Advertisement

Abstract

This research explored aspects of agile teamwork initiatives associated with positive socio-psychological phenomena, with a focus on phenomena outside the scope of traditional management, organizational, and software engineering research. Agile teams were viewed as complex adaptive socio-technical systems. Qualitative grounded theory was used to explore the socio-psychological characteristics of agile teams under the umbrella research question: What is the experience of being in an agile software development team? Results included a deeper understanding of the link between agile practices and positive team outcomes such as motivation and cohesion.

Keywords

Team Member Agile Method Team Climate Agile Practice Agile Software Development 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cockburn, A., Highsmith, J.: Agile software development: The people factor. IEEE Computer 34 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    DeMarco, T., Lister, T.: Peopleware: Productive projects and teams. Dorset House Publishing Co., Inc., New York (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beck, K., Andres, C.: Extreme programming explained: Embrace change, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading, MA, USA (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    von Bertalanffy, L.: An outline of general system theory. Britisch Journal of Philosophie of Science (1950)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arrow, H., McGrath, J.E., Berdahl, J.L.: Small groups as complex systems: Formation, coordination, development and adaptation. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ilgen, D.R., Hollenbeck, J.R., Johnson, M., Jundt, D.: Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology 56, 517–543 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Charmaz, K.: Grounded theory. In: Smith, J.A., Harré, R., Van Langenhove, L. (eds.) Rethinking methods in psychology, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine, Chicago, IL, USA (1967)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1990)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Warr, A., O’Neill, E.: Understanding design as a social creative process. In: Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Creativity and Cognition(C&C ’05), London, UK (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eby, L., Dobbins, G.: Collectivistic orientation in teams: An individual and group-level analysis. Journal of Organizational Behaviour 18 (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bandura, A.: Self-regulation of motivation and action through anticipatory and self-reactive mechanisms. In: Dienstbier, R. (ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 1990, vol. 38, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NB, USA (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bandura, A.: The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 4 (1986)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Baron, R.A., Byrne, D.: Social Psychology, 9th edn. Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, MA, USA (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bandura, A., Cioffi, D., Taylor, C.B., Brouillard, M.E.: Perceived self-efficacy in coping with cognitive stressors and opioid activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55 (1988)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karau, S.J., Williams, K.: Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65 (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth Whitworth
    • 1
  • Robert Biddle
    • 1
  1. 1.Human-Oriented Technology Laboratory, Carleton University, OttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations