Search results

Agile principles have been widely used in software development team practice since the creation of the Agile Manifesto. Studies have examined variables related to agile principles without systematically considering the relationships among key team, agile methodology, and process variables underlying the agile principles and how these variables jointly influence the achievement of software development agility. In this study, the authors tested a team/methodology–process–agility model that links team variables (team autonomy and team competence) and methodological variable (iterative development) to process variables (communication and collaborative decision-making), which are in turn linked to software development agility (ability to sense, respond and learn).

Survey data from one hundred and sixty software development professionals were analyzed using structural equation modeling methods.

The results support the team/methodology–process–agility model. Process variables (communication and collaborative decision-making) mediated the effects of team (autonomy and competence) and methodological (iterative development) variables on software development agility. In addition, team, methodology and process variables had different effects on the three dimensions of software development agility.

The results contribute to the literature on organizational IT management by establishing a team/methodology–process–agility model that can serve as a basis for developing a core theoretical foundation underlying agile principles and practices. The results also have practical implications for organizations in understanding and managing holistically the different roles that agile methodological, team and process factors play in achieving software development agility.

This paper aims to close the gap between the generic concept of knowledge activities (KAs) and implementing them in the context of software engineering organisations concentrating on the non-technical aspects, such as team organisation and practices.

This qualitative research used a questionnaire with practitioners such as software developers and team leads who were asked to provide feedback on a set of team practices and measures typically used in software engineering projects and assess their relation to the activities of acquiring, codifying, storing, maintaining, transferring and creating knowledge. The obtained results were analysed using frequency analysis and further descriptive statistics yielding a matrix linking the investigated team practices and measures to KAs.

Team practices and measures commonly applied in software engineering can be facilitated to trigger particular KAs. While most of these team practices and measures originate from agile methods, they are not restricted to these. A purposeful composition can help in assembling a balanced set of KAs aimed at fostering given knowledge goals in software engineering organisations.

By bridging the communication and terminology gap between knowledge management research and software engineering practitioners, this work lays the foundation for assessing software teams’ knowledge profiles more easily and creating prerequisites for implementing knowledge management by facilitating common practices and measures often already part of their daily work. Hence, overhead can be avoided when implementing knowledge management.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study investigating application and relevance of KAs in the software industry by linking them to practices and measures well-accepted in software engineering, thus providing the necessary vocabulary for the implementation of knowledge management in software development teams.

This study aims to investigate the effects of organizational culture factors on the selection of software process development models and develops a conceptual model for selecting and adopting process development models with an organizational culture approach, using 12 criteria and their sub-criteria defined in Fey and Denison’s model (12 criteria).

The research hypotheses were investigated using statistical analysis, and then the criteria and sub-criteria were selected based on Fey and Denison’s model and the experts’ viewpoints. Afterward, the organizational culture of the selected company was measured using the data from 2016 and 2017, based on Fey and Denison’s questionnaire. Due to the correlation between the criteria, using the decision-making trial and evaluation technique, the correlation between sub-criteria were determined, and by analytical network process method and using Super-Decision software, the process development model was preferred to the 12 common models in information systems development.

Results indicated a significant and positive effect of organizational culture factors (except the core values factor) on the selection of development models. Also, by changing the value of organizational culture, the selected process development model changed either. Sensitivity analysis performed on the sub-criteria implied that by changing and improving some sub-criteria, the organization will be ready and willing to use the agile or risk-based models such as spiral and win-win models. Concerning units where the mentioned indicators were at moderate and low limits, models such as waterfall, V-shaped and incremental worked more appropriately.

While many studies were performed in comparing development models and investigating their strengths and weaknesses, and the impact of organizational culture on the success of information technology projects, literature indicated that the impact of organizational sub-culture prevailing in the selection of development process models has not been investigated. In this study, new factors and indicators were addressed affecting the selection of development models with a focus on organizational culture. Correlation among the factors and indicators was also investigated and, finally, a conceptual model was proposed for proper adoption of the models and methodologies of system development.

Organizations are full of contradictions and leadership dilemmas. Managers often face challenges such as selecting between two contradicting options such that which one is more important can hardly be judged. To manage contradicting dynamics, today’s managers can adopt the paradoxical leadership approach. We build a theoretical model to investigate the influence of paradoxical leadership on multi-dimensional project agility (proactivity, adaptability, and resilience), and multi-dimensional project success (management, investment, and ownership success).

Drawing on survey-based data from the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) megaproject (N = 209), we performed covariance-based structural equation modeling to test the conceptual model.

The findings show that (1) paradoxical leadership has a significant positive impact on megaproject success, (2) paradoxical leadership has a significant positive influence on project agility, (3) project agility has a significant positive effect on megaproject success, and (4) project agility has a significant effect that mediates the link between paradoxical leadership and megaproject success. This research provides a theoretical and practical comprehension of paradoxical leadership with a new perspective on megaprojects.

This study provides an extension of the existing studies on paradoxical leadership and identifies the role of contradicting dynamics and their impact on multiple facets of megaproject success. It not only clarifies the relationship between paradoxical leadership and megaproject success, but also identifies the mediating role of project agility that can play an effective role in mobilizing success in megaprojects.

In literature, it is recognized that there is no universal set of critical success factors (CSFs) applicable to all projects. The goal of this research is to validate a theoretical model which considers that CSFs’ influence on project success (PS) is configurational, that CSFs combine to influence PS.

The authors proposed a theoretical framework which operationalizes CSFs considering contingency and institutional theories' terms, as external contingencies, organizational resources and project strategies, which influence PS. The framework is validated through a qualitative approach on 18 social projects implemented by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Based on the conducted semistructured interviews with NGO managers or project managers, 91 instances when CSFs combine to influence PS were identified.

