Our orders of ignorance about
software teams
Fabio Silva
HASE Research Group – <www.haseresearch.com>
Influenciates
Centre of Informatics – UFPE
Recife – PE – Brazil
E
Seminar presented at the Computer Science Department at
Brigham Young University
Provo, Utah, USA.
O
P
January, 19th, 11:00 – 11:50.
T
Is influenciated
I
software
engineering teams, Phillip G. Armour’s
In this seminar, I will talk about our research on
using
orders of ignorance:
(0OI) what we thing we (probably) know;
(1OI) what we
know that we don’t know;
and how we are trying to transform what we don’t
know that we don’t know
(2OI) into research
questions (1OI).
towards an explanatory model of
software team effectiveness
Fabio Silva
HASE Research Group – <www.haseresearch.com>
Influenciates
Centre of Informatics – UFPE
Recife – PE – Brazil
E
Seminar presented at the Computer Science Department at
Brigham Young University
Provo, Utah, USA.
O
P
January, 19th, 11:00 – 11:50.
T
Is influenciated
I
I received my
PhD in Computer Science
of Computer Science (LFCS),
from the Laboratory for Foundations
University of Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1992. I am an
Associate Professor of Software Engineering
the
Center of Informatics,
of the Federal
at
University of Pernambuco, Brazil, where I
have been working since 1993. I was a co-founder of the Center of Advanced Studies and Systems at Recife
C.E.S.A.R.
(
) in 1996, and of the
Porto Digital Science Park
, in Recife,
Brazil, in 2001, of which I was the first President between 2001 and 2003. In the last 19 years, I have been involved in
teaching entrepreneurship, enterprise creation, innovation management, as well as project
management and
software engineering, supervised 42 master and
2 doctoral
students, and
published over 100 articles in journals and conference proceedings. Currently, I have
16 master 6 doctoral
and
students under my
software engineering. Since July 2011, I have been working as a
Toronto, with Professor Steve
Easterbrook.
supervision working on human aspects in
visiting researcher at University of
DEPARTMENT OF
COMPUTER SCIENCE
I am currently on my sabbatical at
theUNIVERSITY
Computer Science
Department,
OF TORONTO,
Tor onto, Canada, M 5S 3G
University of Toronto, ON, working
with Prof. Steve Easterbrook.
July 16, 20
To whom it may concern,
I was born in Taquaritinga, SP
(since 1965)
Graduated in Computer Science, 1987
at UNICAMP, Campinas, SP
PhD at
University of Edinburgh, Scotland
(1988 – 1992)
USA – 7 hours
Europe – 7 hours
In 1993, I moved to
Recife, PE
8o04'03” S – 34o55'00” W
Average temp.: 25oC/77F
Altitude: 4m
Recife, Brazil
8o04'03” S – 34o55'00” W
Average temp.: 25oC/77F
Altitude: 4m
In 1993, I joined the
Centre of Informatics – UFPE
+80 faculty members
3 undergraduate courses
+1,000 undergraduate students
+300 PhD students
+700 master students
2011 Best Research Institution in Brazil
el A da CAPES no
trado em Informática
Recife, Brazil
8o04'03” S – 34o55'00” W
Average temp.: 25oC/77F
Altitude: 4m
Centre of Informatics – UFPE
(since 1974)
+80 faculty
3 undergraduate courses
+1,000 undergraduate students
+300 PhD students
+700 master students
2011 Best Research Institution in Brazil
In 1996, we created the
Centre of Advanced Studies and
Systems of Recife – C.E.S.A.R.
Spin-off from CIn
500 software engineers
US$ 25 million revenue/year
2004 and 2010 Best Research
Institution in Brazil
Recife, Brazil
8o04'03” S – 34o55'00” W
Average temp.: 25oC/77F
Altitude: 4m
In 2000, I participated in the design
and development of
Porto Digital Science Park
+160 software companies
Largest Science Park in Brazil
oe
1988
1996
1992
Recife, Brazil
Nível A da
CAPES no
8 04'03” S – 34 55'00” W
temp.: 25 C/77F
MestradoAverage
em
Informática
Altitude: 4m
o
o
o
A great industrial environment
for empirical software engineering
research “in the wild”!
With a nice view!
