Coordination in Distributed, Self-managing Work Teams: The Roles of Initiated and Received Task Interdependence

While coordination is assumed to contribute to distributed self-managing work team performance, our knowledge about the factors influencing coordination in such team settings is limited. In the present study, we investigate the moderating roles of initiated and received task interdependence on the relationship between self-management and coordination perceptions in distributed teams that rely on electronic communication tools to interact. A field survey study of 110 employees in 40 distributed teams demonstrated that when there are high levels of initiated task interdependence and low levels of received task interdependence, team self-management is associated with stronger perceived coordination in distributed teams. Based on these results, we discuss theoretical and practical implications for distributed self-managing teams

Changes to team autonomy in large-scale software development: a multiple case study of Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) implementations

Large-scale transformations of agile ways of working have received more attention in the industry in recent years. Some organizations have developed their own solutions for scaling, whereas many have chosen trademarked frameworks. In large-scale agile software development, many developers and development teams carry out work simultaneously. When autonomous teams need to coordinate toward a common goal, they must sacrifice some level of autonomy. Development, testing, and integrations need to be coordinated with other teams and aligned with an organization´s programs or portfolio. Through the conducting of 28 interviews and 17 on-site visits, this multiple case study explored how team autonomy changed in three agile software development organizations that implemented the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe). The positive changes to team autonomy that they experienced as a result included getting a better overview, making better long-term decisions, giving and receiving help, and signaling limitations. We found two negative impacts on team autonomy: limited feature choice and enforced refinement. The study extends previous research on large-scale agile software development and improves our understanding of impacts on team autonomy

Changes to team autonomy in large-scale software development: a multiple case study of Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) implementations

Large-scale transformations of agile ways of working have received more attention in the industry in recent years. Some organizations have developed their own solutions for scaling, whereas many have chosen trademarked frameworks. In large-scale agile software development, many developers and development teams carry out work simultaneously. When autonomous teams need to coordinate toward a common goal, they must sacrifice some level of autonomy. Development, testing, and integrations need to be coordinated with other teams and aligned with an organization´s programs or portfolio. Through the conducting of 28 interviews and 17 on-site visits, this multiple case study explored how team autonomy changed in three agile software development organizations that implemented the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe). The positive changes to team autonomy that they experienced as a result included getting a better overview, making better long-term decisions, giving and receiving help, and signaling limitations. We found two negative impacts on team autonomy: limited feature choice and enforced refinement. The study extends previous research on large-scale agile software development and improves our understanding of impacts on team autonomy.publishedVersio

Changes to team autonomy in large-scale software development: a multiple case study of Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) implementations

Large-scale transformations of agile ways of working have received more attention in the industry in recent years. Some organizations have developed their own solutions for scaling, whereas many have chosen trademarked frameworks. In large-scale agile software development, many developers and development teams carry out work simultaneously. When autonomous teams need to coordinate toward a common goal, they must sacrifice some level of autonomy. Development, testing, and integrations need to be coordinated with other teams and aligned with an organization´s programs or portfolio. Through the conducting of 28 interviews and 17 on-site visits, this multiple case study explored how team autonomy changed in three agile software development organizations that implemented the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe). The positive changes to team autonomy that they experienced as a result included getting a better overview, making better long-term decisions, giving and receiving help, and signaling limitations. We found two negative impacts on team autonomy: limited feature choice and enforced refinement. The study extends previous research on large-scale agile software development and improves our understanding of impacts on team autonomy

Using Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) and Slack: A Case Study of Coordination in Large-Scale Distributed Agile

Today, many large-scale software projects have members working from home, which has changed the way teams coordinate work. To better understand coordination in this setting, we conducted a case study through which we examined two teams in a large-scale agile project by observing meetings and conducting 17 interviews. Through the lens of Relational Coordination Theory (RCT), we analyzed the use of the goal-setting framework Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) and the collaboration tool Slack. Slack was used for frequent, timely, and problem-solving communication and, and its use decreased the number of planned meetings. However, discussions often started on Slack and continued in virtual ad-hoc meetings. The use of OKRs facilitated knowledge sharing, helped the teams align their goals, and provided inter-team insights. The main implication of our research is that projects using OKRs need to support project members, especially in formulating the key results that align and motivate the teams to work toward the same mission

Transformational leadership and leader–member exchange in distributed teams: The roles of electronic dependence and team task interdependence

While the use of distributed teams enabled by digital technologies is burgeoning in contemporary organizations, leaders of distributed teams face different challenges than those of co-located teams. Our knowledge about how these differences play out, however, is not yet fully developed. To address this, the present study investigates how transformational leaders may develop high-quality leader-member exchange (LMX) relationships in distributed teams. Based on two field studies of distributed teams in three organizations, the present study examined how the joint effect of electronic dependence and team task interdependence may influence the relationship between transformational leadership and LMX quality. Across both studies, results from three-way interaction analyses demonstrated that transformational leadership related negatively to LMX quality when electronic dependence and task interdependence were both high. Based on the results, we discuss theoretical and practical implications for leaders with a relationship-based approach in distributed teams

The product owner in large-scale agile: An empirical study through the lens of relational coordination theory

In agile software development, a core responsibility of the product owner (PO) is to communicate business needs to the development team. In large-scale agile software development projects, many teams work toward an overall outcome, but they also need to manage interdependencies and coordinate efficiently. In such settings, POs need to coordinate knowledge about project status and goal attainment both within and across the development teams. Previous research has shown that the PO assumes a wide set of roles. Still, our knowledge about how POs coordinate amongst themselves and with their teams in large-scale agile is limited. In this case study, we explore PO coordination in a large-scale development program through the theoretical lens of Relational Coordination Theory. Our findings suggest that (1) coordination varies depending on the context of each PO, (2) a focus on achieving high-quality communication changes coordination over time, and (3) unscheduled coordination enables of high-quality communication

Responding to change over time:A longitudinal case study on changes in coordination mechanisms in large-scale agile

Context: Responding to change and continuously improving processes, practices, and products are core to agile software development. It is no different in large-scale agile, where multiple software development teams need to respond both to changes in their external environments and to changes within the organization. Objective: With this study, we aim to advance knowledge on coordination in large-scale agile by developing a model of the types of organizational changes that influence coordination mechanisms. Method: We conducted a longitudinal case study in a growing large-scale agile organization, focusing on how external and internal changes impact coordination over time. We collected our data through 62 days of fieldwork across one and a half years. We conducted 37 interviews, observed 118 meetings at all organizational levels, collected supplementary material such as chat logs and presentations, and analyzed the data using thematic analysis. Results: Our findings demonstrate how external events, such as onboarding new clients, and internal events, such as changes in the team organization, influence coordination mechanisms in the large-scale software development program. We find that external and internal change events lead to the introduction of new coordination mechanisms, or the adjustment of existing ones. Further, we find that continuous scaling requires continuous change and adjustment. Finally, we find that having the right mechanisms in place at the right time strengthens resilience and the ability to cope with change in coordination needs in complex large-scale environments. Conclusions: Our findings are summarized in an empirically based model that provides a practical approach to analyzing change, aimed at supporting both researchers and practitioners dealing with change in coordination mechanisms in large-scale agile development contexts.</p