The effects of roles and personality characteristics on software development team effectiveness

The objective of this research is to show the utility of roles and personality characteristics to the evaluation and formation of software development teams. The goals of this research include demonstrating empirically that Belbin's team roles can be used to form and evaluate software teams, providing a partial validation of the analyses by using the Belbin roles to analyze teams from the software industry, and comparing the personality data collected for this research to data from two previous studies and to the general population. In the highly competitive software industry, improving the software development process can be critical to a company's success. More specifically, improving a team's productivity can save employers significant time and money. This investigation addresses the productivity of software development teams in a series of studies. First, controlled studies empirically show that Belbin's roles can be used in team formation to improve team performance. Second, additional studies, both qualitative and quantitative, demonstrate that Belbin's roles can be used as criteria in team evaluation and formation. Finally, teams from the software development industry are evaluated, providing a partial validation of the usefulness of Belbin's roles to software teams. The cumulative effect of the results of the studies in this investigation demonstrate that Belbin's roles can be used effectively in team formation and evaluation. Specifically, Belbin's roles for leadership and innovation are shown in empirical studies to be important in the formation of software teams, and all of the Belbin roles are used in the evaluation of teams in academia as well as in industry. The results of this investigation should be used in team formation and evaluation, in an academic setting as well as in the software development industry. For team evaluation, deficiencies uncovered in the Belbin roles should be remedied, and positive aspects should be encouraged. In team formation, teams should contain the complement of Belbin roles and should specifically contain the leadership and innovation roles focused on as part of this investigation. It is clear from this investigation that Belbin's roles can be used effectively to improve software development teams.

[1]  Raymond McLeod,et al.  Use of a decision support system to evaluate candidates applying for programmer/analyst positions , 1991, CPRS.

[2]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  Personality differences within systems project teams: Implications for designing solving centers , 1981, SIGCPR '81.

[3]  Elliot Soloway,et al.  Empirical Studies of Programmers: Second Workshop , 1991 .

[4]  I. B. Myers.  Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator , 1985 .

[5]  James C. Spohrer,et al.  Empirical Studies of Programmers: Fifth Workshop , 1993 .

[6]  S. B. Flexner,et al.  Random House unabridged dictionary , 1993 .

[7]  Michael Lyons.  The DP psyche , 1985 .

[8]  Paul H. Cheney,et al.  Training, ability, and the acceptance of information technology: an empirical study of IS personnel and end users , 1991, CPRS.

[9]  J. Daniel Couger,et al.  Motivating and managing computer personnel , 1980 .

[10]  Michel Hersen,et al.  Handbook of Psychological Assessment , 1990 .

[11]  C. Ireland.  Fundamental concepts in the design of experiments , 1964 .

[12]  Tom DeMarco,et al.  Controlling Software Projects , 1982 .

[13]  Jonathan Trower,et al.  Improving the performance of technologists and users on interdisciplinary teams: an analysis of information systems project teams , 1991, SIGCPR '91.

[14]  Michael A. West,et al.  Innovation, cultural values, and the management of change in British hospitals , 1992 .

[15]  W. Mischel.  Introduction to personality , 1971 .

[16]  Glenn H. Varney,et al.  Building productive teams , 1989 .

[17]  H. E. Dunsmore,et al.  Software engineering metrics and models , 1986 .

[18]  Sallie Henry.  A project oriented course on software engineering , 1983, SIGCSE '83.

[19]  D. Boehm-Davis,et al.  Mental representations of programs for student and professional programmers , 1987 .

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

[21]  David N. Card.  Statistical process control for software? , 1994, IEEE Software.

[22]  V. L. Campbell,et al.  Testing in counseling practice , 1990 .

[23]  E. S. Knowles,et al.  From Individuals to Group Members: A Dialectic for the Social Sciences , 1982 .

[24]  John H. Baumert.  Process assessment with a project focus , 1994, IEEE Software.

[25]  Martha E. Myers.  Motivation and performance in the information systems field: a survey of related studies , 1991, SIGCPR.

[26]  Kathy Brittain White,et al.  MIS Project Teams: An Investigation of Cognitive Style Implications , 1984, MIS Q..

[27]  Sallie M. Henry,et al.  Comparison of an Object-Oriented Programming Language to a Procedural Programming Language for Effectiveness in Program Maintenance , 1988 .

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

[29]  Thomas W. Ferratt,et al.  Are Information Systems People Different: An Investigation of Motivational Differences , 1986, MIS Q..

[30]  Gerald M. Weinberg,et al.  Psychology of computer programming , 1971 .

[31]  P. Goodman.  Groups That Work (and Those That Don't)Groups That Work (and Those That Don't) by Hackman Richard. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991, 512 pp. , 1992 .

[32]  S. Seashore,et al.  Group Cohesiveness in the Industrial Work Group. , 1955 .

[33]  Laurence J. Peter,et al.  彼得原理=The Peter principle , 2007 .

[34]  R. Meredith Belbin,et al.  Team Roles at Work , 2022 .

[35]  Joyce J. Elam,et al.  A methodology for studying software design teams: an investigation of conflict behaviors in the requirements definition phase , 1987 .

[36]  Fred P. Brooks,et al.  The Mythical Man-Month , 1975, Reliable Software.

[37]  G. Rice,et al.  Personality types and business success of small retailers , 1989 .

[38]  R. Lyman Ott.,et al.  An introduction to statistical methods and data analysis , 1977 .

[39]  Bill Curtis.  Empirical studies of the software design process , 1990 .

[40]  M. E. Shaw.  Group dynamics : the psychology of small group behavior , 1971 .

[41]  Leonie Kohl,et al.  Fundamental Concepts in the Design of Experiments , 2000 .

[42]  J Chin.  Working with computers: theory versus outcome , 1990 .

[43]  Watts S. Humphrey,et al.  A discipline for software engineering , 2012, Series in software engineering.

[44]  T. Tutko,et al.  Winning is everything and other American myths , 1976 .

[45]  Martha Jane Edwards Myers.  An examination of motivation in the information systems profession , 1989 .

[46]  R. Keller,et al.  Predictors of the Performance of Project Groups in R & D Organizations , 1986 .

[47]  Philip M. Podsakoff,et al.  Effects of group-level and individual-level variation in leader behaviours on subordinate attitudes and performance. , 1992 .

[48]  John B. Black,et al.  Software psychology: The need for an interdisciplinary program , 1986, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[49]  Deborah Lee Johnson.  Competitiveness and performance in the workforce: hierarchical factor analysis of managerial competitiveness, achievement motivation, and the big five personality dimensions , 1992 .

[50]  R. Cattell.  The Description and Measurement of Personality , 1947, Mental Health.

[51]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  Self-perceptions and job preferences of entry-level information systems professionals: implications for career development , 1991, SIGCPR '91.

[52]  Roland Robertson,et al.  Role Theory, Concepts and Research , 1966 .

[53]  Francis M. Sim,et al.  Role Theory: Expectations, Identities, and Behaviors. , 1982 .

[54]  Susan G. Straus,et al.  Does the medium matter? The interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. , 1994, The Journal of applied psychology.