HASE – Human Aspects in Software Engineering
Research to improve software practice (Since 2006)
Ongoing Projects
• Towards a theory of self-managing
software team effectiveness
• Conceptual and practical aspects of
replication of empirical software
engineering research
• The role of evidence based research in
software engineering
Results
• 20 Master dissertations
• 25 published articles
• 3 best paper awards (ESEM’2011, EASE’2011,
SBES’2009)
Influenciates
Participants
• 3 professors/researchers
• 6 doctoral students
• 16 master students
E
O
Active Collaborations
• The Open University – England
• University of Maryland Baltimore County – USA
• University of Toronto – Canada
• University of Western Ontario – Canada
P
T
Is influenciated
I
HASE – Human Aspects in Software Engineering
Research to improve software practice (Since 2006)
Research strategy
Incremental knowledge and theory building
through the use of multi-method approach with
a focus on qualitative research.
Scientific Inquiry
Prior Knowledge
E
Observe
(what is wrong wit h
t he current t heory?)
O
Theorize
Experiment
(ref ine/ creat e a
bet t er t heory)
(manipulat e t he variables)
P
T
Design
(Design empirical t est s
of t he t heory)
Tutorial F2
Influenciates
(I nit ial Hypot hesis)
Case Studies for Software Engineers
© 2006 Easterbrook, Sim, Perry, Aranda
43
Is influenciated
I
My Road Map for Today
Organiza onal
Context
•
•
•
Process Criteria of
Effec veness
Reward System
Educa onal System
Informa on System
•
•
•
Group Design
•
•
•
Task structure
Composi on
Norms
Group Effec veness
Level of effort
applied to the tasks
Amount of
knowledge applied
to the tasks
Use of appropriated
performance
strategies
•
•
•
Client sa sfac on
Members
sa sfac on
Group con nuity
Group Synergy
•
•
•
•
Communica on
Coordina on
Coopera on
Conflict
Hackman, 1987.
“The Design of Work Teams”
I will talk about how
from an initial theory …
… and other theories
and models …
Organiza onal
Context
… through several
iterations of empirical
studies …
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Towards understanding the underlying structure of
mo va onal factors for so ware engineers to
guide the defini on of mo va onal programs
Process Criteria
Goal clarity,
challenge, priori es
and stability
Task structure
So ware Process &
Tools
Technological
Con ngencies
•
•
•
Team Design
Influencia
Fabio Q. B. da Silva, A. César C. França
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
P
E
É influenciado
Communica on
Coordina on
Coopera on
Conflict
Cohesion
Trust
Task Design
•
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Power
Reward System
Educa onal System
Informa on System
Resources
Synergy
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
•
•
•
•
•
Composi on
Localiza on
Beliefs
Role assignment
Team process
Level of effort
applied to the tasks
Amount of talent
applied to the tasks
Adap ve use of
development
process and tools
Team Effec veness
•
•
•
•
Performance
Members A tudes
Withdrawal
Behaviors
Team Con nuity
Individual
Characteris cs
•
•
•
•
Talent
Personality
Behavior
Values
… we produced (a proposal of) an
explanatory model of software teams.
an initial model of team effectiveness
we needed to start somewhere…
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
Process Criteria of
Effectiveness
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
•
•
•
Group Design
•
•
•
Task structure
Composition
Norms
Level of effort
applied to the tasks
Amount of
knowledge applied
to the tasks
Use of appropriated
performance
strategies
Group Effectiveness
•
•
•
Client satisfaction
Members
satisfaction
Group continuity
Group Synergy
•
•
•
•
Communication
Coordination
Cooperation
Conflict
Hackman, 1987.
“The Design of Work Teams”
an initial set of research questions …
What motivates software
engineers to apply effort to
software development tasks?
Process Criteria of
Effectiveness
•
What affects that amount of
knowledge software engineers to
apply to software development
tasks?
What are performance strategies
in software development and
what does it mean for a strategy
to be appropriated?
•
•
Level of effort
applied to the tasks
Amount of
knowledge applied
to the tasks
Use of appropriated
performance
strategies
Group Effectiveness
•
•
•
Client satisfaction
Members
satisfaction
Group continuity
1.
Motivation in software
engineering
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
2.
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
composition
3.
Group Design
•
•
•
Software Team building and
Antecedents of effectiveness in
self-managing teams
Task structure
Composition
Norms
Group Synergy
•
•
•
•
Communication
Coordination
Cooperation
Conflict
4.
The role of individual
characteristics on team effectiveness
(0OI) what we thing we
(probably) know;
Motivation in software engineering
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Group Design
•
•
•
Task structure
• Autonomy
• Task identity
• Significance
• Feedback
• Task variety
Composition
Norms
Towards understanding the underlying structure of
mo va onal factors for so ware engineers to
guide the defini on of mo va onal programs
Fabio Q. B. da Silva, A. César C. França
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
Influencia
1.
