Globalization is not a new phenomenon but its dramatic acceleration is. In fact, during the downturn, many companies have turned to international markets as a feasible approach to expand, increase profits and divide risks. However, at times instead of profits many companies face deep losses, cultural disconnect and even consumer hostility. So, why is it that successful large multi-national companies seem to get their global strategy wrong?

It seems the question most companies forget to ask themselves is — are we suitably equipped to meet the needs of the global consumer? Today, companies are challenged by consumers at their own game. As consumers are exposed to global trends and advances in technology, their demands and expectations from companies (local and international) are increasing — they want companies to do away with the “one size fits all” approach and build products that serve their needs.

While companies must be responsive to local needs, for successful global expansion and local penetration establishing a dedicated research team at every point of presence is not a viable option for companies.

MREB’s research shows that leading companies are establishing processes to leverage learnings and resources to benefit from research units spread across countries. In fact, by collaborating efforts, global research teams provide unparalleled research support and boost company competitiveness through cost management and knowledge sharing.

Learn more in MREB’s study Supporting Global Business Needs on how leading global companies optimize their Research teams globally to support their growing business needs by:

1. Proactively share research insights and best practices to avoid research duplication.
2. Strategically align researchers to geographic markets based on business need—not researcher location.
3. Equipping regional business units to handle certain aspects of research independently.

With the recession leading to businesses moving beyond the confines of the company headquarters, we see companies exploring new ways to retain and continue tapping into their pool of experts. A strategic decision gaining ground is to allow employees to work remotely. Increasingly, research teams too are moving from co-located (located in one office) teams to geographically dispersed teams.

Dispersed team structures can offer huge benefits — efficiency, cost savings, and the ability to choose team members with the best skills, regardless of their location. While this structure has its advantages, ask any manager (even the most experienced) and you’ll hear – “managing a dispersed research team presents huge challenges.” Think – distrust and lack of visibility, gap in knowledge-sharing and, the absence of a feeling of a “team”.

Despite tackling these challenges with tried-and-tested solutions which involve senior leadership support, increased managerial time and org-wide investments (e.g., technology and training), managers still struggle to get the manager-team member equation right in a dispersed set-up.

Why is it that companies fail in spite of their best efforts? MREB’s study on Managing Dispersed Research Teams shows that there are hidden “softer” pitfalls that are overlooked by most managers. The secret lies in knowing what signs to watch out for and working consistently to getting to the bottom of them.

Take a closer look at what effective managers of dispersed research teams do differently, and how they realign their management approach on three key areas:

1. Improve Employee Engagement
2. Provide Career Support
3. Foster Knowledge Sharing