1 / 18

An Empirical Study on the Utility of Formal Routines to Transfer Knowledge and Experience

An Empirical Study on the Utility of Formal Routines to Transfer Knowledge and Experience. Reidar Conradi, NTNU Tore Dybå, SINTEF Tele og data conradi@idi.ntnu.no, phone +47 73.593444 Norsk Informatikk-konferanse 2001 (NIK’01) Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001. Contents. Background

amery-hendricks
Download Presentation

An Empirical Study on the Utility of Formal Routines to Transfer Knowledge and Experience

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An Empirical Study on the Utility of Formal Routinesto Transfer Knowledge and Experience Reidar Conradi, NTNU Tore Dybå, SINTEF Tele og data conradi@idi.ntnu.no, phone +47 73.593444 Norsk Informatikk-konferanse 2001 (NIK’01) Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001 NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  2. Contents • Background • Research context and questions • Knowledge of routines • Use and updating of routines • Routines as a medium for transfer of knowledge and experience • Discussion and implications • Limitations and recommendations for future research • Conclusions and postscript NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  3. Background • Formal routines are emphasized in both quality assurance (QA) and software process improvement (SPI). • At the same time; there is often a considerable skepticism among developers to learn from and adhere to formal routines. • Therefore, this study was initiated to explore how developers and manager perceive formal routines as a medium to express and disseminate knowledge and experience. NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  4. Research Context SPIQ - Software Process Improvement for better Quality: • National project, funded in part by the Research Council of Norway, 1997-99 • Three research institutions and 12 IT companies, mostly SMEs. • More than 20 SPI pilot projects were run in these companies. Method: • Interviews with 23 persons (13 developers, 5 QA managers, and 5 SW manager) in 5 companies participating in SPIQ (convenience sample). • Qualitative and quantitative data collected by two last year M.Sc. students, supervised by the authors. • Data analyzed by the students in cooperation with the authors. NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  5. Research Questions1 Q1: What is the knowledge of the routines being used? Q2: How are these routines being used? Q3: How are they updated? Q4: How effective are they as a medium for transfer of knowledge and experience? 1with sub-questions NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  6. About the same Q1.1: Knowledge of Routines NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  7. Most developers (9/13) had a LOW degree of involvement!! Most managers (7/10) had a HIGH degree of involvement!! Q1.2: Degree of Involvement During Introduction of Routines NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  8. Q2: Use of Routines • In general, about 50% of the companies’ routines were in use • The more experienced developers used the routines to a lesser extent than the more inexperienced developers do. • It was a common agreement that: • “There is no point in having routines that are not considered useful” • The status of the routines among the software developers was highly divergent: • “The routines are generally good and useful, but some developers are frustrated regarding their use.” • “The system is bureaucratic – it was better before, when we had more freedom to decide for ourselves what should best be done.” • “The routines are easy to use.” • “Routines are uninteresting and revision meetings are boring.” NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  9. Q3: Updating of Routines • None of the companies had scheduled revisions as part of the process for updating their routines. • Most answers to this issue were rather vague. • Some respondents explained that revisions were informally triggered. • Other respondents did not know how to propose and implement changes to existing routines. • Respondents from all of the companies said that the employees could participate in the revision activities if they wanted to. NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  10. Again, strongly skewed, as for Q1.2. Fisher’s exact test = 13.02 (p = 0.002, two-tailed) Q4.1: Routines as a Medium for Transfer of Knowledge and Experience NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  11. Q4.2: Alternative Mediafor Knowledge Transfer Similar ranking, but different perception of contents. NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  12. Degree of Involvement vs. Assessment of Formal Routines Again, strongly skewed, as for Q1.2 and Q4.1. Fisher’s exact test = 14.71 (p < 0.0005, two-tailed) NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  13. Discussion of Results • Occupational culture • Managers and developers don’t seem to understand each other • This leads to failure in organizational learning. • Participation • All of the companies had a low degree of employee involvement in the development of their routines. • Consequently, the routines were seen as coercive and not enabling. • Situated learning • Significant learning should not be divorced from its specific context. • Developers viewed stories and tacit social activities (e.g. newsgroups and discussion groups) as more flexible, adaptable and relevant than formal routines. NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  14. Knowledge “Conversion”1 1Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  15. Implications • Studies of the effects of idealized formalizations should focus on their relevance for actual routines and their implementation. • We must learn how to establish better cross-cultural dialogues between the different occupational cultures. • Managers should balance discipline and creativity, in order to supplement formal routines with collaborative, social processes. • Both managers and developers should maintain an open dialogue with feedback regarding the utility of formal routines. NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  16. Limitations and Recommendationsfor Future Research Validity: • The small sample and lack of randomness in the choice of respondents may be a threat to external validity. • A major threat to internal validity is that we have not assessed the reliability of our measures (e.g. degree of involvement) Future studies: • Should examine the enabling features of formal routines in much more detail; both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. • Should include a multiple respondent approach to cover all major occupational cultures. • Should do supplementary, ethnographic studies on how developers really work and how their work relate to formal routines NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  17. Conclusions • Developers in general are positive to experience transfer and guidelines. • Formal routines alone is not an efficient way to transfer knowledge and experience. • Large differences between managers and developers regarding the perception of formal routines to transfer knowledge and experience. • In spite of a small sample, we think that the results are representative for a large class of software companies. • A more cooperative and open work atmosphere, with strong developer participation is needed. • The major and most difficult work remains non-technical, that is, to build a learning software organization. NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

  18. Postscript • Quality assurance: under-taught in CS curricula. • Timothy C. Lethbridge:“The Relevance of Software Education: A Survey and Some Recommendations”, Annals of Software Engineering, No. 6, 1998 identifies three under-taught topics: • Testing and Quality Assurance • Configuration Management • Process Standards • Tor Stålhane, IDI: further interviews last summer in 15 Norwegian software companies on attitudes to formal QA systems: • Same pattern: disrespect for formal routines. • Quote:”Oh, quality assurance – that is what those people in that other department is doing”. • So you will here more from us! NIK’01, Tromsø, 26-28 Nov. 2001

More Related