Post on 13-Aug-2020
POLITECNICO DI MILANO
School of Industrial and Information Engineering
Master of Science in Management Engineering
DOES SCRUM METHODOLOGY IMPACT TEAM’S SUBCULTURE?
A multiple case study exploration
Supervisor: Prof. Filomena CANTERINO
Co-supervisor: Prof. Andrea PATRUCCO and
Elena PELLIZZONI
MSc thesis by:
Luca MANZONI 899731
Gaetano Giuseppe PATERNITI 898832
Academic Year 2018-2019
Acknowledgments
i
Acknowledgments
First of all, we would like to thank Professor Elena Pellizzoni and Professor Andrea
Patrucco for the opportunity and the advices provided throughout this thesis. A special
thanks to Filomena Canterino for the support and the aid in defining the framework and
during the drafting.
We would also like to thank our families and our beloved ones for the unfailing support
and the countless opportunities provided throughout these years.
Finally, we would like to express our gratitude to all our friends that have helped us during
this unforgettable journey.
This milestone would have not been reachable without all of you.
Luca and Gaetano
Abstract
ii
Abstract
For several years, annual reports on the status of the Agile methodology emphasize how
the cultural component is among the main factors of success in the employment of the
aforementioned methodology. It has led various scholars to conduct researches in order
to investigate the entity of the possible correlation between the Agile methodology and
the organizational culture, though not focusing on the most used methodology, i.e. the
Scrum one. Moreover, their approach was quantitative, and the points of view considered
not homogeneous within the company organisation.
In order to overcome this blank, we have therefore conducted an exploratory research
considering five cases, for a total of seven Scrum Masters interviewed, to investigate the
leading cultural analogies and the possible correlation between them and the typical
values of the Scrum methodology. In particular, our cases come from medium to large size
companies in the Italian context which operate in a tech-intensive market and which have
been adopting the Scrum methodology for at least two years.
Considering the fundamental variables both of culture and Scrum, it was therefore
possible to study the practical use of the methodology, outline the predominant culture
of each team (applying the procedure of the competing values framework) and analyse
how each case translates Scrum values.
It has been possible to identify the cultural recurring similarities within our sample by
outlining the subculture mix peculiar of each case. Furthermore, our research shows how
Scrum methodology is characterised by the coexistence of predominant subcultures
positioned in opposite quadrants of the cultural model considered. The ability to
assimilate cultural values – apparently incompatible – has been identified by framework
theorists as a manifestation of organizational efficiency.
Another important result regards risk taking from the part of the Agile practitioners, who
are encouraged to ceaselessly improve their product, through experimentation, and place
the client in the spotlight.
It also emerged how the Scrum methodology is dysfunctional to the development of a
rule-respect-oriented subculture and strict standards. Moreover, it appears how the team
Abstract
iii
dominant culture depends on their maturity level in the use of this methodology. Thus,
our research provides Agile practitioners with guidelines and possible behaviours to adopt
for a more efficient use of the Scrum methodology.
Key words: Scrum methodology; Competing values framework; culture values; scrum
values; scrum pillars; scrum maturity; scrum master; competing paradox; cross functional
teams; exploratory multiple case study.
Abstract
iv
Abstract – Italian version
I report annuali sullo stato della metodologia agile mettono in risalto, da diversi anni,
come la componente culturale sia tra i principali fattori di successo nell’utilizzo di tale
metodologia. Ciò ha portato diversi studiosi a condurre delle ricerche per investigare
l’entità della possibile correlazione tra metodologia agile e cultura organizzativa, non
focalizzandosi però sulla metodologia più utilizzata, cioè quella Scrum. Inoltre, il loro
approccio è stato di tipo quantitativo e i punti di vista considerati non omogenei
all’interno dell’organizzazione aziendale.
Per colmare questa lacuna, abbiamo quindi condotto una ricerca esplorativa, prendendo
in esame cinque casi, per un totale di sette Scrum master intervistati, per investigare le
principali analogie culturali e la possibile correlazione tra queste ultime e i valori tipici
della metodologia Scrum. In particolare, i casi provengono da aziende di medio-grandi
dimensioni nel contesto italiano che operano in un mercato tech-intensive e che hanno
superato la fase biennale di sperimentazione dell’utilizzo della metodologia Scrum.
È stato quindi possibile, prendendo in considerazione variabili fondamentali sia di cultura
che di Scrum, studiare l’utilizzo pratico della metodologia, profilare la cultura
predominante di ciascun team (applicando la procedura del competing values framework)
e analizzare come ciascun caso declini i valori di Scrum.
Profilando il mix di sub-culture presenti in ciascun caso, è stato possibile individuare le
similitudini culturali ricorrenti all’interno del nostro campione. Inoltre, la ricerca mostra
come la metodologia Scrum sia caratterizzata dalla coesistenza di sub-culture
predominanti posizionate in quadranti opposti nel modello culturale. Questa capacità di
integrare valori culturali apparentemente incompatibili è stata identificata dai teorici del
framework come sintomo di efficienza organizzativa.
Un altro risultato importante concerne la propensione al rischio da parte degli agile
practitioners, spronati a migliorare continuamente il prodotto e a porre il cliente al centro
dell’attenzione. È emerso anche come la metodologia Scrum sia disfunzionale allo
sviluppo di una subcultura orientata al rispetto di regole e standard stringenti. Inoltre, si
evince come la cultura dominante dei team dipenda dal loro livello di maturità nell’utilizzo
di tale metodologia. La nostra ricerca fornisce quindi agli agile practitioners linee guida e
Abstract
v
possibili comportamenti da adottare per un utilizzo più efficiente della metodologia
Scrum.
Parole chiave: metodologia Scrum; Competing values framework; valori culturali; valori
scrum; scrum master; paradosso degli opposti; team cross funzionali; ricerca esplorativa.
Contents
vi
Table of contents
1 Executive summary ............................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Literature review .......................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Methodology ................................................................................................................ 7
1.4 Results ........................................................................................................................... 8
1.5 Conclusion: limitations, future research and implications .................................13
2 Literature review................................................................................................................15
2.1 Agile .............................................................................................................................15
2.1.1 Scrum methodology ..........................................................................................21
2.1.2 Scaling Agile .......................................................................................................31
2.2 Organizational culture ..............................................................................................35
2.2.1 Organizational culture as a set of layers ........................................................36
2.2.2 Competing Values Framework .......................................................................37
2.3 Agile and culture........................................................................................................43
2.4 Gap analysis and research questions ......................................................................48
2.5 Research framework .................................................................................................50
3 Methodology ......................................................................................................................53
3.1 Methods and process ................................................................................................53
3.1.1 Preliminary exploration ....................................................................................55
3.2 Empirical setting........................................................................................................57
3.2.1 Cases ....................................................................................................................58
3.2.2 Embedded approach cases ..............................................................................60
3.2.3 Holistic approach cases ....................................................................................61
3.3 Data Gathering ..........................................................................................................63
Contents
vii
3.4 Data analysis .............................................................................................................. 66
4 Results ................................................................................................................................. 69
4.1 Within findings: T&D case ..................................................................................... 70
4.1.1 Scrum execution description ........................................................................... 70
4.1.2 T&D Senior case ............................................................................................... 71
4.1.3 T&D Junior case ............................................................................................... 76
4.2 Within findings: T&I case ....................................................................................... 81
4.2.1 Scrum execution description ........................................................................... 81
4.2.2 T&I Senior case ................................................................................................. 82
4.2.3 T&I Junior case ................................................................................................. 87
4.3 Within findings: Energy case .................................................................................. 92
4.3.1 Scrum execution description ........................................................................... 92
4.3.2 Cultural profile: Energy case ........................................................................... 94
4.3.3 Scrum values profile: Energy case ................................................................. 96
4.4 Within findings: E-commerce ................................................................................ 98
4.4.1 Scrum execution description ........................................................................... 98
4.4.2 Cultural profile: E-commerce ......................................................................... 99
4.4.3 Scrum values profile. E-commerce .............................................................. 102
4.5 Within findings: Pharmaceutical case .................................................................. 104
4.5.1 Scrum execution description ......................................................................... 104
4.5.2 Cultural profile: Pharmaceutical ................................................................... 105
4.5.3 Scrum values profile: Pharmaceutical .......................................................... 107
4.6 Overall view ............................................................................................................. 109
4.6.1 Use of Scrum methodology .......................................................................... 109
4.6.2 Cultural profile ................................................................................................ 112
Contents
viii
4.7 Cross case findings ................................................................................................. 114
4.7.1 Co-existence of competing values cultures ............................................... 115
4.7.2 Management of employees encourages risk taking to drive innovation
116
4.7.3 Hierarchical rates depend on teams’ structure .......................................... 117
4.7.5 Seniority leads to results orientation ........................................................... 119
5 Discussion ....................................................................................................................... 121
6 Conclusion....................................................................................................................... 124
6.1 Implications ............................................................................................................. 124
6.2 Limitations and future research ........................................................................... 126
Appendix ................................................................................................................................. 129
Bibliography ............................................................................................................................ 148
Contents
ix
List of tables
Table 1: Research framework ................................................................................................... 6
Table 2: Cases within the sample ............................................................................................. 7
Table 3: Scrum team: characteristics ....................................................................................... 8
Table 4: Scrum ceremonies ....................................................................................................... 9
Table 5: Overall cultural profile ............................................................................................. 10
Table 6: Scrum profile ............................................................................................................. 11
Table 7: Cross-case findings description and discussion................................................... 13
Table 8: Limitations and future research .............................................................................. 13
Table 9: Agile methods ............................................................................................................ 20
Table 10: Clan culture characteristics.................................................................................... 40
Table 11: Adhocracy culture characteristics ........................................................................ 40
Table 12: Hierarchical culture characteristics ...................................................................... 41
Table 13: Market culture characteristics ............................................................................... 41
Table 14: Cultural variables .................................................................................................... 50
Table 15: Scrum variables ....................................................................................................... 51
Table 16: Cases included in the sample ................................................................................ 58
Table 17: Informants characteristics ..................................................................................... 59
Table 18: Data inventory ......................................................................................................... 65
Table 19: Subcultures coding tree structure ........................................................................ 67
Table 20: Scrum values coding tree structure ...................................................................... 68
Table 21: Cultural coding tree: T&D Senior ....................................................................... 73
Table 22: Scrum coding tree: T&D Senior .......................................................................... 75
Table 23: Cultural coding tree: T&D Junior ........................................................................ 78
Table 24: Scrum coding tree: T&D Junior........................................................................... 80
Contents
x
Table 25: Cultural coding tree: T&I Senior ..........................................................................84
Table 26: Scrum coding tree: T&I Senior ............................................................................86
Table 27: Cultural coding tree: T&I Junior ..........................................................................89
Table 28: Scrum coding tree: T&I Junior .............................................................................91
Table 29: Cultural coding tree: Energy .................................................................................95
Table 30: Scrum coding tree: Energy ....................................................................................97
Table 31: Cultural coding tree: E-commerce .................................................................... 101
Table 32: Scrum coding tree: E-commerce ....................................................................... 103
Table 33: Cultural coding tree: Pharmaceutical ................................................................ 106
Table 34: Scrum coding tree: Pharmaceutical ................................................................... 108
Table 35: Scrum team characteristics ................................................................................. 109
Table 36: Scrum ceremonies execution ............................................................................. 110
Table 37: Scrum team execution ......................................................................................... 111
Table 38: Cases cultural profiles .......................................................................................... 112
Table 39: Recurrent cultural patterns ................................................................................. 112
Table 40: Scrum profile ........................................................................................................ 113
Contents
xi
List of figures
Figure 1: The Scrum process model ....................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: OCAI space ................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 3: OCAI spaces overall sample.................................................................................. 10
Figure 4: The Scrum process model (adapted from Boehm and Turner 2005) ............ 22
Figure 5: Competing values Space ......................................................................................... 37
Figure 6: OCAI space .............................................................................................................. 39
Figure 7: Research framework ............................................................................................... 52
Figure 8: Research schema ...................................................................................................... 54
Figure 9: OCAI space T&D senior ....................................................................................... 71
Figure 10: OCAI space T&D junior ..................................................................................... 76
Figure 11: OCAI space T&I Senior ...................................................................................... 82
Figure 12: OCAI space T&I Junior....................................................................................... 87
Figure 13: OCAI space Energy case ..................................................................................... 94
Figure 14: OCAI space e-commerce case ............................................................................ 99
Figure 15: OCAI space Pharmaceutical case ..................................................................... 105
Figure 16: OCAI space juniors ............................................................................................ 119
Figure 17: OCAI space seniors ............................................................................................ 120
Executive summary
1
1 Executive summary
1.1 Introduction
“Being agile means to have a continuous interaction with the user, being able not to have
a perfect solution from the first glance, but to incrementally create it together. Therefore,
it means to reduce the Time to Market in the short run and the cost curve in the long run”
(Giulio I., Scrum Professional Consultant and Agile Coach, E-commerce case).
The term “agility” was first observed in the area of manufacturing (Nagel and Dove, 1991),
where it was disseminated as a concept called “agile manufacturing”, characterized as
“the ability to change the configuration of a system in response to unforeseen changes
and unexpected market conditions (E.C. Conforto et al., 2016); in the upcoming years, the
agile methodologies were created as a reaction to plan-based or traditional methods of
developing software and as a response to the “need for an alternative to documentation
driven, heavyweight software development processes” (D. Cohen et al., 2004; T. Dyba, T.
Dingsøyr, 2008).
After the establishment of the methodology, Agile project management has continuously
attracted attention and investments from many digital-driven companies (VersionOne,
2018) because of their willingness to enhance software product quality, increase
productivity, and reduce the cycle time for product development (Huang et al. 2010),
giving to agile project management the status of one of the most impacting digital trends
of these decades (Dingsøyr et al., 2012; VersionOne, 2012).
However, different factors are considered as fundamental in order to successfully
implement and execute the agile methodology: among them, Culture has been suggested
as a critical factor affecting the adoption of the agile practices (Fruhling & Tarrell, 2008;
Nerur & Balijepally, 2007). This is also confirmed by VersionOne, the largest and longest-
running survey about the agile world, which has stated for different years that
“organizational culture stands out as a critical factor in the success of adopting and scaling
agile”.
Executive summary
2
The increasing trend of scaling agile methodologies in large organization and our interest
in better understanding the reasons of its success, lead our willingness to discover the
possible correlation between the agile methodologies, in particular Scrum, which is the
most widely used method (VersionOne, 2018) and cultural values. In doing so, we used
the Competing Values Framework, ranked by the Financial times between the forty most
important frameworks in business history and resulting one of the most-cited cultural
frameworks from scholars.
By performing a multiple case exploration, our study aims to discover recurrent cultural
patterns inside Scrum teams, and how this methodology enables them; in section 2, we
describe the theoretical background which constituted the basis of our study. Section 3
illustrates the methodology we relied on to carry out the data collection and analysis. The
results of the data analysis, the within and cross case findings that answer to the research
questions are shown in section 4. While in section 5, we discuss confirmations and
possible additions to the theoretical background previously considered. Finally, in section
6, we draw the conclusions and depict practical implications that our study provides to
agile practitioners.
Executive summary
3
1.2 Literature review
“A software development method is said to be an agile software development method
when it is people focused, communications-oriented, flexible (ready to adapt to expected
or unexpected change at any time), speedy (encourages rapid and iterative development
of the product in small releases), lean (focuses on shortening timeframe and cost and on
improved quality), responsive (reacts appropriately to expected and unexpected
changes), and learning (focuses on improvement during and after product development)”
(E.C. Conforto et al., 2016, A. Qumer et al., 2008).
The most widely used method is Scrum (Schwaber & Beedle, 2002; VersionOne, 2018) and
it is defined as a “framework within which people can address complex adaptive
problems, while productively and creatively delivering products of the highest possible
value”. At the core of agile practices there is the idea of self-organizing and cross-
functional teams, whose members are not only collocated but also work at a pace that
sustains their creativity and productivity. Self-organizing teams choose how to best
accomplish their work, rather than being directed by others outside the team. People
work in cross-functional teams, developing products or projects in an iterative,
incremental manner. The Scrum methodology structures development in cycles of work
called Sprints, and it includes three repetitive stages: product backlog development, main
sprint, and daily sprints (D. Cohen et al, 2004).
The successful use of Scrum depends on people becoming more proficient in living the
five scrum values: commitment, courage, focus, openness and respect. If these values are
embodied and lived by the Scrum Team, the Scrum pillars of transparency, inspection, and
Figure 1: The Scrum process model
Executive summary
4
adaptation come to life and build trust for everyone. Scrum Team members learn and
explore those values as they work with the Scrum roles, events, and artefacts (Ken
Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017; Deemer et al., 2012). The Scrum Team consists of a
Product Owner, the Development Team, and a Scrum Master. All events are time-boxed
events, such that every event has a maximum duration. Other than the Sprint itself, which
is a container for all other events, each event in Scrum (Sprint planning, daily stand up,
Sprint review and Sprint retrospective) is a formal opportunity to inspect and adapt
something. These events are specifically designed to enable critical transparency and
inspection. Scrum’s artefacts (Product backlog and Sprint backlog) represent work or
value to provide transparency and opportunities for inspection and adaptation: they are
specifically designed to maximize transparency of key information so that everybody has
the same understanding of the artefact.
The 12th state of agile report (2017) highlights that: “organizational culture stands out as
a critical factor in the success of adopting and scaling agile. The three most significant
challenges to agile adoption and scaling are reported as organizational culture at odds
with agile values (53%), General organizational resistance to change (46%), and
Inadequate management support and sponsorship (42%). Internal agile coaches (53%),
consistent practices and processes across teams (43%), and the implementation of a
common tool across teams (41%) are the top three factors reported to have been most
helpful in scaling agile. These underscore the importance of a culture of excellence and
alignment.”
In the last decade researchers put their efforts into investigating this relationship and
proposing the ideal agile culture thanks to different cultural frameworks. However, since
the majority of the studies were conducted focusing on the XP methodology and
considering answers from heterogeneous organizational levels, two different research
questions arise:
• Considering cross functional teams using Scrum methodology, are there any
recurrent cultural values enabled?
• How does Scrum methodology enable those specific set of cultural values?
Executive summary
5
Then, our research framework requires two phases. First, in order to find recurrent
cultural patterns, we decided to use the Competing values framework of Cameron and
Quinn (2011) since it is the most appropriate for the
internal point of view of the team. In particular, the
variables investigated are six and their translation is
different according to four different subcultures (in
order: clan, adhocracy, hierarchical and market).
Our investigation considers the mix of the four
different definitions for each of the six variables by
leveraging on the OCAI framework (figure aside)
and on a set of defined questions provided by
Quinn, in appendix B.
Then in the second phase, in order to understand how the scrum methodology enables
those specific set of cultural values (so to answer to the second research question), two
steps are needed:
The first step is a further investigation on how agile practitioners portray all the scrum
values. It is performed by exploiting the following table of scrum values, scrum pillars,
scrum maturity (all taken from the Scrum guide of Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland,
2017) and three key lean principles (i.e.: Waste reduction (Dahlgaard et al.,2006);
Customer centricity (Evans et al., 2005); Continuous improvement (P. Brunet et al.,
2003).);
The second step, instead, consists in finding possible correlations between the scrum
table (6) and the cultural one (5). So, our aim is to find how scrum values shape the six
dimensions, which consequently lead to the mix of subcultures.
Hereafter, in table 1, the representation of the research framework is shown, with the
definition of the variables investigated to answer to the two research questions.
Figure 2: OCAI space
Executive summary
6
Cultural variables Definition
Dominant characteristic
The overall organization mindset:
• Like an extended family;
• Entrepreneurial;
• Formal;
• Result oriented.
Organizational leadership
The leadership style:
• Exemplify mentoring and facilitating;
• Exemplify innovation;
• Exemplify coordinating;
• Exemplify aggressive results-oriented focus.
Management of employees
How employees are treated in the organization:
• Fostering teamwork and consensus;
• Encouraged in taking risks;
• Maintaining stability of relationships;
• Inflaming competitiveness.
Organizational glue
The bonding mechanisms between employees:
• Loyalty to the organization & mutual trust;
• Being on the cutting edge;
• Formal rules and policies;
• Achievement and goal accomplishment.
Strategic emphasis
The areas that drive strategic goals:
• Human development and participation;
• Prospecting new opportunities;
• Permanence and control;
• Win the marketplace.
Success factor What is rewarded within the organization:
• Human and team growth;
• Having the newest and unique product;
• Efficiency;
• Outpace competition.
Subcultures
Clan culture
Adhocracy
culture
Hierarchical
culture
Market
culture
Scrum Variables Definition
Commitment People personally commit to achieving the goals of the Scrum Team.
Focus Everyone focuses on the work of the Sprint and the goals of the Scrum Team.
Courage Scrum Team members have courage to do the right thing and work on tough problems.
Openness The Scrum Team and its stakeholders agree to be open about all the work and the challenges with performing the work.
Respect Scrum Team members respect each other to be capable, independent people.
Transparency Significant aspects of the process must be visible to those responsible for the outcome. Observers should share a common understanding of what is being seen.
Adaptation If a process deviates outside acceptable limits, the process or the material being processed must be adjusted as soon as possible to minimize further deviation.
Self-organization Self-organizing teams choose how best to accomplish their work, rather than being directed by others outside the team.
Cross-functionality Cross-functional teams have all competencies needed to accomplish the work without depending on others that are not part of the team.
Customer centricity Identification of critical-to-quality characteristics that are vital to customer satisfaction.
Continuous improvement
Continuous improvement: pervasive and continual activities performed to identify and achieve outcomes that can contribute to the organisational goals.
Waste reduction The excess resources used compared with perfection; everything that increases cost without adding value for the customer.
Table 1: Research framework
Shape
Lead to
Executive summary
7
1.3 Methodology
Being the phenomenon relatively recent and empirical studies investigating these
circumstances scarce, we decided to carry out the research as an exploratory multiple
case-study, as suggested by Yin (1984).
However, before building the sample, we employed a preliminary exploration as a trigger
for our multiple case study by exploiting the experience of an expert, i.e. head of agile
software centre of a mature company, to check whether the research questions could
engender valuable insights via the pre-set of questions and, above all, how to extract
relevant information from the unit of analysis. In particular, we found that our informants
should have been qualified as Scrum Masters, since they represent methodology
facilitators with a direct contact with the team, its members, its objectives and dynamics;
above all, they are responsible of fostering and strengthening teams’ values.
The cases sampling technique adopted is the so called “empirical sampling” (Eisenhardt,
1989). It entails choosing targeted cases or situations, using the rationale of
representative or typical cases for the phenomenon we want to investigate. These ad-hoc
situations refer to successful cases, namely those Scrum projects that have been
conducted following properly the methodology, its events and artefacts. Hereafter the
pool of cases reached via the LinkedIn social media by engaging Scrum masters:
Consistently with the qualitative nature of case study as a research method, we opted for
face-to-face, recorded, semi-structured interviews since they involve the implementation
of a number of predetermined questions used as an organized starting point to drive the
discussion, permitting the interviewer to probe beyond the answers to our prepared
questions, thus making additional points emerge by following a positivistic approach.
