Structural factors that affect global software development learning team performance

ABSTRACT

A team performance model provided an organizing framework for studying multi-cultural distributed learning teams. Structural equation modeling was used to test for relationships among individual, cultural and attitudes about collaborative work factors and team performance. The paper describes this model and its theoretical basis and reports on results from two pilot projects involving 152 students from the US, Panama, UK, and Turkey. While the model shows satisfactory fit, the results suggest that other factors may also influence how well students work together on global software projects. Future research, followed by model development, should incorporate these factors to capture the complexity of the educational and training environments.

REFERENCES

• 1: Aguinis, H., and Henle, C.2003. The search for universals in cross-cultural organizational behavior, in J. Greenberg (Eds.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (2nd ed.), Erlbaum Associated, Mahawah, NJ.
• 2: Blackboard. http://www.blackboard.com
• 3: Bochner S., and Hesketh, B. 1994. Power, distance, individualism/ collectivism and job-related attitudes in a culturally diverse work group, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 25, 2, 233--257.
• 4: Bossche, P., Gijselaers, W., Segers, S. and Kirschner, P. 2006. Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments, Small group research, 37, 5, 490--521.
• 5: Philipp Bouillon , Jens Krinke , Stephan Lukosch, Software Engineering Projects in Distant Teaching, Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Software Engineering Education & Training, p.147-154, April 18-20, 2005 [doi>10.1109/CSEET.2005.31]
• 6: Erin Bradner , Gloria Mark, Why distance matters: effects on cooperation, persuasion and deception, Proceedings of the 2002 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, November 16-20, 2002, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA [doi>10.1145/587078.587110]
• 7: Lisa J. Burnell , John W. Priest , John R. Durrett, Teaching Distributed Multidisciplinary Software Development, IEEE Software, v.19 n.5, p.86-93, September 2002 [doi>10.1109/MS.2002.1032859]
• 8: Burningham C., and West, M. 1995. Individual climate, and group interaction processes as predictors of work team innovation, Small Group Research, 26, 106--117.
• 9: Cordery,J., Mueller W., and Smith, L. 1991. Attitudinal and behavioral effects of autonomous group working: A longitudinal field study, Academy of Management Journal, 34, 464--476.
• 10: Cramton C., and Hinds, P. 2005. Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning? Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 231--263.
• 11: C rnkovic, I., and Land, R. 2003. Taking global software development from Industry University and back again, Proceedings of ICSE International Workshop on Global Software Development, Sjogren.
• 12: Judy Cushing , Kate Cunningham , George Freeman, Towards best practices in software teamwork, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, v.19 n.2, p.72-81, December 2003
• 13: Daniela Damian , James Chisan , Lakshminarayanan Vaidyanathasamy , Yogendra Pal, Requirements Engineering and Downstream Software Development: Findings from a Case Study, Empirical Software Engineering, v.10 n.3, p.255-283, July 2005 [doi>10.1007/s10664-005-1288-4]
• 14: Robert Davison, An instrument for measuring meeting success, Information and Management, v.32 n.4, p.163-176, April 1997 [doi>10.1016/S0378-7206(97)00020-7]
• 15: Allen H. Dutoit , Bernd Bruegge, Communication Metrics for Software Development, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.24 n.8, p.615-628, August 1998 [doi>10.1109/32.707697]
• 16: H. Keith Edwards , Varadharajan Sridhar, Analysis of the Effectiveness of Global Virtual Teams in Software Engineering Projects, Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'03) - Track1, p.19.2, January 06-09, 2003
• 17: J. Alberto Espinosa , Erran Carmel, The Effect of Time Separation on Coordination Costs in Global Software Teams: A Dyad Model, Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'04) - Track 1, p.10043.1, January 05-08, 2004
• 18: J. Espinosa and E. Carmel, 2004. The impact of time separation on coordination in global software teams: a conceptual foundation, Software Process Improvement and Practice, 8, 4, 249--266.
