Integrating Managerial Preferences into the Qualitative Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Team Members
- 516 Downloads
Managers can find it challenging to assess team members consistently and fairly. The ideal composition of qualities possessed by good team members depends on the organization, the team, and the manager. To enable managers to elucidate the qualities they require, we make use of an innovative methodology. This methodology is based on a multi-criteria decision aiding process, starting with the identification and definition of the dimensions that will be used to evaluate team members, then the inference of the manager’s preferences through a multi-step protocol combining multiple types of preference models, and finally extracting a set of rules that can support the manager in his/her tasks. We illustrate this methodology in the case of free/libre/open-source software development teams, where we were able to elicit the characteristics of a good, acceptable, or bad contributor based on multiple managers’ perspectives. We additionally provide an example on how to reproduce this experiment using the MCDA package for the R statistical environment.
This work was supported, in part, by Science Foundation Ireland grants 10/CE/I1855 and 13/RC/2094 to Lero—the Irish Software Research Centre (www.lero.ie).
We would like to thank the six FLOSS community managers who participated in this research and Pr. Mathieu Simonnet, who provided input on the modeling of psychological traits.
- Beecham, S. (2014). Motivating software engineers working in virtual teams across the globe. In Software project management in a changing world (pp. 247–273). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Bouyssou, D., Marchant, T., Pirlot, M., Tsoukiàs, A., & Vincke, P. (2006). Evaluation and decision models with multiple criteria: Stepping stones for the analyst (vol. 86, 1st ed.). Boston: International Series in Operations Research and Management Science.Google Scholar
- Capraro, M., & Riehle, D. (2017). Inner source definition, benefits, and challenges. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 49(4), 67.Google Scholar
- Carillo, K. D. A., & Marsan, J. (2016). “The dose makes the poison”—exploring the toxicity phenomenon in online communities. In International conference on information systems ICIS.Google Scholar
- David, P., Ghosh, R. A., Glott, R., González-Barahona, J. M. Federico Heinz, & Shapiro, J. (2007). Free/libre and open source software: Worldwide impact study. FLOSS World D31: Track 1 International Report.Google Scholar
- Deshpande, S., & Richardson, I. (2009) Management at the outsourcing destination-global software development in India. In Fourth IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering, 2009. ICGSE 2009 (pp. 217–225). Piscataway: IEEE.Google Scholar
- IEEE Spectrum. (2016). The 2016 top programming languages. Available from: http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/software/the-2016-top-programming-languages Google Scholar
- Ihaka, R., & Gentleman, R. (1996). R: A language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 5(3), 299–314.Google Scholar
- Introduction to R. (2018) . https://www.datacamp.com/courses/free-introduction-to-r. Accessed March 15 2018.
- Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Kimmelmann, N. (2013). Career in open source? Relevant competencies for successful open source developers. IT–Information Technology, 55(5), 204–212.Google Scholar
- Moreno-León, J., Robles, G., & Román-González, M. (2016). Examining the relationship between socialization and improved software development skills in the scratch code learning environment. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 22(12), 1533–1557.Google Scholar
- Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., & Most, R. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (vol. 1985). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
- Olteanu, A.-L., & Meyer, P. (2014). Inferring the parameters of a majority rule sorting model with vetoes on large datasets. In DA2PL 2014: From Multicriteria Decision Aid to Preference Learning (pp. 87–94).Google Scholar
- Reagle, J. (2012). “Free as in sexist?” Free culture and the gender gap. First Monday, 18(1), 2012.Google Scholar
- Simon, H. A. (1976). Administrative behavior; a study of decision-making processes in administrative organization-3. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
- Venables, B., Smith, D., Gentleman, R., & Ihaka, R. (1998). Notes on R: A programming environment for data analysis and graphics. Auckland: University of Auckland.Google Scholar
- Wageman, R. (2001). How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choices versus hands-on coaching. Organization Science, 12(5), 559–577.Google Scholar