Familiarity and Performance in Geographically Distributed Software Development 1

Familiarity is the knowledge that members of a team have about the unique aspects of their work, which has been found to have a positive effect on team performance. There are different types of familiarity, including task familiarity – gained from past experience performing similar tasks – and team familiarity – acquired by working with each other. While there is evidence suggesting the beneficial effects of familiarity, most of the empirical research on familiarity has focused on labor crews and shortterm experimental teams. More importantly, to the best of our knowledge, prior studies have not investigated the conditions under which familiarity can be more beneficial for performance. The uncertainties, complexities and tightly coupled interdependencies inherent in software development make it a task ideally suited to benefit from familiarity, but this effect is likely to vary for various task and team conditions. In this study we analyze archival data collected from software production sources to investigate the effect of task and team familiarity on performance in collaborative software development and the interaction effects of task – e.g., project size and complexity – and team context factors – e.g., geographic dispersion and team size – on this effect. Our results indicate that both task and team familiarity help reduce software development. We also find that task familiarity improves software development performance more strongly when team familiarity is weak and vice-versa. Finally, we found that the effect of team familiarity is stronger with larger and geographically dispersed teams.

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

[2]  Paul S. Goodman,et al.  Absenteeism and accidents in a dangerous environment: Empirical analysis of underground coal mines. , 1988 .

[3]  Paul S. Goodman,et al.  Familiarity and Work Group Outcomes , 1992 .

[4]  J. Stoker,et al.  Advances in Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams , 1997 .

[5]  G. Stasser,et al.  Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion , 1985 .

[6]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  Software Development Practices, Software Complexity, and Software Maintenance Performance: a Field Study , 1998 .

[7]  Erran Carmel,et al.  Global software teams: collaborating across borders and time zones , 1999 .

[8]  G. Stasser,et al.  Expert Roles and Information Exchange during Discussion: The Importance of Knowing Who Knows What , 1995 .

[9]  Peter E. Kennedy A Guide to Econometrics , 1979 .

[10]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[11]  Andrea B. Hollingshead,et al.  Transactive Memory Systems in Organizations: Matching Tasks, Expertise, and People , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[12]  C. C. Mann Why software is so bad , 2002 .

[13]  P. Kim When What You KnowCanHurt You: A Study of Experiential Effects on Group Discussion and Performance , 1997 .

[14]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  An Empirical Approach to Studying Software Evolution , 1999, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[15]  S. Mohammed,et al.  Team Mental Model: Construct or Metaphor? , 1994 .

[16]  D. Wegner A Computer Network Model of Human Transactive Memory , 1995 .

[17]  J. Sinacore Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions , 1993 .

[18]  H C Foushee,et al.  Communication as group process media of aircrew performance. , 1989, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[19]  David A. Belsley,et al.  Regression Analysis and its Application: A Data-Oriented Approach.@@@Applied Linear Regression.@@@Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity , 1981 .

[20]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Software Engineering Economics , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[21]  Deborah H. Gruenfeld,et al.  Group Composition and Decision Making: How Member Familiarity and Information Distribution Affect Process and Performance , 1996 .

[22]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  The interdisciplinary study of coordination , 1994, CSUR.

[23]  Dorothy E. Leidner,et al.  Review: Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues , 2001, MIS Q..

[24]  M. Waller The Timing of Adaptive Group Responses to Nonroutine Events , 1999 .

[25]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway's law revisited , 1999, Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Engineering (IEEE Cat. No.99CB37002).

[26]  Bill Curtis,et al.  A field study of the software design process for large systems , 1988, CACM.

[27]  Donald W. Marquaridt Generalized Inverses, Ridge Regression, Biased Linear Estimation, and Nonlinear Estimation , 1970 .

[28]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  Software complexity and software maintenance: A survey of empirical research , 1995, Ann. Softw. Eng..

[29]  Audris Mockus,et al.  Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration , 2000, CSCW '00.

