1. University of Wollongong Anne Fuller 1 Working in teams CSCI311 Software Process Management

2. University of Wollongong 2003 2 Reading Chapter 11 of textbook

3. University of Wollongong 2003 3 Software teams Most professional software developed in teams Large teams may be split into groups to work on sub-systems Preferable for groups < 10 members Reduces communication problems Therefore effectively managing groups is a critical task

4. University of Wollongong 2003 4 Group Management Composition Balance of skills, experience,personalities Cohesiveness Is it a team or individuals working together? Communications Effective? Organisation Does everyone feel valued and satisfied with their role?

5. University of Wollongong 2003 5 Selecting Personnel Constraints budgetary availability of suitable staff learning curves An ideal mix? 40% designers 20% coders 40% testers

6. University of Wollongong 2003 6 Selecting Staff Application domain experience Platform experience Programming language experience Educational background Communications skills Adaptability Attitude Personality

7. University of Wollongong 2003 7 Group cohesiveness Easier/better management Members think the group more important than the individuals Team structure supports delegation of authority More effective exchange of info/ideas familiarity with team members tasks continuity if one member leaves A group quality standard can be developed established by consensus more palatable than imposed external standard “Egoless” programming programs are team property

8. University of Wollongong 2003 8 Factors in Group Communications Size n*(n-1) communication channels Structure Informal groups communicate more than strictly hierarchical structures Composition Personality clashes Mixed gender groups Physical environment Does it facilitate communication? Caves & common layout

9. University of Wollongong 2003 9 Organising Groups Democratic teams all members involved in decision making administrative team leader XP variation Chief Programmer teams experienced senior programmer leads technically and administratively Expert teams established to resolve special problems disbanded after problem resolution

10. University of Wollongong 2003 10 Keeping Staff Motivation Maslow’s hierarchy of needs physiological safety social esteem Self actualisation

11. University of Wollongong 2003 11 Job characteristics Skill variety Task identity Task significance Autonomy Feedback

12. University of Wollongong 2003 12 stages in becoming a team forming storming norming performing adjourning team-building exercises can help the process of becoming a team

13. University of Wollongong 2003 13 getting the right mix Meredith Belbin studied teams working together on management games found that the academically brightest teams often did badly e.g. Arguments Implementation of plans neglected etc. gave psychometric tests to participants to identify best mix of team members

14. University of Wollongong 2003 14 Belbin’s management team types The chair/co-ordinator Not necessarily a strong leader but must be good at controlling meetings: calm, strong, but tolerant The plant Good at generating ideas The monitor-evaluator Good at evaluating ideas and helping to select the best one

15. University of Wollongong 2003 15 Belbin’s management team types The shaper rather a worrier, helps direct the team’s attention to important issues; a driver The team worker/implementer good at creating a good team environment and getting people to do things The resource investigator good at finding resources and information

16. University of Wollongong 2003 16 Belbin’s management team types The completer-finisher focussed in getting task completed The company worker a good team player who is willing to undertake less attractive tasks if they are needed for team success The specialist the ‘techie’ interested in knowledge for its own sake

17. University of Wollongong 2003 17 Typical problems More than one shaper and no strong chair - arguments over direction Several plants and specialists, but no shapers or completer-finishers - interesting discussions but nothing gets implemented

18. University of Wollongong 2003 18 General Advice Time your interventions, don’t overwhelm the others in the team Be flexible Be restrained Keep the common goals of the team in mind all the time

19. University of Wollongong Anne Fuller 19 Types of Group Work Tasks

20. University of Wollongong 2003 20 Types of Group Work Should you divide work up between you or should you do it as a group? Additive tasks Compensatory tasks Disjunctive tasks Conjunctive tasks

21. University of Wollongong 2003 21 Types of Tasks Additive Effort of individuals added together to get end result People are interchangeable e.g. shovelling snow, interviewing people in the street Compensatory Judgments of individuals are pooled Errors by some can be corrected by others e.g. estimating costs, effort

22. University of Wollongong 2003 22 Types of Tasks Disjunctive Only one correct answer Getting answer depends on: Someone getting the right answer Others recognizing it as being correct! Conjunctive Progress depends on the progress of the slowest performer Software projects often like this

23. University of Wollongong 2003 23 ‘social loafing’ Team members who are parasites Particular problem with student groups, but also in work environments Can be alleviated by: Making work of individuals identifiable Consciously involving group member in the project outcomes Rewarding individuals for team contribution cf. ‘club player of the year’ in sports teams

24. University of Wollongong Anne Fuller 24 Leadership: Types of Power

25. University of Wollongong 2003 25 Types of Power: Position power Coercive power - threatening punishment Connection power Legitimate power Reward power

26. University of Wollongong 2003 26 Types of power: Personal Power Expert power Information power Referent power (based on personal attractiveness/ charisma)

27. University of Wollongong 2003 27 Leadership styles decision-making directive permissive implementation autocrat democrat Makes decisions alone, close supervision of implementation Makes decisions alone, gives subordinates some discretionary power in implementation Makes decisions participatively, close supervision of implementation Makes decisions participatively, gives subordinates some discretionary power in implementation

28. University of Wollongong 2003 28 Summary Software Process Management includes team management Personnel selection Group organisation Team motivation Team Leadership