Abstract
Developing software systems is predominantly a team endeavour. The importance of the team is heightened when using an agile development approach that relies on open and frequent communication between team members. It is important for software companies to assess their readiness for an agile development approach and this necessarily includes an assessment of the performance of their teams. This work-in-progress report presents an approach for assessing key software engineering risks in relation to agile or plan-driven development approaches. Importantly, this assessment can be used to uncover subtle team performance issues which have a bearing on how well a particular development approach can be enacted. Assessments performed to date suggest a sufficiently good correlation of subjective rating and actual team performance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Boehm, B. (2002) Get ready for Agile methods, with care. IEEE Computer, 35(1), 64–69.
Boehm, B. and Tuner, R. 2003a Rebalancing your organization's discipline and agility. In: F. Maurerand D. Wells. (eds.) XP/Agile Universe 2003. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 1–8.
Boehm, B. and Tuner, R. 2003b Using risk to balance Agile and plan-driven methods. IEEE Computer, 36(6), 57–66.
Boehm, B. and Tuner, R. (2004) Balancing Agility and Discipline – A Guide for the Perplexed. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Börjesson, A., Martinsson, F. and Timmerås, M. (2006) Agile improvement practices in software organizations. European Journal of Information Systems, (2), 15 (2) 169–182.
Ceschi, M., Sillitti, A., Succi, G. and De Panfilis, S. (2005) Project management in plan-based and Agile companies. IEEE Software, 22(3), 21–27.
Cockburn, A. (2005) Crystal Clear: A Human-Powered Methodology for Small Teams. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Coetzer, G. H. and Bushe, G. R. (2006) Using discrepancy theory to examine the relationship between shared cognition and group outcomes. Team Performance Management, 12(5/6), 155–161.
Cohen, S. G. and Bailey, D. E. (1997) What makes teams work?: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to executive suite. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239–290.
Crosstalk. (2002) Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 15(10).
Fitzgerald, B., Hartnett, G. and Conboy, K. (2006) Customising agile methods to software practices at Intel Shannon. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(2), 200–213.
Gavin, J. H. and Mason, R. O. (2004) The virtuous organization: The Value Of Happiness In The Workplace. Organizational Dynamics, 33(4), 379–392.
Higgs, M., Plewnia, U., and Ploch, J. (2005) Influence of team composition and task complexity on team performance. Team Performance Management, , 11 (7/8) 227–250.
IEEE Software. (2003) IEEE Software, 20(3).
Iversen, J. H., Mathiassen, L., and Nielsen, P A. (2004) Managing risk in software process improvement: An action research approach. MIS Quarterly, 28(3), 395–433.
Kang, H.-R., Yang, H.-D., and Rowley, C. (2006) Factors in team effectiveness: Cognitive and demographic similarities of software development team members. Human Relations, 59(12), 1681–1710.
Losada, M. and Heaphy, E. (2004) The role of positivity and connectivity in the performance of business teams: A nonlinear dynamics model. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6), 740–765.
McCaffery, F., Taylor, P. S., and Coleman, G. (2007) Adept: A unified assessment method for small software companies. IEEE Software, 24(1) 24–31.
Sawyer, S. (2004) Software development teams. Communications of the ACM, 47(12), 95–99.
Sutton Jr., S. M. (2000) The role of process in a software start-up. IEEE Software, 17(4), 33–39.
Syed-Abdullah, S., Holcombe, M., and Gheorge, M. (2006) The impact of an Agile methodology on the well being of development teams. Empirical Software Engineering, 11(1), 143–167.
Taylor, P. S., Greer, D., Sage, P., Coleman, G., McDaid, K., Lawthers, L., and Corr, R. (2006) Applying an Agility/Discipline assessment for a small software organisation. In: J. Münch and M. Vierimaa (eds.) Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES'2006 – 7th international conference on product focused software process improvement, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 2006. Lecture notes in computer science, vol. 4034. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 290–304.
Wilkie, F. G., McCaffery, F., McFall, D., Lester, N., and Wilkinson, E. (2007) A low-overhead method for software process appraisal. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 12(4), 339–349.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Taylor, P.S., Coleman, G., McDaid, K., Keenan, F., Bustard, D. (2009). Using Visual Risk Assessment to Uncover Subtle Team Performance Issues. In: Wojtkowski, W., Wojtkowski, G., Lang, M., Conboy, K., Barry, C. (eds) Information Systems Development. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68772-8_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68772-8_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-30403-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-68772-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)