Five Agile Factors: Helping Self-management to Self-reflect
In this paper a tool is proposed to foster reflection in agile software development teams. Based upon the qualitative model of Moe et al. , we contribute a quantitative questionnaire organized along five dimensions of agile teamwork analogous to the “Five Factor Model” in contemporary psychology. To test this survey tool and its alignment with existing studies, we have executed an empirical validation of the tool with 79 individuals and 8 international Scrum teams. We find that inter-team agreement on the factors is high and that the survey tool is found very useful. The instrument offers a comparable measure to agile teams and gives recommendations for each of the factors helping to understand individual as well as organizational level barriers.
Keywordsself-management software development agile teams scrum organizational management and coordination process implementation and change
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Boehm, B., Turner, R.: Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (2003)Google Scholar
- 5.Emery, F., Thorsrud, E.: Democracy at Work - The Report of the Norwegian Industrial Democracy Program. Springer, Heidelberg (1976)Google Scholar
- 8.Hewitt, B., Walz, D.: Using shared leadership to foster knowledge sharing in information systems development projects. In: HICSS 8, p. 256a (2005)Google Scholar
- 11.Moe, N., Dingsøyr, T., Røyrvik, E.: Putting agile teamwork to the test – an preliminary instrument for empirically assessing and improving agile software development. In: Abrahamsson, P., Marchesi, M., Maurer, F. (eds.) Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming. LNBIP, vol. 31, pp. 114–123. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Moe, N.B., Dingsøyr, T.: Scrum and Team Effectiveness: Theory and Practice. In: Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming pp. 11–20 (2008)Google Scholar
- 14.Morgan, G.: Images of Organization. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (2007)Google Scholar
- 15.Paulhus, D.L.: Socially desirable responding: the evolution of a construct. In: The Role of Constructs in Psychological and Educational Measurement, pp. 46–69. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2002)Google Scholar
- 18.Shea, G., Guzzo, R.: Group effectiveness: What really matters? Sloan Management Review 28, 25–31 (1987)Google Scholar
- 19.Takeuchi, H., Nonaka, I.: The new new product development game. Harvard Business Review (1986)Google Scholar
- 20.Tata, J., Prasad, S.: Team Self-Management, Organizational Structure and Judgments of Team Effectiveness. Journal of Managerial Issues 16(2), 248+ (2004)Google Scholar
- 22.Thompson, L.: Making the Team. ch. 2, ch. 4. Prentice-Hall, New York (2002)Google Scholar
- 23.Walton, R.E., Hackman, J.R.: Designing Effective Work Groups. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco (1986)Google Scholar