How Pair Programming Influences Team Performance: The Role of Backup Behavior, Shared Mental Models, and Task Novelty

References

• Arisholm E, Gallis H, Dybå T, Sjoberg DI (2007) Evaluating pair programming with respect to system complexity and programmer expertise. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. 33(2):65–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balijepally V, Mahapatra R, Nerur S, Price KH (2009) Are two heads better than one for software development? The productivity paradox of pair programming. MIS Quart. 33(1):91–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banker RD, Slaughter SA (2000) The moderating effects of structure on volatility and complexity in software enhancement. Inform. Systems Res. 11(3):219–240.Link, Google Scholar
• Barnes CM, Hollenbeck JR, Wagner DT, DeRue DS, Nahrgang JD, Schwind KM (2008) Harmful help: The costs of backing-up behavior in teams. J. Appl. Psych. 93(3):529–539.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boh WF, Slaughter SA, Espinosa JA (2007) Learning from experience in software development: A multilevel analysis. Management Sci. 53(8):1315–1331.Link, Google Scholar
• Burke CS, Stagl KC, Salas E, Pierce L, Kendall D (2006) Understanding team adaptation: A conceptual analysis and model. J. Appl. Psych. 91(6):1189–1207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chow T, Cao D-B (2008) A survey study of critical success factors in Agile Software Projects. J. Systems Software 81(6):961–971.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Colquitt JA, Zapata-Phelan CP (2007) Trends in theory building and theory testing: A five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Acad. Management J. 50(6):1281–1303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coman ID, Robillard PN, Sillitti A, Succi G (2014) Cooperation, collaboration and pair-programming: Field studies on backup behavior. J. Systems Software 91(May):124–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Conboy K (2009) Agility from first principles: Reconstructing the concept of agility in information systems development. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3):329–354.Link, Google Scholar
• Davern M, Shaft T, Te’eni D (2012) Cognition matters: Enduring questions in cognitive IS research. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 13(4):273–314.Google Scholar
• Dawande M, Johar M, Kumar S, Mookerjee VS (2008) A comparison of pair versus solo programming under different objectives: An analytical approach. Inform. Systems Res. 19(1):71–92.Link, Google Scholar
• DeChurch LA, Mesmer-Magnus JR (2010) Measuring shared team mental models: A meta-analysis. Group Dynam. 14(1):1–14.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Den Hartog DN, De Hoogh AHB, Keegan AE (2007) The interactive effects of belongingness and charisma on helping and compliance. J. Appl. Psych. 92(4):1131–1139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dickinson TL, McIntyre RM (1997) A conceptual framework for teamwork measurement. Brannick MT, Salas E, Prince C, eds. Team Performance Assessment and Measurement (Psychology Press, Mahwah, NJ), 19–43.Google Scholar
• Dingsøyr T, Nerur S, Balijepally V, Moe NB (2012) A decade of agile methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development. J. Systems Software 85(6):1213–1221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Domino MA, Collins RW, Hevner AR (2007) Controlled experimentation on adaptations of pair programming. Inform. Tech. Management 8(4):297–312.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dybå T, Dingsøyr T (2008) Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Inform. Software Tech. 50(9–10):833–859.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dybå T, Arisholm E, Sjoberg DIK, Hannay JE, Shull F (2007) Are two heads better than one? On the effectiveness of pair programming. IEEE Software 24(6):12–15.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Lambert LS (2007) Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psych. Methods 12(1):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Faraj S, Sproull L (2000) Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Management Sci. 46(12):1554–1568.Link, Google Scholar
• Fowler M, Highsmith J (2001) The Agile manifesto. Software Development 9(8):28–35.Google Scholar
• Frank KA (2000) Impact of a confounding variable on a regression coefficient. Sociol. Methods Res. 29(2):147–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gersick CJ, Hackman JR (1990) Habitual routines in task-performing groups. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 47(1):65–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guinan PJ, Cooprider JG, Faraj S (1998) Enabling software development team performance during requirements definition: A behavioral versus technical approach. Inform. Systems Res. 9(2):101–125.Link, Google Scholar
• Hannay JE, Dybå T, Arisholm E, Sjøberg DI (2009) The effectiveness of pair programming: A meta-analysis. Inform. Software Tech. 51(7):1110–1122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harris ML, Collins RW, Hevner AR (2009) Control of flexible software development under uncertainty. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3):400–419.Link, Google Scholar
