Abstract

Agile methods and the related concepts of employee empowerment, self-management, and autonomy have reached large-scale software organizations and raise questions about commonly adopted principles for authority distribution. However, the optimum mechanism to balance the need for alignment, quality, and process control with the need or willingness of teams to be autonomous remains an unresolved issue. In this paper, we report our findings from a multiple-case study in two large-scale software development organizations in the telecom industry. We analysed the autonomy of the agile teams in the organizations using Hackman’s classification of unit authority and found that the teams were partly self-managing. Further, we found that alignment across teams can be achieved top-down by management and bottom-up through membership in communities or through dialogue between the team and management. However, the degree of team autonomy was limited by the need for organizational alignment. Top-down alignment and control were maintained through centralized decision-making for certain areas, the use of supervisory roles, mandatory processes, and checklists. One case employed a bottom-up approach to alignment through the formation of a community composed of all teams, experts, and supporting roles, but excluding managers. This community-based alignment involved teams in decision-making and engaged them in alignment initiatives. We conclude that implementation of such bottom-up structures seems to provide one possible mechanism for balancing organizational control and team autonomy in large-scale software development.

Highlights

  • Large-scale software development has traditionally been recognized as an initiative best approached using conventional top-down management with a clear governance structure, predefined decision-making mechanisms, and roles with varying levels of responsibility

  • As in previous research that demonstrated that teams that are not involved in designing the general policies and alignment initiatives might not fully commit to those initiatives (Moe et al 2009), we found that the top-down approach in Project Mobility was not suitable for all teams, and especially not for the experienced teams that constantly reflected upon and improved their own process

  • The recent trend towards agile transformations at both the development and corporate levels has challenged the common authority distribution principles to allow for more bottom-up decisions to emerge

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Large-scale software development has traditionally been recognized as an initiative best approached using conventional top-down management with a clear governance structure, predefined decision-making mechanisms, and roles with varying levels of responsibility. The notion of autonomous teams is not new and has been studied and described from various perspectives in the past (Hoda et al 2012); research in this area has been around since Trist and Bamforth (1951) studied self-regulated coal miners in the 1950s.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call