Once the interviews are performed, their content is coded to interpret the results.
Case name and industry (quantity of interviews)
Employees (2018)
NI in € M
# Agile Teams
Scrum Master
Years in Agile
(T&D) Telco & digital (2) 91980 2788 46 Internal 2 (T&I) Telco & Infrastructure (2) 103083 -549 6 External 3
E-commerce (1) 123283 1419 30 External 3
Energy (1) 5372 54 6 Internal 2
Pharmaceutical (1) 354000 4559 9 External 5
Table 2: Cases within the sample
Executive summary
8
1.4 Results
Being the interview inspired by the literature and its structure threefold, within results
follow the same format, aiming to: assess whether cases are relying on a correct usage of
the Scrum methodology (tab. 3, 4); discuss their cultural profile starting from the
elaboration of the cultural coding tree (tab. 5) and portraying them, graphically, via the
OCAI representation (fig. 3); examine the Scrum profile (tab. 6), interpreting the
homonymous coding tree to know how cases define the scrum variables investigated.
Scrum team: Characteristics
T&I T&D Energy E-commerce Pharma
Total number of Agile teams
6. Some are remote
46. Majority using scrum
6 (critical mass)
30=14+7+9
9. SAFe oriented
Team clusters Each team is dedicated to one product. Teams under R&D.
6 tribes organized by product/ client. SM under HR.
Each team on the same product. Teams under R&D.
3 product areas with different objectives & backlogs.
Teams working on the same product.
Members per team. Seniority
Between 5 and 9. Mixed
Max 10. Mixed
8. Mixed Max 9. Mixed
8. High
Roles within a team (Scrum master and Product owner always included)
Developers (some remote); Domain experts (remote); user cases owner (UCO); Solution architect.
Developers; Testers; Subject matter experts; UX/UI.
Process specialist (focused on business); Dev-team; UX/UI, infrastructure architect and analysts are transversal.
Developers (back-end, front-end, mobile-app); Testers; Functional analyst (technical & architectural); Data analysts.
Dev-team with t-shaped competences, adjacent knowledge is sought (user experience, design etc.).
Team per SM. Internal/ external
1. But some SM can follow more. External
5. Priority on business/ maturity. Internal
1. Internal
4. External
1. External.
Product owner Internal, + UCO. Fully dedicated.
Internal, fully dedicated
Internal Internal Internal. Fully dedicated
Items prioritization criteria
Story mapping made by PO & UCO to give to epics business value. PO & team prioritize stories according to business value; MVP & release readiness.
Business priority. Market trends.
Fibonacci series: user story identification and definition of difficulty to develop the story (from 1 to 20) made by the team itself
Time to market optimization; Technical & economic feasibility; No open points or missing information; available MVP; UX/UI ready; Story points; ROI & BE.
Prioritization made by the PO, following market trends respecting rules and law dictated by the pharmaceutical industry. Release readiness.
Table 3: Scrum team: characteristics
Executive summary
9
Scrum ceremonies
T&I T&D Energy e-commerce Pharmaceutical
Sprint (Duration)
2 weeks but flexible_1,3,4
2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks
Sprint planning (goal definition & activities)
User story mapping; stories organized by MVP & release
Definition of OKRs, KPIs & “done”.
Initial planning and division of user stories along the product backlog
Items selection according the definition of ready.
Check list made at the project beginning, defines “done” & aligns team & stakeholders
Daily stand up (Duration, structure)
Around 10mins. Done, to be done, impediments.
15mins, shifted. Done, to be done, impediments.
15 mins. Done, to be done, impediments.
Max 15mins. Done, to be done, impediments. SM & PO do not speak.
Max 15 minutes. Done, to be done and possible impediments
Sprint review (Frequency, duration, structure)
The last sprint day. Stories feedback system & demo.
Every 2 weeks, the last sprint day. Team celebration; product feedback system.
Every 2 weeks. Feedback collection, presentation of done
Every 2 weeks, among 2 last Sprint days. SM present team’s stats. Demo to PO & stakeholders.
Every 2 weeks. Team & stakeholders involved, collect feedback from stakeholders
Sprint retrospective (Frequency, structure)
(Not always) After the review. Good, bad & to be improved or “legospective” or star or journey. AC prioritize action items as stories for next sprint.
Last sprint day. Format & theme chosen by SM & PO in order to find the best call to actions. Feedback system.
Last sprint day. One made only with PO, the next one with PO and sponsor. Presentation of what should be changed and description of next sprint’s work
Last sprint day. Flexible but generally: Good, bad & to be improved, 10mins each on post-it. Collective discussion mediated by the SM. Call to action prioritized.
Last day of sprint, after review. Discussion of what needs to be changed, important to find at least one action to perform in the next sprint as an improvement. Use of different techniques (sad, glad, mad) to avoid boredom & monotony.
Backlog refinement
Grooming. PO negotiate with stakeholders & developers.
Negotiation of stories & to be done. Explanation of “done”.
Not necessary because teams decide backlog with PO. If needed, increase sprint of one week.
If acceptance criteria not met during Sprint review. During sprint PO can add new items into bl.
Use of a buffer at the end of sprint to solve or elude technical problems, to not stop the process anytime there is a tech problem.
Peculiar ceremonies, events or artefacts.
“Personality matching” during sprint zero for team building. Spike technique.
“liberating structure” for conflict resolution. Digital sink. Quarter business review.
“One to one” formula for solving impediments after daily stand up; “Form Storm Norm Perform” technique for team definition.
“Meet after” formula for impediments resolution (face to face meeting with SM or PO after daily). Team building self-organized.
One to one session for coaching & for feedback collection. First enlarged planning for scope & milestones definition. Buffer for peculiar impediments.
Table 4: Scrum ceremonies
Executive summary
10
The objective of table 5 is to present the most relevant subculture for each of the six
dimensions, in order to find recurrent cultural patterns and so to answer to the first
research question. Moreover, with fig. 3, the representation of the subculture mix of each
case is plotted, exploiting the OCAI framework.
CULTURAL PROFILE
Dominant characteristic
Organizational leadership
Management of employees
Organizational glue
Strategic emphasis
Success factor
T&D SENIOR MARKET ADHOCRACY HIERARCHY
ADHOCRACY MARKET
ADHOCRACY MARKET
ADHOCRACY MARKET
T&D JUNIOR ADHOCRACY
MARKET ADHOCRACY
CLAN CLAN
ADHOCRACY CLAN
MARKET CLAN
MARKET HIERARCHY
T&I SENIOR MARKET
HIERARCHY HIERARCHY
ADHOCRACY CLAN
HIERARCHY MARKET
CLAN MARKET
ADHOCRACY
T&I JUNIOR ADHOCRACY
MARKET CLAN
CLAN ADHOCRACY
CLAN ADHOCRACY CLAN
MARKET
ENERGY CLAN
ADHOCRACY
CLAN HIERARCHY
HIERARCHY CLAN MARKET
MARKET MARKET
HIERARCHY
E-COMMERCE
CLAN MARKET
CLAN ADHOCRACY
MARKET CLAN CLAN
MARKET HIERARCHY
PHARMA CLAN
MARKET CLAN
ADHOCRACY HIERARCHY
CLAN MARKET
MARKET CLAN
MARKET
Table 5: Overall cultural profile
Figure 3: OCAI spaces overall sample
From upper left to right:
T&D case - Junior; Senior.
T&I case - Junior; Senior.
Energy case
E-commerce case
Pharmaceutical case
Executive summary
11
SCRUM PROFILE
T&D SENIOR T&D JUNIOR T&I SENIOR T&I JUNIOR ENERGY E-COMMERCE PHARMACEUTICAL
Commitment Be proactive in finding solutions to the problems
Learn self-organization and agile mindset
Deliver MVPs Respect the releases
Respect rules and guidelines
Respect of the normative boundaries
Respect deadlines
Working together to the objective
Focus Share the same vision Share the same
vision
Improve budget, time and quality of development
Nothing to highlight Find new business opportunities
Deliver solutions faster
Job to be done
Courage Take tasks assigned to a colleague
Spur decision making People are encouraged to propose new ideas
Nothing to highlight Share proactively impediments
Nothing to highlight
Sharing ideas to the customer
Openness Find compromises between team members
Proactively ask for support
Express thoughts and impediments
Enhance relations between members
Absence of prevarications
Embrace seniors’ expertise
Find new paths to reach the objective
Respect Colleagues’ values and time
Visibility should be left to everyone
Avoid aggressive behaviours
Respect the roles of others
Weighting proposal of adjustments
Leaving no one behind
Others’ opinions & professionality
Transparency Everyone must be able to follow others work.
Nothing to highlight Share the current state of work
Transparency of processes
Objectives and timeboxes are clear
Process to reach the objective
Everyone always informed on the new tasks
Adaptation
Adapt ceremonies in function of the objectives and the context
Adapt ceremonies, techniques and tools to the team
Ceremonies & communication to facilitate interaction with remote workers
Ceremonies and communication adapted for remote workers
Allocation of members in function of what is challenging for them
Ceremonies adapted in function of people
Adaptation of ceremonies and tools in function of people
Self-organization
Micro-management is avoided
Avoid micro-management
Autonomy limited by need of coordination
No technique is imposed
Autonomous in managing deliverables
Employees choose the team to belong
Detecting the missing internal competencies
Cross functionality
Everyone has its specific role and is expert in his field
Possibility to learn from similar roles
Nothing to highlight Cross-pollination Trainings for competences development
Seniors facilitate juniors’ work
T-shaped competences
Customer centricity
Receive feedback to adjust the direction
Understand the right direction
Create value for the customer
Nothing to highlight Nothing to highlight Continuous discussion with him
Continuously consulted for feedbacks
Continuous improvement
Share ideas & best practices externally
Experimentation to achieve greater results
Iterative thinking and customer feedbacks
Nothing to highlight Learn from failures Iterative thinking Learn from unsuccess and its causes
Waste reduction
Fast communication Costs savings
Nothing to highlight Just In Time documentation
Just In Time documentation
Increase process effectiveness
Nothing to highlight
Nothing to highlight
Table 6: Scrum profile
Executive summary
12
Connecting results from table 6, where each case defines the Scrum variables
investigated, and table 5, where cultural patterns are highlighted, it is possible to extract
relevant information to answer to the second research question.
CROSS FINDINGS
DESCRIPTION (answer to second research question)
LITERATURE CONTRIBUTION
Co-existence of competing values cultures
High concentration of Clan and Market subcultures in each case, implicit interconnection between the two competing cultures:
Need of high-skilled team members to outpace competition → technical trainings to outpace competition (Market success factor) increase human development (Clan success factor).
Creation of informal environment (Clan dominant characteristic) and increase of Loyalty (Clan organizational glue) spur motivation and so productivity → creation of an effective solution that may succeed in the market (Market strategic emphasis and success factor).
Confirm theories of Cameron and Quinn: CVF is unlikely to reflect only one subculture, rather it stresses a balance between opposite orientations: some cultural types may be more dominant than others, imposing paradoxical requirements for effective organizations (Cameron, 1986).
Dominance of the clan subculture
Courage to express feedbacks leads to a proactive interaction between colleagues (Openness) → Extended family (Dominant characteristic).
Scrum masters give to the teams the responsibility to self-organize, act only if needed (Self-organization) → Mentoring (Leadership style).
Transparency of communication enhances individual participation and avoids potential misalignments (Transparency) → Loyalty (Organizational glue).
Evidences in line with theories of Iivari and Iivari (2011) and Othman (2016).
High relevance of the market subculture
Satisfy customer’s expectations by continuously improving the solution (Customer centricity, Continuous improvement) → Win the marketplace by outpacing competitors (Strategic emphasis, Success factor).
Evidences in line with theories of Iivari and Iivari (2011) and Othman (2016).
Absence of aggressive leadership style
Aggressive leadership style leads to micro-management, teams instead need self-organization in order to be motivated to perform: use of mentoring leadership style at the expenses of the aggressive one.
Addition to extant literature: aggressive leadership style is not necessary to focalize teams towards goal achievement
Management of employees encourages risk taking to drive innovation
Employees encouraged in taking risks, focus on experimentation and learn the fail fast approach (Courage, Waste reduction) → risk taking orientation (Management of employees).
Confirms cultural theory: unlikely to find only one subculture. Adds to agile: to establish iterative thinking, support people in experimenting.
Executive summary
13
CROSS FINDINGS
DESCRIPTION (answer to second research question)
LITERATURE CONTRIBUTION
Hierarchical rates depend on teams’ structure
Adaptation scrum pillar in contraposition with everything that can be considered as extremely standardized and formalized: generally low hierarchical cultures, except for particular cases (presence of remote workers, transversal roles not dedicated to a single team).
Confirms agile theory of Gupta (2019): hierarchical subculture dysfunctional & incompatible with Scrum. Appends: coordination increases in case of remote workers or transversal roles.
Seniority leads to results orientation
Less mature teams need to learn the agile mindset: Scrum master adapts ceremonies in function of people in order to facilitate meetings execution (Adaptation) → Scrum master as facilitator (Clan leadership style) to obtain results easier (Market subculture).
Mature teams are continuously monitored, individuals must be proactive in finding solutions; production of JIT documentation (Commitment, Waste reduction) → obtain efficiently the results requested (Market subculture).
Indirect confirmation (Huang et al., 2010) of the finding: the more a team is mature, the less it will follow a clan culture; consequently: to decreases of clan rates corresponds growth on market values.
Table 7: Cross-case findings description and discussion
1.5 Conclusion: limitations, future research and implications
Table 8: Limitations and future research
Limitations Future research
Neglection of the evolution of values investigated Repeat the interview after a discrete amount of time, with the same interviewee.
The “convenience sampling” technique is not necessary representative of the population and it is potentially biased (Sample selection bias and self-selection bias)
Perform a wider research in the whole Italian territory
Leverage not only on the LinkedIn social media to reach informants
Non-generalizability to non-Italian cases Extend the research to other countries, considering Hofstede’s studies
The focus in this study is intended to investigate how the scrum methodology, in particular its social side, enables recurrent cultural patterns of team subculture.
Embed in the whole research process also the impact of technical agile practices.
Absence of interconnections between teams managed by different scrum masters
Multiple unit of analysis from the same company
Absence of a great number of multiple sources of evidence. A quantitative and omni comprehensive database is missing
Repetition of experiments in time
Multiple point of view for the same industry
Executive summary
14
In conclusion, this section presents practical implications to be proposed to Scrum
masters:
• The coexistence of the clan subculture and the market one implicitly demonstrates
the importance of technical trainings and horizontal learning to increase loyalty
and commitment of individuals, which is translated in being more competitive on
the market with a product that effectively satisfies customer needs. Therefore, we
suggest to incentivize team members in doing trainings of different nature: in
general, the result obtained will be beneficial for both individuals and the
company, as human growth and efficiency will be enhanced;
• Generally, every case studied shows a strong willingness of the Product owner and
Scrum master to listen to new ideas coming from team members. We advise Scrum
masters to give more space to idea propositions, during the Sprint Retrospective
or in the middle of the Sprint, to discuss about potential innovations to process or
product, in order to give the possibility to implement eventual changes during the
current Sprint;
• Even if general guidelines for internal communication are helpful, charging teams
with harsh rules to comply with, hampers the realization of the adaptation pillar.
Being constrained obstructs the possibility to shape ceremonies and tools in
function of people and, in some cases, to lose responsiveness to market changes.
This is why we suggest to limit the use of rules and laws to let the teams self-
organize;
• We advise Scrum masters to use a customized approach with teams, in function of
their ability in mastering the Scrum principles.
The more a team is new in working with agile methodologies, the more it will be
needed a mentoring approach; when a team is already mature, the Scrum master
can shift his behaviors towards a competitive approach.
Literature review
15
2 Literature review
In this section the analysis of extant literature is performed through a presentation of
Agile methodologies, the definition of organizational culture and the different approaches
that scholars have been in studying the relationship among the two. Consequently, a gap
analysis emerged, where some open points have been selected as trigger for this research
and the research question have been formulated; to conclude, a research framework has
been developed in order to go through them.
2.1 Agile
Agile Methods started to be conceptualized in the mid-1990s, as a reaction to plan-based
or traditional methods of developing software and acknowledge the “need for an
alternative to documentation driven, heavyweight software development processes” (D.
Cohen et al., 2004; T. Dyba, T. Dingsøyr, 2008). The term “agility” was first observed in the
area of manufacturing (Nagel and Dove, 1991), where it was disseminated as a concept
called “agile manufacturing,” even before the term was popularized in the area of agile
project management (or agile methods). The term "agile manufacturing" was treated as
a new paradigm, characterized as “an ability to change the configuration of a system in
response to unforeseen changes and unexpected market conditions (E.C. Conforto et al.,
2016).
The traditional model (i.e. Waterfall), which emphasize ‘‘a rationalized, engineering-based
approach”, was supposed to fix the problem of changing requirements once and for all by
freezing requirements and not allowing any change: The ‘‘traditionalists” are said to
advocate extensive planning, codified processes, and rigorous reuse to make
development an efficient and predictable activity, but practitioners found that
requirements just could not be pinned down in one fell swoop as they anticipated
(D.Cohen et al., 2004; T. Dyba, T. Dingsøyr, 2008).
The need to find new methods was driven by the uncertainties coming from the industry,
the velocity of technological transformation, the requirements that “change at rates that
swamp traditional methods”, and customers that have become increasingly unable to
definitively state their needs up front while, at the same time, expecting more from their
Literature review
16
software (D.Cohen et al., 2004). As a result, several consultants have independently
developed methods and practices to respond to the inevitable change they were
experiencing, addressing the challenge of an unpredictable world by relying on ‘‘people
and their creativity rather than on processes” (D.Cohen et al., 2004; T. Dyba, T. Dingsøyr,
2008).
As with any nascent discipline, the early years of agile development were marked by
exuberance of a few and by skepticism among many: although these new methods had
been developed in the late 90s, they were formally introduced to the software industry
by gathering under the Agile umbrella when the Agile manifesto was created in 2001 (T.
Dingsøyr et al., 2012; Beck et al.,2001). In fact, in February 2001, something remarkable
happened: rather than focus on their differences and the “competitive advantage” of their
own methodologies, 17 creators of the lightweight methodologies met to discuss their
common interests and philosophies, coining the term “agile software development” to
describe their methodologies. (L. Williams, 2012). What emerged was the Agile “Software
Development” manifesto, an answer to the need for an alternative to documentation
driven, heavyweight software development processes convened”. They summarized their
viewpoint, saying that “the Agile movement is not anti-methodology, in fact, many of us
want to restore credibility to the word methodology. We want to restore a balance. We
embrace modeling, but not in order to file some diagram in a dusty corporate repository.
We embrace documentation, but not hundreds of pages of never maintained and rarely
used tomes. We plan, but [we] recognize the limits of planning in a turbulent
environment” (Cohen et al., 2004). We are uncovering better ways of developing software
by doing it and helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value:
• Individuals and interactions over processes and tools;
• Working software over comprehensive documentation;
• Customer collaboration over contract negotiation;
• Responding to change over following a plan.
Literature review
17
That is, while there is a value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left
more. (Agile Manifesto, 2001). Robert L. Glass amalgamates the best of the Agile and
traditional approaches by analyzing the Agile manifesto and comparing it with traditional
values:
• On individuals and interaction over process and tools: “Traditional software
engineering has gotten too caught up in its emphasis on process”. At the same time
“most practitioners already know that people matter more than process”.
• On working software over comprehensive documentation: “It is important to
remember that the ultimate result of building software is product. Documentation
matters . . . but over the years, the traditionalists made a fetish of documentation. It
became the prime goal of the document-driven lifecycle”.
• On customer collaboration over contract negotiation: Glass sympathizes with both
sides regarding this statement: “I deeply believe in customer collaboration, and […]
without it nothing is going to go well. I also believe in contracts, and I would not
undertake any significant collaborative effort without it”.
• On responding to change over following a plan: Both sides are right regarding this
statement, according to Glass: “Over the years, we have learned two contradictory
lessons: Customers and users do not always know what they want at the outset of a
software project, and we must be open to change during project execution” and
requirement change was one of the most common causes of software project failure”
(D. Cohen et al., 2004; R.L. Glass, 2001).
The agile Manifesto is based on the twelve principles (Beck et al., 2001):
• Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through the early and continuous
delivery of valuable software.
• Welcome changing requirements, even late in development. Agile processes harness
change for the customer's competitive advantage.
• Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months,
with a preference to the shorter timescale.
• Businesspeople and developers must work together daily throughout the project.
Literature review
18
• Build projects around motivated individuals. Give them the environment and support
they need and trust them to get the job done.
• The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a
development team is a face-to-face conversation.
• Working software is the primary measure of progress.
• Agile processes promote sustainable development. The sponsors, developers, and
users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely.
• Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility.
• Simplicity, the art of maximizing the amount of work not done, is essential.
• The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.
• At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes
and adjusts its behavior accordingly.
The problem identified with this literature, especially related to agile project management
and project management as a broad theory is the lack of precision in defining and
understanding the meaning of “agility”, causing different interpretations: Based on a
survey and assessment of the various contemporary definitions, Qumer and Henderson-
Sellers offer the following definition for the agility of any entity: “Agility is a persistent
behavior or ability of a sensitive entity that exhibits flexibility to accommodate expected
or unexpected changes rapidly, follows the shortest time span, uses economical, simple
and quality instruments in a dynamic environment and applies updated prior knowledge
and experience to learn from the internal and external environment.” (E.C. Conforto et
al., 2016, A. Qumer et al., 2008). In order to benefit from this definition, these authors
developed a four-dimensional framework (4-DAT) to crystallize the key attributes of
agility: flexibility, speed, leanness, learning and responsiveness. Flexibility is the ability to
respond to change and leanness accentuates lower cost, reduced timeframe and quality
production. Consequently, by applying the above definition of agility to the notion of a
software development methodology, we derive the definition of an “agile method” as: “A
software development method is said to be an agile software development method when
Literature review
19
a method is people focused, communications-oriented, flexible (ready to adapt to
expected or unexpected change at any time), speedy (encourages rapid and iterative
development of the product in small releases), lean (focuses on shortening timeframe and
cost and on improved quality), responsive (reacts appropriately to expected and
unexpected changes), and learning (focuses on improvement during and after product
development)” (E.C. Conforto et al., 2016, A. Qumer et al., 2008).