• He J, Butler BS, King WR (2007) Team cognition: Development and evolution in software project teams. J. Management Inform. Systems 24(2):261–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoegl M, Parboteeah KP, Gemuenden HG (2003) When teamwork really matters: Task innovativeness as a moderator of the teamwork–performance relationship in software development projects. J. Engrg. Tech. Management 20(4):281–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang P, Tafti A, Mithas S (2018) Platform sponsor’s investments and user contributions in knowledge communities: The role of knowledge seeding. MIS Quart. 42(1):213–240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang J, Henfridsson O, Liu M, Newell S (2017) Growing on steroids: Rapidly scaling the user base in digital ventures through digital innovation. MIS Quart. 41(1):301–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hulkko H, Abrahamsson P (2005) A multiple case study on the impact of pair programming on product quality. Internat. Conf. Software Engrg. (ACM, New York), 495–504.Google Scholar
• Im G, Rai A (2008) Knowledge sharing ambidexterity in long-term interorganizational relationships. Management Sci. 54(7):1281–1296.Link, Google Scholar
• Kim K, Mithas S, Whitaker J, Roy PK (2014) Industry-specific human capital and wages: Evidence from the business process outsourcing industry. Inform. Systems Res. 25(3):618–638.Link, Google Scholar
• Kozlowski SW, Klein KJ (2000) A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual, temporal, and emergent processes. Klein KJ, Kozlowski SW, eds. Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 3–90.Google Scholar
• Kude T, Mithas S, Schmidt CT, Heinzl A (2018) Too much of a good thing? How team relationship influences software performance. Proc. INFORMS Conf. Inform. Systems Tech. 2018, Phoenix.Google Scholar
• Lau AKW, Yam RCM, Tang E (2009) The complementarity of internal integration and product modularity: An empirical study of their interaction effect on competitive capabilities. J. Engrg. Tech. Management 26(4):305–326.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lawler EJ, Yoon J (1996) Commitment in exchange relations: Test of a theory of relational cohesion. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 61(1):89–108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee AS (1999) Researching MIS. Currie WL, Galliers RD, eds. Rethinking Management Information Systems: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (Oxford University Press, Cambridge, MA), 7–27.Google Scholar
• Lee F (2002) The social costs of seeking help. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 38(1):17–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee G, Xia W (2010) Toward agile: An integrated analysis of quantitative and qualitative field data. MIS Quart. 34(1):87–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levesque LL, Wilson JM, Wholey DR (2001) Cognitive divergence and shared mental models in software development project teams. J. Organ. Behav. 22(2):135–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lui KM, Chan KCC (2006) Pair programming productivity: Novice–novice vs. expert–expert. Internat. J. Human Comput. Stud. 64(9):915–925.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mangalaraj G, Mahapatra R, Nerur S (2009) Acceptance of software process innovations—The case of extreme programming. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 18(4):344–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mangalaraj G, Nerur S, Mahapatra R, Price KH (2014) Distributed cognition in software design: An experimental investigation of the role of design patterns and collaboration. MIS Quart. 38(1):249–274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marks MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccaro SJ (2001) A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Acad. Management Rev. 26(3):356–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Markus ML, Silver MS (2008) A foundation for the study of IT effects: A new look at DeSanctis and Poole’s concepts of structural features and spirit. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 9(10):609–632.Google Scholar
• Maruping LM, Venkatesh V, Agarwal R (2009a) A control theory perspective on agile methodology use and changing user requirements. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3):377–399.Link, Google Scholar
• Maruping LM, Zhang X, Venkatesh V (2009b) Role of collective ownership and coding standards in coordinating expertise in software project teams. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 18(4):355–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Kude T (2017) Digitization and disciplined autonomy. IEEE IT Professional 19(5):4–8.Google Scholar
• Mithas S, Rust RT (2016) How information technology strategy and investments influence firm performance: Conjecture and empirical evidence. MIS Quart. 40(1):223–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moe NB, Dingsøyr T (2008) Scrum and team effectiveness: Theory and practice. Abrahamsson P, Baskerville R, Conboy K, Fitzgerald B, Morgan L, Wang X, eds. Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming–XP 2008, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 9 (Springer, Berlin), 11–20.Google Scholar