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
É influenciado
What motivates software engineers to perform
tasks in software development?
I
1.
Motivation in software engineering
Motivator
Starting Point
A set of motivators from the
systematic literature review
performed by Beecham et al.
(2008)
m1
m2
m3
m4
m5
m6
m7
m8
m9
m10
m11
m12
m13
m14
m15
m16
m17
m18
m19
m20
Team working
Exercise SE development practices
Participation in the entire lifecycle of the project
Change
Challenging work
Problem solving
Experiment (trying something new)
Exercise creativity
Making a contribution/task significance
Participation in decision making
Work/Life balance
Technical development
Making good use of skills
Feedback
Rewards and financial incentives
Career path
Empowerment
Identification with task
Autonomy
Working in successful company
1.
Motivation in software engineering
Motivator
Starting Point
A set of motivators from the
systematic literature review
performed by Beecham et al.
(2008)
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Group Design
•
•
•
Task structure
• Autonomy
• Task identity
• Significance
• Feedback
• Task variety
Composition
Norms
Match the
model
m1
m2
m3
m4
m5
m6
m7
m8
m9
m10
m11
m12
m13
m14
m15
m16
m17
m18
m19
m20
Team working
Exercise SE development practices
Participation in the entire lifecycle of the project
Change
Challenging work
Problem solving
Experiment (trying something new)
Exercise creativity
Making a contribution/task significance
Participation in decision making
Work/Life balance
Technical development
Making good use of skills
Feedback
Rewards and financial incentives
Career path
Empowerment
Identification with task
Autonomy
Working in successful company
1.
Motivation in software engineering
Empirical Study
We performed a survey to
identify the influence of the 20
motivators on software
engineers in industry.
An operational definition of
motivational force using
Expectancy Theory.
Data collect from 176 software
engineers from companies in
Recife, in 2008.
Fm = Valence X Instrumentality X Expectancy
1.
Motivation in software engineering
Motivators
Empirical Study
We performed a survey to
identify the influence of the 20
motivators on software
engineers in industry.
An operational definition of
motivational force using
Expectancy Theory.
Data collect from 176 software
engineers from companies in
Recife, in 2008.
Motivators were ordered
according to the actual
motivational force.
m1
m11
m6
m9
m20
m8
m5
m17
m12
m2
m7
m19
m13
m10
m14
m3
m18
m16
m4
m15
Team working
Work/Life balance
Problem solving
Making a contribution/task significance
Working in successful company
Exercise creativity
Challenging work
Empowerment
Technical development
Exercise SE development practices
Experiment (trying something new)
Autonomy
Making good use of skills
Participation in decision making
Feedback
Participation in the entire life cycle of a project
Identification with task
Career path
Change
Rewards and financial incentives
Force
0.604
0.599
0.488
0.432
0.390
0.363
0.358
0.354
0.339
0.336
0.335
0.316
0.305
0.285
0.278
0.264
0.232
0.140
0.139
0.104
1.
Motivation in software engineering
Empirical Study
We performed a survey to
identify the influence of the 20
motivators on software
engineers in industry.
An operational definition of
motivational force using
Expectancy Theory.
Data collect from 176 software
engineers from companies in
Recife, in 2008.
Motivators were ordered
according to the actual
motivational force.
Factor analysis was used to group
the motivators
Factors
f1
f2
Use of competence
in Software
Engineering
Power
f3
Work/life balance
f4
Career
f5
Actualization
Motivators
m14
m3
Feedback
Participation in the entire life cycle of a project
m13
m6
Making good use of skills
Problem solving
m8
m2
m1
m10
m19
m17
Exercise creativity
Exercise SE development practices
Team working
Participation in decision making
Autonomy
Empowerment
m9
Making a contribution/task significance
m18
m20
m11
m12
m16
m15
Identification with task
Working in successful company
Work/Life balance
Technical development
Career path
Rewards and financial incentives
m7
Experiment (trying something new)
m4
m5
Change
Challenging work
1.
Motivation in software engineering
Knowledge gained
Most antecedents in Hackman’s Models are also
relevant for software engineers
The software engineering specific factors are not
directly represent in Hackman’s Model
Motivational force is different for specific
motivators for each individual and seems to be
moderated by individual characteristics
2.
