Characteristics of High Performance Software Development Teams

  • Alessandra C. S. Dutra
  • Rafael Prikladnicki
  • Tayana Conte
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 241)


A high performance team is one that exceeds all reasonable expectations and produces extraordinary results. In this work, we are interested in understanding contexts and conditions in which software engineering teams are likely to achieve this status. To this end, we are carrying out a systematic literature review to identify what are the known factors that booster or hinder the performance of software engineering teams and an ad hoc literature review about training approaches in Software Engineering. This paper presents a discussion in relation to current training approaches to software development and their relation to high performance team formation. Based on what was found we reflect on the challenges of high performance teams for software development projects. This work constitutes a key preliminary result towards the design of more elaborate models and theories to predict and explain the performance of software engineering teams.


Software Engineering High performance teams Training Education Systematic literature review 


  1. 1.
    Beck, K., Andres, C.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt A., Jeffries, R., Kern, J., Marick, B., Martin, R.C., Mellor, S., Schwaber, K., Sutherland, J., Thomas, D.: Manifesto for agile software development (2001).
  3. 3.
    Boyett, J.H., Boyett, J.T.: The Guru Guide-the Best Ideas of the Top Management Thinkers. Wiley, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chiavenato, I.: People Management: the New Role of Human Resources in Organizations, 3a edn. Elsevier, Rio de Janeiro (2008). (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cleland, D.I., Ireland, R.L.: Project Manager’s Portable Handbook, pp. 1–257. McGraw-Hill, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Da Silva, F.Q.B., França, A.C.C., Suassuna, M., De Sousa Mariz, L.M.R., Rossiley, I., De Miranda, R.C.G., Gouveia, T.B., Monteiro, C.V.F., Lucena, E., Cardozo, E.S.F., Espindola, E.: Team building criteria in software projects: a mix-method replicated study. J. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55, 1316–1340 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dybå, T., Dingsøyr, T.: Empirical studies of agile software development: a systematic review. J. Sci. Dir. 50, 833–859 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Faraj, S., Sambamurthy, V.: Leadership of information systems development projects. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 53, 238–249 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fernández-Sanz, L., Misra, S.: Analysis of cultural and gender influences on teamwork performance for software requirements analysis in multinational environments. J. IET Softw. 6, 167–175 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hause, M.L.: Distributed team performance in software development. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hause, M., Petre, M., Woodroffe, M.: Performance in international computer science collaboration between distributed student teams. In: Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jiang, L., Carley, K.M., Eberlein, A.: Assessing team performance from a socio-technical congruence perspective. In: International Conference on Software and System Process, ICSSP 2012 – Proceedings (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Katzenbach, J.R., Smith, D.K.: The Wisdom of Teams. Summarized by permission of Harvard Business School Press Copyright by McKinsey and Company, Inc. 275p. (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kitchenham, B.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. EBSE technical report (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Klimoski, R., Zukin, L.N.: Selection and staffing for team effectiveness. In: Sundstrom, E. (ed.) Supporting Work Team Effectiveness, pp. 63–91. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    De Melo, C.O., Cruzes, D.S., Kon, F., Conradi, R.: Interpretative case studies on agile team productivity and management. J. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55, 412–427 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moscovici, F.: Teams Work Right: Multiplication of Human Talent, 8a edn. José Olympio, Rio de Janeiro (2003). (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hackman, R.J.: Why Teams Don’t Work Theory and Research on Small Groups. Plenum Press, New York (1998). Chapter 12, edited by R. Scott Tindale et al.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Raj, P.P., Baumotte A.C.T., Fonseca D.P.D., Silva, L.H.C.M.: Project human resource management. Editora FGV – Fundação Getúlio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro, 180p. (2006). (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Robinson, H., Sharp, H.: The characteristics of XP teams. In: Eckstein, J., Baumeister, H. (eds.) XP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3092, pp. 139–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roda, R.: Self-organizing agile teams: a grounded theory. Tese de Doutorado, Victoria University of Wellington (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Salleh, N., Mendes, E., Grundy, J.: Empirical studies of pair programming for CS/SE teaching in higher education: a systematic literature review. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 37(4), 509–525 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    SEI: CMMI® for Development, Version 1.2. CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008 ESC-TR-2006-008, p. 561. PA Software Engineering Institute-SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sommerville, I.: Software Engineering, 9a edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Staples, D.S., Cameron, A.F.: The effect of task design, team characteristics, organizational context and team processes on the performance and attitudes of virtual team members. In: Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
    Magni, M., Maruping, L.M., Hoegl, M., Proserpio, L.: Managing the unexpected across space: improvisation, dispersion, and performance in NPD teams. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 30, 1009–1026 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Anastasiou, L.G.C., Alves, L.P:. Teaching strategies. In: Proceedings of Education at the University. Strategies Work in the Classroom (3rd edn.), pp. 67–100. Univille, Joinville (2004). (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Prikladnicki, R., Albuquerque, A., Wangenheim, C., Cabral, R.: Teaching software engineering: challenges, teaching strategies and lessons learned in FEES - education forum in software engineering (2009). (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gresse, V.W.C., Shull, F.: To game or not to game? IEEE Softw. 26(2), 92–94 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Halma, A.: – Welcome to, the new way to learn programming (2009).
  32. 32.
    Monsalve, E., Werneck, V., Leite, J.: Teaching software engineering with SimulES-W. In: Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T) (2011)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Conn, R.: Developing software engineers at the C-130 J software factory. IEEE Softw., Los Alamitos 19(5), 25–29 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Beckman, K., Coulter, N., Khajenouri, S., Mead, N.: Collaborations: closing the industry–academia gap. IEEE Softw. 14(6), 49–57 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    ACM/IEEE: Software Engineering Curriculum. Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Software Engineering (2004)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    ACM/IEEE: Computer Science Curriculum, Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Software Engineering (2008)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gibbs, W.: Software’s chronic crisis. Sci. Am. 271(3), 86–95 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alessandra C. S. Dutra
    • 1
  • Rafael Prikladnicki
    • 1
  • Tayana Conte
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculdade de InformáticaPontifícia Universidade Católica (PUCRS)Porto AlegreBrazil
  2. 2.Department of ComputingUniversidade Federal do Amazonas (UFAM)ManausBrazil

Personalised recommendations