisting of commercial and technical employees can face problems regarding the presence or perception of social distances due to predominance of specific functions (Graham, 1995). Deschamps’ (1994) research results showed that 42% of the respondents state that a traditional predominance of one of the disciplines in an organizations culture is accountable for communication and collaboration problems.
According to Graham (1995) humour can be used to reduce social distance by identifying similarities between individuals. These similarities can come in the form of intelligence, values, needs, etc. (Murstein & Brust, 1985). Romero & Cruthirds (2006) argued that affiliative humour is useful in reducing social distance because it causes followers to perceive the leader/leading party as part of the group. Self-defeating humour can also be used to reduce the perception of social distance between followers and a leader/leading party. Furthermore, Romero & Cruthirds (2006)
proposed that combining affiliative with moderate self-defeating humour reduces the perception of social distance between followers and the leader/leading party.
18
3.1 Sample and Data Collection
Potential interesting organisations/ companies/industries were identified through the use of the internet. Organisations with distinct commercial and technical departments, involved in new product development, were identified and approached. Within these organisations candidate respondents were sought. The respondents that were approached for this research were selected on the basis of criteria defined by Song et al. (1996) and Gupta et al. (1985):
1. Working as a project manager (e.g. manager of project team consisting of commercial and technical disciplines), technical professional (e.g. Research & Development, manufacturing), or commercial professional (e.g. Marketing, Sales) on NPD within an organisation 2. Respondents should be working on
at least one new product development process at the time of the interview
Some of the respondents were approached through a phone call to the corresponding organisation. Following the phone call additional information regarding the research was provided by email to the organisations. The respondents that agreed to participate were visited for the first interview round in May or June 2014. Of the 12 respondents, 8 were visited for a second interview round in July 2014. All first-round interviews were done face-to-face within the involved organisations. The second-round interviews were a mix of face-to-face and phone interviews and one interview was conducted through email.
19 industry, Food industry, and Detergents
industry,. Table 1 provides the respondent profiles, and in table 2 an overview of the
profiles of the different organisations is given.
Table 1. Respondent profiles
Respondent Commercial or
Technical discipline (Educational background)
Function Industry Autonomous
NPD/innovation team member Respondent 1 Commercial (Commercial background) Marketing & Business Development Officer Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems NO Respondent 2 Respondent 3 Respondent 4 Technical (Technical background) Commercial (Technical background; Chemical Phd.) Commercial (Commercial background) R&D Manager Business Director Area Sales Manager Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems NO NO NO Respondent 5 Technical (Technical background)
20
Respondent 6 Commercial
(Commercial background)
Sales Manager Packaging NO
Respondent 7 Respondent 8 Respondent 9 Commercial (Commercial background) Technical (Technical background) Technical (Tecnical background) General Sales & Marketing Manager R&D Manager Manager Technology Packaging Packaging Food NO Yes, R&D member in cross-functional innovation team. 3 team members. NO Respondent 10 Commercial (Commercial background) Sales Manager Industry Food NO Respondent 11 Technical (Technical background) Head Product Development Detergents NO Respondent 12 Project Manager (Commercial background) Manager competence team/ Category manager
21
Table 2. Organisation profiles Organisation
number + location:
Industry Product Groups Employees Part of bigger
group EBITDA or Net revenue of group 1 Vaassen Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems
Vertical diffusion & LPCVD furnace systems Horizontal diffusion & LPCVD furnace systems In organization: 110 In group: 350 Yes, international group. United States HQ. Active in Europe, North America and Asia. Net revenue:81,5 million 2 Vaassen Packaging Tobacco Food Dairy In organization: 260 In group: 4.300 Yes, international group. Amsterdam HQ. Active in 10 countries in Europe & North America. EBITDA: 700 million
3 Wezep
22
3.2 Development of the interview
This section will describe the basic outline of the semi-structured depth interview protocol that was applied. The whole interview protocol can be found in Appendix C (Appendix C: The interview protocol). The interview consisted of 6 sections, of which section 1 and section 8 were the introduction and the closing of the interview, respectively. The sections 2 to 7 of the interview protocol are presented below, giving insights in the topic of the questions:
2:Collaboration commercial and technical disciplines;
3:Difficulties in collaborating with the other discipline;
4:Humour in the organisation; 5:Humour as a management tool; 6:Communication,Cohesion,Social Distance;
7:Hypothetical situations with respect to communication, group cohesiveness, and social distance.
