Team-Enacted Use vs. Developer-Needed Use of Agile Practices: How Perceptual (In-)Congruence and Team Feedback-Seeking Shape Developer Well-Being

References

• Ågerfalk PJ, Fitzgerald B, Slaughter SA (2009) Flexible and distributed information systems development: State of the art and research challenges. Inform. Systems Res. 20(3):317–328.Link, Google Scholar
• Ashford SJ, Black JS (1996) Proactivity during organizational entry: The role of desire for control. J. Appl. Psych. 81(2):199–214.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashford SJ, Cummings LL (1983) Feedback as an individual resource: Personal strategies of creating information. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 32(3):370–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baham C, Hirschheim R (2022) Issues, challenges, and a proposed theoretical core of agile software development research. Inform. Systems J. 32(1):103–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bandura A (1989) Human agency in social cognitive theory. Amer. Psychologist 44(9):1175–1184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Bratslavsky E, Finkenauer C, Vohs KD (2001) Bad is stronger than good. Rev. General Psych. 5(4):323–370.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beal DJ (2015) ESM 2.0: State of the art and future potential of experience sampling methods in organizational research. Annual Rev. Organ. Psych. Organ. Behav. 2(1):383–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beck K, Beedle M, Van Bennekum A, Cockburn A, Cunningham W, Fowler M, Grenning J, et al. (2001) Manifesto for agile software development. Accessed March 15, 2025, https://agilemanifesto.org/.Google Scholar
• Benlian A (2013) Effect mechanisms of perceptual congruence between information systems professionals and users on satisfaction with service. J. Management Inform. Systems 29(4):63–96.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benlian A (2014) Are we aligned … enough? The effects of perceptual congruence between service teams and their leaders on team performance. J. Service Res. 17(2):212–228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benlian A (2022) Sprint zeal or sprint fatigue? The benefits and burdens of agile ISD practices use for developer well-being. Inform. Systems Res. 33(2):557–578.Link, Google Scholar
• Blagoev B, Hernes T, Kunisch S, Schultz M (2024) Time as a research lens: A conceptual review and research agenda. J. Management 50(6):2152–2196.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bolger N, Davis A, Rafaeli E (2003) Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Rev. Psych. 54(1):579–616.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V (2021) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide (SAGE, London).Google Scholar
• Cable DM, Edwards JR (2004) Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and empirical integration. J. Appl. Psych. 89(5):822–834.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Callister RR, Kramer MW, Turban DB (1999) Feedback seeking following career transitions. Acad. Management J. 42(4):429–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carroll N, Conboy K, Wang X (2023) From transformation to normalisation: An exploratory study of a large-scale agile transformation. J. Inform. Tech. 38(3):267–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chau DCK, Ngai EWT, Gerow JE, Thatcher JB (2020) The effects of business-IT strategic alignment and it governance on firm performance: A moderated polynomial regression analysis. MIS Quart. 44(4):1679–1703.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cockburn A, Highsmith J (2001) Agile software development, the people factor. Computer 34(11):131–133.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Conboy K, Coyle S, Wang X, Pikkarainen M (2011) People over process: Key challenges in agile development. IEEE Software 28(4):48–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cram WA, D’arcy J, Benlian A (2024) Time will tell: A case for an idiographic approach for behavioral cybersecurity research. MIS Quart. 48(1):95–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dennehy D, Conboy K (2018) Identifying challenges and a research agenda for flow in software project management. Project Management J. 49(6):103–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diener E, Oishi S, Lucas RE (2009) Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. Lopez S, Snyder C, eds. Oxford Handbook of Positive Psychology (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 187–192.Google Scholar
• Diener E, Suh EM, Lucas RE, Smith HL (1999) Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress. Psych. Bull. 125(2):276–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• digital.ai (2023) 17th State of agile report. Accessed March 15, 2025, https://digital.ai/resource-center/analyst-reports/state-of-agile-report/.Google Scholar
• Dikert K, Paasivaara M, Lassenius C (2016) Challenges and success factors for large-scale agile transformations: A systematic literature review. J. Systems Software 119:87–108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR (1994) The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 58(1):51–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR (2001) Ten difference score myths. Organ. Res. Methods 4(3):265–287.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR (2002) Alternatives to difference scores: Polynomial regression analysis and response surface methodology. Drasgow F, Schmitt N, eds. Measuring and Analyzing Behavior in Organizations: Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis (Jossey-Bass/Wiley, San Francisco), 350–400.Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Cable DM (2009) The value of value congruence. J. Appl. Psych. 94(3):654–677.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Harrison RV (1993) Job demands and worker health: Three-dimensional reexamination of the relationship between person–environment fit and strain. J. Appl. Psych. 78(4):628–648.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Parry ME (1993) On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Acad. Management J. 36(6):1577–1613.