At the core of agile practices is the idea of self-organizing and cross-functional teams
whose members are not only collocated but also work at a pace that sustains their
creativity and productivity. Self-organizing teams choose how best to accomplish their
work, rather than being directed by others outside the team. Cross-functional teams have
all competencies needed to accomplish the work without depending on others not part
of the team. The team model in Scrum is designed to optimize flexibility, creativity, and
productivity (Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017). Team's agility, defined as a
performance indicator, would be related at least with two factors: the capacity to change
the project plan and the active involvement of customer in the development process, that
are directly dependent on the use of “agile methods” and are supposed to be industry-
agnostic. Furthermore, customers are actively involved in the development process,
facilitating feedback and reflection that can lead to more satisfying outcomes (E.C.
Conforto et al., 2016, T. Dingsøyr et al., 2012).
As defined previously, there are different agile methodologies that practitioners follow.
Dybå and Dingsøyr (2008), listed the main agile development methods as follow: Scrum
(Schwaber et al., 2001), Crystal methodologies (Cockburn, 2005), Dynamic software
development method (DSDM) (Stapleton & DSDM Consortium., 2003), Feature-driven
development (Palmer & Felsing, 2002), Lean software development (Poppendieck &
Poppendieck, 2003), Extreme Programming (XP; XP2) (Beck, 2000; Beck & Andres, 2005)
and the most widely used method Scrum (Schwaber & Beedle, 2002). Hereafter, their
description:
Literature review
20
Agile method Description
Crystal Clear A family of methods for co-located teams of different sizes and
criticality: Clear, Yellow, Orange, Red, Blue. The most agile method,
Crystal Clear, focuses on communication in small teams developing
software that is not life critical. Clear development has seven
characteristics: frequent delivery, reflective improvement, osmotic
communication, personal safety, focus, easy access to expert users, and
requirements for the technical environment
Dynamic software
development
method (DSDM)
Divides projects into three phases: pre-project, project life cycle, and
post project. Nine principles underlie DSDM: user involvement,
empowering the project team, frequent delivery, addressing current
business needs, iterative and incremental development, allow for
reversing changes, the high-level scope being fixed before project
starts, testing throughout the lifecycle, and efficient and effective
communication
Feature-driven
development
Combines model-driven and agile development with emphasis on the
initial object model, a division of work in features, and iterative design
for each feature. Claims to be suitable for the development of critical
systems. An iteration of a feature consists of two phases: design and
development
Lean software
development
An adaptation of principles from lean production and, in particular, the
Toyota production system to software development. Consists of seven
principles: eliminate waste, amplify learning, decide as late as possible,
deliver as fast as possible, empower the team, build integrity, and
optimize the whole (customer centricity and continuous improvement).
Extreme
programming
(XP; XP2)
Focuses on best practice for development. Consists of twelve practices:
the planning game, small releases, metaphor, simple design, testing,
refactoring, pair programming, collective ownership, continuous
integration, 40-h week, on-site customers, and coding standards. The
revised ‘‘XP2" consists of the following ‘‘primary practices": sit together,
the whole team, informative workspace, energized work, pair
programming, stories, weekly cycle, quarterly cycle, slack, 10-minute
build, continuous integration, test-first programming, and incremental
design. There are also eleven ‘‘corollary practices".
Table 9: Agile methods
Literature review
21
In the following section a particular focus will be given to the Scrum method, as currently
it is the most adopted (VersionOne, 2018).
2.1.1 Scrum methodology
Scrum is a process framework that has been used to manage work on complex products
since the early 1990s. Ken Schwaber first described Scrum in 1996 as a process that
“accepts that the development process is unpredictable,” formalizing the “do what it
takes” mentality, and has found success with numerous independent software vendors.
The term is borrowed from Rugby: “Scrum occurs when players from each team huddle
closely together in an attempt to advance down the playing field” (Ken Schwaber and Jeff
Sutherland, 2017; D. Cohen et al, 2004).
It is defined as a “framework within which people can address complex adaptive
problems, while productively and creatively delivering products of the highest possible
value”. Scrum methodology can be described as:
• Lightweight;
• Simple to understand;
• Difficult to master.
It is a framework within which you can employ various processes and techniques. Scrum
makes clear the relative efficacy of your product management and work techniques so
that you can continuously improve the product, the team, and the working environment;
the framework itself consists of Scrum Teams and their associated roles, events, artifacts,
and rules. Each component within the framework serves a specific purpose and is essential
to Scrum’s success and usage (Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
Scrum proved to be especially effective in iterative and incremental knowledge transfer.
Scrum is now widely used for products, services, and the management of the parent
organization. As technology, market, and environmental complexities and their
interactions have rapidly increased, Scrum’s utility in dealing with complexity is proven
daily. The essence of Scrum is a small team of people. The individual team is highly flexible
and adaptive. The rules of Scrum bind together the roles, events, and artifacts, governing
Literature review
22
the relationships and interaction between them (Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland,
2017).
People work in cross-functional teams, developing products or projects in an iterative,
incremental manner. It structures development in cycles of work called Sprints. The Scrum
model includes three repetitive stages: product backlog development, main sprint, and
daily sprints (explained later in this section) (D. Cohen et al, 2004).
At the beginning of each Sprint, cross-functional Teams select items (customer
requirements) from a prioritized list. The Team agrees on a collective target of what they
believe they can deliver by the end of the Sprint, something that is tangible and will be
truly “done”. During the Sprint, no new items may be added; Scrum embraces change for
the next Sprint, but the current short Sprint is meant to focus on a small, clear, relatively
stable goal (Deemer et al., 2012).
The key principles of Scrum are the following:
• Small working teams that maximize communication, minimize overhead, and
maximize sharing of tacit, informal knowledge;
• Adaptability to technical or marketplace (user/customer) changes to ensure the
best possible product is produced;
• Frequent “builds”, or construction of executables, that can be inspected, adjusted,
tested, documented, and built on;
Figure 4: The Scrum process model (adapted from Boehm and Turner 2005)
Literature review
23
• Partitioning of work and team assignments into clean, low coupling partitions, or
packets;
• Constant testing and documentation of a product as it is built;
• Ability to declare a product ‘done’ whenever required.
The scrum teams should be composed by maximum seven people, and a complete team
should at least include a developer, quality assurance engineer, and a documenter (D.
Cohen et al, 2004).
2.1.1.1 Scrum Pillars and Values
Three pillars uphold every implementation of empirical (i.e. knowledge coming from
experience and making decisions based on what is known) process control: transparency,
inspection, and adaptation. (Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
• Transparency: Significant aspects of the process must be visible to those
responsible for the outcome. Transparency requires those aspects be defined by a
common standard, so observers share a common understanding of what is being
seen;
• Inspection: Scrum users must frequently inspect Scrum artifacts and progress
toward a Sprint Goal to detect undesirable variances. Their inspection should not
be so frequent that inspection gets in the way of the work. Inspections are most
beneficial when diligently performed by skilled inspectors at the point of work;
• Adaptation: If an inspector determines that one or more aspects of a process
deviate outside acceptable limits, and that the resulting product will be
unacceptable, the process or the material being processed must be adjusted. An
adjustment must be made as soon as possible to minimize further deviation.
Scrum prescribes four formal events for inspection and adaptation, which will be studied
later:
• Sprint Planning;
• Daily Scrum;
• Sprint Review;
• Sprint Retrospective.
Literature review
24
The successful use of Scrum depends on people becoming more proficient in living these
five values: commitment, courage, focus, openness and respect. If these values are
embodied and lived by the Scrum Team, the Scrum pillars of transparency, inspection, and
adaptation come to life and build trust for everyone. The Scrum Team members learn and
explore those values as they work with the Scrum roles, events, and artifacts (Ken
Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017; Deemer et al., 2012).
2.1.1.2 Scrum Team
The Scrum Team consists of a Product Owner, the Development Team, and a Scrum
Master.
• Product owner: The Product Owner (PO) is responsible for maximizing the value of
the product resulting from work of the Development Team, so for maximizing
return on investment (ROI) by identifying product features, translating these into
a prioritized list, deciding which should be at the top of the list for the next Sprint,
and continually re-prioritizing and refining the list. The Product Owner is not a
traditional Product Manager, because he actively and regularly interacts with the
Team, prioritize by working with all of the stakeholders and reviewing the results
each Sprint, rather than delegating development decisions to a project manager.
The Product Owner is the sole person responsible for managing the Product
Backlog (see Figure 1). It may represent the desires of a committee in the Product
Backlog, but those wanting to change a Product Backlog item’s priority must
address the Product Owner. For the Product Owner to succeed, the entire
organization must respect his or her decisions. The Product Owner’s decisions are
visible in the content and ordering of the Product Backlog (Deemer et al., 2012;
Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017);
• Development team: The Development Team consists of professionals who do the
work of delivering a potentially releasable Increment of “Done” product at the end
of each Sprint. The Team in Scrum is “cross-functional” – it includes all the
expertise necessary to deliver the potentially shippable product each Sprint – and
it is “self-organizing”, so it is structured and empowered by the organization to
Literature review
25
organize and manage their own work. The resulting synergy optimizes the
Development Team’s overall efficiency and effectiveness.
Development Teams have the following characteristics:
o They are self-organizing: No one (not even the Scrum Master) tells the
Development Team how to turn Product Backlog into Increments of
potentially releasable functionality;
o Development Teams are cross-functional, with all the skills as a team
necessary to create a product Increment;
o Scrum recognizes no titles for Development Team members, regardless of
the work being performed by the person;
o Scrum recognizes no sub-teams in the Development Team, regardless of
domains that need to be addressed like testing, architecture, operations,
or business analysis;
o Individual Development Team members may have specialized skills and
areas of focus, but accountability belongs to the Development Team as a
whole.
Optimal Development Team size is small enough to remain nimble and large
enough to complete significant work within a Sprint. Fewer than three
Development Team members decrease interaction and results in smaller
productivity gains. Smaller Development Teams may encounter skill constraints
during the Sprint, causing the Development Team to be unable to deliver a
potentially releasable Increment. Having more than nine members requires too
much coordination. Large Development Teams generate too much complexity for
an empirical process to be useful. The Product Owner and Scrum Master roles are
not included in this count unless they are also executing the work of the Sprint
backlog (Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017; Deemer et al., 2012);
• Scrum Master: The Scrum Master helps the product group to learn and apply
Scrum to achieve business value, by helping everyone understand Scrum theory,
practices, rules, and values: he is responsible for promoting and supporting Scrum
as defined in the Scrum Guide. He is considered to be a facilitator of the Scrum
process, enabling the team to work in a self-organized and cross-functional way;
furthermore, the Scrum Master protects the team from external disruptions
Literature review
26
(Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017; Deemer et al., 2012; S. V. Spiegler et al.,
2019).
The Scrum Master is a servant-leader for the Scrum Team: he is not the manager
of the Team members, nor is He a project manager, or team representative. The
Scrum Master serves the Team, by helping to remove impediments, protecting the
Team from outside interference, and helping the Team to adopt modern
development practices. He educates, coaches and guides the Product Owner,
Team and the rest of the organization in the skillful use of Scrum.
Unlike a traditional manager, the Scrum Master does not tell people what to do or
assign tasks – they facilitate the process, supporting the Team as it organizes and
manages itself (Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017; Deemer et al., 2012).
2.1.1.3 Scrum events
Prescribed events are used in Scrum to create regularity and to minimize the need for
meetings not defined in Scrum. All events are time-boxed events, such that every event
has a maximum duration. Other than the Sprint itself, which is a container for all other
events, each event in Scrum is a formal opportunity to inspect and adapt something.
These events are specifically designed to enable critical transparency and inspection
(Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
• Sprint: The heart of Scrum is a Sprint, a time-box of one month or less during which
a “Done”, useable, and potentially releasable product Increment is created. Sprints
have consistent durations throughout a development effort. A new Sprint starts
immediately after the conclusion of the previous Sprint. Sprints contain and
consist of the Sprint Planning, Daily Scrums, the development work, the Sprint
Review, and the Sprint Retrospective.
During the Sprint:
o No changes are made that would endanger the Sprint Goal;
o Quality goals do not decrease;
o Scope may be clarified and re-negotiated between the Product Owner and
Development Team as more is learned.
Literature review
27
Each Sprint may be considered a project with no more than a one-month horizon:
it has the goal of what is to be built, a design and flexible plan that will guide
building it, the work, and the resultant product increment. They are limited to one
calendar month in order to limit risks to only one calendar month of cost. When a
Sprint’s horizon is too long the definition of what is being built may change,
complexity may rise, and risk may increase. Moreover, Sprints enable
predictability by ensuring inspection and adaptation of progress toward a Sprint
Goal at least every calendar month (Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
• Sprint planning: The work to be performed in the Sprint is planned at the Sprint
Planning. This plan is created by the collaborative work of the entire Scrum Team.
The Scrum Master ensures that the event takes place and that attendants
understand its purpose. Sprint Planning is necessary in order to understand what
can be delivered as the incrementing result in the upcoming sprint and how to
achieve this result (Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
• Daily scrum: The Daily Scrum is a 15-minute time-boxed event for the
Development Team, held every day of the Sprint, to share information that is
supposed to be relevant to the teams’ progress, in order to synchronize their work
and report to each other on obstacles (Deemer et al., 2012; Schwaber and Jeff
Sutherland, 2017; V. Stray et al., 2016).
In the Daily Scrum, one by one, each member of the Team reports three things to
the other members of the Team:
o What has been accomplished since the last meeting?
o What will be done before the next meeting?
o What obstacles are in the way?
it is a time for a self-organizing Team to share with each other what is going on, to
help them coordinate to the accomplishment of the Sprint Goal and create the
anticipated Increment by the end of the Sprint (Deemer et al., 2012; Schwaber and
Jeff Sutherland, 2017). Its main purpose is to enable team members to obtain an
overview of what other team members are doing. This phenomenon is called team
awareness, which is explained as “an understanding of the activities of others,
which provides a context for your own activities”.
Literature review
28
To summarize, V. Stray defines daily stand up meetings as: “a brief communicative
event that involves two or more people in a team; it is regularly scheduled with a
pre-arranged time and place; the participants stand; it is organized and managed
by the team; and its primary purpose is to increase team awareness” (V. Stray et
al., 2016).
Daily Scrums improve communications, eliminate other meetings, identify
impediments to development for removal, highlight and promote quick decision-
making, and improve the Development Team’s level of knowledge. This is a key
inspect and adapt meeting (Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
• Sprint review: It is held at the end of the Sprint to inspect the Increment and adapt
the Product Backlog if needed. During the Sprint Review, the Scrum Team and
stakeholders collaborate about what was done in the Sprint. Based on that and
any changes to the Product Backlog during the Sprint, attendees collaborate on
the next things that could be done to optimize value. The Sprint Review is an
inspect and adapt activity for the product. It is a time for the Product Owner to
learn what is going on with the product and with the Team (that is, a review of the
Sprint); and for the Team to learn what is going on with the Product Owner and
the market. Consequently, a critical element of the Review is an in-depth
conversation between the Team and Product Owner to learn the situation, elicit
feedback and foster collaboration. The result of the Sprint Review is a revised
Product Backlog that defines the probable Product Backlog items for the next
Sprint. The Product Backlog may also be adjusted overall to meet new
opportunities (Deemer et al., 2012; Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
• Sprint retrospective: The Sprint Retrospective, which occurs after the Sprint
Review, is an opportunity for the Scrum Team to inspect itself and create a plan
for improvements to be enacted during the next Sprint; moreover, it’s an
opportunity for the Team to discuss what’s working and what’s not working, and
agree on changes to try.
Literature review
29
The purpose of the Sprint Retrospective is to:
o Inspect how the last Sprint went with regards to people, relationships,
process, and tools;
o Identify and order the major items that went well and potential
improvements;
o Create a plan for implementing improvements to the way the Scrum Team
does its work.
By the end of the Sprint Retrospective, the Scrum Team should have identified
improvements that it will implement in the next Sprint. Implementing these
improvements in the next Sprint is the adaptation to the inspection of the Scrum
Team itself. Although improvements may be implemented at any time, the Sprint
Retrospective provides a formal opportunity to focus on inspection and adaptation
(Deemer et al., 2012; Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
2.1.1.4 Scrum Artifacts
Scrum’s artifacts represent work or value to provide transparency and opportunities for
inspection and adaptation: they are specifically designed to maximize transparency of key
information so that everybody has the same understanding of the artifact.
• Product backlog: The Product Backlog is an ordered list of everything that is known to
be needed in the product. The Product Backlog lists all features, functions,
requirements, enhancements, and fixes that constitute the changes to be made to the
product in future releases: it is the single, definitive view of “everything that could be
done by the Team ever, in order of priority”. Product Backlog is a living artifact, as
changes in business requirements, market conditions, or technology may cause
changes in the Product Backlog (Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017; Deemer et al.,
2012).
A good Product Backlog should be:
o Detailed appropriately: the top priority items are more fine-grained and
detailed than the lower priority items, since the former will be worked on
sooner than the latter;
Literature review
30
o Estimated: the items for the current release need to have estimates, and
furthermore, should be considered for re-estimation each Sprint as everyone
learns and new information arises;
o Emergent: in response to learning and variability, the Product Backlog is
regularly refined. Each Sprint, items may be added, removed, modified, split,
and changed in priority. Thus, the Product Backlog is continuously updated by
the Product Owner to reflect changes in the needs of the customer, new ideas
or insights, moves by the competition, technical hurdles that appear etc.;
o Prioritized. The items at the top of the Product Backlog are prioritized or
ordered in a 1-N order;
The items in the Product Backlog can vary significantly in size or effort. Larger ones are
broken into smaller items during the Product Backlog Refinement workshop or the
Sprint Planning Meeting, and smaller ones may be consolidated. The Product Backlog
items for the upcoming next several Sprints should be small and fine-grained enough
that they are understood by the Team, enabling forecasts made in the Sprint Planning
meeting to be meaningful (Deemer et al., 2012).
The product backlog doesn’t contain user stories, instead it is a boundary object that
bridges the gap between generating and implementing user stories: a boundary object
is an artifact that different people can use and interpret in different ways. Boundary
objects not only facilitate knowledge sharing and coordination but also help groups
cooperate without consensus. Conceptualizing the product backlog as a boundary
object assumes that it mediates communication between different groups or roles: in
other words, it facilitates communication between professionals with different
backgrounds: product designers, product managers, and engineers (T. Sedano et al.,
2019).
• Sprint backlog: The Sprint Backlog is the set of Product Backlog items selected for the
Sprint, plus a plan for delivering the product Increment and realizing the Sprint Goal.
The Sprint Backlog is a forecast by the Development Team about what functionality
will be in the next Increment and the work needed to deliver that functionality into a
“Done” Increment. The Sprint Backlog makes visible all the work that the Development
Team identifies as necessary to meet the Sprint Goal. To ensure continuous
Literature review
31
improvement, it includes at least one high priority process improvement identified in
the previous Retrospective meeting. As new work is required, the Development Team
adds it to the Sprint Backlog. As work is performed or completed, the estimated
remaining work is updated. Only the Development Team can change its Sprint Backlog
during a Sprint. The Sprint Backlog is a highly visible, real-time picture of the work that
the Development Team plans to accomplish during the Sprint, and it belongs solely to
the Development Team (Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, 2017).
2.1.2 Scaling Agile
In the past years, much has been published to address the question of whether agile
methods are suitable for large-scale distributed projects. Increasingly more evidence
through case study research has been provided to suggest that the fundamental
assumptions of agile development methods are challenged when applying the methods
to large-scale distributed context. Scaling agile software development in large
organizations is complex and poses several challenges. Large projects require appropriate
coordination and communication between teams, dependencies between teams need to
be managed, other non-agile units need to be involved and the right people need to be
part of the process. Recent research reports that most of the goals and practices for
scaling agile are domain independent, listing as key factors challenges in coordinating
multiple teams, difficulties with managing requirements, problems in adaptation with the
organizational structure, and issues in understanding agile concepts along the value chain.
Additionally, customer involvement, software architectural concerns, and inter-team
coordination were also reported, together with challenges in coordinating the work of
several teams (M. Kalenda et al., 2018; W. Alsaqaf et al., 2019).
Authors define large-scale agile development as agile development efforts that involve a
large number of actors, a large number of systems and interdependencies (Rolland et al.
2016), which have more than two teams, and very large-scale as "agile development
efforts with more than ten teams" (T. Dingsøyr et al. 2014).
The fundamental assumption behind traditional methods, generally used from large
companies, is that information systems are fully specifiable and built through meticulous
and extensive planning. Agile methods, on the other hand, assume that information
systems can be built through continuous design, improvement, and testing based on rapid
Literature review
32
feedback and change. Adapting the method to the context will involve balance in a
number of areas, as very largescale projects involve great risk and management attention.
Boehm and Turner (2003) argued that traditional and agile methods should be balanced
when facing risk such as increases in program size. A study conducted by Petersen and
Wohlin (2010), focusing on the transition from traditional plan-driven development to a
more agile method, found that many of the issues raised in traditional development were
not raised after the transition to agile development. This suggests that agile methods can
also work well in large-scale product development (T. Dingsøyr et al., 2018).
2.1.2.1 From software development to large companies
In order to successfully perform the transition from traditional to agile methodology,
different practices, challenges and success factors have been identified:
• Practices: different practices have been identified in order to facilitate the transition,
but the most important one is the “Scaled planning”, revolved around so-called
Milestones. A Milestone defines vision, goals, business, and technical initiatives the
company wants to achieve in the next release (M. Kalenda et al., 2018);
• Challenges: During the transformation process, several challenges have been
identified:
o Resistance to change: The resistance usually occurs at all levels of
organizations, including development teams, middle and upper management.
Moreover, in large organizations, the resistance to change on higher levels,
such as middle and upper management, is a more significant problem;
o Quality assurance: problems with quality assurance and a loss of quality in
code shortly after the transition to scaled agile processes have been reported:
the quality loss was caused mainly by additional responsibilities, pressure on
teams, or bad definition of the concept of “done;
o Integration with non-agile parts of the organization: Misalignment of
organizational structures can create issues, but these issues can be solved by
including waterfall parts of the organization in the planning process and
involving non-agile teams early in planning process. Also, improvement of
Literature review
33
continuous integration and test automation systems helps, as it allows faster
and better integration;
o Requirements management hierarchy: In large projects, requirements are not
manageable by a single person (product owner); hence, there is a need to
divide the responsibility of their management, and this division can be in many
cases a significant challenge, so it should be done carefully and properly;
o Measuring progress: When an organization is changing, the development
process, measuring the changing trend, is important. However, it is challenging
to find the right and most meaningful metrics for large-scale agile
development (M. Kalenda et al., 2018);
o Lack of knowledge: The lack of knowledge is one of the most important
challenges, which may lead to an erroneous implementation of agile practices.
• Success: finally, during the transformation process, several challenges have been
identified:
o Acquire knowledge: As the lack of knowledge is one of the most relevant
challenge, it is no surprise that the most common success factor is to try to
increase the level of knowledge and expertise on agile practices: this becomes
a success factor thanks to deep, systematic knowledge acquisition and sharing.