3.3 Data Analysis
Some data analyses steps (partially based on Morse et al., 2002) are taken to ensure data reliability and validity. First, the 12 transcribed interviews are documented and accessible for review purposes, the same holds for the high-quality audio files. The described analysis steps coupled with the documented transcripts and the audio files improve the reliability of this research. Offering the former specified document and files to the readers of this transcript are a mean to show that the researcher acted in respectable faith and tried to prevent subjective thoughts to become part of the findings of this research. Second, the data obtained from the four organisations were analysed separately to research whether there were differences in
findings between the organisations. No noteworthy differences appeared in the findings of the different organisations. All data from the different respondents were analysed in detail to check for differences between the respondents. Third, new findings that appeared during the analyses of later interviews were compared with former findings. Fourth, the researcher reflected on every interview and made changes in the interview setup when necessary. Fifth, the sample of respondents who best represent or have information on the research question have been included in this research. According to Morse et al. (2002) this procedure guarantees both effective and efficient saturation of themes, by optimizing data quality and minimizing waste.
The remainder of this section will describe in detail how the data was analysed: After conducting a single case study, which consisted of interviewing two or more managers within a single organisation, the following steps were taken:
1. The interviews were transcribed from the high quality audio files. 2. The transcripts were read in detail
by the researcher.
3. Certain themes came back in the different interviews and therefore the findings concerning the relevant themes were described from the perspective of the respondents (e.g. General contributions of humour, Humour and communication, Humour and group cohesiveness, Humour and social distance).
23 contradictions between the
answers of project-, commercial-, and technical managers within one organisation.
Conducting step 1 to step 4 resulted in 4 different Memos that reflected on 4 organisational case studies. The relevant themes were described in these Memos and subsequently the next steps focused on cross-case analysis:
5. All the Memos were printed and laid next to each other for the purpose of cross-case analysis. The themes were analysed one by one, looking at similarities and contradictions between the four Memos regarding differences between the respondents and the organisations. This cross-case analysis coupled with within-case analysis resulted in the development of the results section of this research.
6. To identify relevant quotes that illustrate the findings of this study, the researcher studied the individual transcripts corresponding to the particular themes.
4. Results
In the result section the themes identified from the transcripts will be presented and explained from the perspectives of the respondents and will be structured in four (4) different sections; General contributions of humour, Humour and communication, Humour and group cohesiveness, and Humour and social distance.
In the first section, the findings are presented related to how the respondents
think that humour in general contributes to the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines. The second section will present the findings concerning the role that humour plays in communication between the disciplines. The third section will describe the findings with respect to the effects of humour on the cohesion between co-workers from the different disciplines. The fourth section will describe the findings with regard to how humour influences social distance between commercial and technical disciplines in the collaboration. Quotes of respondents will be cited as follows (Gender, Function, Industry, Respondent number). An overview of the key findings is presented in Appendix D (Appendix D. Overview of key findings),
General contributions of humour In general, the findings show that humour contributes to the perception of a positive and pleasant social atmosphere on the work floor which is considered beneficial for the new product development collaboration between commercial and technical disciples.
24 and more fun to collaborate. The influence
of humour on the social atmosphere, and more specifically negative humour is illustrated by a manager:
“It is extremely unpleasant when humour is absent in an organisation. It’s just no fun to go to work. I worked in a company where aggressive humour was abundant on the work floor, both directed to the outside and internally. A cynical, sarcastic humour style aimed at hurting people was applied. I was reluctant to go to work. I personally could handle the humour used, but it takes a lot of energy to survive the negative atmosphere. Energy that also is needed to do your job properly. It is frustrating.” (M, General Sales & Marketing Manager, Packaging, 7)
With regard to general contributions of humour in the collaboration, it can be concluded that humour contributes to the social atmosphere and the interaction between commercial and technical disciplines, especially positive humour. Several respondents even stated that when no humour was present in the organisation they would not come back to work the other day, underwriting the relevance of humour in organisations and consequently for the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines.
Humour and communication
Communication is elaborated on by the respondents as a very important aspect of the collaboration between the disciplines in new product development. It is observed that organisational stress can be present in these collaborations, which is referred to by respondents as natural tension. The identified reason behind this tension are the differences in time horizons between commercial and technical disciplines. How differences in time horizons between the disciplines can result
in tension is explained by a project manager and a technical manager from the same organisation:
“Time horizons are completely different. Commercial people see, hear or think of something and they want to have it in an instant. Doing research implicates that to achieve your target many steps have to be taken. On that road every now and then you present what has been achieved, but still you do not know if you will reach the final goal. However, to be competitive you need to present these intermediate results. For commercial people this is difficult to understand. If something has a time horizon of say 7 years they do not understand why you even start with it.” (M, Head Product Development,
Detergents, 11)
“There is always tension, which I think is good. By discussing we will understand each other better and this will improve the balance. A product developer will always keep developing, at least a good one does, and have an open eye for literature, be open for discussions and additional issues he sees or hears. This will push him to get new ideas. As a result you never reach the final station, you continue innovating when you are a good developer. Every test yield new information and questions. The challenge is to find the balance between an ongoing product developer and a commercial person who knows the desires of the client.”
