Rayfran Rocha Lima
ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Despite using organizational change interventions as adaptive mechanisms to meet external and internal demands, the software industry still faces challenges in implementing effective team restructuring and reorganizing their projects to maintain or improve the productivity and quality of their activities. GOAL: This paper presents the analysis of an Episodic Organizational Change (EOC) implemented in a matrix company in the software industry that culminated in the restructuring and reorganization of a multitasking test team responsible for ensuring coverage of different test scopes demanded by several projects simultaneously. METHOD: To compare and extend the findings regarding the implementation process of EOCs in the software industry, we replicated a case study that analyzed the motivations, action plan, critical success and failure factors, positive and negative impacts, lessons learned, and suggestions for improvements. RESULTS: The experience gained in this replication suggests that the steps and elements analyzed in this case study can become an EOC analysis process applied in the software industry. Compared to the original case study, the results of this replication corroborate with the motivations, goals, action plan implementation approach, and positive results. However, they diverge from generated negative results. Besides, they expand the findings related to critical factors. Finally, they suggest a pattern in the life cycle of this type of intervention. CONCLUSION: The findings substantiate that the implementation of EOCs that impact the dynamics of teams involved in the development of software projects directly influences the productivity and quality of their deliveries. These results underscore organizations’ need for a careful and diligent approach in planning, managing, and implementing these interventions. The analysis of implemented EOCs can enhance the efficiency of this type of intervention, mitigating risks, seizing opportunities, and reducing the occurrence of failures.
- Steven H Appelbaum, Sally Habashy, Jean-Luc Malo, and Hisham Shafiq. 2012. Back to the future: revisiting Kotter’s 1996 change model. Journal of Management development 31, 8 (2012), 764–782.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Michael Beer and Anna Elise Walton. 1987. Organization change and development. Annual review of psychology 38, 1 (1987), 339–367.Google Scholar
- Jacob Cohen. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and psychological measurement 20, 1 (1960), 37–46.Google Scholar
- Mike Cohn and Doris Ford. 2003. Introducing an agile process to an organization [software development]. Computer 36, 6 (2003), 74–78.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maria Goreti Simão Cruz 2002. Reestruturação organizacional direcionada para a formação de equipes: bases teórico-empíricas. Repositório UFSC n/a (2002), n/a.Google Scholar
- Daniela S Cruzes and Tore Dyba. 2011. Recommended steps for thematic synthesis in software engineering. In 2011 international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement. ÌEEE, NJ, US, 275–284.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas H Davenport and Donna B Stoddard. 1994. Reengineering: business change of mythic proportions?MIS quarterly n/a (1994), 121–127.Google Scholar
- Kenneth P De Meuse and S Jay Liebowitz. 1981. An empirical analysis of team-building research. Group & Organization Studies 6, 3 (1981), 357–378.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kim Dikert, Maria Paasivaara, and Casper Lassenius. 2016. Challenges and success factors for large-scale agile transformations: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software 119 (2016), 87–108.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Line Dubé and Guy Paré. 2003. Rigor in inform. systems positivist case research: current practices, trends, and recommendations. MIS quarterly n/a (2003), 597–636.Google Scholar
- J. Dul and T. Hak. 2007. Case study methodology in business research. Routledge, n/a.Google Scholar
- Abdelouahab Errida and Bouchra Lotfi. 2021. The determinants of organizational change management success: Literature review and case study. International Journal of Engineering Business Management 13 (2021), 18479790211016273.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Marília G. Ferreira and Raul S. Wazlawick. 2011. Software Process Improvement: A organizational change that need to be managed and motivated. International Journal of Computer and Information Engineering 5, 2 (2011), 134–142.Google Scholar
- Taghi Javdani Gandomani, Hazura Zulzalil, AA Ghani, Abu Bakar Md Sultan, and Khaironi Yatim Sharif. 2014. How human aspects impress Agile software development transition and adoption. International Journal of Software Engineering and its Applications 8, 1 (2014), 129–148.Google Scholar
- Vahid Garousi, Markus Borg, and Markku Oivo. 2020. Practical relevance of software engineering research: synthesizing the community’s voice. Empirical Software Engineering 25 (2020), 1687–1754.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mark Hughes. 2011. Do 70 per cent of all organizational change initiatives really fail?Journal of change management 11, 4 (2011), 451–464.Google Scholar
- Ming Huo, June Verner, Liming Zhu, and Muhammad Ali Babar. 2004. Software quality and agile methods. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference, 2004. COMPSAC 2004.IEEE, NJ, USA, 520–525.Google Scholar
- M. Ivarsson and T. Gorschek. 2011. A method for evaluating rigor and industrial relevance of techn. evaluations. Empirical SW Engineering 16 (2011), 365–395.Google ScholarDigital Library
- David A Kolb and Alan L Frohman. 1970. An organization development approach to consulting. Sloan Management Review (pre-1986) 12, 1 (1970), 51.Google Scholar
- John P Kotter. 2012. Leading change. Harvard business press, Brighton, MA.Google Scholar
- John P Kotter and Dan S Cohen. 2012. The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change their organizations. Harvard Business Press, Brighton, MA.Google Scholar