The dominant path reveals the combination of CSFs in terms of strategies adopted to face contingencies (70 instances), another as resources which moderate managers' strategies (14 instances), and in seven instances positive contingencies and resources combine and influence the PS. The results reveal that CSFs combine in reactive and dynamic ways to influence PS.

The research contributes to the vast literature on projects' success by adopting a different perspective. Configurational theory explains project management and projects' complexity better than the traditional approaches, which have a rather correlational perspective.

Managing project completion within the stipulated time is significant to all firms' sustainability. Especially for software start-up firms, it is of utmost importance. For any schedule variation, these firms must spend 25 to 40 percent of the development cost reworking quality defects. Significantly, the existing literature does not support defect rework opportunities under quality aspects among Indian IT start-ups. The present study aims to fill this niche by proposing a unique mathematical model of the defect rework aligned with the Six Sigma quality approach.

An optimization model was formulated, comprising the two objectives: rework “time” and rework “cost.” A case study was developed in relevance, and for the model solution, we used MATLAB and an elitist, Nondominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA-II).

The output of the proposed approach reduced the “time” by 31 percent at a minimum “cost”. The derived “Pareto Optimal” front can be used to estimate the “cost” for a pre-determined rework “time” and vice versa, thus adding value to the existing literature.

This work has deployed a decision tree for defect prediction, but it is often criticized for overfitting. This is one of the limitations of this paper. Apart from this, comparing the predicted defect count with other prediction models hasn’t been attempted. NSGA-II has been applied to solve the optimization problem; however, the optimal results obtained have yet to be compared with other algorithms. Further study is envisaged.

The Pareto front provides an effective visual aid for managers to compare multiple strategies to decide the best possible rework “cost” and “time” for their projects. It is beneficial for cost-sensitive start-ups to estimate the rework “cost” and “time” to negotiate with their customers effectively.

This paper proposes a novel quality management framework under the Six Sigma approach, which integrates optimization of critical metrics. As part of this study, a unique mathematical model of the software defect rework process was developed (combined with the proposed framework) to obtain the optimal solution for the perennial problem of schedule slippage in the rework process of software development.

This research aims to investigate the process of value creation, value delivery, and value capture in project-based companies. Most previous research focused on companies that operate regularly and offer manufactured products or services. This research used companies in the field of information technology that developed software to explain how value creation, value delivery, and value capture occurred. A case study with qualitative research was applied to analyze between cases. Empirical findings showed that companies carry out six activities to ensure that value creation, value delivery, and value capture can be realized in the software development process. The six activities were iterative and not a rigid sequence. This research was limited to the software industry, and further research can test the results of this study by using a survey to increase the generalizability theory developed in this study.

This study seeks to illuminate the managerial tensions inherent in implementing scaled agile (on the organizational, top management, middle management and team levels) and to frame these challenges within the broader context of project management.

The study adopts a grounded theory approach and delves into a qualitative dataset sourced from 34 interviews with subject matter experts actively engaged in scaling agile initiatives within large organizations spanning various industries. Additionally, the data have been enriched through a comprehensive literature review of the existing body of knowledge on scaling agile.

As a result of our investigation, we propose a framework of managerial tensions in scaling agile in large corporate settings and a series of research propositions and questions that may contribute significantly to the body of knowledge surrounding the phenomenon of “deprojectification” and propose agenda for the future studies in the field of project management.

The study also carries significant managerial implications. Firstly, based on the insights from the practice of scaling agile in large corporate setting, management can build awareness of the challenges inherent of transitioning to agile practices. This may help to anticipate the possible problems and proactively develop strategies how to address them. Secondly, management can be instructed about contingencies inherent in scaling agile, along with the potential disfunctions and side effects (unintended outcomes) that may emerge during the transition process. Thirdly, project management practitioners can gain insights on how scaling agile may cause shifts in the approach to managing projects, project team management and competencies that need to be developed to cope with environments where various approaches to managing projects coexist.

These insights can aid in the agile transition process, beginning with directing managerial attention toward contextual factors and progressing through potential challenges at the organizational, top management, middle management and team levels. Furthermore, the study highlights possible dysfunctionalities and side effects of scaling agile, shedding light on the “dark side” of agile.

The study contributes to the expansion of the empirical database on the implementation of agile practices in large organizational settings. It plays a role in defining and delineating the phenomenon of scaling agile within the context of project management and outlines a research agenda for future project management studies. Additionally, our study adds to the ongoing discourse surrounding the “deprojectification” effect that can occur during the scaling of agile. Lastly, it establishes connections between project management and software development literature regarding the implementation of agile at scale.

Algorithm bias refers to repetitive computer program errors that give some users more weight than others. The aim of this article is to provide a deeper insight of algorithm bias in AI-enabled ERP software customization. Although algorithmic bias in machine learning models has uneven, unfair and unjust impacts, research on it is mostly anecdotal and scattered.

As guided by the previous research (Akter et al., 2022), this study presents the possible design bias (model, data and method) one may experience with enterprise resource planning (ERP) software customization algorithm. This study then presents the artificial intelligence (AI) version of ERP customization algorithm using k-nearest neighbours algorithm.

This study illustrates the possible bias when the prioritized requirements customization estimation (PRCE) algorithm available in the ERP literature is executed without any AI. Then, the authors present their newly developed AI version of the PRCE algorithm that uses ML techniques. The authors then discuss its adjoining algorithmic bias with an illustration. Further, the authors also draw a roadmap for managing algorithmic bias during ERP customization in practice.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no prior research has attempted to understand the algorithmic bias that occurs during the execution of the ERP customization algorithm (with or without AI).