(M, Manager Competence Team, Detergents, 12)
25 perceived as threatening can be
communicated with the use of humour in such a way that it will not be perceived as threatening and hostile. Humour can also assist in communicating that an earlier conflict was not personal. Joking and laughing together with colleagues with whom one had an conflict earlier can be a clear signal that the conflict was not personal but rather business-like. How humour can contribute to communication between the disciplines is explained by two managers:
“Yes, humour is a means to break the ice and to remove the tension. It becomes clear that the conflict is not personal but only business related. Joking about a business conflict at a later moment makes it obvious that it is not personal.”
(M, R&D Manager, Packaging, 5)
“I use humour consciously because it is a tool to find partnership, bringing people together. If this is difficult from the business point of view, either with colleagues or clients, humour can be used to build bridges. In cases of arguments about prices or procedures humour can be applied to tell the message but make it perceive quite different. This might prevent negative feelings.”
(M, Sales Manager, Packaging, 6)
Findings show that the sharing of humour and laughter creates a connection between people that facilitates better communication. People that have a deeper connection are more likely to listen to and understand each other more accurately, according to the respondents.
Commercial respondents think that self-defeating humour can be beneficial for communication, however, this was only noted by one technical respondents. This form of humour is argued to trigger
receivers to explain something ones more since you make yourself somewhat smaller. The findings show that differences in language or jargon can lead to misunderstanding or even result in complete lack of understanding between commercial and technical managers. Imagine a situation where a R&D manager tries to explain something extremely technical to a sales manager. The sales manager can faces great difficulty in understanding the detailed explanation of the R&D Manager. Two commercial managers explain how the use of self-defeating humour can help in this situation: “Self-defeating humour sounds very negative, but when you are able to make yourself somewhat smaller relative to others than you can clear an obstacle. If you say something like; ‘Yes guys, I am just a simple salesman and I know you guys studied for this, could you please explain this one more time for me in ‘jip and janneke’ language?’. Then you create some kind of support base. Therefore I would use affiliative and self-defeating humour in case of communication problems”.
(M, General Sales & Marketing Manager, Packaging, 7)
“I recognize that. Sometime you make a joke like about yourself by saying: “I do not understand a thing about that having only done a Bachelor, whereas you have a PhD”. This joke will trigger the technical person to explain it to you once more.”
(M, Marketing & Business Development Officer, Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems, 1)
26 make it easier to come to decisions and it
will open a lot of things for discussion, and therefore enhances communication and decision making. This contribution of humour to the collaboration is illustrated by one of the commercial managers: “Affiliative humour is preferred in case of communication problems. This humour style can get people on the same level again. People will laugh about the same things and that will create a feeling of solidarity and therefore it will be easier to come to decisions”.
(M, Sales Manager, Packaging, 6)
The findings also show that humour can play an important role in the process of releasing tension between the disciplines. It is observed that managers make conscious use of humour when tension is perceived. According to the respondents humour can be used to relax, break the ice in the beginning of a meeting, or to reset a tense or stuck conversation. An illustration of how humour can help to open up a stuck conversation or meeting is given by a manager:
“Well, humour can help restarting a collapsed conversation. You might not recognize it, but Joseph Luns, former minister of external affairs and a characteristic person, once stood up during a difficult meeting of the ministers. He took a table cloth, wrapped it around his shoulders, walked around for a minute, sat down and continued the meeting. After this incident the atmosphere had changed and the meeting was concluded successfully. This illustrates what humour can do in such a situation.”
(M, Manager Technology, Food, 9)
It is observed that tension can be present in meetings between commercial and technical disciplines because of the before
explained differences in time horizons between the disciplines. The sharing of laughter in such a tense meeting will help to put the perceived tension in perspective, and therefore tension is reduced. It is also argued that laughing about humour creates positive emotions that oppress and/or reduce tension. Humour can redirect attention away from tension for a moment. A commercial manager explained how humour can help to reduce tension in a situation where a commercial and technical manager communicate about a newly developed product:
“People have egos of different size, ranging from small to very big. If the latter people have difficulties with a certain situation and are accounted for that they often react very forceful. They do not listen to the content but react on the intrusion of their territory. In such a situation it is smart to let the big ego remain a big ego. By making a joke you can build bridges. For example if you want to tell an R&D person that his product is not too good you better not say it like that, but you could say: “he listen, we were nearly there. At least it is better than the Dutch team who become only third place where as we were second best”. Accompanied with a grin. This will take the cold out of the air.”
