Advertisement

Perceptive Agile Measurement: New Instruments for Quantitative Studies in the Pursuit of the Social-Psychological Effect of Agile Practices

  • Chaehan So
  • Wolfgang Scholl
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 31)

Summary

Rising interest on social-psychological effects of agile practices necessitate the development of appropriate measurement instruments for future quantitative studies. This study has constructed such instruments for eight agile practices, namely iteration planning, iterative development, continuous integration and testing, stand-up meetings, customer access, customer acceptance tests, retrospectives and co-location.

The methodological approach followed the scale construction process elaborated in psychological research. We applied both qualitative methods for item generation, and quantitative methods for the analysis of reliability and factor structure (principal factor analysis) to evaluate critical psychometric dimensions.

Results in both qualitative and quantitative analyses indicated high psychometric quality of all newly constructed scales. The resulting measurement instruments are available in questionnaire form and ready to be used in future scientific research for quantitative analyses of social-psychological effects of agile practices.

Keywords

agile practices measurement instruments iteration planning iterative approach continuous integration test-driven development stand-up meetings co-location retrospectives customer acceptance tests customer access 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abrahamsson, P., Warsta, J., Siponen, M.T., Ronkainen, J.: New directions on agile methods: a comparative analysis. In: ICSE 2003: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 244–254. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Robinson, H., Sharp, H.: The social side of technical practices. In: Baumeister, H., Marchesi, M., Holcombe, W.M.L., Holcombe, M. (eds.) XP 2005. LNCS, vol. 3556, pp. 100–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Whitworth, E., Biddle, R.: The social nature of agile teams. In: Proceedings AGILE 2007, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 26–36. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thomas, J., Clark, S., Gioia, D.: Strategic sensemaking and organizational performance: Linkages among scanning, interpretation, action, and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal 36(2), 239–270 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nickerson, R.S.: Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology 2(2), 175–220 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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., Mellor, S., Schwaber, K., Sutherland, J., Thomas, D.: Manifesto for agile software development (Online) (August 2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giles, D.C.: Advanced Research Methods in Psychology, Routledge, East Sussex, UK, New York, USA (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    So, C.: Teamwork in agilen Softwareteams (Teamwork in agile software development teams). OBJEKTspektrum Schwerpunkt: Kosten und Nutzen von Vorgehensmodellen (OBJEKTspektrum Focus: Cost and Benefit of Software Development Processes) (1), 10 (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Williams, L., Layman, L., Krebs, W.: Extreme programming evaluation framework for object-oriented languages version 1.4. Technical Report TR-2004-18, North Carolina State University, Department of Computer Science, Raleigh, NC (June 2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Layman, L., Williams, L., Cunningham, L.: Motivations and measurements in an agile case study. Journal of Systems Architecture: the EUROMICRO Journal 52(11), 654–667 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lozano, L.M., García-Cueto, E., Muñiz, J.: Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 4(2), 73–79 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cortina, J.M.: What is coefficient alpha? an examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology 78(1), 98–104 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gorsuch, R.L.: Factor Analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1983)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S.: Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th edn. Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kline, P.: An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. Routledge, London (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chaehan So
    • 1
  • Wolfgang Scholl
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Organizational and Social Psychology Institute of PsychologyHumboldt UniversityBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations