Toward a Model of Managing Interruptions in Agile IT Projects

Working in uncertain environments fundamentally changes how we organize work. Using agile methodologies for IT projects helps teams to better meet user needs and ensure flexibility in uncertain environments. But using agile methods increases interactions with fellow team members and external stakeholders such as customers. These interactions are either embedded in agile practices or occur unplanned in the work context, which both cause interruptions in the workplace. While those can be helpful in terms of task completion, meeting user needs, and increased process flexibility, interruptions hinder employees in being efficient and productive. We thus conducted a Grounded Theory study analyzing four cases to understand the nature and consequences of interruptions in agile ISD teams and how the team manages these interruptions. We find that IT project teams formalize interruptions to reduce negative consequence, channel interruptions during their daily routines based on expertise and workload, and use digital tools both to reduce the number of interruptions and also to prioritize incoming interruptions. Our analysis suggests that IT project teams use practices embedded in the agile method to exploit the positive aspects of interruptions and find ways to reduce the negative.

[1]  James Noble,et al.  The impact of inadequate customer collaboration on self-organizing Agile teams , 2011, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[2]  Jason Bennett Thatcher,et al.  Job Satisfaction in Agile Development Teams: Agile Development as Work Redesign , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Manuel Wiesche,et al.  How to Implement Clan Control in DevOps Teams , 2018, AMCIS.

[4]  J. McGrath Time, Interaction, and Performance (TIP) , 1991 .

[5]  Thomas Zimmermann,et al.  The Work Life of Developers: Activities, Switches and Perceived Productivity , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[6]  Yulin Fang,et al.  Following the Sun: Temporal Dispersion and Performance in Open Source Software Project Teams , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Cecil Eng Huang Chua,et al.  Enacting Clan Control in Complex IT Projects: A Social Capital Perspective , 2012, MIS Q..

[8]  Daniel Sundmark,et al.  Impediments in Agile Software Development: An Empirical Investigation , 2013, PROFES.

[9]  Mary E. Zellmer-Bruhn Interruptive Events and Team Knowledge Acquisition , 2003, Manag. Sci..

[10]  L. Perlow The Time Famine: Toward a Sociology of Work Time , 1999 .

[11]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Inter-team coordination in large-scale agile development: A test of organizational discontinuity theory , 2016, XP Workshops.

[12]  Kristine Dery,et al.  The Digital Workplace Is Key to Digital Innovation , 2017, MIS Q. Executive.

[13]  J. George,et al.  Work Interrupted: A Closer Look at the Role of Interruptions in Organizational Life , 2003 .

[14]  Samer Faraj,et al.  A Configural Approach to Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams , 2017, MIS Q..

[15]  Helmut Krcmar,et al.  Subgroups in Agile and Traditional IT Project Teams , 2018, HICSS.

[16]  M. Maznevski,et al.  Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness , 2000 .

[17]  Alain Pinsonneault,et al.  The many faces of information technology interruptions: a taxonomy and preliminary investigation of their performance effects , 2015, Inf. Syst. J..

[18]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  A Control Theory Perspective on Agile Methodology Use and Changing User Requirements , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[19]  Venugopal Balijepally,et al.  Are Two Heads Better than One for Software Development? The Productivity Paradox of Pair Programming , 2009, MIS Q..

[20]  Jan Recker,et al.  How Agile Practices Impact Customer Responsiveness and Development Success: A Field Study , 2017 .

[21]  Weidong Xia,et al.  Toward Agile: An Integrated Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Field Data , 2010, MIS Q..

[22]  Grigori Melnik,et al.  Direct verbal communication as a catalyst of agile knowledge sharing , 2004, Agile Development Conference.

[23]  Bonnie Brinton Anderson,et al.  More Harm Than Good? How Messages That Interrupt Can Make Us Vulnerable , 2016, Inf. Syst. Res..

[24]  Jane Webster,et al.  Multicommunicating: Juggling Multiple Conversations in the Workplace , 2013, Inf. Syst. Res..

[25]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Impact of task switching and work interruptions on software development processes , 2017, ICSSP.

[26]  Helmut Krcmar,et al.  Grounded Theory Methodology in Information Systems Research , 2017, MIS Q..

[27]  Helmut Krcmar,et al.  The Influence of Agile Practices on Performance in Software Engineering Teams: A Subgroup Perspective , 2018, SIGMIS-CPR.

[28]  Michael N. Bazigos,et al.  Why agility pays , 2015 .

[29]  Zahra Shakeri Hossein Abad,et al.  Understanding Task Interruptions in Service Oriented Software Development Projects: An Exploratory Study , 2017, 2017 IEEE/ACM 4th International Workshop on Software Engineering Research and Industrial Practice (SER&IP).

[30]  Beth A. Bechky,et al.  Expecting the Unexpected? How SWAT Officers and Film Crews Handle Surprises , 2011 .

[31]  Shahla Ghobadi,et al.  Risks to Effective Knowledge Sharing in Agile Software Teams: A Model for Assessing and Mitigating Risks , 2017, Inf. Syst. J..

[32]  Thomas D. LaToza,et al.  Maintaining mental models: a study of developer work habits , 2006, ICSE.

[33]  Jan Pries-Heje,et al.  Aligning Software Processes with Strategy , 2006, MIS Q..

[34]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Perceived discontinuities and constructed continuities in virtual work , 2011, Inf. Syst. J..

[35]  Jason Bennett Thatcher,et al.  Interrupting the Workplace: Examining Stressors in an Information Technology Context , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[36]  Richard T. Vidgen,et al.  Coevolving Systems and the Organization of Agile Software Development , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[37]  C. Urquhart Grounded Theory for Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide , 2012 .

[38]  Prof. Edzard Ernst,et al.  More Harm than Good? , 2018, Springer International Publishing.