article

Antecedents and consequences of team potency in software development projects

Authors:

Salih Z. ImamogluAuthors Info & Claims

Information and Management, Volume 44, Issue 7

Pages 646 - 656

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2007.08.001

Published: 01 October 2007 Publication History

Abstract

Developing new software quickly, successfully, and at low cost is critical in organizations. Ways of assessing the effectiveness of development teams has highlighted measures of factors, such as teamwork, group cohesiveness, and team integration, but the use of group potency theory (the collective belief of a group that it can be effective) is rare. In our study, we investigated antecedents of and consequences to group potency in software development project teams. By examining 53 software development project teams collected from small and medium-sized software firms in Turkey, we found, that team potency positively affected speed-to-market, development cost, and market success of the product. We also found that trust among project team members, past experiences of the members, and team empowerment had a positive impact on the team potency during the project. Managerial and theoretical implications are discussed.

References

[1]

Adler, T.R., Leonard, J.G. and Nordgren, R.K., Improving risk management: moving from risk elimination to risk avoidance. Information and Software Technology. v41. 29-34.

[2]

Akgün, A.E. and Lynn, G.S., New product development team improvisation and speed-to-market: an extended model. European Journal of Innovation Management. v5. 117-129.

[3]

Andersen, P.H. and Kumar, R., Emotions, trust and relationship development in business relationships: A conceptual model for buyer-seller dyads. Industrial Marketing Management. v35. 522-535.

[4]

Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W., Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin. v103. 411-423.

[5]

Bagozzi, R., Yi, Y. and Phillips, L.W., Assessing construct validity in organizational research. Administrative Science Quarterly. v36. 421-458.

[6]

Bandura, A., Social Foundations of Thought and Action. 1986. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

[7]

Bouffard-Bouchard, T., Influence of self-efficacy on performance in a cognitive task. Journal of Social Psychology. v130. 353-363.

[8]

Campion, M.A., Medsker, J.G. and Higgs, A., Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology. v46. 823-850.

[9]

W.W. Chin, Pls-graph User's Guide Version 3.0. C.T. Bauer College of Business, University of Houston Houston, TX, 2001.

[10]

Cooper, R.G. and Kleinschmidt, E.J., Success factors in product innovation. Industrial Marketing Management. v16. 215-223.

[11]

DeMarco, T. and Listen, T., Peopleware: Productive Projects and Teams. 1987. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

[12]

Drasgow, F. and Kanfer, R., Equivalence of psychological measurement in heterogeneous populations. Journal of Applied Psychology. v70. 662-680.

[13]

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research. v18. 39-51.

[14]

Gallivan, J., The influence of software developers' creative style on their attitudes to and assimilation of a software process innovation. Information & Management. v40. 443-465.

[15]

Gevers, J.M.P., Van Eerde, W. and Rutte, C.G., Time pressure, potency, and progress in project groups. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. v10. 205-221.

[16]

Ghiselli, E.E., Campbell, J.P. and Zedeck, S., Measurement Theory for the Behavioral Sciences. 1981. Freeman, San Francisco, CA.

[17]

Gist, M.E., Self-efficacy: implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. Academy of Management Review. v12. 472-485.

[18]

Gladstein, D.L., Groups in context: a model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly. v29. 499-517.

[19]

Griffin, A. and Page, A.L., An interim report on measuring product development success and failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management. v10. 291-308.

[20]

Gully, S.M., Incalcaterra, K.A., Joshi, A. and Beaubien, J.M., A meta-analysis of team-efficacy, potency, and performance: interdependence and level of analysis as moderators of observed relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology. v87. 819-832.

[21]

Guzzo, R.A., Yost, P.R., Campbell, R.J. and Shea, G.P., Potency in groups: articulating a construct. British Journal of Social Psychology. v32. 87-106.

[22]

Heng, C., Tan, B.C.Y. and Wei, K., De-escalation of commitment in software projects: Who matters? What matters?. Information & Management. v41. 99-110.

[23]

Hertel, G., Niedner, S. and Herrmann, S., Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel. Research Policy. v32. 1159-1177.

[24]

Hurley, R. and Hult, G.T.M., Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing. v62. 42-54.

[25]

Jiang, J.J., Klein, G., Hwang, G., Huang, J. and Hung, S., An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance. Information & Management. v41. 279-288.

[26]

Jung, D.I. and Sosik, J.J., Group potency and collective efficacy: examining their predictive validity, level of analysis, and effects of performance feedback on future group performance. Group and Organization Management. v28. 366-391.

[27]

Kessler, E.H. and Chakrabarti, A.K., Speeding up the phase of new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management. v16. 231-247.

[28]

Kirkman, B.L. and Rosen, B., Powering up teams. Organizational Dynamics. v28. 48-65.

[29]

Larson, C.E. and LaFasto, F.M.J., Teamwork: What Must Go Right/What Can Go Wrong. 1989. 5th ed. Sage Publications Inc., USA.

[30]

Linberg, K.R., Software developer perceptions about software project failure: a case study. Journal of Systems and Software. v49. 177-192.

[31]

Lindell, M.K. and Whitney, D.J., Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research design. Journal of Applied Psychology. v86. 114-121.

[32]

Lindsley, D.H., Brass, D.J. and Thomas, J.B., Efficacy-performance spirals: a multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review. v20. 645-678.

[33]

Little, B.L. and Madigan, R.M., Motivation in work teams: a qualitative and quantitative exploration of the construct of collective efficacy. Small Group Research. v28. 517-534.

[34]

Lynn, G.S., Innovation Audit. 2001. Stevens Institute of Technology.

[35]

Mann, C.C., Why software is so bad. Technology Reviewes. v105. 33-38.

[36]

Manz, C.C. and Sims, H.P., Superleadership: beyond the myth of heroic leadership. Organizational Dynamics. v19. 18-35.

[37]

Shea, G.P. and Guzzo, R.A., Group effectiveness: what really matters?. Sloan Management Review. v28. 25-31.

[38]

Spink, K.S., Collective efficacy in the sport setting. International Journal of Sport Psychology. v21. 380-395.

[39]

Spreitzer, G.M., Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal. v39. 483-504.

[40]

Thamhain, H.J. and Wilemon, L., Criteria for controlling projects according to plan. Project Management Journal. v17. 75-81.

[41]

Werner, J.M. and Lester, S.W., Applying a team effectiveness framework to the performance of student case teams. Human Resource Development Quarterly. v12. 385-402.

[42]

Wood, R. and Bandura, A., Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision-making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. v56. 407-415.

[43]

Yang, H. and Tang, J., Team structure and team performance in IS development: a social network perspective. Information & Management. v41. 335-349.

Cited By

Cheng HYang H(2018)The antecedents of collective creative efficacy for information system development teamsJournal of Engineering and Technology Management10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.12.00133:C(1-17)Online publication date: 16-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.12.001
Bellini CPereira RBecker J(2012)Customer Team Effectiveness through People Traits in Information Systems DevelopmentInternational Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals10.4018/jhcitp.20120701053:3(54-78)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.4018/jhcitp.2012070105
Staron MMeding W(2011)Monitoring bottlenecks in agile and lean software development projects - a method and its industrial useProceedings of the 12th international conference on Product-focused software process improvement10.5555/2022348.2022353(3-16)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2022348.2022353

Index Terms

Antecedents and consequences of team potency in software development projects
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Management of computing and information systems
      1. Project and people management
      2. Software management
2. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Collaboration in software development
      1. Programming teams

Recommendations

Antecedents and consequences of team memory in software development projects

Team memory is important, yet it is rarely addressed in papers on software development. We investigated the antecedents and consequences of team memory (both declarative and procedural) in software development projects. By examining 67 projects in the ...
Business Analytics Continuance in Software Development Projects – A Preliminary Analysis
Responsible AI and Analytics for an Ethical and Inclusive Digitized Society
Abstract
This paper investigates factors affecting business analytics (BA) in software and systems development projects. This is the first study to examine business analytics continuance in projects from Pakistani software professional’s perspective. The ...
Agile software development projects–Unveiling the human-related critical success factors
Highlights
- We examine the human factors that contribute to agile software development success.
- Team capability has a strong effect on the success of agile software development.
- Customer involvement has a strong effect on the success of agile ...
Abstract Context
Investment in information technology is associated with better business performance when its implementation is successful, but it has high costs in case of failure, especially for large software development projects, which typically have ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Information and Management

Information and Management Volume 44, Issue 7

October, 2007

49 pages

ISSN:0378-7206

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © Elsevier B.V. © 2007.

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 October 2007

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 19 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Cheng HYang H(2018)The antecedents of collective creative efficacy for information system development teamsJournal of Engineering and Technology Management10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.12.00133:C(1-17)Online publication date: 16-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.12.001
Bellini CPereira RBecker J(2012)Customer Team Effectiveness through People Traits in Information Systems DevelopmentInternational Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals10.4018/jhcitp.20120701053:3(54-78)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.4018/jhcitp.2012070105
Staron MMeding W(2011)Monitoring bottlenecks in agile and lean software development projects - a method and its industrial useProceedings of the 12th international conference on Product-focused software process improvement10.5555/2022348.2022353(3-16)Online publication date: 20-Jun-2011
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2022348.2022353

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents