growthWhen a company grows from small-size to mid-size then the number of projects grows as well as employees. Chances of communication gap increases, different teams do the same things, and new technological adaptations become challenging.
I know that company’s architects are responsible for the above communication challenges etc. But to evaluate latest technologies & helping projects teams for their adoption, should a mid-size company have small, effective, and dedicated research team working closely with the architects?
This team can also help architects to implement the better development processes across the company.
I wonder if a mid-size software company ( > 200 employees) should have this dedicated research team of size 6-7 people. Is this the right way?
It depends on what your company does. If you are at the cutting edge of technology then yes. You need to actively focus on innovation. Whether 6-7 is the right number that is upto you. Perhaps start with 2-3 and build the team up to fit knowledge/capability gaps.
Essentially, you want to be in a position where you can build/develop the designs your Research team & architects create. You also want to be in a position where you will have a high degree of confidence that the products will sell (and how much).
If market viability assessments were in the remit of a designated team then it is more likely your organisation will do this well. If it is with a number of generalists who have to do a bit of everything, then you are likely to be inconsistent with design standards, market viability assessments, and obsolescence etc.
If your organisation develops similar products to those already on the market (e.g. less R&D, less risk, but less reward), then the generalist model would work better. As you would be over-investing in innovation capability.
The other way to look at this function would be to attach it to sales & marketing. So that whenever a sales rep feeds back they can check out with the Research team whether client needs could be met through a new product development (that you have or could stretch to deliver).
A cutting edge engineering firm (with c.200 employees) I know had two sets of R&D teams one for each of their product families. But the level of expertise was very high and not that related. They had challenges with getting products to market and then getting these built as they shared a building/operations capability. But a generalist model would have worked worse.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.