The most recommended way to acquire knowledge and expertise is to hire an
external expert with broad and deep familiarity with agile development, which
shares his knowledge with several internal employees, who then spread it
across the organization;
o United view on values and practices: For a successful agile transition, it is
necessary to define a common view on the change, in particular on values,
definitions, way of working and understanding beneficial. There is a need to
define roles, their responsibilities, and common definitions properly. Also,
Schnitter and Mackert stated that it was beneficial to use a common language
between teams, architects and product owners, such as established agile
definitions, the unified modeling language or fundamental modeling concepts;
o Tools and infrastructure: Organizations have to be prepared to provide
sufficient resources to teams while transforming to agile development.
Literature review
34
Common tools and infrastructure are particularly beneficial in a distributed
environment, where teams need all the help to reduce their communication
impediments;
o Teamwork support: Close connections and constant communication between
teams and team members are necessary for successful agile development. The
organization should establish a transparent environment for openness in the
team without fear of discussing problems to improve teamwork. Also, it is
better to keep teams small (M. Kalenda et al., 2018).
To conclude, culture has been suggested as a critical factor affecting the adoption of agile
software development practices (Fruhling and Tarrell, 2008; Nerur and Balijepally, 2007):
“to be Agile is a cultural matter. If the culture is not right, then the organization cannot be
Agile” (D. Cohen et al., 2004).
Literature review
35
2.2 Organizational culture
Many researchers, in the last decades, attributed to the concept of culture different
definitions, according to their aim and its level of aggregation. It is employed differently
in anthropology (ethnographic), in political science and sociology (nations), in
management (organizations).
It is a complex concept that find different definitions even in anthropology, the science
field from which this notion originates (Kroeber et al. 1952). For example, many
anthropologists, (C. Geertz, 1973, J. Lett, 1987; R. Keesing, A. Strathern, 1998) view culture
as an inescapable context in which life (in communities, organizations) takes place.
According to them, it is a symbolic system consisting of learned, shared, patterned sets of
meanings guiding the actions of cultural members.
From a sociological point of view, it is defined as: "the collective programming of the mind
that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from others", so it is
a collective phenomenon in which individuals behave according to their societal or
country context (Hofstede et al., 2010). Societal cultures reside in (often unconscious)
values, in the sense of broad tendencies to prefer certain states of affairs over others
(Hofstede, 2001).
Hofstede’s conceptualization of national culture is one of the most popular (Huang et al.
2010) approaches used to study the impact of organizational values over culture, thanks
to its well-known taxonomy of the six cultural dimensions (power distance, uncertainty
avoidance, individualism, masculinity, Confucian dynamism and indulgence). Through his
model it is possible to highlight the relative position, according to the six cultural
dimensions, of a society in comparison with others, allowing national-level analyses and
country or regional comparisons.
In economics, Boyd and Richerson (1985, 2005) define culture as “decision-making
heuristics or rules of thumb that have evolved to serve our need to make decisions in
complex and uncertain environments”. By relying on general beliefs, values, or social
norms about the right thing to do in different situations, people may not always behave
optimally, but they do save on the costs of obtaining information they need to always
behave optimally (Alesina et al., 2015).
Literature review
36
However, the definition to which we tend is that of respected anthropologist (like
Hofstede et al., 2010 and Besley and Persson, 2017) who describe culture as the deepest
underlying values shared by the members of an organization. Indeed, in our study the
focus is on organizational culture, defined as the set of shared values and ideas valuable
to reach the common mission and objectives, which plays a key role for the company
success.
2.2.1 Organizational culture as a set of layers
Hofstede (2001) depicts culture as a set of layers with values at its core that are carried
out by collective activities called rituals which are embodied by cultural leaders called
heroes and promoted in characteristics such as words, objects or conditions summarized
as symbols. The rituals, heroes and symbols visible to outsiders are collectively called
practices. According to Hofstede, people correspond to different levels of culture on a
national, professional and organisational level. He regarded organizational culture as the
collection of values, beliefs and norms shared by its members and reflected in its practices
and goals.
Organizational culture has been analysed from numerous viewpoints (Smircich, 1983).
Organizational culture can be construed (livari and Huisman 2007; J. livari and N. livari
2011) to cover almost everything in an organization: basic assumptions and beliefs, values,
models of behaviour, rituals, practices, symbols, heroes, artefacts, and technology
(Gagliardi 1986; Hofstede et al. 1991; Schein 1985). Therefore, it is understandable that it
has several interpretations (Allaire and Firsiroru 1984; Czarniawska-Joerges 1992; Leidner
and Kayworth 2006; Smircich 1983). Although those differences, it seems that important
researchers (Hofstede et al. 1991; Schein 1985) agree that organizational culture includes
several levels with a varying degree of awareness on the part of the culture-bearers.
In particular, organizational culture (Schein, 1985) has three main levels. The deepest level
concerns what people give for granted, without being aware of them, i.e. patterns of basic
assumptions. The middle level is related to values and beliefs, concerning what “ought”
to be done. While the surface level covers the visible and audible patterns of the culture.
The Competing Values Model (Quinn and Rohrbaugh 1983; Denison and Spreitzer 1991;
Quinn et al., 2011), presented in the next paragraph, specifically focuses on the
Literature review
37
organizational values, which represent the intermediate level of the organizational culture
(Schein, 1985).
2.2.2 Competing Values Framework
The competing values Framework, named also as Quinn and Rohrbaugh model, thanks to
its main developers, was born in the 80’s in order to predict if an organization performs
effectively. Its robustness enabled a wide usage of the framework to understand and
classify a plethora of organizational phenomena, from the individual level to the company
level, passing through teams and department layers. Its adoption affected, obviously, the
understanding of organizational effectiveness but also of organizational culture or how to
tend to a different organizational culture so of organizational design, of leadership roles
and competencies, of stages of life cycle development, etc.
Their empirical studies and statistical analysis
showed two major dimensions around which is
possible to classify organizational culture. One
axis differentiates flexibility, versatility and
dynamism from stability, control and steadiness;
while the second dimension puts at odds an
internal focus to the organization, so on values
like collaboration and harmonious relationships,
and an external focus to the organization, so on
values like competition and differentiation.
As it shown in figure 5 above, the intersection between the axis forms four quadrants,
each one representing a different subculture, with its related competing opposite
(Cameron and Quinn, 2011):
• Clan or group culture is characterized by internal focus and flexibility. The primary
focus of a group culture is on the wellbeing of its employees and on human
relations, rather than on the measures of financial performance (Quinn and
Rohrbaugh, 1983) so that employees can see the organization as an extended
family. The environment is managed through team cooperation and employee
empowerment and customers are considered as partners. It fosters trust between
Figure 5: Competing values Space
Literature review
38
employees leveraging on participation, collaboration and individual commitment.
Top management, celebrating teams’ success, makes employees proud and loyal
to the organization;
• Adhocracy or developmental culture lies at the intersection of external focus and
a flexible organizational structure. It enables organizations to operate in hyper-
turbulent market conditions (Cameron & Quinn, 2011), hence the focus is on
enabling entrepreneurship and experimentation, in viewing failures as learning
opportunities, so on creativity, autonomy and risk taking. But in order to survive
to a fast-changing market, this culture manifests adaptability and responsiveness
in finding new growth opportunities by acquiring new resources or by exploiting
customer feedbacks in order to improve current products or to elicit new ideas;
• Hierarchic culture comes from stable organizational structure and internal focus.
It enforces rules and deals with productivity and achievement of well-defined
objectives. It is characterized by standardized procedures to increase “the
regularity and consistency of outcomes” (Cameron & Quinn, 2011), putting high
value on economy and obedience to laws in order to settle overall stability. The
general aim is to establish uniformity across the internal affairs of the organization
formalizing relationships, emphasizing on the task rather than on the individual. It
fit with stable environments where it is possible to control and coordinate
products and services but also workers and their job. Indeed, the focus is also on
specialization, meritocracy, separate ownership and accountability;
• Market or rational culture is the product of the intersection between external
focus and stability. Great emphasis is put on controlling the proper fulfilment of
defined objectives. Here, strategies and actions address coordination,
productivity, internal efficiency, adherence to rules after having inspected the
external market in which the organization operates in order to maximise profits.
Being customers interested only on the value, the organization try to improve it
by leveraging on very results oriented, perfectionists, aggressive and competitive
employees.
Literature review
39
2.2.2.1 OCAI
Cameron and Quinn (2011), starting from this framework, created a tool called
Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI). It can be employed for several
ends, like the assessment or mapping of the current subculture within the organization
under scrutiny, to identify the discrepancy with the subculture to which the organization
is willing to tend or to label leader’s role, strategy quality, level of effectiveness needed.
Hence, its results can be a key starting point for organizational cultural transformation.
Those valuations are made around the concepts of organizational adhesives, patterns of
interaction with employees and organization purposes through six fundamental
dimensions for defining organizational culture:
1. Dominant characteristic;
2. Organizational leadership;
3. Management of employees;
4. Organizational glue;
5. Strategic emphasis;
6. Criteria of success.
Informants are called to distribute 100
points among four options presented
for each of the six sections, in function
of the extent to which the alternative is
similar to the organization. Then, OCAI
scores are averaged: for each of the
four choices, points are summarized
and then divided by 6 in order to be
plotted in the OCAI space, figure 6
aside.
The following tables (10-13), adapted from Cameron and Quinn (2011), presents the
explanation of the statements/options associated to the previous six dimensions for each
of the four subcultures:
Figure 6: OCAI space
Literature review
40
CLAN CULTURE
Dominant
characteristic
The organization is a very personal place. It is like an extended family. People
seem to share a lot of themselves.
Organizational
leadership
The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify
mentoring, facilitating, or nurturing.
Management
of employees
The management style in the organization is characterized by teamwork,
consensus, and participation.
Organizational
glue
The glue that holds the organization together is loyalty and mutual trust.
Commitment to this organization runs high.
Strategic
emphasis
The organization emphasizes human development. High trust, openness and
participation persist.
Criteria of
success
The organization defines success on the basis of the development of human
resources, teamwork, employee commitment, and concern for people.
Table 10: Clan culture characteristics
ADHOCRACY CULTURE
Dominant
characteristic
The organization is a very dynamic and entrepreneurial place. People are
willing to stick their necks out and take risks.
Organizational
leadership
The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify
entrepreneurship, innovating, or risk taking.
Management
of employees.
The management style in the organization is characterized by individual risk-
taking, innovation, freedom, and uniqueness.
Organizational
glue
The glue that holds the organization together is commitment to innovation
and development. There is an emphasis on being on the cutting edge.
Strategic
emphasis
The organization emphasizes acquiring new resources and creating new
challenges. Trying new things and prospecting for opportunities are valued.
Criteria of
success
The organization defines success on the basis of having the most unique or
newest products. It is a product leader and innovator.
Table 11: Adhocracy culture characteristics
Literature review
41
HIERARCHICAL CULTURE
Dominant
characteristic
The organization is a very controlled and structured place. Formal procedures
generally govern what people do.
Organizational
leadership
The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify
coordinating, organizing, or smooth-running efficiency.
Management
of employees
The management style in the organization is characterized by security of
employment, conformity, predictability, and stability in relationships.
Organizational
glue
The glue that holds the organization together is formal rules and policies.
Maintaining a smooth-running organization is important.
Strategic
emphasis
The organization emphasizes permanence and stability. Efficiency, control,
and smooth operations are important.
Criteria of
success
The organization defines success on efficiency. Dependable delivery, smooth
scheduling, and controlling costs are critical.
Table 12: Hierarchical culture characteristics
MARKET CULTURE
Dominant
characteristic
The organization is a very result oriented. A major concern is with getting the
job done. People are very competitive and achievement oriented.
Organizational
leadership
The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify a no-
nonsense, aggressive, results-oriented focus.
Management
of employees
The management style in the organization is characterized by hard-driving
competitiveness, high demands, and achievement.
Organizational
glue
The glue that holds the organization together is the emphasis on
achievement and goal accomplishment. Aggressiveness and winning are
common themes.
Strategic
emphasis
The organization emphasizes competitive actions and achievement. Hitting
stretch targets and winning in the marketplace are dominant.
Criteria of
success
The organization defines success on the basis of winning in the marketplace
and outpacing the competition. Competitive market leadership is the key.
Table 13: Market culture characteristics
Literature review
42
Despite the Framework differentiates four different subcultures with very different
peculiarities, it is not possible to find an organization that is depicted by only one value
system. Therefore, the expected output is likely a combination of the four, marked by a
dominance of one over the others (Quinn et al., 2011).
Moreover, as suggested by the framework name “competing”, it is likely to find
contradictory, mutually exclusive elements that are present and operate equally at the
same time, so paradoxes (Cameron, 1986). So, the model helps analysts think of criteria
as competing rather than as compatible and congruent. The attribute is characterized as
follows: “Organizational effectiveness is inherently paradoxical. To be effective, an
organization must possess attributes that are simultaneously contradictory, even
mutually exclusive” (Cameron, 1986).
Literature review
43
2.3 Agile and culture
Every year, VersionOne, publish a report, called “annual state of agile report” giving to
agilists results about their Agile survey, providing deep insight into agile trends, best
practices and lessons learned to help them succeed. This annually published report gained
great attention because it is the largest and longest-running survey about the agile world.
The 12th state of agile report highlights the following interesting trend among its surveys
across the globe: “organizational culture stands out as a critical factor in the success of
adopting and scaling agile. The three most significant challenges to agile adoption and
scaling are reported as organizational culture at odds with agile values (53%), General
organizational resistance to change (46%), and Inadequate management support and
sponsorship (42%). Internal agile coaches (53%), consistent practices and processes across
teams (43%), and the implementation of a common tool across teams (41%) are the top
three factors reported to have been most helpful in scaling agile. These underscore the
importance of a culture of excellence and alignment.”
Likewise, the 13th annual state of agile report confirm that organizational culture still
matters: “the survey responses indicate that organization cultural issues remain the
leading impediments to adopting and scaling agile. General resistance to change,
inadequate management support and sponsorship, and organizational culture that is at
odds with agile values rank as the top three challenges.”
As it is shown in the previous paragraph, organizational culture is a peculiar concept
because of its multiplicity of definitions and interpretations whose scope can cover
everything from a basic set of values to all components of an organization (Schein, 1985;
Hofstede et al., 1990; Keesing and Stratherns, 1998). For this reason, it is as well
complicated to find in literature a shared understanding of what agile culture is. As a
consequence, researchers put their efforts on proposing the ideal agile culture, which
tends to be people-centered and collaborative (Cockburn and Highsmith, 2001; Nerur et
al., 2005), democratic (Siakas and Siakas, 2007), less formalized and non-hierarchical
(Strode et al., 2009), and has an appropriate reward system (Derby, 2006).
Some of them tried to conceptualize the agile culture by investigating the characteristics
of organizational culture using agile methods (Wendorff, 2002; Robinson and Sharp, 2005;
Literature review
44
Siakas and Siakas, 2007; Strode et al., 2009; Tolfo et al., 2011; Iivari, 2011; Othman et al.,
2016). The most popular research methods adopted in order to define agile
methodologies culture are Schein’s (1985) model, Hofstede’s (1991) culture dimensions
and the Competing Values Model (Quinn et al. 2011, Denison and Spreitzer, 1991).
However, the majority of them focused only on the Extreme Programming methodology.
In particular, Schein (1985), identifies three distinct levels in organizational culture: visible
artefacts, espoused values, and basic underlying assumptions. Moreover, he defines
organizational culture as “a pattern of shared basic assumptions that a group learned by
solving its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, and which has
worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, worth of being taught to new
members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel about those problems”. Tolfo et
al. (2011) visualized the organizational culture through the three levels proposed by
Schein showing that the perception of cultural levels can make the cultural analysis more
effective while adopting an agile method since it is an important complement to a more
critical approach. So, they identify a number of favorable and unfavorable aspects in
relation to XP adoption. Thanks to this he affirms that an agile culture is founded on a set
of basic presuppositions similar to the agile principles. Those presuppositions are the
foundation for shared values that allow the establishment of the agile philosophy, and
because of that, the practices and technology used by each agile method represent only
manifestations of the agile culture, or the top of the iceberg, that is, its visible artifacts
(Tolfo et al., 2011).
Recalling the Anthony’s pyramid (1965) of information system structure it is worth noting
that organizational culture includes the strategic context, and not only the tactical and
operational ones. At the strategic level there may be stakeholders (like managers, board
of directors, investors, and even the company’s customers) who may have their own
principles and values, which create obstacles for the adoption of an agile method. So, it is
likely that upper and lower levels share different values and principles, because, for
instance, motivations of a company sponsor, client or director may be different from the
ones of a developer or a Scrum master (Tolfo et al., 2011). From this research, two key
remarks for our study emerge: agile values and principles must be widespread in all the
levels, and not present only in the tactical and operational level of the company;
Literature review
45
motivations and values of upper and lower levels may be different, so it is important to
take information only from one organization level.
Instead, Siakas and Siakas (2007) exploited two dimensions of the Hofstede’s model,
uncertainty avoidance and power distance and built four culture types labelled as clan,
democratic, hierarchical and disciplined in order to understand which quadrant(s) better
advocate agile culture related to the Extreme Programming methodology. Their findings
assessed that a low degree of the two dimensions best promotes an “agile professional
culture” due to a horizontal hierarchy and an emphasis on flexibility and spontaneity
bringing the democratic culture type as the most suitable one.
Many researchers used the Competing Values Model introduced by Quinn and Rorbaugh
(1983) and later adopted by Denison and Spreitzler (1991) trying to distinguish the four
organizational culture types affecting the unit of analysis under investigation: group
culture, developmental culture, hierarchical culture and rational culture.
In his multi-case study based on nine projects, Strode et al. (2009) found a statistically
significant correlation between twenty-four organizational culture factors (adapted from
the Competing Values Model) and the weighted sum of XP technique usage. The
spearman correlations coefficients show most consistently significant associations with
the group culture and more weakly with the developmental culture of the organization.
Indeed, those are the findings: the organization values feedback and learning; social
interaction in the organization is trustful, collaborative, and competent; the project
manager acts as a facilitator; the management style is that of leadership and
collaboration; the organization values that teamwork is flexible, participative and
encourages social interaction; the organization enables empowerment of people; the
organization is results oriented; leadership in the organization is entrepreneurial,
innovative, and risk-taker; and the organization is based on loyalty, mutual trust and
commitment (Strode et al., 2009).
Relying on the same framework as a theoretical model of organizational culture and
identifying a number of hypotheses connected to the relationship between organizational
culture and agile method deployment, Iivari and Iivari (2011), following Iivari and Huisman
(2007), assert that is not possible to allocate agile methods (Scrum and XP) only to one
Literature review
46
cultural type, instead they are reflected as a reasonable balance between the opposite
polarities. They point out that the CVF have been applied in their work as a quantitative,
nomothetic research into organizational culture, while the majority of organizational
culture studies are qualitative and idiographic (Iivari and Iivari, 2011). For example, some
implications found after having tested their thirteen hypotheses: agile methods are most
incompatible with the hierarchical culture orientation; there may be a paradox between
the hierarchical culture and the developmental culture, if the goal is faithful enactment of
methods; when compared with ad hoc development, each culture orientation favors agile
methods but only up to some point in the case of rational, group, and development
culture orientations; the more formalized an agile method becomes, the sooner it will be
considered dysfunctional in organizations with strong developmental culture.
More recently, Othman (2016) analyzed five cases against the implications of the CVM
and supported the Iivari and Iivari (2011) findings by suggesting that the group culture,
the culture of development and rational culture promote the acceptance of the agile
methodology, while the hierarchical culture hinders the acceptance.
The most recent paper using the CVF, written by Gupta et. al (2019), is positioned in a
different wave of analysis methodology. Because he used a stream of literature as a
theoretical basis that categorize agile methodologies into social and technical practices
(Corvera et al., 2013; Ozcan-Top et al., 2013; Hummel et al.2015; Diegmann et al., 2016;)
that now has achieved consensus among the scholars. The social practices are related to
the interaction between team members, so the focus is on social behaviours,
collaboration, participation, free flow of information and direct communication. Examples
of those practices are daily stand ups and retrospective meetings, since they enable
employees at different levels and in different roles to voice their concerns and suggest
improvements in the development cycle. instead, the technical practices refer to the
coding/testing-oriented software engineering practices, like “unit-testing, “Pair-
programming”, “Refactoring” (Beck, 2000; Gupta et al., 2019).
In the Gupta et al. (2019) respondents were called to classify nine practices into social or
technical. Then, they were asked to answer to a questionnaire (179 valid answers) based
on a Likert scale. Results have been obtained through well-established measures from the
extant literature. The four CVM cultural constructs were measured using the scales
Literature review
47
proposed by Iivari and Huisman (2007). IT department’s usage of technical agile practices
were measured with scales proposed by Maruping et al. (2009), while social agile practices
construct was measured using the scales suggested by So and Scholl (2009). Then they
have been evaluated exploiting two statistical tools. The findings are the following:
hierarchical culture will have a negative impact on social agile practices usage. Hierarchical
culture will have a negative impact on technical agile practices usage. Rational culture will
have a positive impact on social agile practices usage. Rational culture will have a negative
impact on technical agile practices usage. Group culture will have a positive impact on
social agile practices usage. Group culture will have a positive impact on technical agile
practices usage. Developmental culture will have a positive impact on social agile practices
usage. Developmental culture will have a positive impact on technical agile practices
usage.
Literature review
48
2.4 Gap analysis and research questions
Being the concepts of agile and organizational culture rich in meanings and usages: As it
is shown in the previous paragraph “agile and culture”, important considerations have
been made regarding the relation between these two concepts, but there is still room for
different kind of studies around the correlation between them.
Important gaps have been found in the literature, which will help us to increase the
importance of both the research made and the results found.
The first gap regards the agile methodology taken into consideration: researches from
literature study the correlation between culture and Extreme Programming methodology.
For example, Gupta et al. (2019) demand “How does IT department culture affect the use
of social and technical agile practices?” and from their literature analysis emerge that a
number of other studies (e.g., Iivari & Iivari, 2011; Nerur et al., 2005; Robinson & Sharp,
2005a; Siakas & Siakas, 2007; Strode et al., 2009; Tolfo & Wazlawick, 2008) have also
proposed the influence of culture on the usage of agile software development practices.
Our research, instead, focuses on Scrum methodology: even if the agile principles may be
the same, social and technical agile practices may differ. For this reason, our research will
be allocated in stream of literature that differentiates social from technical agile practices:
in particular, the focus will be exclusive to the social agile practices.
Another important gap is related to the different subject of the study: Researches from
literature build their question giving for granted that it is the culture of the entire
department that affects the usage of agile methodologies. Our research instead would
like to find evidences that is the agile methodology to have an impact over the teams’
culture.
A consideration should be also made on the unit of the analysis: the researches we
highlighted in literature have a macro-view on the entire IT department culture and not
on the specific part of the department that uses agile methodologies.