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Shipp AJ (2007) The relationship between person-environment fit and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework. Ostroff C, Judge TA, ed. Perspectives on Organizational Fit (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco), 209–258.Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Caplan RD, Van Harrison R (1998) Person-environment fit theory: Conceptual foundations, empirical evidence, and directions for future research. Cooper CL, ed. Theories of Organizational Stress (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK), 28–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edwards JR, Cabe DM, Williamson IO, Lambert LS, Shipp AJ (2006) The phenomenology of fit: Linking the person and environment to the subjective experience of person-environment fit. J. Appl. Psych. 91(4):802–827.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Enders CK (2010) Applied Missing Data Analysis (Guilford Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Fischer M, Heinz M, Schlereth C, Rosenkranz C (2023) “You can’t always get what you want”: Examining employees’ preferences and job satisfaction in agile transformations. ECIS 2023 Research Paper No. 393, ECIS, Kristiansand, Norway.Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald B, Hartnett G, Conboy K (2006) Customising agile methods to software practices at Intel Shannon. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 15(2):200–213.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fry LW, Smith DA (1987) Congruence, contingency, and theory building. Acad. Management Rev. 12(1):117–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gabriel AS, Podsakoff NP, Beal DJ, Scott BA, Sonnentag S, Trougakos JP, Butts MM (2019) Experience sampling methods: A discussion of critical trends and considerations for scholarly advancement. Organ. Res. Methods 22(4):969–1006.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hennel P, Rosenkranz C (2021) Investigating the “socio” in socio-technical development: The case for psychological safety in agile information systems development. Project Management J. 52(1):11–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoda R, Murugesan LK (2016) Multi-level agile project management challenges: A self-organizing team perspective. J. Systems Software 117:245–257.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hofmann DA, Gavin MB (1998) Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research in organizations. J. Management 24(5):623–641.Google Scholar
• Jansen KJ, Kristof-Brown AL (2005) Marching to the beat of a different drummer: Examining the impact of pacing congruence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 97(2):93–105.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joyce W, Slocum JW, Von Glinow MA (1982) Person-situation interaction: Competing models of fit. J. Organ. Behav. 3(4):265–280.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Junker TL, Bakker AB, Derks D (2024) Toward a theory of team resource mobilization: A systematic review and model of sustained agile team effectiveness. Human Resource Management Rev. 35(1):101043.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Junker TL, Bakker AB, Gorgievski MJ, Derks D (2022) Agile work practices and employee proactivity: A multilevel study. Human Relations 75(12):2189–2217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein G, Jiang JJ, Cheney P (2009) Resolving difference score issues in information systems research. MIS Quart. 33(4):811–826.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kristof AL (1996) Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psych. 49(1):1–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kristof-Brown AL, Zimmerman RD, Johnson EC (2005) Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psych. 58(2):281–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kude T, Foerderer J, Mithas S, Heinzl A (2023) How deadline orientation and architectural modularity influence software quality and job satisfaction. J. Oper. Management 69(6):941–964.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kude T, Mithas S, Schmidt CT, Heinzl A (2019) How pair programming influences team performance: The role of backup behavior, shared mental models, and task novelty. Inform. Systems Res. 30(4):1145–1163.Link, Google Scholar
• Lai X, Li F, Leung K (2013) A Monte Carlo study of the effects of common method variance on significance testing and parameter bias in hierarchical linear modeling. Organ. Res. Methods 16(2):243–269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lankton NK, Mcknight DH, Wright RT, Thatcher JB (2016) Research note—Using expectation disconfirmation theory and polynomial modeling to understand trust in technology. Inform. Systems Res. 27(1):197–213.Link, Google Scholar
• Liao Z, Liu W, Li X, Song Z (2019) Give and take: An episodic perspective on leader-member exchange. J. Appl. Psych. 104(1):34–51.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luong TT, Sivarajah U, Weerakkody V (2021) Do agile managed information systems projects fail due to a lack of emotional intelligence? Inform. Systems Frontiers 23(2):415–433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maruping LM, Daniel SL, Cataldo M (2019) Developer centrality and the impact of value congruence and incongruence on commitment and code contribution activity in open source software communities. MIS Quart. 43(3):951–976.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Masood Z, Hoda R, Blincoe K (2022) Real world scrum a grounded theory of variations in practice. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. 48(5):1579–1591.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meckenstock J-N (2024) Shedding light on the dark side—A systematic literature review of the issues in agile software development methodology use. J. Systems Software 211:111966.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mikkelsen MF (2021) Perceived project complexity: A survey among practitioners of project management. Internat. J. Managing Projects Bus. 14(3):680–698.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldaña J (2014) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Milne A (2022) 10 reasons why agile transformations fail and how yours can succeed. net solutions (August 8), https://www.netsolutions.com/insights/how-to-prevent-agile-transformation-failure/.Google Scholar