• 19: Fruchter, R., and Townsend, A. 2003. Multi-cultural dimensions and multi-modal communication in distributed, cross-disciplinary teamwork, Int. J. Engen. Ed., 19, 1,53--61.
• 20: R. Guzzo and M Dickson, Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness, Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 1996, 307--338.
• 21: Hall, E. 1976. Beyond culture, Anchor Press, Garden City NJ.
• 22: Herder P., and Sjoer,E. 2003. Group-based learning in internationally distributed teams: An evaluation of a cross-Atlantic experiment, ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Boulder, CO.
• 23: Hofstede, G. 1991. Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind, McGraw-Hill, UK.
• 24: Jehn, K., Northcraft G., and Neale, M. 1997. Opening Pandora's Box: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in Workgroups (Working Paper). Philadelphia, PA: Wharton School.
• 25: Kidwell, R., Mossholder M., and Bennett, N. 1997. Cohesiveness and organizational citizenship behavior: A multilevel analysis using work groups and individuals, Journal of Management, 23, 6, 775--793.
• 26: P. Layzell , O. P. Brereton , A. French, Supporting collaboration in distributed software engineering teams, Proceedings of the Seventh Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, p.38, December 05-08, 2000
• 27: Maznevski, M. 1994. Understanding our differences: Performance in decision making groups with diverse members, Human Relations, 47, 5, 531---552.
• 28: Bertrand Meyer, The Unspoken Revolution in Software Engineering, Computer, v.39 n.1, p.124-123, January 2006 [doi>10.1109/MC.2006.37]
• 29: Munkvold B., and Line, L. 2005. Training students in distributed collaboration: Experiences from two pilot projects, Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 3, 2, 1--17.
• 30: O'Leary M. and J. Cummings, J. 2002. The spatial, temporal, and configurational characteristics of geographic dispersion in work teams, in Presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Denver, Co. (request copy via email from: http://www.managingteams.org/
• 31: Pelled, L., Eisenhardt K., and Song, M. 2001. Getting it together: Temporal coordination and conflict management in global virtual teams, Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1251--1262.
• 32: Polzer, J.,Crisp, C., Jarvenpaa S., and Kim, J. 2006. Geographically-colocated subgroups in globally dispersed teams: A test of the faultline hypothesis, working paper.
• 33: Anne Powell , Gabriele Piccoli , Blake Ives, Virtual teams: a review of current literature and directions for future research, ACM SIGMIS Database, v.35 n.1, p.6-36, Winter 2004 [doi>10.1145/968464.968467]
• 34: Maryam Purvis , Martin Purvis , Stephen Cranefield, Educational experiences from a Global Software Engineering (GSE) project, Proceedings of the sixth conference on Australasian computing education, p.269-275, January 01, 2004, Dunedin, New Zealand
• 35: Joseph W. Rottman, Successfully Outsourcing Embedded Software Development, Computer, v.39 n.1, p.55-61, January 2006 [doi>10.1109/MC.2006.33]
• 36: Schumacker R., and Lomax, R. 1996. A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• 37: Shenkar, O. 2001. Cultural Distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences, Journal of International Business Studies, 32, 3, 519--535.
• 38: Siegel S., and Kaemmerer, W. 1978. Measuring the perceived support for innovation in organizations, Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 553--562.
• 39: Steinbeck, R., Engel, C., Ybarra, C., and Jansson, E. 2000. Team building in globally distributed project-based courses: A case study from the Stanford learning lab, EdMedia 2000, Montreal Canada.
• 40: Swezey R., and Salas, E. 1992. Guidelines for use in team-training development, in R. W. Swezey, & E. Salas (Eds), Teams: Their training and performance, 219--45, Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• 41: Tsui, T. Egan and Tsin, K. 1995. Diversity in research: lessons from demography research. In Martin Chemers, S. Oskamp, and M. A. Costanza (Eds.), Diversity in Organizations, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA., 191--219.
• 42: Wagner, W., Pfeffer J., and O'Reilly, C. 1984. Organizational demography and turnover in to management groups, Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 1, 74--92.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.3 Group and Organization Interfaces
          Subjects: Collaborative computing

General Terms:
Human Factors

Keywords:
collaborative learning, global software development, groupware