Teaching Communication Management in Software Projects Through Serious Educational Games

  • Rafaella Marchi Pellegrini
  • Carlos Eduardo Sanches da Silva
  • Adler Diniz de Souza
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 738)

Abstract

Companies that have been successful in implementing software project management, have focused efforts on people-oriented topics, for example, communication and teamwork. In order to effectively disseminate the attributes that the organization expects from a newly formed professional and what the university prepares, it is necessary to adopt ways of teaching that will encourage the involvement of these young people. It is in this context that active teaching methodologies, such as Game Based Learning, have emerged to include processes of experimentation and social interactivity. This work aims to identify and prioritize the practices inherent to Communication Management in Software Projects, that allow to perfect a game for teaching and learning. The steps of this research were: (1) identification of communication management practices and processes in the literature, (2) prioritization of practices and processes through the use of the AHP method, (3) conducting cycles of application of the object of study: an online board game and finally (4). The results allow to conclude that there was an improvement in the number of correct answers after the students played the game, especially in practices Communicate changes efficiently, Accurately collect requirements and Communicate frequently with interested parties. So, it is possible to prove statistically that the game increased students’ knowledge about these practices.

Keywords

Game based learning Communication management Software projects management 

References

  1. 1.
    T. Souza, C. Gomes, Bibliometric study of main maturity models in project management. Perspect. Manag. Knowl. 55, 5–26 (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Vargas Neto, L. Patah, Expanding the vision of indicators for projects: focus on virtual teams. Prod. Oper. Syst. Manag. São Paulo 9(2), 17–33 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    V. Brusamolin, The insertion of narrative discourse in the informational cycle and its impact on organizational learning. Ibero-Am. J. Inf. Sci. 8(2), (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Shah, R. Hasim, A. Shah, U. Khattak, Communication management guidelines for software organizations in Pakistan with clients from Afghanistan. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 160, 012100 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Morais, L. Taconi, W. Mura, R. Barros, Solution for Communication Problems in Software Project Management, Londrina (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S.S. Shabanah, et al., Designing computer games to teach algorithms, in Information Technology: New Generations (ITNG), 2010 Seventh International Conference on. IEEE, (2010), pp. 1119–1126 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Project Management Institute, A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide), 5th end edn. (Project Management Institute Inc., Newtown Square, PA, 2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Braglia, M. Frosolini, An integrated approach to implement project management information systems within the extended enterprise. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32, 18–29 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Ghobadi, L. Mathiassem, Perceived barriers to effective knowledge sharing in agile software teams. Inf. Syst. J. 26(2), 95–125 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    V. Turkulainen, I. Ruuska, T. Brady, K. Artto, Managing project-to-project and project-to-organization interfaces in programs: Organizational integration in a global operations expansion program. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 33, 816–827 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. García, A. Maldonado, A. Alvarado, D. Rivera, Human critical success factors for kaizen and its impacts in industrial performance. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 70(9–12), 2187–2198 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Brinkhoff, O. Ozer, G. Sargut, All you need is trust? An examination of inter-organizational supply chain projects. Prod. Oper. Manag. 24(2), 181–200 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Battaglia, L. Bianchi, M. Frey, E. Passetti, Sustainability reporting and corporate identity: action research evidence in an Italian retailing cooperative. Bus. Ethics 24(1), 52–72 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Shokri, S. Ahn, S. Lee, C. Haas, R. Haas, Current status of interface management in construction: drivers and effects of systematic interface management. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 142(2) (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Wlazlak, G. Johansson, R&D in Sweden and manufacturing in China: a study of communication challenges. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 25, 258–278 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    W. Sun, S. Mollaoglu, V. Miller, B. Manata, Communication behaviors to implement innovations: how do AEC teams communicate in IPD projects? Proj. Manag. J. 46(1), 84–96 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    S. Xu, H. Lou, The information-related time loss on construction sites: a case study on two sites. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 11, 128 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Dillon, H. Taylor, Employing grounded theory to uncover behavioral competencies of information technology project managers. Proj. Manag. J. 46(4), 90–104 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Verner, M. Babar, N. Cerpa, T. Hall, S. Beecham, Factors that motivate software engineering teams: a four country empirical study. J. Syst. Softw. 92, 115–127 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    G. Cserhati, L. Szabo, The relationship between success criteria and success factors in organizational event projects. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 32, 613–624 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. Vollmer, P. Wolf, Adaption of conflict management styles during the encounter of cultures. Int. J. Cross. Cult. Manag. 15, 151–166 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    E. Papatheocharous, A. Andreou, Empirical evidence and state of practice of software agile teams. J. Softw. Evol. Process. 26, 855–866 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    V. Janarthanan, Serious video games: games for education and health, in Information Technology: New Generations (ITNG), 2012 Ninth International Conference on. IEEE, (2012), pp. 875–878Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Chesire, Two P-values for a 2 Proportions Test? Am I Seeing Double? (2011), [Online]. http://blog.minitab.com/blog/quality-dataanalysisand-statistics/two-p-values-for-a-2-proportions-test-am-i-seeing-double. Acessed 2 June 2017

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rafaella Marchi Pellegrini
    • 1
  • Carlos Eduardo Sanches da Silva
    • 1
  • Adler Diniz de Souza
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Production Engineering and Management, Federal University of ItajubaItajubaBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceFederal University of ItajubaItajubaBrazil

Personalised recommendations