This presentation provides an up-close examination of MediSys Corp. and its contextual conditions and tables recommendations to resolve the problems affecting the IntensCare project and safeguard MediSys Corp.'s future.

1. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Product
Development Team
Olivier Serrat
2019

2. MediSys Corp.: Key Facts
• Privately-held, U.S.-based manufacturer of specialty medical devicesCompany
Profile
• 2002Established
• 1,750 peoplePersonnel
• US$400 million (2008)Annual Revenue
• Pulmonary and renal monitoring systemsFlagship
Products
• Entrepreneurial, with an accent on innovative thinking, from redesign to
development of systems
Organizational
Culture
• Growth is slowing; competitors are moving in; IntensCare is the most
ambitious project thus far; a new President, Beaumont, has been
appointed
Forces for
Change

3. MediSys Corp.: Historical Product Development Sequence
Research & Development
proposes new
technologies or systems
Sales & Marketing
develops product
descriptions (e.g.,
customer needs and
responses, MediSys new
concepts)
Design & Engineering
develops product
specifications
Regulatory Affairs
researches and conducts
clinical trials to test
prototypes
Production fabricates and
assembles products

4. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project (1)September2006
Gerson (Research & Development)
conceptualizes a patient monitoring
system to collect data in intensive
care units, post to an electronic
database, and build an integrated
profile of patient health. The system
would deliver electronic alerts to
physicians and nurses. Per the
historical product development
sequence, Gerson (Research &
Development) pitches the IntensCare
concept to Fisher (Sales &
Marketing).
October2006
Fisher (Sales &
Marketing) tests
the IntensCare
concept in the
market and vets
it on account of
considerable
interest in the
market.
December2006
Gerson
(Research &
Development)
and Fisher
(Sales &
Marketing) hold
discussions with
Design &
Engineering.

5. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project (2)June2007
After conducting
preliminary
market research
and product
designs, an ad
hoc product
development
team presents
the IntensCare
concept to senior
leadership.
July2007
Senior
leadership
assigns
US$500,000
for software
development
and ongoing
product
engineering
work.
January2008
Beaumont is
hired as
President.
(Beaumont
later commits
US$20
million to
IntensCare.)
August2008
Beaumont introduces a
parallel system to
speed the product
development process
and formalizes the core
team for IntensCare.
(Work had slowed
owing to competing
assignments. Earlier,
Fisher had been named
VP (Sales & Marketing).

6. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Product Development
Team*
Jack Fogel, IntensCare
Project Leader, Production
("Laid back but
experienced")**
Aaron Gerson, Research
& Development
("Brilliant")**
Valerie Merz, Sales &
Marketing ("A go-
getter")**
Bret O'Brien, Design &
Engineering ("Expert but
narrow")**
Dipesh Mukerjee, Design
& Engineering ("Ambitious
and eager but may be
stretched")**
Karen Baio, Regulatory
Affairs ("Sharp, good
potential")**
* The IntensCare Product Development Team was formalized in August 2008.
** The text in brackets summarizes Beaumont's annotations on HR's list of prospective team members.

7. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Situation &
Synopsis of Problems as of February 13, 2009 (1)
The IntensCare Product Development Team has worked for six months but
met with design and engineering problems—for software design and
development outsourced to firms in India—that are affecting the project's
schedule. Yet, speed is the key.
Two competitors have launched work on similar monitoring systems to
directly compete with MediSys Corp. in the market, with established cross-
functional team abilities likely to impact MediSys Corp.'s future product
development as well.
Per Beaumont, Medisys Corp. must finalize and launch IntensCare by
August 2009.

8. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Situation &
Synopsis of Problems as of February 13, 2009 (2)
A year has passed between the allocation of the funds for development
(July 2007) and the formalization of the team (August 2008); much
progress has been achieved but the team members have had other work.
Mukerjee (Design & Engineering) has owned up to (more) problems in
software design and development outsourced to India (February 12,
2009). To maintain the critical path of design and engineering, the
software must be delivered in final form by May 1, 2009.
O'Brien (Design & Engineering) keeps Merz (Sales & Marketing) in the
dark: delays will slow the critical path to product launch. Merz (Sales &
Marketing), tasked with profit-and-loss responsibility, feels disenfranchised
but all team members have different drivers and blame one another.
The revised release date for IntensCare is very aggressive but IntensCare
is behind on design, clinical testing, and production schedule. Modular
design has become a sticking point.

9. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—The Heart of The
Matter (1)
Going over
budget only
marginally
reduces profits if a
product is
released on time;
but, staying on
budget but
reaching the
market late
substantially
reduces profits;
MediSys Corp.
cannot afford that.
The IntensCare Product Development Team is not
performing as expected, notably regarding
efficiency and effectiveness. Without preparation,
the product development sequence all at MediSys
Corp. were familiar with was jettisoned in favor of a
cross-functional team design and parallel
development process. Personnel did not object to the
new process, which represents evolutionary change:
but, sudden introduction gave no time to form, storm,
norm, and perform à la Tuckman (1965) and created
or surfaced forces affecting behaviors. To note, the
requisites of success (e.g., drivers, business processes,
rewards, and communications) were not aligned
beforehand.
A company has a
competitive
advantage when
its culture gives
priority to its
customers,
investors, and
employees; fits
the business
environment; and
is adaptable to
change (Kotter &
Heskett, 1992)

10. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—The Heart of The
Matter (2)
Purposes •Considering the team's lonely travails, MediSys Corp.'s mission and goals are a somber
yet increasingly urgent proposition.
Structure
•There no longer is an immediate fit between purposes and structure: the organization
chart does not empower the new cross-functional team design and parallel development
process.
Relationships
•The relations between individuals and between departments are adversarial. The
interdependence that cross-functionality demands has not come to pass. The mode of
conflict resolution is avoidance: team members are uncooperative and—with
exceptions—unassertive.
Rewards
•MediSys Corp. formally rewards contributions to departments, not cross-functional
accomplishments. Reporting and evaluation arrangements remain what they were under
the erstwhile product development sequence.
Leadership •Fogel neither defines the team's purposes nor embodies these in IntensCare; his
normative style of leadership is hands-off.
Helpful
Mechanisms
•No helpful mechanisms (e.g., external support) facilitate the accomplishment of
objectives; indeed, what is at hand hinders efforts.
Leadership
Purposes
Structure
RewardsHelpful
Mechanisms
Relationships
Source: Weisbord, M. (1976). Organizational diagnosis: six places to look for trouble with or without a
theory. Group and Organization Studies, 1(4), 430–447.
Outside Environment
Figure: Weisbord's Six-Box Model

11. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—The Heart of The
Matter (3)
Exhibit No. 1
• Fogel does not set the tone; Gerson no longer contributes; Beaumont intervenes but late
in the day; hierarchy is engrained so no one takes up the slack.
Exhibit No. 2
• The parallel system requires that all critical functions work together from concept to
production but no changes have been made regarding reporting and evaluation
arrangements. The functional perspective trumps all others, notably psychodynamic,
social identity, social network, temporal, and evolutionary perspectives (Poole &
Hollingshead, 2005).
Exhibit No. 3
• Mukerjee, who reports to O'Brien, was allowed to outsource software design and
development to firms in India despite notoriously difficult experience.

12. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—The Heart of The
Matter (4)
Exhibit No. 4
• Team members withhold key information to avoid confrontation. Merz, for example,
bears responsibility for profit and loss but is not informed of Mukerjee's difficulties.
Exhibit No. 5
• No one knows how to proceed vis-à-vis modular design.
Exhibit No. 6
• Team members are not allowed to focus: they are often pulled away to work on other
priorities in their functional areas, presumably with Beaumont's blessing. Despite the
personnel shortages that overlapping assignments intuit, no personnel has been hired to
relieve pressure, no resources are contributed or shared by MediSys Corp.'s other
projects, and team members are left to their own devices.

13. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—The Heart of the
Matter (5)
Exhibit No. 7
• Fisher, who had tested the IntensCare concept in the market, held discussions with Design
& Engineering, and served in the ad hoc product development team, was promoted VP
(Sales & Marketing) just before the IntensCare Product Development Team was
formalized, a move that heightened the pressure on Merz, his newly-hired successor.
Exhibit No. 8
• As Beaumont's original annotations on HR's list of prospective team members for
IntensCare suggest, the team exhibits considerable diversity; thence, intrinsic variances
in goals and interests have fostered intra-group conflict. The Thomas–Kilmann Conflict
Mode Instrument (1975) would reveal a predominance of avoiding over competing,
accommodating, collaborating, or compromising, signifying low scores along the two
basic dimensions of assertiveness and cooperativeness. The Blake–Mouton Managerial
Grid (1962) would reveal a high concern for people and a low concern for completing
task, signifying impoverished management.

14. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Suggestions for
Improvement—Now, Soon, & Next (1)Now*
Scope out the dysfunctions of the IntensCare Product Development Team: (i) absence of
trust; (ii) fear of conflict; (iii) lack of commitment; (iv) avoidance of accountability; and (v)
inattention to results (Lencioni, 2002).
Justify team formation: (i) the challenge is relatively complex, uncertain, and holds
potential for conflict; (ii) the challenge requires inter-group cooperation & coordination;
(iii) the challenge and its solution have important organizational consequences; (iv) there
are tight deadlines; and (v) widespread acceptance and commitment are vital to
successful delivery of IntensCare (Serrat, 2010).
Circumscribe and assuage any remaining resistance to change: (i) individual (e.g., blind,
political, ideological); (ii) group (e.g., turf protection and competition, closing ranks,
demands for new leadership); or (iii) organizational (e.g., insufficient sense of urgency,
this too shall pass, diversionary tactics, sabotage, claiming timing is wrong)?
* "Now" means immediately.

15. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Suggestions for
Improvement—Now, Soon, & Next (2)Now*
Clarify the fundamentals of team performance à la Drexler–Sibbet (1994): (i)
orientation—why am I here?; (ii) trust building—who are you?; (iii) goal clarification—
what are we doing?; (iv) commitment—how will we do it?; (v) implementation—who does
what, when, where?; (vi) high performance—WOW!; and (vii) renewal—why continue?
Align goals and synergize individual efforts.
Stress-test the new release date for IntensCare and retrofit all activities in keeping with
the new schedule, viz., August 2009.
Using all available resources, accelerate software design and development outsourced to
firms in India, with close attention to project metrics (e.g., time, cost, human resources,
scope, quality) by Mukerjee under daily supervision by O'Brien. If the critical path cannot
be held, pull out and relocate works to the U.S.
With technical inputs from Gerson and clear communications from O'Brien, resolve the
non-issue of modular design: commit to modularizing the next version of IntensCare.
* "Now" means immediately.

16. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Now, Soon, &
Next (3)Soon*
Encourage all members of the IntensCare Product Development Team to change their
perspective on problems: the new mental model of blame should be replaced by that of
curiosity and constant inquiry to uncover what is unseen.
Train all members of the IntensCare Product Development Team in other functional areas
so they might understand the complex issues others face and acquire new skills.
Adopt a form of distributed leadership (e.g., formal, pragmatic, strategic, incremental,
opportunistic, cultural) and adjust the business processes for reporting and evaluation
based on that.
Institute seamless cross-functional communications to represent accomplishments and
challenges company-wide and build team spirit.
Reward the members of the IntensCare Product Development Team for cross-functional
teamwork, not just for individual work toward departmental objectives.
* "Soon" means within 1–2 months.

17. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Suggestions for
Improvement—Now, Soon, & Next (4)Next*
Hire interdisciplinary personnel to diversify (seemingly highly technical) skill sets and work
styles and promote and enrich cross-functional approaches to product development.
Ongoingly build an open and trustful working environment that fosters cohesion (e.g.,
annual planning meting and leadership development retreats, weekly and quarterly
team meetings, ad hoc topical meetings) and make sure going forward that Medisys
Corp. projects and their teams have the external support they require, for example by
instituting communities of practice.
Boost learning from experience, for example by means of after-action reviews, exit
interviews, learning charters, learning histories, and the Most Significant Change
technique.
Hire an ombudsperson to help address work-related issues where differences cannot be
reconciled.
* "Next" refers to the ongoing institutionalization of improved team practices from August 2009.

18. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Suggestions for
Improvement—Now, Soon, & Next (5)Next*
Building on the foregoing actions, enshrine in MediSys Corp. the following characteristics of
successful teams: (i) a clear, elevating goal; (ii) a results-driven structure; (iii) competent
team members; (iv) unified commitment; (v) a collaborative climate; (vi) standards of
excellence; (vii) external support and recognition; and (viii) principled leadership (Larson
& LaFasto, 1989).
* "Next" refers to the ongoing institutionalization of improved team practices from August 2009.

19. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Risks, Costs, &
Other Concerns (1)
From an up-close examination of MediSys Corp. and its contextual conditions,
this presentation has tabled recommendations to resolve the problems
affecting IntensCare and safeguard MediSys Corp.'s future. Weisbord’s Six-
Box Model helped assess the functionality of business operations and
processes; what other possible diagnostic models were considered [e.g.,
Leavitt’s Diamond (structure–task–technology–people), the McKinsey 7-S
Framework (strategy–structure–systems–shared values–style–staff–skills)] do
not bring sufficient attention to bear on relationships and helpful mechanisms,
two crucial drivers impacted by cross-functional team design and parallel
development. The recommendations resonate with MediSys Corp.'s mission and
core competencies; encompass customers, personnel, and competitors; and
make for ease and speed of accomplishment as well as attractiveness; that
said, the general agreement the recommendations can deliver does not imply
easy change—it still takes energy to move a group, even when everyone is on
board.

20. MediSys Corp.: The IntensCare Project—Risks, Costs, &
Other Concerns (2)
• The primary risk relates to
software design and
development in India.
IntensCare and all available
resources including technical
backup should be deployed to
ensure timely delivery of the
software, with no hesitation to
pull out and relocate works to
the U.S. if the critical path
cannot be held.
Risks
• No costs are associated with the
recommendations, with one possible
exception related to the primary risk
and possibly associated with the
addition of resources to accelerate or
relocate software design and
development. The cost of acceleration
or relocation is difficult to quantify at
present but ought not be major given
Medisys Corp.'s expertise in related
ventures.
Costs
• With distributed
leadership, other
ways to leverage
Fogel's talents will
have to be found.
• No ethical or
diversity-related
concerns* are
foreseen.
Other
Concerns
* There is no age, gender, race, etc. segregation in MediSys Corp. and the recommendations are
diversity-neutral; likewise, there are no issues pertaining to personal integrity or ethical behavior.

21. Annex: Leadership—A Taxonomy of Distribution
• Based on designated roles and job descriptionsFormal
Distribution
• Based on necessity, often with ad hoc delegation of workloadPragmatic
Distribution
• Based on planned appointment of individuals tasked to contribute to the
development of leadership throughout the organization
Strategic
Distribution
• Based on devolution of greater responsibility as people demonstrate the capacity
to lead
Incremental
Distribution
• Based on capable people willingly extending their roles to organization-wide
leadership because they are predisposed to take initiatives
Opportunistic
Distribution
• Based on intuitive, collective, concurrent, collaborative, and compassionate
leadership
Cultural
Distribution
Source: Adapted from National College for School Leadership. (2004). Distributed leadership in action.
Nottingham.

22. Annex: References (1)
Blake, R., Mouton, J., & Bidwell, A. (1962). Managerial grid. Advanced Management - Office
Executive, 1(9), 12–15.
Donnellon, A., & Margolis, J. (2009). Medisys Corp: The IntensCare Product Development Team.
Harvard Business School. Issue: 4059.
Kotter, J., & Heskett, J. (1992). Corporate culture and performance. New York, NY: Free Press.
Larson, C., & LaFasto, F. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/What can go wrong. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
National College for School Leadership. (2004). Distributed leadership in action. Nottingham.

23. Annex: References (2)
Poole, M., & Hollingshead, A. (2005). Theories of small groups interdisciplinary perspectives.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Serrat, O. (2009). Working in teams. Manila: Asian Development Bank.
Sibbet, D. & Drexler, A. (1994). Team performance: Principles, practices. San Francisco, CA:
Grove Consultants International.
Thomas, K. (1975). Thomas–Kilmann conflict mode instrument. In M. Dunnett (ed.), The handbook
of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6):
384–399.
Weisbord, M. (1976). Organizational diagnosis: six places to look for trouble with or without
a theory. Group and Organization Studies, 1(4), 430–447.

24. Quick Response Codes
@Academia.edu
@LinkedIn
@ResearchGate
@Scholar
@SlideShare
@Twitter