1

Appendices of: Systematic Mapping Study about Teams in Software Engineering

HASE Technical Report Nº. 2013-002

Danilo Monteiro Ribeiro, Elisa Sattyam, Fernando Kenji, Marcos Cardoso, Rodrigo Lopes Center of Informatics

Federal University of Pernambuco

Recife, Brazil

danilomonteiroo, elisa.sattyam, fkenjikamei, marcos.cardoso, digolopes [@gmail.com]

SUMÁRIO

APPENDIX I. DEINIÇÕES DOS FATORES QUE AFETAM O

DESENVOLVIMENTO DISTRIBUIDO DE SOFTWARE ............ 1

1) Processo ................................................................. 1 2) Comprometimento ................................................. 1 3) Tipo de tarefa......................................................... 1 4) Comunicação ......................................................... 1 5) Performance .......................................................... 1 6) Confiança ............................................................... 1 7) Cultura ................................................................... 1 8) Produtividade ......................................................... 1 9) Dispersão ............................................................... 1 10) Complexidade na tarefa ......................................... 2 11) Familiaridade da tarefa ......................................... 2

APPENDIX II. PROPOSIÇÕES DOS FATORES QUE

AFETAM O DESENVOLVIMENTO DISTRIBUIDO DE

SOFTWARE 2

APPENDIX I. Deinições dos fatores que afetam

o desenvolvimento distribuido de software

1) Processo [Definição]: “The four dimensions of team work are drawn

from the Team Climate Inventory (Anderson and West,

1994), which has been repeatedly validated as a

measurement instrument for team processes and has

consistent psychometric properties (Agrell and Gustafson,

1994; Ragazzoni, Baiardi, Zotti, Anderson, and West,

2002). This study uses a 14-item Team Climate Inventory

instrument which has been validated (Kivimaki and

Elovainio, 1999).”

2) Comprometimento [Definição]: “The items assessing commitment to clan are

drawn from Mowday, Porter, and Steers (1982).”

3) Tipo de tarefa [Definição]: não definido.

4) Comunicação [Definição]: Communications enhances shared-team

identity (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005).

5) Performance [Definição]: Team performance is assessed by

Effectiveness and Efficiency measures developed by Hoegl

and Gemuenden (2001).

6) Confiança [Definição]: "The willingness of a party to be vulnerable to

the actions of another party based on the expectation that

the other will perform a particular action important to the

trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that

other party" (Mayer et al.1995)

7) Cultura [Definição]: Culture influences the common understanding

between teammates due to diversity in people’s

assumptions, behaviours, expectations about leadership

practices, team norms, attitudes towards hierarchy, sense of

time, and communication styles. (Duarte and Snyder 2001,

Herbsleb and Moitra 2001).

8) Produtividade [Definição]: “We measured productivity using the

following ratio of output and input parameters, where Code

Sizeis measured using KLOC (and Function Points), and

Total Project Effort is measured using person hours:” [03]

9) Dispersão [Definition]: “Configurational Dispersion, which is a key

focus of this study, was assessed using three measures:

Number of Sites, Personnel Imbalance, and Experience

Spread.

(…)

Number of Sites. Number of locations where team

members work.

Personnel Imbalance. Extent of unevenness in distribution

of personnel across locations.

Human Aspects in Software Engineering

http://www.haseresearch.com

Technical Report N. 2012-003

Available at …

2

Experience Spread (configurational). Extent of unevenness

in work experience of personnel across locations.”[03]

10) Complexidade na tarefa [Definição]: Para [01], a complexidade na tarefa envolve o

seu tamanho e a complexidade da estrutura.

“Task Size. We measured task size as the number of

thousands of lines of software instructions (i.e., software

code added, deleted, or changed) written for the MR. As

the software product was written in one programming

language, lines of code provides a reasonable measure of

software size. Naturally, we expect that more software

instructions will take longer to develop.

Structural Complexity. Structural complexity can be

evaluated by measuring characteristics that make software

difficult to understand and change (Curtis et al.1979). As

the number of modules affected increases, it becomes more

difficult to understand how the parts being modified will

affect other parts of the system (Darcy et al. 2005,

Herbsleb and Mockus 2003) which increases the amount of

information that developers need to process to implement

the MR, thus increasing its complexity (Wood 1986).

Therefore, we measured the structural complexity of the

task as the number of modules impacted by the MR.

Because each delta affects a single module, information

about which modules were affected by an MR is readily

available in our data set.”

11) Familiaridade da tarefa [Definição]: “Task Familiarity. Prior empirical studies

have measured task familiarity simply as prior work

experience in a similar task (Littlepage et al. 1997,

Reagans et al. 2005). To be effective in their work,

software developers need to understand the existing

software product base and the application domain in which

the new software will operate (Boehm 1981, Brooks 1995,

Curtis et al. 1988, Walz et al. 1993)”

APPENDIX II. Proposições dos fatores

que afetam o desenvolvimento distribuido de

software

[Proposição] Tipo de tarefa afeta positivamente a

comunicação

“The findings show that that task type seems to be one of the most important factors in promoting comunication among the team members.” [04]

[Proposição]: Comprometimento afeta positivamente a

performace.

“Alternatively, the factors of commitment to

clan, trust, and team processes were each significant for team performance and project success.” [05]

[Proposição]: Processo afeta positivamente a

performance

“Alternatively, the factors of commitment to clan, trust, and team processes were each significant for team performance and project success.” [05]

[Proposição]: Comunicação afeta positivamente a

performance

“Alternatively, the factors of commitment to

clan, trust, and team processes were each

significant for team performance and project

success.” [05]

[Proposição]: Cultura afeta positivamente a

comunicação

A comparison of the clusters by cultural

groups indicates that culture

may have some relationship to the type of

communication patterns that occur within a

group. [05]

[Proposição]: Comunicação afeta positivamente a

performance

“higher performing cluster had more

communication behaviors than any other

cluster, and their communication activities

were more evenly distributed

among the different types of communication

activities.” [05]

“Like Bandow (2001), Dirks and Ferrin

(2001) we found that when virtual teams lack

trust, there may be significant problems with

the performance and behaviour of the team

members.” [03]

[Proposição]: Cultura afeta positivamente a confiança

“On the basis of our results, we believe that

the problem with poor socio-cultural fit may

have been exacerbated by a lack of face-to-

face interaction and too little socialization.”

[09]

[Proposição]: Confiança afeta positivamente a

produtividade

“All the projects reported a decrease in

productivity and quality, and that team

Human Aspects in Software Engineering

http://www.haseresearch.com

Technical Report N. 2012-003

Available at …

3

morale was undermined, as a result

of an absence of trust.” [03]

[Proposição]: Comunicação afeta positivamente a

confiança

“From our study we found that poor

socialization, lack of face-to-face meetings,

too little communication, and poor socio-

cultural fit were reported by

all the projects” [03]

[Proposição]: Familiaridade afeta positivamente a

performance

“Our results show that while familiarity is

generally beneficial for performance, it

can also complement or offset different

elements of complex work environments.”

[01]

[Proposição]: Complexidade afeta negativamente a

performance

“Our results show that while familiarity is

generally beneficial for performance, it

can also complement or offset different

elements of complex work environments.”

[01]

[Proposição]: Cultura não afeta a performance

“The cultural differences variable was not

significant in distinguishing high-

performing from low-performing teams, as

demonstrated in Tables 1 and 2” [05]