(M, General Sales & Marketing Manager, Packaging, 7)
27 because a long and tiring meeting, a joke
can be useful to take out the tension and to give people the opportunity to rethink matters. I’ve also encountered situation where people postponed meeting to the next week, which would not have occurred if a joke had not been made.”
(M, Manager Technology, Food, 9)
Humour and Group Cohesiveness Group Cohesiveness is elaborated on by the respondents as a very important aspect of the collaboration between the commercial and technical disciplines. It is said to be crucial for a team to be cohesive in order to successfully come to decisions and collaborate in new product development. However, it is also observed that it is not always easy to create cohesive groups existing of commercial and technical disciplines. A reason why this might be difficult is given by a commercial manager:
“The personality of the average R&D person and that of the average sales person are different. This does not mean that this is a difference in introvert versus extrovert, but there are differences.”
(M, General Sales & Marketing Manager, Packaging, 7)
Without the use of humour in the interaction between the disciplines the relationships are argued to be merely business-like, humour facilitates emotions to become part of the relationships between co-workers from different disciplines. The respondents argued that humour strengthens the emotional bonds between them and their co-workers and therefore the otherwise business-like interaction becomes more familiar and group cohesiveness increases. A project manager illustrated the importance of humour In establishing emotional bonds
between commercial and technical disciplines:
“By incorporating humour in conversations and daily activities social binding with colleagues is improved by becoming less rational and business oriented. Therefore, the we-feeling is increased resulting in improved functioning of the team. This is contradictory to the more commercial result–oriented view of what has been achieved or the technical way of looking at what can be made. Humour makes you look different at each other in a more emotional and less rational way.”
(M, Manager Competence Team, Detergents, 12)
The results show that humour can contribute to group cohesiveness in several ways. It is observed that affiliative- and aggressive humour can be helpful.
28 looking at one another. This certainly
creates a bond.”
(M, Manager Technology, Food, 9)
“I think that humour can create a feeling of linkage between people. For example you can joke about previous situations they were in. This results in joint laughs and sharing of humour leading to creation of bonds, irrespective their background.” (M, R&D Manager, Packaging, 5)
Aggressive humour is also identified as helpful for constructing a common group identity. Respondents state that aggressive jokes can be made about two different entities, namely competitors of the organisation and complaining customers. The results show that competitors are commonly described as the ‘enemy’ and are often the subject of aggressive jokes within organisations. It is found that aggressive jokes concerning competitors can create a feeling of unity within the group because a common enemy is created and ridiculed. It is also observed that such ridiculisation of a competitor may result in the urge or common sense to do something better than the competitor, increasing commitment to the group goals by the team members. These jokes strengthen the bond one is feeling towards fellow group members and the organisational goals of the group, and therefore it improves group cohesiveness. A commercial manager explained how he thinks that humour in the form of aggressive jokes lead to more cohesion in the group:
“Yes, it is good by creating a feeling of us opposed to the rest of the world. I like to say that I will extinguish the competitor or knock him out, strong language like that. I have the idea that this works to give us the feeling that we are really fighting the competitor, who is our enemy at that moment. This will keep us sharp.”
(M, General Sales & Marketing Manager, Packaging, 7)
It should be noted that the only interviewed project manager argued that there are dangers connected to making too much aggressive jokes about competitors. He stated that joking about the competition imposes a danger of losing seriousness in the group. The project manager argues that the group might underestimate the competitor which in turn could impose great dangers for the competitive strength of the group:
“You should take a competitor seriously. If you make jokes about them too often this can lead to a feeling of superiority and, subsequently, underestimation of the competitor. This is something you should be aware of when making jokes about serious matters. It can lead to the danger of making things unimportant to a certain degree and underestimation of the significance of the situation. I do not think that that helps us.”
(M, Manager Competence Team, Detergents, 12)
29 organisation can benefit from it by
improving their business. Two managers illustrate the double-edged sword with regard to aggressive jokes about customers:
“Well it could work out in two ways. It could work as a binding experience in a certain manner. On the other side it could also be that a customer has a very justified complain en when someone is joking about that complain which is serious business it could lead to lower cohesion of the group. So you have to be very careful about using aggressive humour. So it could work out two ways. When I look within this organisation then I could say that it works out in a positive manner most of the times.”.