Software Team building and composition
An Empirical Study on the Use of Team Building
Criteria for So ware Projects
•
•
•
Structure of the
task
Composition
Norms
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Group Design
Fabio Q. B. da Silva, A. César C. França, Ta ana B. Gouveia,
Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Elisa S. F. Cardozo, Marcos Suassuna
S
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
O
P
E
É influenciado
What criteria are used in industrial practice to select
members of a software team and what are the
relationships between these criteria and project success?
I
2.
Software Team building and composition
Empirical Study
A multi-method approach was
used in two phases.
Group Design
•
•
•
Structure of the
task
Composition
Norms
Phase I : Qualitative research
based on interviews and coding of
collected data to build a set of
team building criteria.
Phase II: Quantitative research
based on a survey and statistical
analysis to correlate the use of
the criteria and project success.
2.
Software Team building and composition
Phase I : Qualitative research
Interviews with 18 software
development professionals
from 6 software companies
from Recife
Group Design
•
•
•
Structure of the
task
Composition
Norms
2.
Software Team building and composition
Phase I I: Quantitative research
A survey of 48 projects from 24
companies from 9 different
States in Brazil.
Correlations?
Team Building Criteria
Group Design
•
•
•
Structure of the
task
Composition
Norms
C1 – Technical profile
C2 – Individual costs
C3 – Productivity
C4 – Availability
C5 – Personality
C6 – Behavior
C7 – Project Importance
C8 – Customer Importance
Project Success
G1 – Costs
G2 – I mplementation date
G3 – Functionality/scope
X
G4 – Team Satisfaction
G5 – User satisfaction
G6–
Project
satisfaction
manager
2.
Software Team building and composition
Phase I I: Quantitative research
A survey of 48 projects from 24
companies from 9 different
States in Brazil.
Correlations
2.
Software Team building and composition
Knowledge gained
Personality and behavior correlates strongly with
project success and are not part of Hackman’s
Model
External criteria related to project importance and
costumer importance for the organization have
strong correlation with user satisfaction
Antecedents of effectiveness in self-managing teams
An Empirical Study on the Rela onship between
the Use of Agile Prac ces and the Success of
Scrum Projects
A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Leila Mariz
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
A Qualita ve Study of the Determinants of Selfmanaging Team Effec veness in a Scrum Team
Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Isabella R. M. dos
Santos, Felipe Farias, Elisa S. F. Cardozo, André R. G. do A.
S
Leitão, Dacio N. M. Neto, Miguel J. A. Pernambuco Filho
O
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
3.
P
E
É influenciado
I
Antecedents of effectiveness in self-managing teams
Is the adoption of the agile
practices related to the success of
software projects managed using
Scrum?
An Empirical Study on the Rela onship between
the Use of Agile Prac ces and the Success of
Scrum Projects
A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Leila Mariz
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
3.
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
Survey - 2009
9 small companies in Recife
11 software projects
62 participants
3.
Antecedents of effectiveness in self-managing teams
T. Chow, e D. Cao, "A Survey Study of Critical Success Factors
in Agile Software Projects.", The Journal of Systems and
Software, n. 81, 2007, pp. 961–971
An Empirical Study on the Rela onship between
the Use of Agile Prac ces and the Success of
Scrum Projects
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
O
P
E
É influenciado
Critical Success
Factors
Delivery strategy
Agile software
engineering
techniques
Team capability
A01
A02
A03
A04
A05
A06
A07
A08
A12
A13
A14
A15
A16
A17
Team environment
Customer
involvement
I
Agile Attibutes
A09
A10
A11
Project
management
process
Influencia
A. César C. França; Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Leila Mariz
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
A18
A19
A20
A21
A22
Regular delivery of software
Delivering most important features first
Well-defined coding Standards up front
Pursuing simple design
Rigorous refactoring activities
Right amount of documentation
Correct integration testing
Team members with high competence and
expertise
Team members with great motivation
Managers knowledgeable in agile
Managers who have adaptative management
style
Appropriate technical training to team
Following agile-oriented requirement
management process
Following agile-oriented project management
process
Following agile-oriented configuration
management process
Good progress tracking mechanism
Strong communication focus with daily face-toface meetings
Honoring regular working Schedule
Collocation of the whole team
Coherent, self-organizing team-work
Projects with small team
Projects with no multiple independent teams
A23 Good customer relationship
A24 Strong customer commitment and presence
A25 Customer having full authority
Critical Success
Factors
Delivery strategy
Correlated Agile Attibutes
A01 Regular delivery of software
A02 Delivering most important features first
Agile software
engineering
techniques
Team capability
Project
management
process
A07 Correct integration testing
A08 Team members with high competence and
expertise
A13 Following agile-oriented requirement
management process
A14 Following agile-oriented project management
process
Team environment
A20 Coherent, self-organizing team-work
Customer
involvement
A23 Good customer relationship
Antecedents of effectiveness in self-managing teams
A Qualita ve Study of the Determinants of Selfmanaging Team Effec veness in a Scrum Team
Are the determinants of
self-managing team
effectiveness present in a
Scrum team?
Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Isabella R. M. dos
Santos, Felipe Farias, Elisa S. F. Cardozo, André R. G. do A.
S
Leitão, Dacio N. M. Neto, Miguel J. A. Pernambuco Filho
O
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
3.
P
E
É influenciado
I
Antecedents of effectiveness in self-managing teams
Qualitative Case Study
Single case holistic design
Mature Scrum Team
• Eight team members
• Four software engineering
Data Collection
Semi-structured interviews
Observations of team work
A Qualita ve Study of the Determinants of Selfmanaging Team Effec veness in a Scrum Team
Are the determinants of
self-managing team
effectiveness present in a
Scrum team?
Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Isabella R. M. dos
Santos, Felipe Farias, Elisa S. F. Cardozo, André R. G. do A.
S
Leitão, Dacio N. M. Neto, Miguel J. A. Pernambuco Filho
O
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
3.
P
E
É influenciado
I
3.
Antecedents of effectiveness in self-managing teams
Employee Involvement
Context
•
•
•
•
•
Autonomy
Task identity
Significance
Feedback
Task variety
Power
Information
Training
Rewards
Resources
Group Design
•
•
•
Composition
• Composition
• Size
• Stability
Beliefs
• Norms
• Efficacy
Process
• Coordination
• Sharing of
Expertise
• Implementation
of Innovation
We extended the model of
effectiveness with more
antecedents, due to the lack of
explanatory power of the original
model in the context of agile
teams.
Cohen SG (1993) The Design of Effective Selfmanaging Teams. Advances in Interdisciplinary
Studies of Work Teams. Vol. 1 Theories of Selfmanaging Working Teams 1:
A Qualita ve Study of the Determinants of Selfmanaging Team Effec veness in a Scrum Team
Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Isabella R. M. dos
Santos, Felipe Farias, Elisa S. F. Cardozo, André R. G. do A.
S
Leitão, Dacio N. M. Neto, Miguel J. A. Pernambuco Filho
O
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Task structure
•
•
•
•
•
P
E
É influenciado
I
Antecedents of effectiveness in self-managing teams
Employee Involvement
Context
Group Task Design
•
•
•
•
•
Autonomy ✔
Task identity ✔
Significance ✔
Feedback
Task variety ✔
•
•
•
•
•
Power ✔
Information ✔
Training ✔
Rewards ✔
Resources ✔
Group Characteristics
•
•
•
Composition
• Composition ✔
• Size ✔
• Stability ✔
Beliefs
• Norms
• Efficacy
Process
• Coordination ✔
• Sharing of
Expertise ✔
• Implementation
of Innovation
Our preliminary findings seemed to
indicate that…
… adoption of a development or
management method has a
complex interplay with the
determinants of team
effectiveness.
… feedback loops seem to exist
between the adoption of the
methodology and the existence
of determinants.
A Qualita ve Study of the Determinants of Selfmanaging Team Effec veness in a Scrum Team
Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Isabella R. M. dos
Santos, Felipe Farias, Elisa S. F. Cardozo, André R. G. do A.
S
Leitão, Dacio N. M. Neto, Miguel J. A. Pernambuco Filho
O
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
3.
P
E
É influenciado
I
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
4.
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
4.
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
An Experimental Research on the Rela onships
between Preferences for Technical Ac vi es and
Behavioural Profile in So ware Development
Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Ana Cris na F. César
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
4.
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
Influencia
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
I
É influenciado
Abili es and Behavioural Profiles of SQA
Professionals Related to Process Maturity Levels
An Experimental Research on the Rela onships
between Preferences for Technical Ac vi es and
Behavioural Profile in So ware Development
O
P
E
É influenciado
Aliny Figueirêdo Meira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
Influencia
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Ana Cris na F. César
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
I
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
4.
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
Influencia
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
I
É influenciado
Personality in So ware Engineering: preliminary
findings from a systema c literature review
An Experimental Research on the Rela onships
between Preferences for Technical Ac vi es and
Behavioural Profile in So ware Development
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
I
É influenciado
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Abili es and Behavioural Profiles of SQA
Professionals Related to Process Maturity Levels
P
E
É influenciado
Influencia
Aliny Figueirêdo Meira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Shirley S. J. O. Cruz, Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Pedro C. F. Santos,
Isabella R. M. Santos, Fabio Q. B. da Silva
S
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
O
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
Influencia
Influencia
Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Ana Cris na F. César
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
I
4.