Moreover, the interviewee has an important role in this: quantitative researches used in
literature don’t create a distinction between the responses of employees (with an internal
Point of View of the team) and managers (with an external Point of view of the team). We
Literature review
49
believe, as affirmed by Tolfo et al., (2011), that alongside the Anthony’s pyramid (1965)
values, objectives and motivation differ and may be in conflict. Studying the IT department
in its entirety can give, from one side, a weighted gross view of the common sense of the
organizational unit, but, on the other side, can give results susceptible to interference
because of the different values that affect people playing different roles at different
hierarchical level. So, our research would like to focus only on the “agile part” of the firm,
using the internal point of view of the team.
The last gap found regards the geographical context: researches from literature are
performed on limited geographical contexts; there aren’t researches that conduct this
kind of study in the Italian one.
Thanks to these relevant gaps between literature and our research, we have been able to
formulate two research questions for this study:
• Considering cross functional teams using Scrum methodology, are there any
recurrent cultural values enabled?
• How does Scrum methodology enable those specific set of cultural values?
Literature review
50
2.5 Research framework
In order to find recurrent cultural patterns (answer to the first research question), we
defined the following set of cultural variables to be investigated; all of them have been
taken from Cameron and Quinn (2011). In particular, the variables are six and their
translation is different according to the four different subcultures (in order: clan,
adhocracy, hierarchical and market). Our investigation considers the mix of the four
different definitions for each of the six variables.
Cultural variables investigated
Definition
Dominant characteristic The overall organization mindset:
• Like an extended family;
• Entrepreneurial;
• Formal;
• Result oriented.
Organizational leadership
The leadership style:
• Exemplify mentoring and facilitating;
• Exemplify innovation;
• Exemplify coordinating;
• Exemplify aggressive results-oriented focus.
Management of employees
How employees are treated in the organization:
• Fostering teamwork and consensus;
• Encouraged to take risks;
• Maintaining stability of relationships;
• Inflaming competitiveness.
Organizational glue The bonding mechanisms between employees:
• Loyalty to the organization and mutual trust;
• Being on the cutting edge;
• Formal rules and policies;
• achievement and goal accomplishment.
Strategic emphasis The areas that drive strategic goals:
• Human development and participation;
• Prospecting new opportunities;
• Permanence and control;
• Win the marketplace.
Success factor What is rewarded within the organization:
• Human and team growth;
• Having the newest and unique product;
• Efficiency;
• Outpace competition.
Table 14: Cultural variables
Literature review
51
Then, in order to understand how the scrum methodology enables those specific set of
cultural value (so to answer to the second research question), two steps are needed:
The first step is a further investigation on how agile practitioners portray all the scrum
values. It is performed by exploiting the following table of scrum values, scrum pillars,
scrum maturity (all taken from the Scrum guide of Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland,
2017) and three key lean principles (i.e.: Waste reduction (Dahlgaard et al.,2006);
Customer centricity (Evans et al., 2005); Continuous improvement (P. Brunet et al.,
2003).);
Scrum variables investigated
Definition
Commitment People personally commit to achieving the goals of the Scrum
Team.
Focus Everyone focuses on the work of the Sprint and the goals of the
Scrum Team.
Courage Scrum Team members have courage to do the right thing and
work on tough problems.
Openness The Scrum Team and its stakeholders agree to be open about
all the work and the challenges with performing the work.
Respect Scrum Team members respect each other to be capable,
independent people.
Transparency Significant aspects of the process must be visible to those
responsible for the outcome. Observers should share a
common understanding of what is being seen.
Adaptation If a process deviates outside acceptable limits, the process or
the material being processed must be adjusted as soon as
possible to minimize further deviation.
Self-organization Self-organizing teams choose how best to accomplish their
work, rather than being directed by others outside the team.
Cross-functionality Cross-functional teams have all competencies needed to
accomplish the work without depending on others that are not
part of the team.
Customer centricity Identification of critical-to-quality (CTQ) characteristics that are
vital to customer satisfaction.
Continuous improvement Continuous improvement: pervasive and continual activities
performed to identify and achieve outcomes that can
contribute to the organisational goals.
Waste reduction The excess resources used compared with perfection;
everything that increases cost without adding value for the
customer.
Table 15: Scrum variables
Literature review
52
The second step, instead, consists in finding possible correlations between the Scrum
table and the cultural one. So, our aim is to find how scrum values shape the six
dimensions, which consequently lead to the mix of subcultures.
Scrum Values
Commitment
Focus
Courage
Openness
Respect
Transparency
Adaptation
Self-organization
Cross-functionality
Customer centricity
Continuous improvement
Waste reduction Subcultures
Clan culture
Adhocracy culture
Hierarchical culture
Market culture
Dimensions
Dominant characteristic
Organizational leadership
Management of employees
Organizational glue
Strategic emphasis
Success factor
Shape
Lead to
Figure 7: Research framework
Methodology
53
3 Methodology
It is important to examine all the literature in the most neutral way in order to avoid
ignoring possible future conflicting findings, as confidence in the findings would be
reduced. For example, readers may assume that the results are incorrect (a challenge to
internal validity), or if correct, are idiosyncratic to the specific cases of the study (a
challenge to generalizability) (Eisenhardt, 1989).
As emerged from the previous section, agile project management is continuously
acquiring attention and investments from many digital-driven companies (VersionOne,
2018) because of their willingness to enhance software product quality, increase
productivity, and reduce the cycle time for product development (Huang et al. 2010). This
gave to agile project management the status of one of the most impacting digital trends
of those decades (Dingsøyr et al., 2012; VersionOne, 2012). However, Fruhling and Tarrell
(2008) state that organizational culture and team members mindset are among the most
important aspects affecting success of agile projects. So, as explained by the gap analysis
and being the phenomenon relatively recent, empirical studies investigating this
circumstance are scarce.
3.1 Methods and process
Consequently, as suggested by Yin (1984, p.23), we decided to carry out the research as
an exploratory multiple case-study, where multiple sources of evidence are used.
Because, still according to Yin (2017), a case study is an “empirical inquiry that investigates
a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between
phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of
evidence are used”. In particular, an exploratory case study can be applied any time to a
given phenomenon observable in the field that is new and mostly unknown, and when
there is a lack of theories to formulate hypotheses ex ante the investigation. Therefore, a
case where the phenomenon of interest can be observed is selected, and field work and
data collection are undertaken prior to the final definition of study questions and
hypotheses, since the major features of the case are uncertain.
Methodology
54
For this reason, we decided to provide a robust structure to our research design, that can
be summarized in the following schema:
Figure 8: Research schema
Methodology
55
Even though exploratory cases should start with little or no theory under consideration
and no hypotheses to test, as Kathleen Eisenhardt wrote in her 1989 piece on building
theories from case study research, it is virtually impossible to begin researching with a
fully “clear theoretical slate”. Indeed, we started having in mind what agile methodologies
are and whether organizational culture might be a success driver, as well as possible
approaches to go through them. So, we selected the theoretical lenses of the Competing
Values Framework and the agile development philosophy as a starting point, but such
theory solely served to define a sufficiently broad research question, a sketched
questionnaire and some sample characteristics (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt and
Graebner, 2007).
3.1.1 Preliminary exploration
However, before building the sample, we needed to check whether the research question
could engender valuable insights via the pre-set of questions and, above all, how to
extract relevant information from the unit of analysis.
So, we established to benefit of a preliminary exploration, not as a case study of its own,
but as a trigger for our multiple case study by exploiting the experience and the role of a
very subject expert, i.e. head of agile software centre, of an innovative and mature
company in mastering the methodology. Through this informant we have been able, first,
to test the clarity and validity of the questions but, above all, our decisions concerning the
case design. Even though we understood that there was room for deeper investigation
and discussion, we realized that the point of view of a top manager has a direct lack over
team’s dynamics. As a support to this, following Kunda (1992) and Tolfo et al., (2011), it
would be better not mixing outcomes of people covering roles at the strategic and the
operational level, because of their different perception of goals and their different beliefs
and values; in particular, it would be better to avoid the association of the current culture
with the managers' view of the desirable culture to be imposed on the department. This
ideology may differ radically from the organizational culture perceived by others (Kunda
1992).
Methodology
56
Therefore, two main takeovers came from this interview:
1. the SCRUM methodology is the agile practice to be investigated because it is the
most widely adopted, as it is also confirmed by scholars (Dingsøyr et al., 2012;
VersionOne, 2012);
2. the informants must be qualified as Scrum Masters, since they are those
methodology facilitators with a constant and direct contact with the teams, its
members, its objectives and its dynamics, but above all they are those figures
intended to foster and strengthen teams’ values. Thereby, its point of view will
allow us not to mix point of views from strategic and operational level.
Thus, this permitted to sharpen the research questions and to define the unit of analysis.
Indeed, our study aims at researching recurrent sets of cultural patterns, according to the
Competing Values Framework, of cross-functional teams in medium-large technology
intensive companies that deploy properly the Scrum methodology. Furthermore, it aims
at understanding how the Scrum methodology enables those specific sets of recurrent
cultural values.
As it is clear from the above research questions, cross-functional teams are identified as
the main object under scrutiny, i.e. the unit of analysis, located in medium-large
companies proficient in following the Scrum methodology, i.e. the context.
Cross-functional teams have all competencies needed to accomplish the work
autonomously, without the need of external competences to the team. The team model
in Scrum is designed to optimize flexibility, creativity, and productivity (Ken Schwaber and
Jeff Sutherland, 2017) if the methodology is correctly followed. Moreover, including more
than one context to be analysed and compared, i.e. the companies, our research can be
classified as a multiple-case study, despite that all the firms come from the technology
intensive context.
Thus, after the preliminary exploration, we defined that the focus had to be on teams by
inspecting Scrum masters’ standpoints via the usage of the Competing Values Model as
framework, to analyse internal dynamics and enabled values by a reasonable use of the
Scrum methodology.
Methodology
57
Further than this, the application of theories and standards, such as the Competing Values
Model (Quinn et al., 2011) and The Scrum Guide (Schwaber et al., 2017), to support the
definition of coding variables to be studied and interpreted, have enriched the study also
with a descriptive setup.
Once the unit of analysis and the methodological approaches are defined, another major
methodological point has arisen, regarding how cases have been selected.
3.2 Empirical setting
The cases sampling technique adopted is the so called “empirical sampling” (Eisenhardt,
1989). It entails choosing targeted cases or situations, using the rationale of
representative or typical cases for the phenomenon we want to investigate. These ad-hoc
situations refer to successful cases, namely those Scrum projects that have been
conducted following properly the methodology, its events and artefacts. Moreover,
considerations should be made also on the timeframe that elapses between the beginning
of its adoption and the instant in which the interview has been performed. In particular,
it is important to select medium to large companies because, as also stated by Smirchic
and Gregory (1983), “large organizations tend to develop a number of subcultures”. Being
interested in understanding how the Scrum methodology empowers sets of cultural
values, peculiar to the subcultures defined in the Competing Values Framework, it is
important to “filter” companies according to a certain degree of expertise in using this
methodology. Therefore, for our research, we looked for medium to large companies with
a discreet level of Scrum maturity.
Successful cases have been found, above all, in medium-large organizations established
in the technology intensive context in the Milan metropolitan area: this specific
geographical area has been selected as representative of the Italian agile context, because
most of the companies that respect our selection criteria are located in this region.
Exploratory researches, generally, use a sampling class, called “non-probability sampling”
that can be distinguished in “judgement sampling”, “convenience sampling” or “quota
sampling” (Strauss and Corbin, 1997) because of the complexity in reaching the selected
segment of population (Henry, 1990). In particular, we implemented the “convenience
sampling” technique, since we developed our selection process according the criteria of
Methodology
58
time, cost and easiness of reach. The potential pool of participants has been identified
exploiting, most of all, the LinkedIn social media, looking for workers that are currently
employed as Scrum masters, dedicated to cross functional teams and available to perform
the interview, in the Milan metropolitan area.
3.2.1 Cases
Some researchers and reviewers, like Eisenhardt (1989) and Yin (1984), consider a
multiple case study as providing more robust results and compelling arguments. This is
due to the fact that such approach possibly reinforces the generalization of results, while
enabling a comparative analysis of findings, due to the potential presence of emblematic,
patterned, polar types, or niche situations within the sample. In order to select cases for
our multiple case study, we opted for the heterogeneity procedure: following this
approach, we aim at including a variety of cases, since we would like to identify and
compare different cultural mindsets related to the same phenomenon. So, the industry
diversity does not impact on the results, as all the cases are taken from technology
intensive context, rather it is the enabler for a deeper cross-case discussion.
Hereunder, table 16 presents a screenshot of the companies included in our sample: in
particular, the alias associated to the belonging industry as a practical way to label them
since we were not allowed to use all their names; number of employees and net income
to testify the medium-large size of the companies; the number of years spent using the
agile methodology, instead, disprove the novelty of implementation of the agile
methodology inside the firms.
Table 16: Cases included in the sample
Case name and industry
Number of employees (2018)
NI in €M (2018)
Number Agile Teams
Scrum Master
Scrum Master dedicated
Years in Agile
(T&D) Telco & digital
91980 2788 46 Internal Partially 2
(T&I) Telco & Infrastructure
103083 -549 6 External Generally, fully
3
E-commerce 123283 1419 30 External Partially 3
Energy 5372 54 6 Internal Fully 2
Pharmaceutical 354000 4559 9 External Fully 5
Methodology
59
Table 17 instead supports the informant’s validation: the role demonstrates that each
informant can be classified as “Scrum master”; years spent using the Scrum methodology
shows that each informant had enough time to develop and interiorize the values
connected to the Scrum methodology.
Case name Role Years in Scrum
T&D junior Scrum master 2
T&D senior Scrum master 3
T&I junior Agile coach and Scrum master 4
T&I senior Agile leader and Senior Scrum Master 9
E-commerce Professional Scrum Master 2
Energy Scrum master and Digital demand manager 3
Pharmaceutical Chief Scrum Master 4
Table 17: Informants characteristics
To reinforce the robustness of our research, we included both the embedded and the
holistic approaches: in particular, we firstly implemented the embedded one, focusing on
multiple units of analysis at the same time inside one company (Yin, 2017), in order to
understand if different Scrum masters enable different cultural values inside the same
organization. As described in table 17, four interviews have been made using this
approach, focusing on two firms that work in adjacent industries (i.e.
Telecommunication).
Then, the holistic approach has been exploited: considering a single unit of analysis for
each context analysed (Yin, 2017), each one working in a different industry. This method
enabled a broader view, independently from the industry, which gave the possibility to
focus on the peculiarities of the scrum masters and how these peculiarities can affect the
different subcultures of the agile team.
Methodology
60
In the next section, a brief description of the companies taken into consideration for our
researches will be performed.
3.2.2 Embedded approach cases
3.2.2.1 T&D case
The T&D case is a British multinational telecommunications conglomerate with
headquarters in London, leader in technology communications through mobile, fixed,
broadband and TV, with an extensive experience in connectivity, convergence and the
Internet of Things, as well as championing mobile financial services and digital
transformation in emerging markets. Launched in 1985, the company has grown into an
international business and one of the most valuable brands in the world. It predominantly
operates services in the regions of Asia, Africa, Europe, and Oceania: in particular, it has
mobile operations in 24 countries, with approximately 640 million mobile customers, 21
million fixed broadband customers and 14 million TV customers. In November 2017, the
organization began a process of transformation, moving from a traditional functional-
structured company to an agile organization, formed by six tribes, that incorporates all
the necessary functions for a high level of customer-centricity, and a total of 45 agile
teams.
3.2.2.2 T&I case
The T&I case represents a European telecommunication company, born in 1865, famous
for the rapid success in the mobile phone sector that allowed it to become by 1998 the
best-selling mobile phone brand in the world. The 2015 acquisition of a Franco-American
telecommunications equipment provider greatly broadened the scope of the portfolio
and customer base. Additional acquisitions have positioned the firm to be an industry
leader in the transition to 5G wireless technology by offering the only end-to-end 5G
network portfolio available on a global basis.
Company’s scope is to develop and deliver the industry's only end-to-end portfolio of
network equipment, software, services and licensing that is available globally. Its
customers include service providers whose combined networks support 6.1 billion
Methodology
61
subscriptions, as well as enterprises in the private and public sector that use its network
portfolio to increase productivity and enrich lives.
Competing in a highly competitive industry, the company saw the possibility to offer a full-
taylorization of their products as a competitive advantage: this is why in 2016 the R&D
department started the agile transformation. This new structure gave to the organization
the opportunity to involve more the customer in the development process and fully satisfy
customer’s requests regarding the product customization.
3.2.3 Holistic approach cases
3.2.3.1 E-commerce case
E-commerce case represents a European multinational clothing-retail company, born in
1947 and known for its fast-fashion clothing for men, women, teenagers and children. The
company and its associated companies operate in 62 countries, with over 4,500 stores.
The organization always pays attention to create a convenient and inspiring experience
for its customers, as the brand engages with customers in stores and online as well as in
social media and other creative places. Therefore, it is heavily investing to enrich the
shopping experience, both physical and digital. In particular, the agile transformation,
started at the beginning of 2017, has been necessary not only to promote continuous
improvements in the digital shopping experience, but also to answer with flexibility to
customers’ requests during particular periods of the year (black Friday, Christmas etc.).
3.2.3.2 Energy case
Established in 1884, it is the leading energy operator in Italy, as the biggest plants in the
country that use waterpower belong to this company. During its centenary history, the
firm contributed to Italy’s electrification and development. Today, it operates in Italy,
Europe and in the Mediterranean basin, employing 5,000 people. It is a leading player in
Italy and Europe in the procurement, production and sale of electricity, in the provision of
energy and environmental services. Its mission is to supply electricity, gas and energy and
environmental services to families and businesses through intelligent, competitive and
sustainable solutions.
Methodology
62
Two years ago, the IT department has been transformed in an agile structure, and six agile
teams have been created. The peculiarity of this case is that the agile part of the
organization is not involved in the core business of the company, but instead has as
“customer” the front-end departments of the organization. As a result, the agile
methodologies have been useful to show the continuous improvements in the work done
and deliver faster the digital infrastructure requested by the front-end departments of the
organization.
3.2.3.3 Pharmaceutical case
This case represents an American holding company that owns a number of
pharmaceutical manufacturing, wholesale, and distribution companies. The company was
formed on December 31, 2014, after different acquisitions of European pharmaceutical
companies. Nowadays, it is the largest retail pharmacy, health and daily living destination
across the U.S. and Europe, a global leader in retail and wholesale pharmacy.
The company is present in more than 25 countries and has one of the largest global
pharmaceutical wholesale and distribution networks, with more than 400 distribution
centres delivering to more than 240,000 pharmacies, doctors, health centres and
hospitals.
Company’s purpose is to help people across the world lead healthier and happier lives.
The agile transformation process began in 2014, starting from the IT department. After
one year of implementation, the company moved from one department to a full “agile
business”: scaling agility to the organization-level has been seen as company’s secret to
keep its position as one of the leaders in the market.
Methodology
63
3.3 Data Gathering
Assuming that people in organizations are “knowledgeable agents” (Gioia et al., 2013),
we tried not to create bias, influence or contaminate the informer’s voice by imposing
any preordained knowledge. So, our contribution focused into a transcription of the
informant’s experience. Moreover, with those intentions we developed and built our data
gathering and analysis process.
Consistently with the qualitative nature of case study as a research method, which broadly
aims at describing and interpreting human-related phenomena as well as in our study, the
main way to gather data and information is by means of interviews. We opted for face-
to-face, recorded, semi-structured interviews since they involve the implementation of a
number of predetermined questions used as an organized starting point to drive the
discussion, permitting the interviewer to probe beyond the answers to our prepared
questions, thus making additional points emerge.
Additionally, we followed a positivistic and functional research approach where we, as
interviewers, re-direct if needed the interviewee towards the study’s research questions
and propositions. In this way, we let results better adhere to our original research aim,
avoiding the risk to have misalignments in the topics discussed during the different
interviews.
More in depth, the interview is inspired by the literature and its structure is threefold:
• Scrum assessment: The Scrum Guide (Schwaber et al., 2017) gave us pivotal points
to test at different levels. Asking about the usage made and the timeframe of the
events (daily stand-ups, reviews, retrospectives), passing through the
interiorization of Agile pillars (individuals and interactions over processes and
tools; working software over comprehensive documentation; customer
collaboration over contract negotiation; responding to change over following a
plan) and Scrum pillars (transparency, adaptation, inspection) is aimed at assessing
whether the organization under scrutiny - Scrum master and its (their) team(s) -
follow a proper usage of the framework;
• Cultural discussion: then, starting from an already developed structured
questionnaire of the Competing Values Model (Quinn et al., 2011), especially used
Methodology
64
for quantitative purposes, we tried to restate it into qualitative questions. So, we
kept its six dimensions (dominant characteristics, organizational leadership,
management of employees, organizational glue, strategic emphasis, criteria of
success) and developed open questions clearly inspired by the quantitative ones,
without neglecting the main key words, such as risk taking, goal orientation,
human development, control. The main purpose of this part is to receive open and
qualitative answers, full of valuable insights, about the subculture(s) affecting the
team under scrutiny (hierarchical, clan, market or adhocracy culture);
• Scrum as enabler of the team culture: in the last part of the interview, our efforts
were addressed to understand how and if there is a relationship among the
previous two parts. Hence, we try to challenge the informants in order to find, if
they exist, connections between what affirmed in the second part and those
SCRUM values (commitment, focus, courage, openness and respect) that mostly
mark the team under investigation.
However, at the end of each interview we asked to fill the OCAI structured questionnaire
(Quinn 2011) in order to define analytically the cultural mix, by adapting his introductory
statement: “The following questionnaire consists in six sections. Each section has four
alternatives. Divide 100 points (for each section) among these four alternatives depending
on the extent to which this alternative is similar to your organization.” With organization
we mean the unit of analysis under investigation, i.e. the set of teams working with Scrum
in your company.
For the whole questionnaire see appendix A.
Before or during the interview, no preordained relationships with other theories or
approaches were exposed to the informant. The informants were only informed about
our general aim, we did not directly mention any approach or methodology neither before
nor during the interviews. Our aim was to leave them unaware of the actual purpose of
the study as any cue can lead to a bias in behaviour. In fact, the goal was to “generalize”
and not “particularize” the analysis, making it exploratory in nature. (Yin, 1984).
The use of multiple source of evidence is essential to make sure we provide evidence for
our statements stemming from a qualitative research process, the called “data
Methodology
65
triangulation” (Eisenhardt, 1989). Beyond interviews, i.e. our primary source of
information, there are two other data collection methods we intended to use for data
triangulation: our observation and secondary sources.
The first, consists in understanding the social context, how it influences individual
behaviours. Observation has been carried out through site visits as an outside observer,
paying attention most of all to dashboards and their use.
The latter refers to the use of archival data, such as pre-existing documents, photographs,
emails, audios, videos or other artefacts possibly embedding insightful information.
