| Empirical study of how personality, team processes and task characteristics relate to satisfaction and software quality |
| Full text |
Pdf
(205 KB)
|
Source
|
ESEM
archive
Proceedings of the Second ACM-IEEE international symposium on Empirical software engineering and measurement
table of contents
Kaiserslautern, Germany
SESSION: Empirical s`tudies of processes and products
table of contents
Pages 291-293
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-59593-971-5
|
|
Authors
|
|
| Sponsors |
|
| Publisher |
|
| Bibliometrics |
Downloads (6 Weeks): 7, Downloads (12 Months): 118, Citation Count: 0
|
|
|
ABSTRACT
This paper analyses the relationships between personality, team processes, task characteristics, product quality and satisfaction in software development teams. The data analysed here were gathered from a sample of 35 teams of students (105 participants) from a Spanish university. These teams applied an adaptation of an agile methodology, eXtreme Programming (XP), to develop the same software product. We found that the teams with the highest job satisfaction are precisely the ones whose members score highest for the personality factors agreeableness and conscientiousness. The satisfaction levels are also higher when the members can decide how to develop and organize their work. On the other hand, the level of satisfaction and cohesion drops the more conflict there is between the team members. Finally, the teams exhibit a significant positive correlation between the personality factor extroversion and software product quality.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
| |
1
|
Barrick M. R., Stewart G. L., Neubert M. J., Mount M. K. Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology 1998; 83(3):377--391.
|
| |
2
|
|
| |
3
|
Cook T. D., Campbell D. T. Quasi-Experimentation Design and Analysis Issues for the Field Settings. Houghton Mifflin, 1979.
|
| |
4
|
Costa Jr. P. T., McCrae R. R. NEO Personality Inventory. Psychological Assessment Resources, 1992.
|
| |
5
|
Gladstein DL. Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 1984; 29:499--517.
|
| |
6
|
Jedlitschka A., Pfahl D. Reporting Guidelines for Controlled Experiments in Software Engineering. 2005. www.iese.fraunhofer.de/network/ISERN/pub/technical_reports/isern-05-01.pdf
|
| |
7
|
Jehn, K. Enhancing effectiveness: An investigation of advantages and disadvantages of value-based intragroup conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management 1994; 5:223--238.
|
| |
8
|
Molleman E., Nauta A., Jehn K. A. Person-job fit applied to teamwork: A multi-level approach. Small Group Research 2004, 35:515--539.
|
| |
9
|
Stokes J. P. Toward an understanding of cohesion in personal change groups. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy 1983; 33:449--467.
|
| |
10
|
Van der Vegt G., Emans B., Van de Vliert E. Affective reactions to individual task interdependence in outcome interdependence groups. Personnel Psychology 2001; 54:51--69.
|
|