• Mueller L, Benlian A (2022) Too drained from being agile? The self-regulatory effects of agile ISD practices use and their consequences for turnover intention. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 23(6):1420–1455.Google Scholar
• Mueller L, Albrecht G, Toutaoui J, Benlian A, Cram WA (2025) Navigating role identity tensions—IT project managers’ identity work in agile information systems development. Eur. J. Inform. Systems 34(2):383–406.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nazir S, Collignon SE, Surendra NC (2024) Understanding collective ownership in agile development: Turbo charging the process. Inform. Management 61(6):104004.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nestler S, Humberg S, Schönbrodt FD (2019) Response surface analysis with multilevel data: Illustration for the case of congruence hypotheses. Psych. Methods 24(3):291–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Connor M, Conboy K, Dennehy D, Carroll N (2024) Temporal complexity in information systems development flow: Challenges and recommendations. Comm. Assoc. Inform. Systems 54(1):699–735.Google Scholar
• Podsakoff PM, Mackenzie SB, Lee J, 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
• Preacher KJ, Zhang Z, Zyphur MJ (2016) Multilevel structural equation models for assessing moderation within and across levels of analysis. Psych. Methods 21(2):189–205.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.Google Scholar
• Reis HT, Wheeler L (1991) Studying social interaction with the Rochester Interaction Record. Zanna MP, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Academic Press, San Diego), 270–318.Google Scholar
• Ribeiro ABC, Alves CF (2021) A survey research on feedback practices in agile software development teams. Santos R, Oliveira SRB, Santos IdS, Marczak S, Viana D, Canedo ED, Albuquerque AB, et al., eds. Proc. XX Brazilian Sympos. Software Quality (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1–10.Google Scholar
• Rietze S, Zacher H (2022) Relationships between agile work practices and occupational well-being: The role of job demands and resources. Internat. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19(3):1258.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saldaña J (2021) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers (SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Saravanan V, Berman GJ, Sober SJ (2020) Application of the hierarchical bootstrap to multi-level data in neuroscience. Neuron Behav. Data Anal. Theory 3(5).Google Scholar
• Sarker S, Ahuja M, Sarker S (2018) Work-life conflict of globally distributed software development personnel: An empirical investigation using border theory. Inform. Systems Res. 29(1):103–126.Google Scholar
• Schwaber K, Sutherland J (2020) The Scrum guide. The definitive guide to Scrum: The rules of the game. Accessed November 30, 2024, https://www.scrum.org/resources/scrum-guide.Google Scholar
• Singh K, Strobel J (2022) Exploring lived experiences of agile developers with daily stand-up meetings: A phenomenological study. Behaviour Inform. Tech. 42(4):403–423.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toutaoui J, Benlian A, Hess T (2022) Managing paradoxes in bi-modal information technology functions: A multi-case study. Inform. Systems J. 32(6):1177–1202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripp J, Sambamurthy V (2023) How agile feedback practice use impacts software quality. J. Comput. Inform. Systems, ePub ahead of print December 20, https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2023.2286557.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripp JF, Riemenschneider C, Thatcher JB (2016) Job satisfaction in agile development teams: Agile development as work redesign. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 17(4):267–307.Google Scholar
• van Oorschot KE, Sengupta K, Van Wassenhove LN (2018) Under pressure: The effects of iteration lengths on agile software development performance. Project Management J. 49(6):78–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Goyal S (2010) Expectation disconfirmation and technology adoption: Polynomial modeling and response surface analysis. MIS Quart. 34(2):281–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Brown SA, Bala H (2013) Bridging the qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. MIS Quart. 37(1):21–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Venkatesh V, Thong JYL, Chan FKY, Hoehle H, Spohrer K (2020) How agile software development methods reduce work exhaustion: Insights on role perceptions and organizational skills. Inform. Systems J. 30(4):733–761.Crossref, 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
• Vogel RM, Rodell JB, Sabey TB (2020) Meaningfulness misfit: Consequences of daily meaningful work needs-supplies incongruence for daily engagement. J. Appl. Psych. 105(7):760–770.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang X, Conboy K, Pikkarainen M (2012) Assimilation of agile practices in use. Inform. Systems J. 22(6):435–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiesche M (2021) Interruptions in agile software development teams. Project Management J. 52(2):210–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williams L, Cockburn A (2003) Agile software development: It’s about feedback and change. Computer 36(6):39–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Windeler JB, Maruping L, Venkatesh V (2017) Technical systems development risk factors: The role of empowering leadership in lowering developers’ stress. Inform. Systems Res. 28(4):775–796.Link, Google Scholar
• Wright TA, Cropanzano R (2000) Psychological well-being and job satisfaction as predictors of job performance. J. Occupational Health Psych. 5(1):84–94.Crossref, Google Scholar