The following table, adapted from Clark, Gioia et al. (2010), shows the summary of our
data inventory:
DATA TYPE QUANTITY ORIGINAL
DATA
SOURCE
ORIGINAL
(INTENDED) DATA
AUDIENCE
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION:
SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW ON SITE
1 Sky - 1h:36m:49s Informants Analysis for this study
CASES:
SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS ON SITE
5 - 5hours, 46 minutes and 29 seconds
Pharmaceutical – 48m:24s; E-commerce - 1h:09m:17s; Energy – 1h:33m:18s; 2 T&I – 2h:15m:30s;
Informants Analysis for this study
CASES:
SEMI-STRUCTURED TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS
2 T&D – 2h:0m:30s
Senior – 39m:26s Junior – 1h:11m:4s
Informants Analysis for this study
STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE
7 OCAI questionnaires Informants Analysis for this study
ARCHIVAL RECORDS 40 (Informal E-mails, LinkedIn chat and MeetUp chat)
Informants and practitioners
Analysis for this study
EXTERNAL DOCUMENTS AND SOURCES
1 Agile business day video – T&D 1 blog, whoisagile MeetUp discussions
Informants, journalists, practitioners
Public
UNSTRUCTURED INTERVIEWS:
OFF OF RECORDS
13 private conversations Informants Analysis for this study
EVENTS 1 workshop – Scrum gamification Coaching agency
Agile practitioners
Table 18: Data inventory
Methodology
66
3.4 Data analysis
“Analysing data is the heart of building theory from case studies, but it is both the most
difficult and the least codified part of the process” (Yin, 1984).
The responses from the interviewees were recorded and fully transcribed. If any
information was still unclear and/or more data were needed, the informants were later
contacted to ask for clarification, via phone call, mail or LinkedIn chat.
Once the interviews have been transcribed, we started analysing their texts. The text
analysis process consists in the content analysis, which we performed according to the
aforementioned threefold structure of the questionnaire.
The assessment about the correct usage of the Scrum methodology has been performed
by classifying in tables the main characteristics of ceremonies, how teams are organized
and how they execute their routines.
The second part exploits the OCAI framework provided by Quinn (2011), in which we
asked to our informants to distribute 100 points, or to provide a priority order, among the
four possible answers associated to each of the six dimensions of the Competing values
model. In this way, we have obtained the subculture mix within a team and, if it exists,
the dominant culture.
The analysis of the last part, instead, has been performed through the so-called coding
and coding tree building, in order to create a visual instrument to understand patterns
and relations about how scrum values steer teams towards their dominant subculture.
Concerning coding, Strauss and Corbin (1997) define it as the analytic process of
examining data line by line or paragraph by paragraph for significant events, experiences,
feelings and so on, that are then denoted as concepts. A code is a label, a concept, a word
that signifies “what is going on in this piece of data” (Strauss et al., 1997).
In particular, we followed an inductive approach for each case study and its coding. The
starting points of this procedure are the research questions and the theory-based
elements of the study; theory hence serves to define the categories and codes to be used
Methodology
67
for data coding, so that the interpretation of the results will be made in the light of the
theory inductively selected. Such approach also influences the sequence found in the
coding tree, where the theory-derived variables and categories are supported by
empirical evidences (the codes) (Strauss and Corbin, 1997).
In practice, starting from our research questions – Considering cross functional teams
using scrum methodology, are there any recurrent cultural values enabled? How does
scrum methodology enable those specific set of cultural values? – and from the
theoretical basis of the Competing Values Model (Quinn et al., 2011) and of The Scrum
Guide (Schwaber et al., 2017) we have been able to define two coding trees as basis for a
first identification of the recurrent cultural patterns and consequently the possible Scrum
enablers. Hence, the first one includes cultural codes, while the second one is exclusive to
codes regarding the Scrum methodology.
The Cultural coding tree has been built following the coming steps:
1. The first level is filled with the
specific codes that strictly regards
culture: they have been built and
constructed by us with the aim of
generating valuable insights or,
whether they already stand for,
they are the “in vivo codes” (called
this way in Glaser and Strauss’
1967 work on Grounded Theory),
meaning the very words, i.e. the
quotes, used by participants during
the interviews;
2. The second level is composed by the six dimensions of the Competing Values
Framework, accompanied by a particular label provided by the OCAI framework in
order to create a distinction base on the four different subcultures;
3. The last order represents the four different subcultures defined by the Competing
Values literature: clan, market, adhocracy and hierarchical.
Codes from text or insight
CVF 6 dimensions
CVF subculture
1st order 2nd order 3rd order
Dominant characteristic
Leadership style
culture
Management of employees
Organizational glue
Strategic emphasis
Success factor
Table 19: Subcultures coding tree structure
Methodology
68
The Scrum Coding tree instead, has been structured as follows:
1. The first level is filled with the
codes that strictly regards the Scrum
values, Scrum pillars and particular
key principles of Lean management:
they follow the same structure
expressed in the cultural coding tree;
2. The second level is fulfilled
with the variables (i.e. focus,
commitment, etc.) defined as Scrum
values, Scrum pillars and Lean
principles;
3. The last order contains the
macro-groups mentioned before:
Scrum Values, Scrum pillars, Scrum
maturity and Lean principles.
For the all filled coding trees, see Appendix B.
Codes or insights
Values Overarching
1st order 2nd order 3rd order
Commitment
Scrum values
Courage
Openness
Focus
Respect
Adaptation
Scrum pillars
Transparency
Self-organization
Scrum maturity
Cross-functionality
Customer centricity
Lean principles
Continuous improvement
Waste reduction
Table 20: Scrum values coding tree structure
Results
69
4 Results
After coding the content of each case study, results have to be analysed and interpreted.
According to the methodology definition presented in section 3, both the questionnaire
and the data analysis process are characterized by a threefold structure. Consequently,
within results reflect this format for each case, indeed hereafter we present:
• A description of the case, focusing on team’s way of doing Scrum. Here, the
objective is to assess whether cases are relying on a correct usage of the Scrum
methodology. This evaluation is made considering how Scrum ceremonies are
carried out, how they are defined, their objective and structure; team’s main
characteristics, its way of working and executing routines;
• A discussion about the case cultural profile, starting from the OCAI representation
and passing through the cultural coding tree and informant’s quotes (labelled in
italic) - full coding trees in appendix B. -, we delineate its main characteristics,
considering the relevant subcultures associated for each of the six CVF dimension;
• The examination of the Scrum profile, exploiting the homonymous coding tree and
informant’s citations (labelled in italic), in order to gather insightful data regarding
the set of enabled scrum values.
To conclude the within cases results, we present a general overview about these inward
findings to start the last part, the cross-case discussion. In particular, there are:
• three key tables useful for assessing whether cases are relying on a correct usage
of the scrum methodology;
• Exploiting the OCAI framework provided by Quinn (2011):
o a table of the subculture mix of all the cases; it will be helpful for answering
to the first research question “Are there any recurrent cultural pattern?”;
o a representation of the dominant recurrent cultural pattern, so the answer
to the first research question.
• A summarization of the Scrum profile.
Then, at the end, we provide cross-case considerations, outlining the main findings found
about recurrent cultural patterns and their relations with the Scrum values taken into
consideration.
Results
70
4.1 Within findings: T&D case
4.1.1 Scrum execution description
The agile structure of the organization comprehends 46 agile teams, divided in six tribes,
and each tribe has its own product or client. In fact, they use a peculiar terminology: they
talk about products and not projects. Each team is composed up to ten employees, with
a very wide range of competences: developers, testers, experts with a high degree of
knowledge of the subject (the so called subject matter experts), UI/UX designers. The
Scrum master is internal and follows up to five teams, while instead the Product owner is
fully dedicated to the single agile squad. Scrum masters are under the Human Resource
function in order to sustain and guide the agile transformation, started in September
2017, in terms of way of working and mindset, so, with a focus on people.
Before each sprint, the sprint planning is performed, where the product owner defines
the Objective and Key results (OKRs), the KPIs to monitor and the meaning of “done”.
During the sprint, which lasts two weeks, all the ceremonies of SCRUM are respected: the
daily stand ups last 15 minutes, and every member of the team has to explain what he has
done the day before, what he is going to do that day and the possible impediments
encountered during his work, which will be eventually discussed later with the Scrum
master and the Product owner. The Sprint review occurs every two weeks, at the end of
each sprint: it is the moment where teams receive feedbacks from stakeholders and
celebrate for the work done. Right after the review, the Sprint retrospective gives the
opportunity to teams to discuss about the feedbacks received, what has been performed
properly and what can be improved. It is important to highlight that the scrum masters
always put efforts in adapting the ceremonies in order to facilitate the interaction
between team members.
The standard tool used in the organization is Jira, but each team has the opportunity to
use the tool that mostly suits their way of working: from our observation, we had the
opportunity to remark how, even if each team knows how to use Jira, they are free to use
other ways to work in team, from a structured dashboard to notes written on a
blackboard.
Results
71
Finally, due to the fact that Scrum masters are not fully dedicated to one team, there are
two different ways to prioritize their work:
• Business priority;
• Maturity of the teams in using the SCRUM methodology.
This distinction gave us the opportunity to analyse two different cases, according to the
different maturity of the teams. The first case (i.e. senior case) regards a team mature in
using the methodology, and so being fully self-organized on the ceremonies and on the
way of working, it has as success criteria the continuous improvement of efficiency, so
cost reduction, as well the monitoring of specific KPIs, like the Net Promoter Score or the
Click-through Rate; the other one (i.e. junior case), being less mature in the use of the
methodology, the scrum master must assure a sufficient level of self-organization of the
team, the continuous monitoring of the customer satisfaction and that the work made by
the team during each sprint satisfies the “done” criteria.
4.1.2 T&D Senior case
4.1.2.1 Cultural profile: T&D Senior
The T&D senior case
represents a dominance in the
market culture, with also
interesting findings of
adhocracy culture to be
pointed out.
In fact, there is the presence of
codes that demonstrates the
result orientation as the
dominant characteristic of the
company: the team is
composed by brilliant, young
and full of ideas employees,
which creates a very result-Figure 9: OCAI space T&D senior
Results
72
oriented and competitive working environment. The working environment can also be
seen as an entrepreneurial place, where everyone can be entrepreneur of his own product,
and the sharing of new ideas leads also to reasoning outside the box.
The leadership style tends to exemplify innovation, as the members are encouraged in
propositions and everyone is able to follow the work done by their colleagues. There are
also some peculiar traits of coordination in the leadership style, as team members are
charged with feasible tasks and they are coordinated by the use of tools.
Each member of the team must be proactive in presenting and solving issues encountered,
otherwise it may happen that someone else takes the task assigned to him: this creates a
sort of healthy competition between employees, used as management of people.
The glue that holds together the members is the goal accomplishment, as they are
stimulated by challenging but feasible objectives; in addition, the entrepreneurial mindset
of individuals pushes them to be experts in their specific roles and fields.
All members share the same vision, the final objective is to win the marketplace, and so it
doesn’t matter how the team will reach the goal, well trained people need to impose their
own ideas in order to success faster; moreover, emphasis is also put on the research for
new opportunities, so it is important to perform skilling and re-skilling to find them, and
to be able to meet new potential needs.
Finally, the project is defined as successful if it is able to outpace the competition, so
employees must be trained to be better than competitors.
Results
73
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions subculture
Ambience is friendly DC: Extended family
Empathy Clan culture
Listening LS: Mentoring
Continuous dialogue
Regard to other values and time ME: Teamwork
Explain the problem and the solution OG: Loyalty
Share ideas SE: Participation
Open innovation DC: Entrepreneurial place
Sharing new ideas let you reason outside the box
Interest in bringing innovation
Adhocracy culture
Entrepreneur of the own product
People are encouraged in proposition LS: exemplify innovation
Everyone is able to follow other work
But fail fast ME: risk taking orientation
Proactivity in presenting and solving issues
Taking others’ tasks
Learn From the unsuccess
Each one has his role and is expert in his field OG: cutting edge
To meet new potential needs
SE: prospecting new opportunities
Skilling and re-skilling
Share ideas and best practices with external companies and partners
Line up with external digital players
Tools are key for coordination LS: coordination Hierarchical culture Look for compromises ME: stability of
relationship Punctuality
Continuous track SE: control
Cost savings SF: efficiency
Brilliant, young and full of ideas employees are result oriented DC: result
orientation Market culture
Scrum motivates result orientation
Risk but fail fast ME: competitive
Taking others’ tasks
Proactivity in presenting and solving issues
Negotiation of stories charge OG: goal accomplishment
Challenging objectives but feasible
Enabled by tools
Well trained people need to impose own ideas SE: win the marketplace
Share same vision
Train employees to be better than competitors SF: outpace competition
Table 21: Cultural coding tree: T&D Senior
Results
74
4.1.2.2 Scrum Values profile: T&D Senior
As employees are committed to perform challenging but feasible objectives, share the
same vision and be proactive in finding solutions to the problems encountered, they must
have the courage to share the impediments encountered and, if needed, to exit from their
comfort zone and take tasks assigned to other colleagues. individuals have to respect
others’ values and time, so they must be open to find compromises between team
members to efficiently reach the goal.
About adaptation, the Scrum master adapts the ceremonies in function of the objectives
and the context, and teams are charged with different weights of stories, in function of
their velocity; a high degree of transparency has to be respected, as everyone must be
able to follow others work.
Thanks to the high level of Scrum maturity demonstrated, teams have the possibility to
self-organize, and so micro-management is avoided; moreover, everyone has its specific
role and is expert in his field, representing a high degree of cross-functionality in each
team.
Teams continuously try to improve their solutions, so they are always looking for the best
idea: that’s why practitioners share ideas & best practices with external companies &
partners, lining up with digital external players.
The customer centricity has also its key role: teams must understand the value of the
community and be near to its needs and continuously collaborate with it, in order to
receive feedbacks, which help to understand if the project has taken the right direction.
Last but not least, teams always invest efforts in waste reduction: they strive to increase
their velocity through fast communications and efficiency by saving costs.
Results
75
Table 22: Scrum coding tree: T&D Senior
Codes from text Values Overarching
Challenging objectives but feasible Commitment
Scrum motivates result orientation
Scrum values Proactivity in presenting and solving issues
Taking others’ tasks Courage
To share impediments
Everyone is able to follow other work Openness
Explain the problem and the solution
Find compromises
Share same roadmap Focus
Share same vision
Regard to other values and time Respect
Punctuality
Negotiation of stories charge in relation to team velocity Adaptation
Resilience of actions and frameworks
Scrum pillars Ceremonies and tools are adapted in function of objectives and context
Continuous monitoring via burn down, burn up and velocity charts
Transparency
Same communication standard between developers and SMEs generates cues of business
Explain the problem and the solution
In big companies you can’t expect that everyone sees each dashboard
No micromanagement Self-organization
Trainings in function of context Cross-functionality
Scrum maturity
Each one has his role and is expert in his field
Only customer collaboration Customer centricity
Near to his needs
Lean principles Feedback to understand if the direction is right
Value of the community
Share ideas and best practices with external companies and partners Continuous improvement
Line up with external digital players
Looking for compromises Waste reduction
“liberating structure” for conflict resolution
Cost savings
Fast communication
Results
76
4.1.3 T&D Junior case
4.1.3.1 Cultural profile: T&D Junior
The T&D junior case doesn’t have a clear dominant culture, it is a combination of the clan
culture and the adhocracy one.
Starting from dominant characteristics, the working environment is seen as an
entrepreneurial place: stimulation of pioneering spirit is enhanced, decision making is
stimulated and everyone feels as the entrepreneur of his own product. The attention is
also brought on the result orientation, as there is a constant research in exploring new
paths in order to reach greater goals.
From the clan culture, the leadership style promoted is the mentoring/facilitating one:
members are proactive in asking for support, and the leader inspires the right mindset.
The leadership pushes members also to exemplify innovation, as the employees are
incentivized to experiment, because it helps in achieving greater results in the short run,
especially in this dynamic context, and creates learning opportunities from market and
client’s feedbacks. As a result of this, also the management of employees follows a risk-
taking orientation, because in case of failure, the team has the possibility to learn from
failed experiments. In order to reach this “innovation-seeking” mindset, teamwork has a
Figure 10: OCAI space T&D junior
Results
77
key role to manage people: in fact, it is important that everyone feels unique in terms of
competences, and all the team members know they are rowing in the same direction.
The friendly relationship between the colleagues and the fact that everyone feels unique
in terms of competences strengthens loyalty, which can be defined as the organizational
glue of this case. On the other hand, goal accomplishment motivates members to do their
best, as another variable of organization glue: they share the same vision, the same
roadmap and should be motivated to reach the business objective. Moreover, emphasis
is put on participation: all team members should have their own task, everyone has
visibility regarding other’s work, and it is the team to propose how participation in
ceremonies should be performed.
To conclude, the success factor of the team is to become product leader, by outpacing the
competition and keeping high levels of efficiency: the company should train employees to
be better than competitors, in order to increase effectiveness, but they should also focus
on efficiency, making sure that all the “done” is reached and that a continuous adaptation
of techniques and ceremonies is implemented in order to increase velocity.
Results
78
Codes from text CVF dimensions subculture
improve way of working DC: Extended family
Create a positive mood Clan culture ask for support (proactivity)
LS: Mentoring Inspire the right mindset
Everyone feels unique in terms of competences ME: Teamwork
Rowing in the same direction
Stakeholders feedbacks helps in adjusting orientation and hold organization since you know you are not wasting efforts
OG: Loyalty
All team members must be collocated SE: Participation
Teams propose how to
Leave visibility to everyone
Support horizontal learning SF: Human development
Open people mind to new ideas
Enhancing cross-contamination
Skilling and reskilling
Stimulation of pioneering spirit DC: Entrepreneurial place
Spur decision making
Entrepreneur of the own product Adhocracy culture Ownership of initiatives LS: innovation
Experimentation creates learning opportunities from market and client’s feedbacks ME: risk taking
orientation
Learn From failed experiments
High impact factor of skills OG:cutting edge
Experimentation is pushed SE: prospecting new opportunities
Unsuccess is awarded
Learning from unsuccess as opportunity for the next sprint
Responsiveness and velocity SF: being product leader
satisfy new customer needs
Strategic management push towards to be tech leader
Numerical approach SE: control Hierarchical culture All the “done” is reached SF: efficiency
Exploring new paths in dynamic context leads to grater goals DC: result orient
Market culture
Introduction of procedures and tools only if strictly needed ME: competitive
Trainings in function of context
See that there is always something to do OG: goal accomplishment Share same vision
To reach the business objective SE: win the marketplace
Responsiveness thanks to cross skills
Train employees to be better than competitors SF: beat compet
Table 23: Cultural coding tree: T&D Junior
Results
79
4.1.3.2 Scrum values profile: T&D Junior
Being an environment not fully mature in using Scrum, teams are committed to learn self-
organization and the agile mindset: this lack of the agile mindset has made necessary a
smart use of the customer feedback system, which is useful to understand the right
direction, assuring that the team is not working for nothing. A lot of effort is invested in
making the employees feel like a team: in fact, they must be focused on sharing the same
vision and always rowing together in the same direction; everyone should respect
colleagues, and so visibility should be left to everyone; openness means to ask, with
proactivity, for support to colleagues; risk is not take from the individual, but at team level:
the whole team should have the courage to spur decision making.
The lack of maturity has a great impact on the level of adaptation implemented: in fact,
the Scrum master adapts every ceremony, technique and tool to the team, in order to
foster collaboration and increase the familiarity of the teams with the tools.
The incremental level of self-organization that teams have allows the Scrum master to
avoid micro-management and to empower decision making of teams. Moreover, the
competence heterogeneity inside teams enhances cross-functionality: not only
responsiveness is increased thanks to cross skills, but individuals have the possibility to
learn from similar roles and grow thanks to horizontal learning.
To conclude, teams have freedom for experimentation, because it helps in achieving
greater results in the short run, especially in this specific dynamic context: in this way,
teams have the possibility to continuously improve their solutions.
Results
80
Codes from text Values Overarching
Capability of being self-organized and agile in mindset
Commitment
Train working harder and test the full working capacity
Scrum values Feedback system allows to understand the right direction, you’re not working for nothing
All the “done” is reached
At team level, not individual. Only in the short run Courage
Spur decision making
Ask for support (proactivity)
Openness
Support sharing of information and motivation (related to decisions and development directions)
Rowing in the same direction
Focus
Share same vision
Label actions as “done”
See that there is always something to do
Leave visibility to everyone Respect
Feedback system adoption
Adaptation
Ceremonies and tools are adapted in function of objectives and context
Scrum pillars
Resilience of actions and frameworks to external and dynamic context
Learning opportunity for the next sprints
Continuous adaptation of techniques and ceremonies
Post it on dashboard visible to everyone Transparency
Share same roadmap
Avoid micromanagement Self-organization
Empower decision making Scrum maturity
Team propose how to organize participation
Support horizontal learning
Cross-functionality
Learn from similar roles
Responsiveness thanks to cross skills
Open people mind to new ideas
Only cross skills
Feedbacks To correct the direction of actions Customer centricity
Customer and PO satisfied, constantly and rapidly Continuous improvement
Lean philosophy
Experimentation Helps in achieving greater results in the short run especially in dynamic context
Stakeholders feedbacks helps in adjusting orientation and hold together organization because you understand you are not wasting efforts Waste reduction
Introduction of procedures and tools only if strictly needed
Table 24: Scrum coding tree: T&D Junior
Results
81
4.2 Within findings: T&I case
4.2.1 Scrum execution description
The teams working with agile methodologies in this specific case are six, all belonging to
the R&D department. In particular, each squad has its own product and comprehends
from five to nine members: developers, domain experts, user case owners (who responds
directly to the product owner of the outcome of the project) and solution architects are
the figures needed in order to run the team. All the members of the team possess a T-
shape set of competences: they not only have a core competence, but also basic
knowledge of the other ones, in order to learn from their colleagues and help each other
if needed. The Scrum master can be internal or external, while the Product owner is
internal: they are both fully dedicated to one team.
At the beginning of a project, a sprint zero is performed: teams are built following a
“personality matching” methodology, in order to potentially avoid conflicts between
members; moreover, spikes are performed: they represent activities such as research,
design, investigation, exploration, and prototyping. Their purpose is to acquire the
knowledge necessary to reduce the risk of a technical approach, better understand a
requirement, or increase the reliability of a story estimated.
Sprints usually last two weeks, but they can vary if needed: they can last from one to
maximum four weeks. Before each sprint, the product owner and the user case owner
perform the sprint planning: during this ceremony, they build the user story mapping, a
collection of stories organized according to the Minimum Viable Product and the different
releases scheduled.
