Top

Information Systems Frontiers

Published in:

22-10-2015

Pair programming teams and high-quality knowledge sharing: A comparative study of coopetitive reward structures

Authors: Shahla Ghobadi, John Campbell, Stewart Clegg

Published in: Information Systems Frontiers | Issue 2/2017

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

There has been a growing research interest in understanding knowledge sharing in agile development. Yet, empirical research that sheds light on its underlying practices, such as pair programming, is evolving. This study uses insights from coopetition and software literature to focus inquiry on the relation between coopetitive rewards and high-quality knowledge sharing in pair programming teams. Theoretical hypotheses are developed and validated, suggesting that: ‘coopetitive rewards influence high-quality knowledge sharing both directly and over time through their impact on the level of knowledge sharing satisfaction’, and, ‘the impact of coopetitive rewards on high-quality knowledge sharing is dependent upon task complexity and the history of working under similar reward structure’. This study generates new understanding related to the use of rewards in pair programming teams, and offers a rigorous and replicable seven-step experimental process for simulating coopetitive structures and investigating their role in pair programming and in similar collaborative contexts.

previous article Leader’s dilemma game: An experimental design for cyber insider threat research

next article Do big data support TV viewing rate forecasting? A case study of a Korean TV drama

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Ally, M., Darroch, F., & Toleman, M. (2005). A framework for understanding the factors influencing pair programming success, eXtreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering (pp. 1–10). UK: Sheffield.

Balijepally, V., Mahapatra, R., Nerur, S., & Price, K. H. (2009). Are two heads better than one for software development? The productivity paradox of pair programming. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 91–118.

Beath, C. M., & Orlikowski, W. J. (1994). The contradictory structure of systems development methodologies: deconstructing the IS-user relationship in information engineering. Information Systems Research, 5(4), 350–377.CrossRef

Beersma, B., Hollenbeck, J. R., Humphery, S. E., Moon, H., Conlon, D. E., & Ilgen, D. R. (2003). Cooperation, competition, and team Performance: toward a contingency approach. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 572–590.CrossRef

Beersma, B., Hollenback, J. R., Conlon, D. E., Humphrey, S. E., Moon, H., & Ilgen, D. R. (2009). Cutthroat cooperation: the effects of team role decisions on adaptation to alternative reward structures. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), 131–142.CrossRef

Bellini, E., Canfora, G., García, F., Piattini, M., & Visaggio, C. A. (2005). Pair designing as practice for enforcing and diffusing design knowledge. Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 17(6), 401–423.CrossRef

Biron, M., & Bamberger, P. (2010). The impact of structural empowerment on individual well-being and performance: taking agent preferences, self-efficacy and operational constraints into account. Human Relations, 63(2), 163–191.CrossRef

Brandenburger, A. M., & Nalebuff, B. J. (1996). Co-Opetition: a revolutionary mindset that combines competition and co-operation. New York: Bantam Dell Pub Group.

Byström, K., & Järvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing and Management, 31(2), 191–213.CrossRef

Campbell, D. J. (1988). Task complexity: a review and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 40–52.

Canfora, G., Cimitile, A., Garcia, F., Piattini, M., & Visaggio, C. A. (2007). Evaluating performances of pair designing in industry. Journal of Systems and Software, 80(8), 1317–1327.CrossRef

Chan, F. K. Y., & Thong, J. Y. L. (2009). Acceptance of agile methodologies: a critical review and conceptual framework. Decision Support Systems, 46(4), 803–814.CrossRef

Chau, T., & Maurer, F. (2004). Knowledge sharing in agile software teams. In L. Wolfgang (Ed.), Logic versus approximation (pp. 173–183). United States: Springer.CrossRef

Cockburn, A. (2006). Agile software development: the cooperative game (agile software development series). Boston, United States: Addison-Wesley Professional.

Cockburn, A., & Highsmith, J. (2001). Agile software development: the people factor. Computer, 34(11), 131–133.CrossRef

Conboy, K., Coyle, S., Wang, X., & Pikkarainen, M. (2010). People over process: key people challenges in agile development. IEEE Software, 99(1), 47–57.

Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E. (2009). The bureaucratic phenomenon. London: Transaction Pub.

Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Relations, 2(2), 129–152.CrossRef

Dingsøyr, T., Nerur, S., Balijepally, V. G., & Moe, N. B. (2012). A decade of agile methodologies: towards explaining agile software development. Journal of Systems and Software, 85(6), 1213–1221.CrossRef

Esterhuizen, D., Schutte, C. S. L., & Du Toit, A. S. A. (2012). Knowledge creation processes as critical enablers for innovation. International Journal of Information Management, 32(4), 354–364.CrossRef

Ferrin, D. L., & Dirks, K. T. (2003). The use of rewards to increase and decrease trust: mediating processes and differential effects. Organization Science, 14(1), 18–31.CrossRef

Fu, F.-L., Wu, Y.-L., & Ho, H.-C. (2009). An investigation of coopetitive pedagogic design for knowledge creation in Web-based learning. Computers & Education, 53(3), 550–562.CrossRef

Garvey, C. (2002). Steer teams with the right pay. HR Magazine, 47(1), 71–78.

Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9–41.CrossRef

Ghobadi, S. (2014). What drives knowledge sharing in software team: a review and classification framework. Information Management, 52(1), 82–97.CrossRef

Ghobadi, S., & D’ambra, J. (2011a). Coopetitive relationships in cross-functional software development teams: how to model and measure? Journal of Systems and Software, 85(5), 1096–1104.CrossRef

Ghobadi, S., & D’ambra, J. (2011b). Coopetitive knowledge sharing: an analytical review of literature. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(4), 307–317.

Ghobadi, S., & D’ambra, J. (2012). Knowledge sharing in cross-functional teams: a coopetitive model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(2), 285–301.CrossRef

Ghobadi, S., & D’ambra, J. (2013). Modeling high-quality knowledge sharing in cross-functional software development teams. Information Processing and Management, 49(1), 138–157.CrossRef

Ghobadi, S., & Mathiassen, L. (2014). Perceived barriers to effective knowledge sharing in Agile software teams. Information Systems Journal. doi:10.1111/isj.12053.

Gordon, F. M., Welch, K. R., Offringa, G., & Katz, N. (2000). The complexity of social outcomes from cooperative, competitive, and individualistic reward systems. Social Justice Research, 13(3), 237–269.CrossRef

Gupta, N. & Bajwa, J. K. (2012) Analysis of knowledge sharing practices in distributed agile environment. International Journal of Computer and Communication Technology, 3(6), 6–11.

Hanks, B. (2008). Empirical evaluation of distributed pair programming. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(7), 530–544.CrossRef

Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., Gavin, J. H., & Florey, A. T. (2002). Time, teams, and task performance: changing effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 1029–1045.CrossRef

Highsmith, J., & Cockburn, A. (2001). Agile software development: the business of innovation. Computer, 34(9), 120–127.CrossRef

Hulkko, H. & Abrahamsson, P. (2005). A multiple case study on the impact of pair programming on product quality, Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering: ACM, 495–504, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: theory and research. MN, US: Interaction Book Company.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1998). Cooperative learning and social interdependence theory. Social Psychological Applications to Social Issues, 4, 9–36.CrossRef

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2006). New developments in social interdependence theory. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 131(4), 285–358.CrossRef

Johnson, M. D., Hollenbeck, J. R., Humphrey, S. E., Ilgen, D. R., Jundt, D., & Meyer, C. J. (2006). Cutthroat cooperation: asymmetrical adaptation to changes in team reward structures. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 103–119.CrossRef

Li, C., & Hsieh, C. (2009). The impact of knowledge stickiness on knowledge transfer implementation, internalization, and satisfaction for multinational corporations. International Journal of Information Management, 29(6), 425–435.CrossRef

Lin, T. C., & Huang, C. C. (2010). Withholding effort in knowledge contribution: the role of social exchange and social cognitive on project teams. Information Management, 47(1), 188–196.CrossRef

Lin, C., Tan, B., & Chang, S. (2008). An exploratory model of knowledge flow barriers within healthcare organizations. Information Management, 45(5), 331–339.CrossRef

Lin, S. P., Wang, Y. C., Yuan-Hui, T., & Hsu, Y. F. (2010). Perceived job effectiveness in coopetition: a survey of virtual teams within business organizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 1598–1606.CrossRef

Loebbecke, C., Van Fenema, P. C., & Powell, P. (1999). Co-Opetition and knowledge transfer. The Database for Advances in Information Systems, 30(2), 14–25.CrossRef

Lucker, G. W., Rosenfield, D., Sikes, J., & Aronson, E. (1976). Performance in the interdependent classroom: a field study. American Educational Research Journal, 13(2), 115–123.CrossRef

Mcgrath, J. E., Arrow, H., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). The study of groups: past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 95–105.CrossRef

Müller, M. M. (2005). Two controlled experiments concerning the comparison of pair programming to peer review. Journal of Systems and Software, 78(2), 166–179.CrossRef

Müller, M. M. (2007). Do programmer pairs make different mistakes than solo programmers? Journal of Systems and Software, 80(9), 1460–1471.CrossRef

Nerur, S., Mahapatra, R. K., & Mangalaraj, G. (2005). Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies. Communications of the ACM, 48(5), 72–78.CrossRef

Pais, L., & dos Santos, N. R. (2015). Knowledge-sharing, cooperation and personal development. In K. Kraiger, J. Passmore, N. R. dos Santos & Sigmar Malvezzi (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Training, Development, and Performance Improvement (pp. 278-302). UK, Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell.