• Moe NB, Dingsøyr T, Dybå T (2009) Overcoming barriers to self-management in software teams. IEEE Software 29(6):20–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moe NB, Dingsøyr T, Dybå T (2010) A teamwork model for understanding an agile team: A case study of a Scrum project. Inform. Software Tech. 52(5):480–491.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mohammed S, Dumville BC (2001) Team mental models in a team knowledge framework: Expanding theory and measurement across disciplinary boundaries. J. Organ. Behav. 22(2):89–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mohammed S, Ferzandi L, Hamilton K (2010) Metaphor no more: A 15-year review of the team mental model construct. J. Management 36(4):876–910.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nidumolu S (1995) The effect of coordination and uncertainty on software project performance: Residual performance risk as an intervening variable. Inform. Systems Res. 6(3):191–219.Link, Google Scholar
• Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation (Oxford University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pikkarainen M, Haikara J, Salo O, Abrahamsson P, Still J (2008) The impact of agile practices on communication in software development. Empirical Software Engrg. 13(3):303–337.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psych. 88(5):879–903.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter CO (2005) Goal orientation: Effects on backing up behavior, performance, efficacy, and commitment in teams. J. Appl. Psych. 90(4):811–818.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter CO, Webb JW, Gogus CI (2010) When goal orientations collide: Effects of learning and performance orientation on team adaptability in response to workload imbalance. J. Appl. Psych. 95(5):935–943.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter COHL, Hollenbeck JR, Ilgen DR, Ellis APJ, West BJ, Moon H (2003) Backing up behaviors in teams: The role of personality and legitimacy of need. J. Appl. Psych. 88(3):391–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raisch S, Birkinshaw J (2008) Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. J. Management 34(3):375–409.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramasubbu N, Bharadwaj A, Tayi GK (2015) Software process diversity: Conceptualization, measurement, and analysis of impact on project performance. MIS Quart. 39(4):787–807.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramesh B, Mohan K, Cao L (2012) Ambidexterity in agile distributed development: An empirical investigation. Inform. Systems Res. 23(2):323–339.Link, Google Scholar
• Rosen MA, Bedwell WL, Wildman JL, Fritzsche BA, Salas E, Burke CS (2011) Managing adaptive performance in teams: Guiding principles and behavioral markers for measurement. Human Resource Management Rev. 21(2):107–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ryan S, O’Connor RV (2013) Acquiring and sharing tacit knowledge in software development teams: An empirical study. Inform. Software Tech. 55(9):1614–1624.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salas E, Sims DE, Burke CS (2005) Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork? Small Group Res. 36(5):555–599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saldanha T, Mithas S, Krishnan MS (2017) Leveraging customer involvement for fueling innovation: The role of relational and analytical information processing capabilities. MIS Quart. 41(1):267–286.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Salleh N, Mendes E, Grundy J (2011) Empirical studies of pair programming for CS/SE teaching in higher education: A systematic literature review. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. 37(4):509–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sarker S, Sarker S (2009) Exploring agility in distributed information systems development teams: An interpretive study in an offshoring context. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3):440–461.Link, Google Scholar
• Schmidt C, Srinivasa GV, Heymann J (2014) Empirical insights into the perceived benefits of agile software engineering practices: A case study from SAP. Proc. 36th Internat. Conf. Software Engrg. (ACM, New York), 84–92.Google Scholar
• Schwaber K, Beedle M (2001) Agile Software Development with Scrum (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).Google Scholar
• Shuffler ML, DiazGranados D, Salas E (2011) There’s a science for that: Team development interventions in organizations. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 20(6):365–372.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith-Jentsch KA, Kraiger K, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E (2009) Do familiar teammates request and accept more backup? Transactive memory in air traffic control. Human Factors 51(2):181–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tafti A, Mithas S, Krishnan MS (2007) Information technology and the autonomy–control duality: Toward a theory. Inform. Tech. Management 8(2):147–166.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vanhanen J, Lassenius C (2005) Effects of pair programming at the development team level: An experiment. Internat. Sympos. Empirical Software Engrg. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 336–345.Google Scholar
• Vidgen R, Wang X (2009) Coevolving systems and the organization of agile software development. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3):355–376.Link, Google Scholar
• Williams L, Kessler RR, Cunningham W, Jeffries R (2000) Strengthening the case for pair programming. IEEE Software 17(4):19–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yates D, Wagner C, Majchrzak A (2010) Factors affecting shapers of organizational wikis. J. Assoc. Inform. Sci. Tech. 61(3):543–554.Google Scholar
• Yu X, Petter S (2014) Understanding agile software development practices using shared mental models theory. Inform. Software Tech. 56(8):911–921.Crossref, Google Scholar