The daily stand ups have an average duration of ten minutes: each member explains what
he did the day before, what he is going to do in the current day and the possible
impediments on the path. The sprint review occurs the last day of the sprint, and all the
stakeholders of the project participate: in this occasion, feedback are collected, and the
team has the opportunity to show a demo of the work done to the stakeholders. During
the sprint retrospective instead, usually done after the review, the Scrum master
discusses with the team about what has been performed in the proper way, what instead
has been not and what needs to be improved in the next sprint. After the end of a sprint,
Results
82
the Product owner and the user case owner refine the sprint backlog, according to the
business value of the stories present in the story mapping.
Regarding the techniques used, test-driven development and peer programming are the
most common; moreover, there are no communication standards to use.
The most peculiar detail of this case is the team itself: it may happen that the teams are
not composed by colleagues of the same country, but coming from different continents,
sometimes even freelance developers are included in the project. this leads to two
significant problems to solve: the difficult coordination of the team, due to the fact that
some workers will always work remotely, and the teamwork itself, threatened by the
competitiveness of freelance workers against the internal ones; this is why coordination
plays a key role in this case.
Competing in the telecommunication industry, innovation is a variable of success for the
company: teams must be able to always to create the most innovate product, in order to
have a unique product in the market and at the same time increase the customer value.
4.2.2 T&I Senior case
4.2.2.1 Cultural profile: T&I Senior
From a cultural mix point of view,
The T&I senior case represents a
quite balanced case, with the
market culture that anyway slightly
dominates the other cultures.
Regarding the dominant
characteristic, teams are very result
oriented (market culture): the goals
must be always clear and
achievable, and it is important that
the customer always has the feeling
that something useful is being done.
Coordination is also fundamental:
the working environment is seen as
Figure 11: OCAI space T&I Senior
Results
83
a formal place (hierarchical culture) where members are committed to follow rules,
because some members are in remote, and this need of coordination limits the autonomy
of teams; the hierarchical culture is clearly visible also in the leadership style used,
combined with specific traits of the adhocracy culture: there is a continuous need of
updates in order to overcome the organizational inertia due to remote working, and so
continuous settlements for remote workers are made to avoid misalignments. In addition,
people are encouraged to propose new ideas, the best idea wins: it doesn’t matter where
the idea came from. About the management of employees, it is clear that teamwork is
fundamental: being also a matter of not constantly being in the same room during the
development of the project, it is important that every employee constantly share the
current state of the work. Regarding the organization glue, even though goal
accomplishment is a key variable, respecting the common rules is the main driver: in fact,
team members are usually not located in the same room, and this creates a sort of
alienation between the team members; getting the job done, respecting the common
guidelines, is the only way to keep them unite. In particular, teams use “Spike” techniques
to better understand how to reach the objective. The strategic emphasis, instead, tends
to be the participation of people (clan culture): they can speak without any dominance or
bias, they are encouraged to expose impediments, everyone is called to speak and
constant collaboration is always enhanced. To conclude, success is reached if the product
outpaces the competition (market culture) because the company becomes a product
leader (adhocracy culture): top managers push to the market assault, so it is fundamental
to constantly create value for the customer and be able to quickly respond to change.
Results
84
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions CVF subculture
People can speak without any dominance or bias DC: Extended family
Autonomy is limited by need of coordination LS: Mentoring Clan culture
Encourage straightforwardness
Share current state of work ME: Teamwork
Not to be aggressive and having understanding of others
OG: Loyalty
Express thoughts, impediments SE: Participation
Constant collaboration
Everyone is called to speak
People are encouraged to expose impediments
Cross-pollination SF: Human development
Mandatory technical trainings (workshop and online tests)
People are encouraged to propose new ideas, the best idea win LS: exemplify
innovation
Doesn’t matter from where the idea came from Adhocracy culture Design thinking
SE: prospecting new opportunities
Be aware of the continuous changing trends
Elasticity in structure
Create value for the customer SF: being product leader
Ability to respond to change
Committed to follow rules, as some members are in remote
DC: formal place
No misalignments, continuous settlement for remote workers LS: exemplify
coordination
Hierarchical culture
Continuous needs of updates
Need to overcome inertia
Common guidelines OG: rules
Monitor that things are getting done SE: control
Budget, time and quality of development must improve
SF: efficiency
Goals must be clear and achievable DC: result orientation
Customer must communicate that something useful is done
Acquisition of analytical mindset SE: win the marketplace
Market culture
Capability to associate the right value of features in function of the moment and the context
Always improve responsiveness
Enabling iterative thinking SF: outpace competition
Top managers push to market assault
Table 25: Cultural coding tree: T&I Senior
Results
85
4.2.2.2 Scrum values profile: T&I Senior
The Scrum profile of this case has the peculiar trait of having remote workers inside the
agile teams: this impacts the self-organization of teams, because they are forced to
respect rules and continuously update the remote workers, so autonomy is limited by
need of coordination.
The presence of remote workers implies also efforts on adaptation, as ceremonies and,
above all, communication must be adapted to facilitate interaction with remote workers;
regarding transparency, every member is called to share the current state of work:
Continuous settlement for remote workers are made, in order to avoid misalignments
within team members.
Moreover, this case is rich of codes belonging to the Lean philosophy: in fact, teams pay
most of their attention to customer centricity, as they aim to create value for the customer
and continuously communicate with them to understand if something useful is done;
iterative thinking and customer feedbacks help teams to create continuous improvements
to their solutions; moreover, waste reduction is sought, especially in terms of efficiency,
as straightforwardness is encouraged, documentation is produced with Just In Time
mindset and feedbacks are expressed to avoid conflicts.
In order to enable this last code, individuals must have respect towards their colleagues,
so people can speak without any dominance or bias, without being aggressive and having
understanding of others. Teams are constantly committed to deliver MVPs and to respect
the releases: this is why they focus on improving budget, time and quality of development
and on improving responsiveness. Openness is also incentivized: members can expose to
others their own issues, express thoughts and impediments, and people are encouraged
to propose new ideas, as the best idea wins.
Results
86
Codes from text Values Overarching
Deliver MVPs Commitment
Respecting releases Scrum values
“Spike” technique to better understand how to reach the objective
Acquisition of analytical mindset Courage
People are encouraged to propose new ideas, the best idea win
Express thoughts, impediments Openness
Expose own issues
Everyone is called to speak
Budget, time and quality of development must improve Focus
Always improve responsiveness
Not to be aggressive and having understanding of others
Respect
People can speak without any dominance or bias
Starting from feedbacks, the right techniques are chosen
Adaptation
Adapt ceremonies and communication Above all for remote workers Scrum pillars Elasticity in structure
Share current state of work
Transparency
No misalignments, Continuous settlement for remote workers
Autonomy is limited by need of coordination Self-organization
Cross-pollination Cross-functionality
Create value for the customer
Customer centricity
Increase value to the customer
Customer must communicate that something useful is done
Lean principles
Customer feedbacks for continuous improvements Continuous improvement
Enabling iterative thinking
Express feedbacks to avoid conflicts Waste reduction
Encourage straightforwardness
Documentation Just in time
No too much room for mentoring
Table 26: Scrum coding tree: T&I Senior
Results
87
4.2.3 T&I Junior case
4.2.3.1 Cultural profile: T&I Junior
The T&I junior case has two
dominant cultures, the clan and
the adhocracy, with also some
interesting insights coming from
the market one. In fact, the
competitive working context
makes the dominant
characteristic very result-
oriented, as the objective must
be always clear and achievable;
on the other hand, there is also a
sort of entrepreneurial mindset,
which adds also a bit of
adhocracy culture to the
dominant characteristics.
The fact that everyone has the possibility to share his current state of work, in addition to
a purposeful listening approach, promotes a mentoring/facilitating leadership style; the
leadership style tends also to exemplify innovation: the “fail fast” approach is accepted,
members work in group in order to find new paths and iteration is supported to deliver a
unique product.
Regarding instead the management of employees, teamwork (clan culture) and risk-taking
orientation (adhocracy culture) are both important, because teamwork is boosted to
exploit synergies coming from different competencies, and “fail fast” mindset is
accepted.
Interesting evidences are highlighted regarding the organizational glue: loyalty (clan
culture) of employees is the key variable, thanks to the continuous relations and the
mutual trust of team members; on the other hand, it is important to note that from the
point of view of the scrum master interviewed, rules and laws can never be organizational
glues, as they would limit team’s motivation to perform and do their best.
Figure 12: OCAI space T&I Junior
Results
88
Moreover, the strategic emphasis that is highlighted is the one of the adhocracy culture,
as there is a continuous research for new opportunities thanks to design thinking, being
aware of the continuous changing trends of the market and finding new paths working in
group.
Finally, there are different success factors, coming from the market and clan cultures. First
of all, there is a constant willingness to outpace the competition, enabling iterative
thinking and delivering innovative products; on the other hand, human development is
important for the company, and this is why they make sessions of mindset coaching in
groups and mandatory technical trainings, that can be workshops or online tests.
Results
89
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions CVF subculture
Informal workplace DC: Extended family
Listening LS: Mentoring Clan culture
Mindset coaching made in groups and available also on-line.
Boosting teamworking to exploit synergies ME: Teamwork
Continuous relations OG: Loyalty
Mutual trust of team members
Foster human interactions SE: Participation
Constant collaboration
Cross-pollination
SF: Human development
Mandatory technical trainings (workshop and online tests)
Presence of entrepreneurial mindset DC: Entrepreneurial place
Fail fast ME: risk taking orientation
Adhocracy culture
Support iteration to deliver a unique product OG: being on the cutting edge
Everyone does his best in his role
Find new paths working in group SE: prospecting new opportunities
Design thinking
Be aware of the continuous changing trends
Strive in order to create a unique and innovative product SF: being product leader
Deliver unique product
Risks may be compromising for the team ME: stability of relationship Hierarchical
culture Formal rules NEVER are organizational glues OG: rules
Coordination of teams with remote workers SE: control
Budget, time and quality of development must improve
SF: efficiency
Goals must be clear and achievable DC: result orientation
Acquisition of analytical mindset
SE: win the marketplace
Market culture
Capability to associate the right value of features in function of the moment and the context
Enabling iterative thinking SF: outpace competition
Deliver innovative products
Top managers push to market assault
Table 27: Cultural coding tree: T&I Junior
Results
90
4.2.3.2 Scrum values profile: T&I Junior
The Scrum profile is strongly concentrated on Adaptation, due to the presence of remote
workers, so ceremonies and communication are adapted for remote workers, and on
transparency of processes thanks to the ceremonies adapted.
Moreover, having a lower maturity of Scrum, the Scrum master works in order to increase
the self-organization of teams: in fact, no technique is imposed, they choose what they
prefer, and at the beginning of a project the “Personality matching” technique is used for
members allocation. The cross-functionality of teams helps human growth, as the cross-
pollination leads to learning new competences from colleagues.
Another critical point is waste reduction, especially in terms of internal efficiency:
feedbacks are used during the retrospective in order to avoid conflicts, and if they happen
they are solved with one-to-one discussion; moreover, documentation is created only if
needed, with a Just in time mindset.
Regarding the Scrum values, the respect inside teams is important, since everyone
understand and respect the roles of others and develop the ability to listen the opinion of
colleagues. Another important value is openness, because everyone must share the
current state of work in order to give visibility especially to remote workers, and enhance
continuous relations between members in order to always keep contacts with remote
workers.
Results
91
Codes from text Values Overarching
Strive in order to create a unique and innovative product
Commitment
Acquisition of analytical mindset Courage Scrum values
Share current state of work Openness
Continuous relations
Goals must be clear and achievable Focus
Listening Respect
Everyone does his best in his role
Adapt ceremonies and communication Above all for remote workers
Adaptation
Starting from feedbacks, the right techniques are chosen
Scrum pillars
Transparency of processes thanks to ceremonies
Transparency
No technique is imposed, they choose what they prefer
Self-organization
“Personality matching” technique for members allocation
Scrum maturity
Cross-pollination Cross-functionality
Enabling iterative thinking Continuous improvement
Feedbacks In order to avoid conflicts Waste reduction
Lean principles
Solve conflicts with one-to-one discussion
Absence of misalignments is fundamental for remote workers
Documentation Just in time
Table 28: Scrum coding tree: T&I Junior
Results
92
4.3 Within findings: Energy case
4.3.1 Scrum execution description
The agile structure of the organization reaches the critical mass of six teams working on
different projects, but instead of creating a new product to offer to the final customers,
they create systems used by other departments of the organization. Each team is
composed by eight people maximum, but the peculiarity of the teams is the fluidity that
characterizes them: in fact, each team has its own process specialist, that is focused on
the business of its specific project, and then there is a development team in which
members split their weekly agenda on different projects. Moreover, there is a unique user
experience designer, which guarantees a proper user experience in using the product, that
offers his competences to the teams when needed. Finally, both Scrum masters and
Product owners are internal and fully dedicated to a single team. The teams are under the
R&D department, and at the end of the project an MVP is developed.
At the beginning of the project, the teams must be created: the Scrum master uses the
“Form Storm Norm Perform” technique. Thanks to this method, a sample of the team is
created and a simple task is assigned, in order to analyse if members are able to work
together; if conflicts occur, they are resolved in “one-to-one” discussions with the Scrum
master. After a short period of assessment, the teams should be able to exploit synergies
from the variety of competences. Then, the team previously created, together with the
Product owner, creates the product backlog. After the definition of all the user stories, it
is the team to create a prioritization of the backlog: using the Fibonacci series, each
member assigns a “difficulty score”, from one to twenty, according to its personal
thoughts on the difficulty to complete the specific user story. Thanks to this process, the
product owner is able to order all the stories in the different sprint backlogs and organize
the workforces.
At the beginning of each sprint, the Objectives and Key results, KPIs and “done” are
defined. The sprints generally last two weeks, but if needed it can be stretched to
maximum three weeks. The daily stand ups have a maximum duration of fifteen minutes,
and each member explain the work done, the work to be done and potential
impediments, that in case will be solved with the Scrum master or the Product owner after
the end of the ceremony. The scrum master gives the freedom to the team to choose how
Results
93
to do the different ceremonies: in particular, the sprint review, done at the end of each
sprint, is a moment of feedback collection and presentation of the work done. On the
other hand, the sprint retrospective happens right after the review: the Product owner
participates to every retrospective, instead the other stakeholders participate to one
retrospective every two sprints. In this occasion, the team presents what should be
changed in the work done and what is going to be done in the next sprints. Anyway, the
backlog is rarely refined, because it is the team that has originally prioritized all the user
stories and so it is aware of the work and time needed to complete each sprint backlog:
as said previously, instead of refining it, a week is added to the sprint in order to complete
the backlog originally defined.
The standard tool used by teams is the Trello board, but it is mostly used to create a
common language between all the teams; in fact, for the internal operations, each team
can use the tool it prefers. The same happens for the communication: there is a
communication standard, which is Trello, but other than that the teams can use informal
chats to communicate (WhatsApp, Hangout etc.).
The scrum master focuses a lot of attention on time boxing: this variable has become a
concrete mindset inside the organization, as every employee pays attention to the timing
of ceremonies, meetings and to respect deadlines.
Finally, due to the particular “internal” customer of this case, teams define as success the
delivery of a product that respects all the criteria requested by the customer, with a high
degree of efficiency, in terms of both velocity and cost saving.
Results
94
4.3.2 Cultural profile: Energy case
The energy situation is quite
balanced among the clan, the
hierarchical and the market
cultures. The dominant
characteristics of the working
place are to keep it informal to
facilitate the expression of any
kind of issues at any time (Clan
culture) and to make it
challenging in finding new
opportunities (Adhocracy
culture). For this reason, the
leadership style is to exemplify
coordination, mostly concerning team composition (Hierarchical culture) because of the
presence of transversal roles, to exemplify team-working through one-to-one coaching
sessions on the way of operating and by putting people at their ease leaving them free to
use the tools they need (Clan culture). This leads to a management of employees oriented
to grant an overall stability of relationships (Hierarchical culture) by explaining everything
clearly at the beginning and by respecting others’ time and work. This, conjointly with the
familiar place, creates a sense of mutual trust (Clan culture) between members without
any kind of prevarications and shows deep sensibility for others’ propositions keeping
them together; consequently, decisions are kept together achieving general agreement in
what to do, demonstrating a common commitment for the team success (Market culture).
Therefore, the strategic emphasis devolves upon competitive actions designed to win the
market-place, like following its constant evolutions, providing high value trainings (Market
culture) in order to consolidate competitive advantages, continuously improving products
and generating economic return (Market culture). On the other hand, success is measured
with internal improvement of procedures aimed to increase velocity and decrease of the
cost curve (Hierarchical).
Figure 13: OCAI space Energy case
Results
95
Codes from text CVF dimensions subculture
Informal place DC: extended family
Facilitation of expressing issues of any kind, at any moment
Freedom to use the tools that teams prefer LS: exemplify mentoring
Clan culture One to one sessions of coaching
Teams are put at their ease
Use of “common sense” ME: teamwork and facilitation
Continuous transition of competencies
Deep sensibility for others’ propositions OG: mutual trust
Prevarications do not exist
Individuals are motivated to share impediments always SE: participation
Members allocated in function of whats challenging for them DC: entreprene. place
Commitment to find new opportunities Adhocracy culture People encouraged to be proactive (not much indulgence) ME: individual
risk taking Take ownership of initiatives
Exploit customer feedbacks SE: prospecting new opportunities
Explore new business opportunities
Boost forecast process after failures
Commitment in respecting rules DC: Controlled and structured place.
Production of compliance documentation
Transversal figures control the overall view over the teams
Normative assessment
“Form Storm Norm Perform” technique for team building and execution
LS: exemplify coordination
Hierarchical culture
Everything is clear ME: stability of relationship
Punctuality
Clear use of standard references OG: rules
Defined timebox
Roles and tasks are clearly assigned
Velocity SF: efficiency
Cost savings
Procedures improvements
Respect timelines DC: result orientation
Members do their best and know that others do the same
Objectives are clear and they know how to reach them
General agreement in what to do OG: goal accomplishment
Market culture Focus on delivering MVPs before the release
Follow constantly regulation evolutions SE: win the marketplace
Individuals are incentivized to propose skilling trainings
Effective products granting economic return SF: outpace competition
Consolidate competitive vantage
Product continuously improved
Table 29: Cultural coding tree: Energy
Results
96
4.3.3 Scrum values profile: Energy case
Concerning its scrum profile, what deserves to be noted is that the commitment value is
addressed to both goal achievement without being assertive and to the respect of the
normative boundaries imposed by the context. The commitment to goal achievement is
enabled by the transparency of communication, since objectives and timeboxes are clear
and everyone knows how to reach them, by the pervasive adaptation spirit showed in
allocating members in teams in function of what is challenging for them and in reaching
general consensus over what to do. Agreement that is achievable thanks to the courage in
sharing proactively impediments, to the openness and sensibility for other’s propositions
(absence of prevarications) and to the respect constantly demonstrated towards
colleagues’ work by weighting proposal of adjustments of their output.
In an optical of continuous improvement, employees are invited to propose ideas for
increasing velocity and quality of sprint activities and learn from their failures, channelling
their focus in being effective (so in reducing waste) and in finding new business
opportunities by leveraging on the constant regulation evolutions.
Regarding teams’ maturity and the degree of self-organization, they are autonomous in
managing deliverables and in choosing intra-team communication tools. Moreover, the
degree of cross-functionality is assured thanks to the “Form Storm Norm Perform”
technique, which allows to assign all the needed role for each team, and thanks to several
trainings for competences development. However, even though internal transition of
competencies is guaranteed, cross functionality is reached only by taking into account also
all the transversal figures (architect, analyst and designers).
Results
97
Codes from text Values Overarching
Hire people with the right mindset Commitment
To respect normative context Scrum values To goal achievement without being assertive
Objectives are clear and members know how to reach them
Individuals are motivated to share impediments at any moment Courage
Proactivity in making proposals, with not much indulgence
Informal place Openness
Deep sensibility for others’ propositions
Effectiveness Focus
In finding new business opportunities
In producing the compliance documentation
By weighting proposal of adjustments Respect
Prevarications do not exist
Punctuality
No mandatory communication standards
Adaptation
Members are allocated in function of what is challenging for them
Scrum pillars
Follow constantly regulation evolutions
General agreement in what to do
Every team has its own way of communication, so it is internal transparency Transparency
It is key for alignments
Standard reference documentation to mandatory follow for the most important deliverables
Roles and tasks are clearly assigned
In particular internal communication and tools
Self-organization
Individuals are incentivized to propose trainings to develop competences
Scrum maturity
Autonomy in managing deliverables
Ownership of initiatives
“Form Storm Norm Perform” technique Cross-functionality
Internal transition of competencies
Different roles are clearly assigned
A transversal architect connects and aggregates the work
Feedbacks exploitation Customer centricity
It is internal Lean principles Members are invited in proposing ideas for increasing
velocity and quality of sprint activities Continuous improvement
Exploit failures for fostering procedures
Iterative and incremental thinking
Respect timelines and timebox Waste reduction
Increase velocity and cost savings
Table 30: Scrum coding tree: Energy
Results
98
4.4 Within findings: E-commerce
4.4.1 Scrum execution description
The agile structure is divided in 3 product areas, which have different business objectives
and backlogs. Thirty teams in total are operative, in particular fourteen for the first
business area, seven for the second one and nine for the third one. The business area in
discussion has to develop the E-commerce platform of a multinational clothing brand. The
squads of this particular business area are composed by nine members, with different
competences: developers, that are divided by front-end developers, back-end developers
and mobile application developers; testers of the solution; functional analysts and data
analysts. The scrum masters are external, and each scrum master monitors four agile
squads; the Product owners instead are internal and they are fully dedicated to a single
team.
When a product area is created, the different teams are built through a process of self-
organization, moderated by the different scrum masters. After this process, the Product
owner creates the product backlog and elaborates the definition of “done”. The sprints
have a standard duration of two weeks, and during this timeframe the Scrum master can,
if needed, add items inside the current sprint backlog. The daily stand ups last fifteen
minutes, and each member explains to the team the work done, what has to be done and
future potential impediments; these impediments will be then tackled and solved at the
end of the daily stand up with the Scrum master or the Product owner. The sprint review
is performed the last two days of the sprint, and the scrum master presents to the team
results regarding their productivity and relevant KPIs; moreover, the team presents a
demo of the add-ons of the platform to the Product owner and stakeholders. The sprint
retrospective instead is performed the last day of the sprint, and in time frames of ten
minutes each it is discussed what has been performed well, what has gone wrong and
what needs to be improved. The discussion is mediated by the scrum master, and the “call
to action” is enhanced in order to motivate the team to always improve. Moreover, during
the retrospective the backlog can be refined if some items don’t respect the acceptance
criteria. It is important to highlight that the teams choose how to do the ceremonies.
The prioritization of the items in the product backlog is made, according to technical and
economic feasibility, in order to optimize the Time To Market and satisfy the ROI and
Results
99
Break Even requested. Moreover, in order to create a Minimum Viable Product from the
first sprint and incrementally add features, the different operations inside teams are
performed in sequence: the first step of each sprint is to create or improve the user
interface and the user experience. Once these aspects are defined, the rest of the items
can be tackled by the team.
