Autonomy in Software Engineering: A Preliminary Study on the Influence of Education Level and Professional Experience

Context: Software development process is executed by professionals with different roles, who are responsible for distinct activities. These roles can have different degrees of autonomy depending on some factors, such as the adopted process and hierarchy. Goal: This study aims to identify what factors can impact autonomy and also investigate how autonomy is given to an employee based on two main factors: education level and professional experience. Methodology: Initially, a survey was carried out to understand how autonomy is perceived by 102 software engineers, as well as by 83 professionals from other areas. The next step was applying semi-structured interviews with software engineers to find a better understanding of the quantitative findings. Results: In general, education level and professional experience do not have an impact on autonomy. Only when autonomy is evaluated from the education level perspective, there is a significant difference among the respondents. During the interviews, we also could identify some topics that respondents mentioned which were related to autonomy. For example, the experience that software engineer has in a current project and the development process adopted by the company influence how autonomy is perceived. Conclusion: While professional qualification and experience are not directly related to autonomy, the lack of process and the amount of work experience on specific projects seem to be relevant factors to be aware of.

[1]  Stephen E. Humphrey,et al.  The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[2]  Per Runeson,et al.  Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering , 2009, Empirical Software Engineering.

[3]  Luiz Fernando Capretz,et al.  The Innovative Behaviour of Software Engineers: Findings from a Pilot Case Study , 2016, ESEM.

[4]  Alfonso Fuggetta,et al.  Software process: a roadmap , 2000, ICSE '00.

[5]  M. S. Krishnan,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of Productivity and Quality in Software Products , 2000 .

[6]  Tore Dybå,et al.  Understanding Self-Organizing Teams in Agile Software Development , 2008, 19th Australian Conference on Software Engineering (aswec 2008).

[7]  Marcelo Cataldo,et al.  On the relationship between process maturity and geographic distribution: an empirical analysis of their impact on software quality , 2009, ESEC/FSE '09.

[8]  Philippe Kruchten,et al.  The Rational Unified Process Made Easy - A Practitioner's Guide to the RUP , 2003, Addison Wesley object technology series.

[9]  Alistair Cockburn,et al.  Agile Software Development: The Business of Innovation , 2001, Computer.

[10]  Ken Schwaber,et al.  Agile Software Development with SCRUM , 2001 .

[11]  Ronnie E. S. Santos,et al.  Preliminary Findings about the Nature of Work in Software Engineering: An Exploratory Survey , 2016, ESEM.