- Maarit Laanti, Outi Salo, and Pekka Abrahamsson. 2011. Agile methods rapidly replacing traditional methods at Nokia: A survey of opinions on agile transformation. Information and Software Technology 53, 3 (2011), 276–290.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Per Lenberg, Lars Göran Wallgren Tengberg, and Robert Feldt. 2017. An initial analysis of software engineers’ attitudes towards organizational change. Empirical Software Engineering 22 (2017), 2179–2205.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kurt Lewin. 1947. Frontiers in group dynamics: II. Channels of group life; social planning and action research. Human relations 1, 2 (1947), 143–153.Google Scholar
- Rayfran Rocha Lima, Marcelo Santana Costa, Ana Carolina Oran, and César França. 2022. Factors that Boost and Hinder the Transition from Traditional to Self-managed Teams: A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings of the XXI Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality. ACM, New York, NY, 1–11.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rayfran Rocha Lima, Luis Pascareli, Marcelo Ayres, Suelen Roberto, Ana C. Oran, and César França. 2023. Understanding an organizational change and development intervention applied in a Global Software Industry. In XXXVII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES 2023). ACM, Campo Grande, MS, 1–11.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ronald Lippitt. 1958. Dynamics of planned change. n/a n/a, n/a (1958), n/a.Google Scholar
- Sharan B Merriam and Elizabeth J Tisdell. 2015. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons, n/a.Google Scholar
- Sune Dueholm Müller, Lars Mathiassen, and Hans Henrik Balshøj. 2010. Software Process Improvement as organizational change: A metaphorical analysis of the literature. Journal of Systems and Software 83, 11 (2010), 2128–2146.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Medicine National Academies of Sciences, Engineering 2019. Reproducibility and replicability in science. National Academies Press, n/a.Google Scholar
- Chris Olsen and DMM St George. 2004. Cross-sectional study design and data analysis. College entrance examination board 26, 03 (2004), 2006.Google Scholar
- Minna Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, Outi Salo, Pekka Abrahamsson, and Jari Still. 2008. The impact of agile practices on communication in software development. Empirical Software Engineering 13 (2008), 303–337.Google ScholarDigital Library
- PMI. 2021. A Guide to the Project Manag. Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (7th ed.). Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA.Google Scholar
- Jerry I Porras and Peter J Robertson. 1992. Organizational development: Theory, practice, and research.Consulting Psychologists Press, n/a.Google Scholar
- P. Runeson and M. Höst. 2009. Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical sw engineering 14 (2009), 131–164.Google Scholar
- E.H. Schein. 1996. Kurt Lewin’s change theory in the field and in the classroom: Notes toward a model of managed learning. Systems practice 9 (1996), 27–47.Google Scholar
- Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland. 2011. The scrum guide. Scrum Alliance 21, 1 (2011), 1–38.Google Scholar
- Sheng-Pao Shih, Ruey-Shiang Shaw, Ta-Yu Fu, and Che-Pin Cheng. 2013. A systematic study of change management during CMMI implementation: A modified activity theory perspective. Project Management Journal 44, 4 (2013), 84–100.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Martin E Smith. 2002. Success rates for different types of organizational change. Performance Improvement 41, 1 (2002), 26–33.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dirk Stelzer and Werner Mellis. 1998. Success factors of organizational change in software process improvement. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 4, 4 (1998), 227–250.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Noel Tichy. 1996. Simultaneous transformation and CEO succession: Key to global competitiveness. Organizational Dynamics 25, 1 (1996), 45–59.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Karl E Weick and Robert E Quinn. 1999. Organizational change and development. Annual review of psychology 50, 1 (1999), 361–386.Google Scholar
- Claes Wohlin, Per Runeson, Martin Höst, Magnus C Ohlsson, Björn Regnell, and Anders Wesslén. 2012. Experimentation in software engineering. Springer Science & Business Media, n/a.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert K Yin. 2009. Case study research: Design and methods. Vol. 5. Sage, n/a.Google Scholar
- Kinza Zahra, Farooque Azam, Fauqia Ilyas, Huma Faisal, Nadia Ambreen, and Nida Gondal. 2017. Success factors of organizational change in software process improvement: A systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information and Education Technology. ACM, n/a, 155–160.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Improving test team performance through an Episodic Organizational Change implementation: A case study replication and extension
Recommendations
Implementation costs of IS-enabled organizational change
Organizations incur substantial costs in managing organizational changes associated with the implementation of information systems (IS). However, the relationship between organizational changes and IS implementation costs is not well understood. ...
Organizational Linkages for Surviving Technological Change: Complementary Assets, Middle Management, and Ambidexterity
Technological innovation sometimes requires industry incumbents to shift to a completely new core technology. To successfully navigate a technological transition, firms often face the ambidextrous challenge of “exploiting” existing complementary assets ...
Organizational Innovation and Substandard Performance: When is Necessity the Mother of Innovation?
This study extends earlier empirical research into organizational decline which has found that substandard performance stimulates innovation in a wide range of manufacturing industries. Using data from 74 U.S. high technology firms, this research ...
Comments