Pee, L. G., Kankanhalli, A., & Kim, H. W. (2010). Knowledge sharing in information systems development: a social interdependence perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(10), 550–575.

Ramesh, B., Mohan, K., & Cao, L. (2012). Ambidexterity in agile distributed development: an empirical investigation. Information System Research, 23(2), 323–339.CrossRef

Ryan, S., & O’connor, R. V. (2009). Development of a team measure for tacit knowledge in software development teams. Journal of Systems and Software, 82(2), 229–240.CrossRef

Serrano, J. M., & Pons, R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: we can also do it without task structure. Intercultural Education, 18(3), 215–230.CrossRef

Sharp, H., & Robinson, H. (2008). Collaboration and co-ordination in mature eXtreme programming teams. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(7), 506–518.CrossRef

Shih, H.-P., & Huang, E. (2014). Influences of Web interactivity and social identity and bonds on the quality of online discussion in a virtual community. Information Systems Frontiers, 16(4), 627–641.CrossRef

Shih, M.-H., Tsai, H.-T., & Wu, C.-C. (2006). A holistic knowledge sharing framework in high-tech firms: game and co-opetition perspectives. International Journal of Technology Management, 36(4), 354–366.CrossRef

Sjøberg, D. I., Hannay, J. E., Hansen, O., Kampenes, V. B., Karahasanovic, A., Liborg, N.-K., & Rekdal, A. C. (2005). A survey of controlled experiments in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(9), 733–753.CrossRef

Slavin, R. E. (1977). Classroom reward structure: an analytical and practical review. Review of Educational Research, 47(4), 633–650.CrossRef

Speier, C., Vessey, I., & Valacich, J. S. (2003). The effects of interruptions, task complexity, and information presentation on computer-supported decision-making performance. Decision Sciences, 34(4), 771–797.CrossRef

Tan, K. H., Wong, W. & Chung, L. (2015). Information and knowledge leakage in supply chain. Information Systems Frontiers, 1–18. doi:10.1007/s10796-015-9553-6.

Taylor, E. Z. (2006). The effect of incentives on knowledge sharing in computer-mediated communication: an experimental investigation. Journal of Information Systems, 20(1), 103–116.CrossRef

Wageman, R., & Baker, G. (1997). Incentives and cooperation: the joint effects of task and reward interdependence on group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(2), 139–158.CrossRef

Wang, G. A., Liu, X., Wang, J., Zhang, M., & Fan, W. (2015). Examining micro-level knowledge sharing discussions in online communities. Information Systems Frontiers, 1–12. doi:10.1007/s10796-015-9566-1.

Willem, A., & Buelens, M. (2009). Knowledge sharing in inter-unit cooperative episodes: the impact of organizational structure dimensions. International Journal of Information Management, 29(2), 151–160.CrossRef

Williams, L., Kessler, R. R., Cunningham, W., & Jeffries, R. (2000). Strengthening the case for pair programming. IEEE Software, 17(4), 19–25.CrossRef

Wood, R. E. (1986). Task complexity: definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(1), 60–82.CrossRef

Wray, S. (2010). How pair programming really works. IEEE Software, 27(1), 50–55.CrossRef

Zacharis, N. Z. (2011). Measuring the effects of virtual pair programming in an introductory programming java course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 54(1), 168–170.CrossRef

Title: Pair programming teams and high-quality knowledge sharing: A comparative study of coopetitive reward structures
Authors: Shahla Ghobadi
John Campbell
Stewart Clegg
Publication date: 22-10-2015
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Information Systems Frontiers / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 1387-3326
Electronic ISSN: 1572-9419
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-015-9603-0

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Estimating participants for knowledge-intensive tasks in a network of crowdsourcing marketplaces

Driving innovation through big open linked data (BOLD): Exploring antecedents using interpretive structural modelling

Open data and its usability: an empirical view from the Citizen’s perspective

The role of civil society groups in improving access to the DC-CAN

Professor Kenneth Arrow and Information Systems Frontiers: In memoriam

Delivering public value through open government data initiatives in a Smart City context

Premium Partner