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Survey - 2007
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
Influencia
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
I
É influenciado
An Experimental Research on the Rela onships
between Preferences for Technical Ac vi es and
Behavioural Profile in So ware Development
Influencia
Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Ana Cris na F. César
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
I
É influenciado
Abili es and Behavioural Profiles of SQA
Professionals Related to Process Maturity Levels
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Aliny Figueirêdo Meira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
Team role behavior (Belbin’s Theory)
influences the use of software development
process.
4.
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Survey - 2007
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
Influencia
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
Team role behavior (Belbin’s Theory)
influences the use of software development
process.
I
É influenciado
Survey - 2008
An Experimental Research on the Rela onships
between Preferences for Technical Ac vi es and
Behavioural Profile in So ware Development
Influencia
Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Ana Cris na F. César
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
I
É influenciado
Abili es and Behavioural Profiles of SQA
Professionals Related to Process Maturity Levels
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Aliny Figueirêdo Meira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
Team role behavior (Belbin’s Theory)
correlates with preference for software
development tasks.
4.
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Survey - 2007
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
Influencia
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
Team role behavior (Belbin’s Theory)
influences the use of software development
process.
I
É influenciado
Survey - 2008
An Experimental Research on the Rela onships
between Preferences for Technical Ac vi es and
Behavioural Profile in So ware Development
Influencia
Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Ana Cris na F. César
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
Team role behavior (Belbin’s Theory)
correlates with preference for software
development tasks.
I
É influenciado
Mix-method - 2008
Abili es and Behavioural Profiles of SQA
Professionals Related to Process Maturity Levels
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Aliny Figueirêdo Meira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
The required abilities and team role behavior
of the SQA professional changes with the
maturity level of the organization.
The role of individual characteristics on team effectiveness
Personality in So ware Engineering: preliminary
findings from a systema c literature review
Human Factors that Affect So ware Process Use
Paula Gonçalves Ferreira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Shirley S. J. O. Cruz, Cleviton V. F. Monteiro, Pedro C. F. Santos,
Isabella R. M. Santos, Fabio Q. B. da Silva
S
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
Influencia
O
P
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
E
I
É influenciado
P
E
É influenciado
Systematic Review – 2010
An Experimental Research on the Rela onships
between Preferences for Technical Ac vi es and
Behavioural Profile in So ware Development
Influencia
Fabio Q. B. da Silva; Ana Cris na F. César
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
P
E
I
É influenciado
Abili es and Behavioural Profiles of SQA
Professionals Related to Process Maturity Levels
Center of Informa cs
Federal University of Pernambuco
Recife, Brazil
Influencia
Aliny Figueirêdo Meira; Fabio Q. B. da Silva
<fabio@cin.ufpe.br>
S
O
P
E
É influenciado
I
Influencia
4.
• Personality relates to :
• project success,
• code quality, individual satisfaction, and team cohesion
• Diversity is important in the early stages of the software
project.
• Teams with predominance of Introversion experience
lower effectiveness due to communication problems.
• Heterogeneous teams are “optimum” when solving
unstructured tasks while homogeneous teams are
“optimum” when solving structured tasks.
I
(1OI) what we
don’t know
know that we
From the initial model …
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
Process Criteria of
Effectiveness
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
•
•
•
Group Design
•
•
Task structure
Composition
Norms
Group Synergy
•
•
•
•
Communication
Coordination
Cooperation
Conflict
Level of effort
applied to the tasks
Amount of
knowledge applied
to the tasks
Use of appropriated
performance
strategies
Group Effectiveness
•
•
•
Client satisfaction
Members
satisfaction
Group continuity
after several
iterations …
Scientific Inquiry
Prior Knowledge
(I nit ial Hypot hesis)
Observe
Scientific
Inquiry
(what is wrong wit h
t he current t heory?)
Prior Knowledge
Experiment
(I nit ial Hypot hesis)
Design
(Design empirical t est s
of t he t heory)
Tutorial F2
Theorize
(ref ine/ creat e a
bet t er t heory)
(manipulat e t he variables)
Case Studies for Software Engineers
Experiment
Observe
Scientific
Inquiry
(what is wrong
wit h
t he current t heory?)
Prior Knowledge
© 2006 Easterbrook, Sim, Perry, Aranda
(I nit ial Hypot hesis)
43
Theorize
(ref ine/ creat e a
bet t er t heory)
(manipulat e t he variables)
Observe
Scientific
Inquiry
(what is wrong wit h
Design
t he current t heory?)
(Design empirical t est s
of t he t heory)
(Comparison: The Engineering Cycle)
Tutorial F2
Prior Knowledge
© 2006 Easterbrook, Sim, Perry, Aranda
Case Studies for Software Engineers
(I nit ial Hypot hesis)
Not
e similarit y wit h
Experiment
process
if ic
(manipulat
e t of
he scient
variables)
invest igat ion:
Prior Knowledge
(e. g. cust omer f eedback)
Observe
Design
(Design empirical t est s
Observe
(Comparison:
The Engineering Cycle)
of t he t heory)
(what is wrong wit h
t he current syst em?)
Tutorial F2
Case Studies for Software Engineers
Look f or anomalies - what can’t
t he current
heory explain?
Prior tKnowledge
I nt ervene
(replace t he old syst em)
Carry out t he
experiment s
(manipulat e
t he variables)
Tutorial F2
(e. g. cust omer f eedback)
I nit ial hypot heses
Design experiment s t o
t est t he new t heory
Model
(describe/ explain t he
observed problems)
Creat e/ ref ine
t heory
(what is wrong wit h
t he current t heory?)
© 2006 Easterbrook, Sim, Perry, Aranda
43
Not
e similarit y wit h
Experiment
process
of variables)
scient if ic
(manipulat
e t he
invest igat ion:
Requirement s models are
t heories about t he world;
Designs are t est s of t hose
t heor ies
Theorize
(ref ine/ creat e a
bet t er t heory)
Design
(Design empirical t est s
of t he t heory)
Observe
a bet t er
(Comparison:
(what is wrong wit h The Engineering Cycle)
Design
t he current syst em?)
(invent a bet t er syst em)
Look f or anomalies - what can’t
t he current t heory explain?
Prior Knowledge 44
© 2006 Easterbrook, Sim, Perry, Aranda
Case Studies for Software Engineers
Theorize
(ref ine/ creat e a
bet t er t heory)
Requirement s models are
t heories about t he world;
Designs are t est s of t hose
t heor ies
I nit ial hypot heses
43
Tutorial F2
Case Studies for Software Engineers
Not e similarit y wit h
process of scient if ic
© 2006 Easterbrook, Sim, Perry, Aranda
43
we added antecedents to model selfmanagement in agile teams
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Organizational Context
•
•
•
•
•
Power
Information system
Education system
Reward system
Resources
Task Structure
Group Design
•
•
•
Task structure
Composition
Norms
•
•
•
•
•
Autonomy
Task identity
Significance
Feedback
Task variety
Group Characteristics
•
•
•
Composition
Beliefs
Team Process
we then expanded task structure to include
software engineering specific features …
Organizational Context
•
•
•
•
•
Power
Information system
Education system
Reward system
Resources
Task Structure
•
•
•
•
•
Autonomy
Task identity
Significance
Feedback
Task variety
Group Characteristics
•
•
•
Composition
Beliefs
Team Process
Task Design
•
•
•
•
Goal clarity,
challenge, priorities
and stability
Task structure
Software Process &
Tools
Technological
Contingencies
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
•
•
Power
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Resources
Task Design
•
•
•
•
Goal clarity,
challenge, priorities
and stability
Task structure
Software Process &
Tools
Technological
Contingencies
… and included
localization into team
design to explain
effectiveness in
distributed software
development.
Team Design
Group Characteristics
•
•
•
Composition
Beliefs
Team Process
•
•
•
•
Composition
Localization
Beliefs
Team process
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
•
•
From Yeatts & Hyten
(1998) model (and from
your own results) we
added individual
characteristics as
moderating factors.
Power
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Resources
Task Design
•
•
•
•
Goal clarity,
challenge, priorities
and stability
Task structure
Software Process &
Tools
Technological
Contingencies
Team Design
•
•
•
•
•
Composition
Localization
Beliefs
Role assignment
Team process
Individual
Characteristics
•
•
•
•
Talent
Personality
Behavior
Values
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
•
•
Synergy
Group Synergy
•
•
•
•
Power
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Resources
Communication
Coordination
Cooperation
Conflict
•
•
•
•
•
•
Communication
Coordination
Cooperation
Conflict
Cohesion
Trust
Task Design
•
•
•
•
then we added cohesion
and trust as factors
related to team synergy.