[30]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Architectures, coordination, and distance: Conway’s law and beyond , 1999 .

[31]  D. Armstrong,et al.  Managing distances and differences in geographically distributed work groups. , 2002 .

[32]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  What Do We Know about Proximity and Distance in Work Groups? A Legacy of Research , 2002 .

[33]  G. Littlepage,et al.  Effects of Task Experience and Group Experience on Group Performance, Member Ability, and Recognition of Expertise , 1997 .

[34]  Dewayne E. Perry,et al.  People, organizations, and process improvement , 1994, IEEE Software.

[35]  R. Dorfman A Formula for the Gini Coefficient , 1979 .

[36]  Audris Mockus,et al.  Expertise Browser: a quantitative approach to identifying expertise , 2002, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2002.

[37]  J. McGrath,et al.  TIME MATTERS IN TEAM PERFORMANCE: EFFECTS OF MEMBER FAMILIARITY, ENTRAINMENT, AND TASK DISCONTINUITY ON SPEED AND QUALITY , 2003 .

[38]  K. Weick,et al.  Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. , 1993 .

[39]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

[40]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[41]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  Rapid Software Development through Team Collocation , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[42]  C. Cramton The Mutual Knowledge Problem and Its Consequences for Dispersed Collaboration , 2001 .

[43]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Coordination and Collective Mind in Software Requirements Development , 1998, IBM Syst. J..

[44]  Jody Hoffer Gittell,et al.  Supervisory Span, Relational Coordination and Flight Departure Performance , 2001 .

[45]  R. Hall,et al.  Members of great teams think alike: A model of team effectiveness and schema similarity among team members. , 1994 .

[46]  Maureen S. Battistella,et al.  Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization , 1991 .

[47]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Coordination in software development , 1995, CACM.

[48]  Kathleen M. Carley,et al.  Workgroup Members , 2022 .

[49]  Rebecca E. Grinter Workflow Systems: Occasions for Success and Failure , 2000, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[50]  J. Alberto Espinosa,et al.  Team Boundary Issues Across Multiple Global Firms , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[51]  D. P. Leyden,et al.  Familiarity and Group Productivity , 1991 .

[52]  J. Hackman,et al.  The design of work teams , 1987 .

[53]  Kyle Lewis Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: scale development and validation. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[54]  E. Salas,et al.  Shared mental models in expert team decision making. , 1993 .

[55]  L. Sproull,et al.  Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams , 2000 .

[56]  H. Alker,et al.  On measuring inequality. , 1964, Behavioral science.

[57]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations , 1976 .

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

[59]  T. Allen Managing the flow of technology , 1977 .

[60]  T Okado,et al.  [Interpersonal relations and group processes]. , 1972, Kangogaku zasshi.

[61]  R. Katz The Effects of Group Longevity on Project Communication and Performance. , 1982 .

[62]  Audris Mockus,et al.  An Empirical Study of Speed and Communication in Globally Distributed Software Development , 2003, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[63]  R. Moreland,et al.  Group Versus Individual Training and Group Performance: The Mediating Role of Transactive Memory , 1995 .

[64]  C. Coulton,et al.  Interaction Effects in Multiple Regression , 1993 .

[65]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  The geography of coordination: dealing with distance in R&D work , 1999, GROUP.

[66]  Bill Curtis,et al.  Measuring the Psychological Complexity of Software Maintenance Tasks with the Halstead and McCabe Metrics , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[67]  James D. Thompson Organizations in Action , 1967 .

[68]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  The Moderating Effects of Structure on Volatility and Complexity in Software Enhancement , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[69]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Managing Distances and Differences in Geographically Distributed Work Groups , 2002 .

[70]  P. Kidwell,et al.  The mythical man-month: Essays on software engineering , 1996, IEEE Annals of the History of Computing.

[71]  Joyce J. Elam,et al.  Inside a software design team: knowledge acquisition, sharing, and integration , 1993, CACM.