Personalised continuous software engineering

This work describes how human factors can influence continuous software engineering. The reasoning begins from the Agile Manifesto promoting individuals and interactions over processes and tools. The organisational need to continuously develop, release and learn from software development in rapid cycles requires empowered and self-organised agile teams. However, these teams are formed without necessarily considering the members’ individual characteristics towards effective teamwork, from the personality and cognitive perspective. In this realm, this paper proposes a two level approach: first, form teams based on their collective personality traits and second, provide personalised tools and methods based on their individual differences in cognitive processing. The approach is motivated by a study conducted in a business environment focusing on task execution, satisfaction and effectiveness of team members in relation to their personalities and cognitive characteristics. Our preliminary results show that human factors provide a promising basis for increasing the capability of continuous software engineering.

[1]  R. Riding,et al.  Cognitive Styles—an overview and integration , 1991 .

[2]  D. Wegner.  Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of the Group Mind , 1987 .

[3]  Petri Kettunen,et al.  Directing High-Performing Software Teams: Proposal of a Capability-Based Assessment Instrument Approach , 2014, SWQD.

[4]  Gunnar R. Bergersen,et al.  Programming Skill, Knowledge, and Working Memory Among Professional Software Developers from an Investment Theory Perspective , 2011 .

[5]  Tom DeMarco,et al.  Peopleware (2nd ed.): productive projects and teams , 1999 .

[6]  Paul Ralph,et al.  Scrum Abandonment in Distributed Teams: A Revelatory Case , 2013, PACIS.

[7]  Alfred Kobsa,et al.  The Adaptive Web, Methods and Strategies of Web Personalization , 2007, The Adaptive Web.

[8]  Davi Viana,et al.  The influence of human aspects on software process improvement: Qualitative research findings and comparison to previous studies , 2012, EASE.

[9]  A. Baddeley.  Working memory: theories, models, and controversies. , 2012, Annual review of psychology.

[10]  Rebecca H. Rutherfoord.  Using personality inventories to help form teams for software engineering class projects , 2001, ITiCSE '01.

[11]  A. Cockburn,et al.  Agile Software Development: The People Factor , 2001, Computer.

[12]  John A. Johnson,et al.  The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures ☆ , 2006 .

[13]  Myers,et al.  Gifts Differing: Understanding Personality Type , 1980 .

[14]  Colin M. Macleod.  Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  Dean Leffingwell,et al.  Scaling Software Agility: Best Practices for Large Enterprises (The Agile Software Development Series) , 2007 .

[16]  B. Tuckman.  DEVELOPMENTAL SEQUENCE IN SMALL GROUPS. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[17]  Jo Ellen Moore,et al.  Personality characteristics of information systems professionals , 1991, SIGCPR '91.

[18]  Lefteris Angelis,et al.  Links between the personalities, views and attitudes of software engineers , 2010, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[19]  Tom DeMarco,et al.  Peopleware: Productive Projects and Teams , 1987 .

[20]  Diane B. Walz,et al.  Investigating traits of top performing software developers , 2000, Inf. Technol. People.

[21]  Ahmed Seffah,et al.  The obstacles and myths of usability and software engineering , 2004, CACM.

[22]  Andreas S. Andreou,et al.  Evidence of Agile Adoption in Software Organizations: An Empirical Survey , 2013, EuroSPI.

[23]  R. R. Abidin.  Psychological Assessment Resources , 1995 .

[24]  Ellis Horowitz,et al.  Software Cost Estimation with COCOMO II , 2000 .

[25]  Panagiotis Germanakos,et al.  Realizing Comprehensive User Profile as the Core Element of Adaptive and Personalized Communication Environments and Systems , 2009, Comput. J..

[26]  Joseph J. LaViola,et al.  Code bubbles: a working set-based interface for code understanding and maintenance , 2010, CHI.

[27]  Jeff Sutherland,et al.  Manifesto for Agile Software Development , 2013 .

[28]  Silvia Teresita Acuña,et al.  A replicated quasi-experimental study on the influence of personality and team climate in software development , 2013, Empirical Software Engineering.

[29]  Lefteris Angelis,et al.  Towards individualized software engineering: empirical studies should collect psychometrics , 2008, CHASE.

[30]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Climbing the "Stairway to Heaven" -- A Mulitiple-Case Study Exploring Barriers in the Transition from Agile Development towards Continuous Deployment of Software , 2012, 2012 38th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications.

[31]  Natalia Juristo Juzgado,et al.  Assigning people to roles in software projects , 2004, Softw. Pract. Exp..