Challenges in Understanding the Relationship between Teamwork Quality and Project Success in Large-Scale Agile Projects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.17725v1
• Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 10:37:20 GMT
• Title: Challenges in Understanding the Relationship between Teamwork Quality and Project Success in Large-Scale Agile Projects
• Authors: Torgeir Dings{\o}yr, Phillip Schneider, Gunnar Rye Bergersen, Yngve Lindsj{\o}rn
• Abstract summary: We investigated the relationship between teamwork quality and project success with a survey of 196 project participants across 34 teams in four projects. The observed effect of teamwork quality on project success operates differently across projects. We conclude with a call for more studies on the quality and frequency of interaction between teams in addition to internal team factors.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: A number of methods for large-scale agile development have recently been suggested. Much of the advice in agile methods focuses on teamwork. Prior research has established that teamwork quality influences project success both for traditional software development teams and agile teams. Further, prior studies have also suggested that teamwork quality may play out differently in large projects compared to small. We investigated the relationship between teamwork quality and project success with a survey of 196 project participants across 34 teams in four projects, replicating a previous study on single teams. The new data do not fit the previously established theoretical model, which raises several concerns. The observed effect of teamwork quality on project success operates differently across projects. We discuss possible reasons, which include disagreements on what characterises success in large-scale agile development, "concept drift" of teamwork quality factors, the possibility that interteam factors might have more influence on project success than intrateam factors, and finally, that our study design does not capture all relevant levels and functions. We conclude with a call for more studies on the quality and frequency of interaction between teams in addition to internal team factors to further advance theory and practice within large-scale agile software development.

Related papers

• Improving Software Engineering Team Communication Through Stronger Social Networks [1.119697400073873]
  Students working in teams in software engineering group project often communicate ineffectively. We apply two different communication analysis techniques, triad census and socio-technical congruence, to data gathered from a two-semester software engineering group project. Our findings suggest that each team's triad census for a given sprint is promising as a predictor of the percentage of story points they pass, which is closely linked to project success.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T01:46:26Z)
• Assessing Teamwork Dynamics in Software Development Projects [2.823770863747379]
  This study investigates teamwork dynamics in student software development projects through a mixed-method approach. We analyzed individual contributions across six project phases, comparing self-reported and actual contributions to measure discrepancies. Findings reveal that teams with minimal contribution discrepancies achieved higher project grades and exam pass rates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-21T08:23:46Z)
• Collaborative Gym: A Framework for Enabling and Evaluating Human-Agent Collaboration [51.452664740963066]
  Collaborative Gym is a framework enabling asynchronous, tripartite interaction among agents, humans, and task environments. We instantiate Co-Gym with three representative tasks in both simulated and real-world conditions. Our findings reveal that collaborative agents consistently outperform their fully autonomous counterparts in task performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T09:21:15Z)
• Code Collaborate: Dissecting Team Dynamics in First-Semester Programming Students [3.0294711465150006]
  The study highlights the collaboration trends that emerge as first-semester students develop a 2D game project. Results indicate that students often slightly overestimate their contributions, with more engaged individuals more likely to acknowledge mistakes. Team performance shows no significant variation based on nationality or gender composition, though teams that disbanded frequently consisted of lone wolves.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T11:42:05Z)
• Using Agile Story Points and Game Theory Together: Better Software Planning and Development in Agile Software Development [0.0]
  This study integrates key concepts from Agile software development, Story Point estimation, and Game Theory. We propose the application of game theoretic strategies, notably the Vickrey Auction and Stag Hunt Game.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-30T18:32:14Z)
• TeamLoRA: Boosting Low-Rank Adaptation with Expert Collaboration and Competition [61.91764883512776]
  We introduce an innovative PEFT method, TeamLoRA, consisting of a collaboration and competition module for experts. By doing so, TeamLoRA connects the experts as a "Team" with internal collaboration and competition, enabling a faster and more accurate PEFT paradigm for multi-task learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-19T09:58:53Z)
• Multi-Agent Software Development through Cross-Team Collaboration [30.88149502999973]
  We introduce Cross-Team Collaboration (CTC), a scalable multi-team framework for software development. CTC enables orchestrated teams to jointly propose various decisions and communicate with their insights. Results show a notable increase in quality compared to state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T10:18:36Z)
• DevEval: Evaluating Code Generation in Practical Software Projects [52.16841274646796]
  We propose a new benchmark named DevEval, aligned with Developers' experiences in practical projects. DevEval is collected through a rigorous pipeline, containing 2,690 samples from 119 practical projects. We assess five popular LLMs on DevEval and reveal their actual abilities in code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T06:51:30Z)
• Cooperation, Competition, and Maliciousness: LLM-Stakeholders Interactive Negotiation [52.930183136111864]
  We propose using scorable negotiation to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) To reach an agreement, agents must have strong arithmetic, inference, exploration, and planning capabilities. We provide procedures to create new games and increase games' difficulty to have an evolving benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T13:33:06Z)
• Detecting and Optimising Team Interactions in Software Development [58.720142291102135]
  This paper presents a data-driven approach to detect the functional interaction structure for software development teams. Our approach considers differences in the activity levels of team members and uses a block-constrained configuration model. We show how our approach enables teams to compare their functional interaction structure against synthetically created benchmark scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-28T14:53:29Z)
• On Emergent Communication in Competitive Multi-Agent Teams [116.95067289206919]
  We investigate whether competition for performance from an external, similar agent team could act as a social influence. Our results show that an external competitive influence leads to improved accuracy and generalization, as well as faster emergence of communicative languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-04T01:14:27Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.