Goal clarity,
challenge, priorities
and stability
Task structure
Software Process &
Tools
Technological
Contingencies
Team Design
•
•
•
•
•
Composition
Localization
Beliefs
Role assignment
Team process
Individual
Characteristics
•
•
•
•
Talent
Personality
Behavior
Values
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
•
•
Power
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Resources
Synergy
•
•
•
•
•
•
Communication
Coordination
Cooperation
Conflict
Cohesion
Trust
Task Design
•
•
•
•
Process Criteria of
Effectiveness
Goal clarity,
challenge, priorities
and stability
Task structure
Software Process &
Tools
Technological
Contingencies
•
•
•
Team Design
•
•
•
•
•
Composition
Localization
Beliefs
Role assignment
Team process
Level of effort applied
to the tasks
Amount of knowledge
applied to the tasks
Use of appropriated
performance strategies
Individual
Characteristics
•
•
•
•
Talent
Personality
Behavior
Values
Process Criteria
•
•
•
Level of effort
applied to the tasks
Amount of talent
applied to the tasks
Adaptive use of
development
process and tools
… and interpreted
performance strategy
as software process
use and continuous
changes.
finally, we decided on
the multi-dimensional
definition of
effectiveness ...
Team Performance
•
•
•
Members Attitudes
Group Effectiveness
•
•
•
Client satisfaction
Members
satisfaction
Group continuity
Client satisfaction
Management satisfaction
Economic viability
•
•
Satisfaction
Organizational commitment
Team Continuity
•
Capability of members to work
together in the future
Withdrawal Behaviors
•
•
Absenteeism
Voluntary Turnover
Organizational
Context
•
•
•
•
•
Power
Reward System
Educational System
Information System
Resources
Synergy
•
•
•
•
•
•
… and connected
everything.
Communication
Coordination
Cooperation
Conflict
Cohesion
Trust
Task Design
•
•
•
•
Process Criteria
Goal clarity,
challenge, priorities
and stability
Task structure
Software Process &
Tools
Technological
Contingencies
•
•
•
Team Design
•
•
•
•
•
Composition
Localization
Beliefs
Role assignment
Team process
Individual
Characteristics
•
•
•
•
Talent
Personality
Behavior
Values
Level of effort
applied to the tasks
Amount of talent
applied to the tasks
Adaptive use of
development
process and tools
Team Effectiveness
•
•
•
•
Performance
Members Attitudes
Withdrawal
Behaviors
Team Continuity
and how we are trying to
transform what we don’t know
that we don’t know (2OI) into
research questions
(1OI).
HASE – Human Aspects in Software Engineering
Research to improve software practice (Since 2006)
Back to the strategy
How do we plan to test the model?
Scientific Inquiry
Prior Knowledge
E
Observe
(what is wrong wit h
t he current t heory?)
O
Theorize
Experiment
(ref ine/ creat e a
bet t er t heory)
(manipulat e t he variables)
P
T
Design
(Design empirical t est s
of t he t heory)
Tutorial F2
Influenciates
(I nit ial Hypot hesis)
Case Studies for Software Engineers
© 2006 Easterbrook, Sim, Perry, Aranda
43
Is influenciated
I
HASE – Human Aspects in Software Engineering
Research to improve software practice (Since 2006)
Back to the strategy
How do we plan to test the model?
Teams in industry
Different company size, target market and countries
Multiple tasks: development, test, maintenance, etc.
Ethnographic-informed approach
Preference for rich qualitative data
Several replications
Influenciates
A multi-case, multi-method replication design
E
O
P
T
Is influenciated
I
HASE – Human Aspects in Software Engineering
Research to improve software practice (Since 2006)
Back to the strategy
How do we plan to test the model?
Collaborative work
Brazilian funding for:
• Visiting doctoral students from Brazil (“sandwich”)
• Visiting senior researchers to Brazil
• Post-doctoral research in Brazil
Influenciates
Field studies in different countries
E
O
P
T
Is influenciated
I
do (Acadêmico e
ão
do (Acadêmico e
ão
team effectiveness
What does it mean to say that a software team is effective?
Lines of code per men-month? Bugs found and fixed? Finish the project on
time and on budget? Quality software? Client satisfaction? Profit? Marketshare?
What about a team that does all that but…
… members experience low morale, come late to work without proper
justification, …
What about a project team in which the turnover is over 30%?
… there are multiple criteria that can be used to define team
effectiveness; the choices we make will ultimately affect how we
build, manage, develop, and evaluate teams.