Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Assigned roles for Inter-team coordination in Large-Scale Agile Development: a literature review.
Karlstad University, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT, Department of Information Systems and Project Management.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1512-6592
2017 (English)In: Proceedings of the XP2017 Scientific Workshops / [ed] Tonelli, Roberto, Cologne: University , 2017, article id 15Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Inter-team coordination has been recognized as one of the most important challenges in large-scale agile development settings. Except specific practices, such asScrum of Scrums meetings, certain roles are oftenreported to be responsible for areas of coordination incase studies. Although agile values state thatcoordination should be dealt with face-to-face byindividuals, two commonly used prescriptive frameworksfor large-scale agile development suggests contrastingways of coordinating regarding roles and theirresponsibilities. One propose additional coordinating roles leaving less mandate and autonomy to the single team while the other propose no additional roles, compared to the original roles of Scrum, allowing more autonomy to the teams. This literature review is an analysis of roles assigned with the responsibility for inter-team coordination in 42 case studies of large-scale agile development settings. The review shows that only four of the analyzed organizations appoints roles according to the large-scale agile frameworks. Rather, a wide range of different additional roles with different role tailoring is displayed where the majority is focusing on vertical coordination rather than horizontal coordination. In three of the cases, the role setup has specificallytargeted coordination for architectural issues. The study shows that the prescriptive frameworks are seen as toolboxes leaving the responsibility for tailoring to the single organization. This implies a stronger need for theoretical support on what to use as basis for tailoring of roles and their responsibilities.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Cologne: University , 2017. article id 15
National Category
Information Systems
Research subject
Information Systems
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-70312DOI: 10.1145/3120459.3120475OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kau-70312DiVA, id: diva2:1266103
Conference
XP2017, May 22 - 26, 2017 Cologne, Germany
Available from: 2018-11-27 Created: 2018-11-27 Last updated: 2018-12-13Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Gustavsson, Tomas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Gustavsson, Tomas
By organisation
Department of Information Systems and Project Management
Information Systems

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 18 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf