<![CDATA[Background: Cross-functional teams are created because innovation problems do not fit neatly inside one department. Their advantage comes from combining different knowledge, but the same diversity also creates different vocabularies, priorities and definitions of a good solution. Aims: This article examines the mechanisms that connect the topic to organizational or policy performance and identifies the conditions that make those mechanisms stronger or weaker. Research Method: A structured narrative review integrates peer-reviewed research with authoritative policy, statistical, and professional sources, including Grant (1996); Edmondson (1999). Sources are coded by outcome, mechanism, boundary condition, and practical implication. Results and Conclusion: The synthesis indicates that outcomes are heterogeneous. Putting specialists in the same meeting does not integrate knowledge. Without clear goals, decision rights and psychological safety, cross-functional work can become a sequence of handoffs or a negotiation between departmental interests. Six recurring themes show that implementation quality, information, capability, and institutional context frequently matter as much as the headline policy or technology. Contribution: The article offers an evidence-based framework for cross-functional innovation teams that translates the literature into decision principles without claiming primary data that were not collected.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