(M, Sales Manager, Packaging, 6)
“When it concerns an obvious not present client, it can enhance the “we” feeling. At such a moment it is us against the annoying client. But you should be extremely careful that the person involved in contacts with that client is not placed outside the group. That person might get the feeling to defend the client, leading to splitting up the group. Such situations have occurred. However, difficult clients often lead to increased performance.”
(M, Manager Technology, Food, 9) Humour and Social Distance
It is observed how the use of several humour styles can contribute to decreasing social distance in the collaboration between commercial and technical respondents. There are also some differences observed between the answers given by commercial and technical managers, which will be described later on in this section.
Affiliative humour can lower the perception of social distance when it is perceived in the collaboration. It is argued
by managers from both disciplines, that sharing humour and laughter creates a feeling of being equal, consequently undermining the perceived social distance. If the dominant and less dominant discipline share a laugh during a business meeting it is said that this brings them together. Another description of this effect is that the sharing of humour will give the respondents the feeling to be on the same level, and is therefore contributing to reduced perception of social distance. How humour contributes to the reduction of social distance between the disciplines is explained by a technical manager:
“Humour as such has the power to overcome difference in status and order. With respect to social distance between commercial and technical functions, which by I do not see within our organisation, humour could diminish the distance and equalize the parties. This phenomenon can be considered a very positive contribution towards collaboration between these functions.”
(M, R&D Manager, Packaging, 5)
30 dominant discipline can ‘open up’, they
perceive to be more recognized and could therefore contribute more to the collaboration. How the use of self-defeating humour by the more dominant discipline can contribute to the collaboration is explained by two managers:
“In fact it is the same as when specific egos are present. A group does not have an ego, but one of the parties can be very dominant. That party should try to make itself smaller to become more accessible for the other. This will decrease the risk of conflicts and improved transparency.“ (M, General Sales & Marketing Manager, Packaging, 7)
“Well, when you are looking towards something dominant you might feel insignificant. If the other shows vulnerable the relation becomes more relaxed and equal. During a meeting this will improve balance and understanding and lead to more open discussions.”
(M, Marketing & Business Development Officer, Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems, 1)
A noteworthy difference between commercial and technical managers attracted attention. In this case of perceived social distance in the collaboration, several commercial managers stated that they will make use of self-enhancing humour when they are in the less dominant position. Technical managers do not argue to do this as frequently as the commercial managers do. Self-enhancing humour is chosen by commercial managers to strengthen their dominance or to signal that they are just as
capable as the more dominant discipline. It is argued by the managers that they do this out of dissatisfaction with the situation. Some commercial managers explain why they would use self-enhancing humour: “In the less dominant role I can try to strengthen my position with the use of enhancing humour. I would use self-enhancing humour in combination with some teasing, so somewhat aggressive humour, try to make yourself stronger and the other somewhat weaker. However, I would say: “but listen.., I collaborate too.” (M, Business Director, Solar and semiconductor diffusion and LPCVD furnace systems, 3)
“In such a situation you try to strengthen your position relative to the other. Formally the other party can be superior, but by applying “informal” methods you try to improve your own status. This can be successful, because in every organisation there can be many informal leaders that are effective be using the rights words and humour irrespective their actual position.” (M, General Sales & Marketing Manager, Packaging, 7)
“I think that self-enhancing humour can be used to tilt yourself to a higher level. You try to show that you know what you are talking about. I would not suggest to lower yourself by using self-defeating humour. That will make you even less popular.”
31
5. Conclusion
This section will provide the theoretical and managerial implications of this research’ results. The limitations of this research will be presented and future research suggestions will be proposed.
5.1 Discussion
This study contributes in theoretical- and practical terms to the current business management and innovation literature. The theoretical contributions of this research to current literature can be found in the increased knowledge of how humour can contribute to the specific collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines in new product development. The results suggest that managers may benefit by using specific humour styles in specific situations to improve the collaboration between commercial and technical disciplines. Findings show how humour can contribute in a general manner to the collaboration between the disciplines, and more specifically how humour can contribute to communication, group cohesiveness, and to the reduction of social distance between the disciplines. These findings are largely in line with research on the psychological effects of humour and the effects of humour in the workplace as described in the theoretical background section (Kahn, 1989; Mesmer-Magnus et al., 2012; Romero & Cruthirds 2006; Lippit, 1982; Martin, 2001).
Findings indicate that commercial managers think that self-defeating humour can be beneficial for communication while this was noted by only one technical manager. A possible explanation for this discrepancy could be that commercial managers are more likely to lack understanding in the technical aspects of the work of technical managers than that is