All the teams of the product area use Jira and Qmetry Confluence, an add-on of Atlassian,
as standard tools, in order to have a common language and enable interaction between
teams. Jira is also used as the common tool to communicate inside and between teams.
The teams reach a successful result when two objectives are attained: a certain degree of
efficiency, in terms of velocity and cost saving, and an increase of market shares thanks
to the solution created.
4.4.2 Cultural profile: E-commerce
The E-commerce case fluctuates
mainly between the clan and the
market culture.
Indeed, codes regarding extended
family (Dominant characteristic),
exemplification of mentoring and
team facilitation (Leadership
style), loyalty (Organization glue)
and participation (Strategic
emphasis) lead to the dominant
culture of clan. Instead, regarding
the market culture, what mostly
stands out are the clear result
orientation of the organization
(Dominant characteristic) and the willingness to outpace the competition (Success factor).
However, team members are managed following a risk orientation approach
(Management of employees) to stimulate innovation (Adhocracy culture).
Figure 14: OCAI space e-commerce case
Results
100
The working place can be considered as a familiar environment, since people
communicate continuously, exchanging cues (feedbacks) to strengthen themselves;
moreover, they are all considered equals. On the other side, being peers allows a fair
evaluation among them over their results. In order to improve performances, the pursued
leadership style aims to invest in coaching the proper way of working and in order to do
more at their best, employees are not micromanaged and are left free to follow their own
attitudes; for this reason they are incentivized to take risks, in order to bring innovation
and to learn from eventual failures. Generally, the leadership style enters into team
dynamics to facilitate its building and sequence of events.
Therefore, transparency of communication, respect of rules and in particular punctuality,
commit the team towards goal achievement for the organization success.
As it is clear, great emphasis is put on member participation and personal growth (also by
providing demanded tools and trainings) to basically have an organization in which
everyone cooperate and is committed to the company success on the market, so by being
always ready and faster to gain market share.
Results
101
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions subculture
Everyone is equal DC: Extended family
Expressing feedbacks is a way of respecting others
Continuous dialogue
Clan culture No micro-management
LS: exemplify mentoring and facilitating
People are guided when they are called to build teams
People are left free to follow own attitudes
Coaching on way of working
No one can be left behind ME: teamwork and facilitation
Face to face clarifications
Mutual respect OG: mutual trust and team commitment
Punctuality
Transparency
Creating a stimulating environment
SE: participation
Providing tools for personal growth
Everyone is called to speak
Take ownership of initiatives LS: exemplify innovation and entrepreneurship
Via team building Adhocracy culture Courage in making and finalizing propositions ME: individual risk
taking Don’t worry if unsuccess occur
Teams must have valuable cross-competencies SE: prospecting new opportunities
Provide common guidelines LS: coordination
Team’s settled rules
OG: rules
Hierarchical culture Punctuality
All teams have the same protocol in writing stories
Cost reduction
SF: efficiency
Boost ROI and BE
Increase productivity
Evaluation on results DC: result orientation
Continuous evaluation Market culture Stimulation in doing more
ME: competitive Continuous performance evaluation
People are trained in working in optimal condition
Be faster with propositions, reduce TTM
SF: outpace competition
Be always ready near consumerism events
People are encouraged to do what they are best in
Perform technical trainings
Increase market share
Table 31: Cultural coding tree: E-commerce
Results
102
4.4.3 Scrum values profile. E-commerce
The adaptation pillar is deeply interiorized, since teams’ objectives are settled according
internal attitudes, teams customize ceremonies in function of people and it is perfectly
integrated with the self-organization freedom teams have. Indeed, micromanagement
does not exist, team members can discover own attitudes and most of all, by respecting
maturity guidelines, they can choose the team to belong. Concerning these team building
rules, Scrum masters care a lot in mixing members of both technical and methodological
different expertise and in ensuring that each team has all the competencies for developing
end-to-end features. This entails openness of juniors in embracing seniors’ wisdom and
expertise, and increase the team cross-functionality, because seniors are called to
facilitate juniors’ work by teaching technicalities, not necessarily from the same domain.
At the heart of this there is respect of others, so by leaving no one behind, and
transparency of communication. In particular, what must be visible to everyone is the
process followed to reach the objective, where the “done” and the “to be done” are
labelled. Generally, this process has its roots in customer centricity and in continuous
improvement, indeed the continuous discussion with the customer allows to develop
iterative thinking and to structure releases on MVPs. Consequently, the focus is on
delivering solutions faster and almost perfect from the design point of view, and the
commitment in respecting deadlines, especially in correspondence of consumerism
events.
Results
103
Codes from text Values Overarching
To team growth by putting together seniors and juniors (technically and methodologically) Commitment
In enabling the iterative thinking Scrum values In respecting deadlines
In finding own attitudes
Responsibility of own actions Courage
Of ownership and to accomplish of initiatives
Embrace seniors’ wisdom and expertise Openness
To new challenges
To embrace others’ feedback
In delivering faster, reducing the time to market Focus
In reducing inefficiencies
In delivering MVPs
Transparency Respect
Punctuality
No one can be left behind
Teams’ objectives are settled according internal attitudes Adaptation
Teams adapt ceremonies in function of people
Scrum pillars
To common guidelines concerning way of conducting ceremonies, writing stories and backlog, definition of defects acceptance criteria
Everyone should be able to understand other teams’ work by looking in their dashboard Transparency
Clearly describe the done and the what to be done
Share process of reaching the objective
In team building (objectives and composition) Self-organization
When and how ceremonies should be Scrum maturity No micromanagement
Discover own attitudes
Seniors are called to facilitate juniors’ work Cross-functionality
Juniors learn technicalities from seniors, not necessary from the same domain
Each team must have all the competencies for developing end-to-end features
Once MVP and design are ready, collect his feedback Customer centricity
Continuous discussion
Consumerism events are pivotal Lean principles Enhance personal expertise Continuous
improvement Incremental developing
Prioritization of enhancement actions
“meet after” formula for solving impediments Waste (Time) reduction
Strengthen synthesis skill
Cost curve improved sprint after sprint
Identify and solve impediments
Table 32: Scrum coding tree: E-commerce
Results
104
4.5 Within findings: Pharmaceutical case
4.5.1 Scrum execution description
In the pharmaceutical case, the agile structure is divided in nine agile teams, all working
on the same product. There are nine people per team, members of the development team
with T-shape competences: they have their core competencies and also other knowledge
on the competences of their colleagues. The scrum master is external to the company,
while instead the Product owner is internal; they are both fully dedicated to a single team.
At the beginning of each project, a first planning moment is set to define scope and
milestones of the project; a checklist is made, the definition of “done” is created and
teams and stakeholders are aligned. Moreover, some buffers are placed between
different sprints, in order to solve or elude technical problems without stopping the
process anytime there is a problem. Prioritization is made exclusively by the dedicated
PO, following market trends and respecting rules and laws dictated by the pharmaceutical
industry. The sprints last two weeks, without considering the above-mentioned buffer.
The daily stand up last fifteen minutes, and each member communicates to their
colleagues the work done, the work to be done and possible impediments. The sprint
review is performed every two weeks, and it is used by the team to collect the feedback
of the stakeholders. The sprint retrospective instead, made the last day of the sprint, is a
discussion of what needs to be changed, and it is important to find at least one action to
perform in the next sprint, as an improvement. In order to avoid boredom & monotony,
the Scrum master always tries to use different ways to perform this ceremony.
Jira and physical dashboards are the standard tool for working and communicating; after
a certain degree of maturity, the teams have the possibility to use their own way of
working and communicating. One peculiarity of this case is that, in case of need, Self-
organized teams can look for the missing competence in other teams, and so individuals
may spend time also on other teams’ projects. The success factors are a good degree of
efficiency (especially in terms of velocity), customer satisfaction and the achievement of
the predefined milestones.
Results
105
4.5.2 Cultural profile: Pharmaceutical
The most relevant subcultures of this case
are the clan subculture and the market one.
Members show a great sense of belonging
to the organization, trusting their peers and
without creating any problem concerning
the share of issues (Clan culture), because
they are truly committed in doing the job
assigned, no matter the impediments and
how the goal can be achieved, always
following the advancements posted in the
dashboards (Market culture). Transparency
of actions and of accomplishments (so of communication) is a key driver for motivating
employees, since they understand that they are continuously monitored (Market culture),
trying always to avoid inter-team and intra-team competition (Hierarchical culture) thanks
to the one-to-one coaching sessions on the way of working (Clan culture). Another
motivational point arises from the constant willingness to keep high harmony, interest
and excitement around the work to be done (Clan culture), encouraging them to make
propositions (Adhocracy culture) and facilitating the work by providing standardized
dashboards (Clan culture). This familiar place is held together by the mutual trust nestled
in the employees’ relationships; indeed, from a professional point of view, they deeply
support mutual aid (Clan culture), work compactly to the goal (Market culture) and, from
a personal point of view, they consider each other truly as equals, as peers (Clan culture).
Actually, the organization rely a lot on people direct participation by trying to involve
everyone in the decision-making process, in making propositions and on indirect
participation, by keeping attention and listening to others’ propositions (Clan culture).
Moreover, emphasis is also put on their skills improvements, pushing them to make
motions for technical trainings and to stay in line with the market evolution and trends,
(Market culture) in order to be able to eventually adapt to them. All of this is finally due
to the constant willingness to satisfy the customer by achieving the goals at planned
timing (Market culture).
Figure 15: OCAI space Pharmaceutical case
Results
106
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions subculture
Sense of belonging DC: extended family
Share of problems
One to one coaching session LS: exemplify mentoring and facilitating
Clan culture
Choose right tools in function of people
Keep employees committed and not bored
Find a matching person for conflict resolution ME: teamwork and facilitation
Harmony
Standardized dashboards
Professional trust OG: mutual trust and team commitment
Everyone is equal
Mutual aid
Transparency of communication
People ask for specific training SE: participation
Listen others’ propositions
Everyone is involved
Stimulate iterative thinking LS: exemplify innovation
Experiment best working practices Adhocracy culture Circumvent issues and postpone their resolution ME: individual risk
taking Everyone is called in making propositions
Learn from unsuccess SE: prospecting new opportunities
Understand causes of unsuccess
Exploit customer’s feedbacks
Larger preliminary meetings LS: exemplify coordination
No misalignments Hierarchical culture No inter and intra team competition ME: stability of
relationship No vertical movements
Respect milestones SF: efficiency
Find always improvement actions
The job must be done DC: result orientation
Achievements are always visible Market culture No matter how is achieved the goal
ME: competitive Each one has its own goal, constantly monitored
Team work compactly to OG: goal accomplishment
Actions and achievements are always visible
Clear milestones and detailed plan
Technical trainings SE: win the marketplace
Adapt to its dynamicity
Stay in line with its trends
Customer and sponsors satisfaction SF: outpace competition
Intra team union to stupefy stakeholders
By improving internal performances
Table 33: Cultural coding tree: Pharmaceutical
Results
107
4.5.3 Scrum values profile: Pharmaceutical
Its scrum profile is grounded into the two scrum pillars considered, transparency and
adaptation. Indeed, people are committed to work together compactly to the objective,
to reach the scope at each step because the continuous communication generates
motivation, and everyone is always informed on the new tasks; actions, stories,
achievements and feedbacks are continuously monitored, which drives the focus on the
job to be done and on following the metrics evolution. Parallelly, the adaptation pillar
enables the focus value of being flexible, so to work on prioritized items and in thinking
iteratively, hence it impacts also the continuous improvement principle, according to
which is pivotal to find an action in the retrospective as improvement for the team and to
learn from failures. This is supposed to open the team mindset to find new paths to reach
the objective, to encourage them to share impediments and to directly share ideas to the
customer, which is a central figure for the process since it is continuously and directly
consulted for feedbacks, lately exploited to adjust backlog and directions.
Teams are self-organized in choosing the timing and the means to interact with the
customer, and in detecting the missing internal competencies in order to achieve the
status of cross-functional teams, where competences are T-shaped, everyone has own
goal and most of all mutual aid is achieved. At the heart of this there is respect for others’
professionality and opinions.
Results
108
Codes from text Values Overarching
Ask for personal skilling Commitment
To accomplish the scope at each step Scrum values
In working together compactly toward the objective
To directly share ideas to the customer Courage
Share impediments
Switching point of view Openness
To find new paths to reach the objective
On iterative thinking Focus
On prioritized items
Following metrics evolution
On the job to be done
Each opinion has the same value Respect
Professional
The detailed plan
Standardized dashboards Adaptation
Of ceremonies and tools in function of people Scrum pillars
To the business context
Experiment procedures till optimal working way is found
A matching person is called to favour conflict resolution
Actions, stories, achievements and feedbacks continuous monitoring Transparency
Of communication generate motivation
Business part always kept informed dev team on new tasks
Detect internal missing competences Self-organization
Talk directly with the customer Scrum maturity
Mutual aid Cross-functionality
Each one has own goal
T-shaped competences
Continuous and direct communication
Customer centricity
Exploit his feedbacks to adjust backlog and directions
Lean principles
Constant demand for feedbacks
Continuous improvement
Always find an action in the retrospective as improvement for the team
Learn from unsuccess and its causes
Provide the asked trainings and courses
Find the optimal working conditions Waste reduction
Respect milestones
Table 34: Scrum coding tree: Pharmaceutical
Results
109
4.6 Overall view
Within results were reviewed and confirmed by the interviewees, to potentially correct
any error or bias and ultimately enhance the correctness of our interpretations.
4.6.1 Use of Scrum methodology
Scrum team: Characteristics
T&I T&D Energy E-commerce Pharmaceutical
Team clusters Each team is dedicated to on one product.
6 tribes organized by product or by client.
Solutions developed usually used by other functions in Edison.
3 product areas with different business objectives & backlogs.
Teams working on the same product.
Total number of Agile teams
6. Some members are remote
46. Majority using scrum
6 (critical mass)
30=14+7+9
9. SAFe oriented.
Members per team. Seniority
Variable, between 5 and 9. Mixed.
Max 10. Mixed.
8. Mixed. Max 9. Mixed.
8. high.
Roles within a team (Scrum master and Product owner always included)
Developers (some remote); Domain experts (remote); user cases owner (UCO); Solution architect; T-shaped competences.
Developers; Testers; Subject matter experts; UX/UI.
Process specialist (focused on business); Dev-team; UX/UI designer, infrastructure architect and analysts are transversal.
Developers (back-end, front-end, mobile-app); Testers; Functional analyst (technical & architectural); Data analysts.
Dev-team with t-shaped competences, everyone has his core competence but also some knowledge on adjacent ones (user experience, design etc.).
Team per SM. Internal/ external
1. But some SM can follow more. External
5. Dedication on business priority or team maturity. Internal
1. Internal
4. External
1. External.
Product owner Internal, plus UCO. Fully dedicated.
Internal, fully dedicated
Internal Internal Internal. Fully dedicated
Table 35: Scrum team characteristics
Results
110
Scrum ceremonies T&I T&D Energy e-commerce Pharmaceutical
Sprint (Duration)
2 weeks but flexible_1,3,4
2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks
Sprint planning (goal definition & activities)
User story mapping; stories organized by MVP & release
Definition of OKRs, KPIs & “done”.
Initial planning and division of user stories along the product backlog
Items selection according the definition of ready.
Check list made at the project beginning, defines “done” & aligns team & stakeholders
Daily stand up (Duration, structure, comments)
Around 10mins. Done, to be done, impediments.
15mins, shifted. Done, to be done, impediments.
15 mins. Done, to be done, impediments.
Max 15mins. Done, to be done, impediments. SM & PO do not speak.
Max 15 minutes. Done, to be done and possible impediments
Sprint review (Frequency, duration, structure)
The last sprint day. Stories feedback system & demo.
Every 2 weeks, the last sprint day. Team celebration; product feedback system.
Every 2 weeks. Feedback collection, presentation of done
Every 2 weeks, among 2 last Sprint days. SM present team’s stats. Demo to PO & stakeholders.
Every 2 weeks. Team & stakeholders involved, collect feedback from stakeholders
Sprint retrospective (Frequency, structure)
(Not always) After the review. Good, bad & to be improved or legospective or star or journey. AC prioritize action items as stories for next sprint.
Last sprint day. Format & theme chosen by SM & PO in order to find the best call to actions. Feedback system.
Last sprint day. One made only with PO, the next one with PO and sponsor. Presentation of what should be changed and description of next sprint’s work
Last sprint day. Flexible but generally: Good, bad & to be improved, 10mins each on post-it. Collective discussion mediated by the SM. Call to action prioritized.
Last day of sprint, after review. Discussion of what needs to be changed, important to find at least one action to perform in the next sprint as an improvement. Use of different techniques (sad, glad, mad) to avoid boredom & monotony.
Backlog refinement
Grooming. PO negotiate with stakeholders & developers.
Negotiation of stories & to be done. Explanation of “done”.
Not necessary because teams decide backlog with PO. If needed, increase sprint of one week.
If acceptance criteria not met during Sprint review. During sprint PO can add new items into bl.
Use of a buffer at the end of sprint to solve or elude technical problems, to not stop the process anytime there is a tech problem.
Peculiar ceremonies, events or artefacts.
“Personality matching” during sprint zero for team building. Spike technique.
“liberating structure” for conflict resolution. Digital sink. Quarter business review.
“One to one” formula for solving impediments after daily stand up; “Form Storm Norm Perform” technique for team definition.
“Meet after” formula for impediments resolution (face to face meeting with SM or PO after daily). Team building self-organized.
One to one session for coaching & for feedback collection. First enlarged planning for scope & milestones definition. Buffer for peculiar impediments.
Table 36: Scrum ceremonies execution
Results
111
Scrum team: Execution
T&I T&D Energy e-commerce Pharmaceutical
Tools or techniques used
test driven development. Peer programming
Jira, charts (burn down & up, velocity)
Trello, inside teams-communication no mandatory tool
Jira, QMetry Confluence (“add on” of Atlassian).
Jira, physical dashboard
Communication Standard
No, security issues. Jira Usually Trello, but not mandatory. Informal Chats are also accepted.
Jira and less Trello. Same for each team.
Jira. Standard dashboard at the beginning, after maturity possibility to personalize it.
Ceremonies adaptation
SM&AC choose, starting from feedbacks, the right technique. Ceremonies of less mature teams can lasts more to solve individual problems.
SM & AC adapt them. Teams choose how to do the ceremonies.
Teams choose when and how ceremonies should be. But common guidelines (for the 14 teams).
In function of the situation & following a continuous improvement approach in particular for the retrospective.
Items prioritization criteria
Story mapping is made by PO & UCO to give to epics business value. Then PO & team develop stories & prioritize them according the business value. MVP & release readiness.
Business priority. Market trends.
Fibonacci series: user story identification and definition of difficulty to develop the story (from 1 to 20) made by the team itself
Time to market optimization; Technical & economic feasibility; No open points or missing information; available MVP; UX/UI ready; Story points; ROI & BE.
Prioritization made exclusively by the dedicated PO, following market trends with the total respect of rules and law dictated by the pharmaceutical industry. Release readiness.
Additional elements
Teams under R&D. Security assessment & documentation JIT, at the end. User case owner (UCO) is antipattern.
SM under HR. Not projects but products. Several self- organized teams (pauses, tools, activities).
Teams under R&D. Time boxing is key, everyone committed to respect predefined timing, MVP production at the end.
Teams choose when and how ceremonies should be.
Self-organized teams look for the missing competence in other teams, individuals may spend time also for other teams’ projects.
Success metrics Senior: Increase customer value. POs: employee committed to edge products. Working software. As R&D of AI & big data, innovative products are key: budget, time & quality of dev.
Senior: NPS, CTR, cost acquisition reduction, cost saving. Junior: Team able to be self-organized. Customer & PO satisfaction. All the “done” is reached. Responsiveness & velocity.
Product that works well, efficiency (velocity & cost saving).
Efficiency (velocity & cost savings). Market share increase.
Efficiency (velocity). Customer satisfaction. Milestones achieved.
Table 37: Scrum team execution
Results
112
4.6.2 Cultural profile
The objective of the following table is to present the most relevant subculture for each
of the six dimensions, in order to find recurrent cultural patterns and so to answer to the
first research question.
Exploiting the pattern matching technique, we have been allowed to compare the
previous identified patterns, in order to determine whether they match or differ, so to
underscore similarities and differences in the cases, based on the specific variables
identified. Therefore, a more concise answer to the first research question is represented
by the following cultural patterns:
CVM variables OCAI keywords Subculture
Dominant characteristic Extended Family Clan
Leadership style Mentoring/facilitating Clan
Management of employees Risk taking orientation Adhocracy
Organizational glue Loyalty Clan
Strategic emphasis Win the marketplace Market
Success factors Outpace competition Market
Table 39: Recurrent cultural patterns
Table 38: Cases cultural profiles
CULTURAL PROFILE
Dominant characteristic
Organizational leadership
Management of employees
Organizational glue
Strategic emphasis
Success factor
T&D SENIOR MARKET ADHOCRACY HIERARCHY
ADHOCRACY MARKET
ADHOCRACY MARKET
ADHOCRACY MARKET
T&D JUNIOR ADHOCRACY
MARKET ADHOCRACY
CLAN CLAN
ADHOCRACY CLAN
MARKET CLAN
MARKET HIERARCHY
T&I SENIOR MARKET
HIERARCHY HIERARCHY
ADHOCRACY CLAN
HIERARCHY MARKET
CLAN MARKET
ADHOCRACY
T&I JUNIOR ADHOCRACY
MARKET CLAN
CLAN ADHOCRACY
CLAN ADHOCRACY CLAN
MARKET
ENERGY CLAN
ADHOCRACY
CLAN HIERARCHY
HIERARCHY CLAN MARKET
MARKET MARKET
HIERARCHY
E-COMMERCE
CLAN MARKET
CLAN ADHOCRACY
MARKET CLAN CLAN
MARKET HIERARCHY
PHARMA CLAN
MARKET CLAN
ADHOCRACY HIERARCHY
CLAN MARKET
MARKET CLAN
MARKET
Results
113
SCRUM PROFILE
T&D SENIOR T&D JUNIOR T&I SENIOR T&I JUNIOR ENERGY E-COMMERCE PHARMACEUTICAL
Commitment Be proactive in finding solutions to the problems
Learn self-organization and agile mindset
Deliver MVPs Respect the releases
Respect rules and guidelines
Respect of the normative boundaries
Respect deadlines
Working together to the objective
Focus Share the same vision Share the same
vision
Improve budget, time and quality of development
Nothing to highlight Find new business opportunities
Deliver solutions faster
Job to be done
Courage Take tasks assigned to a colleague
Spur decision making People are encouraged to propose new ideas
Nothing to highlight Share proactively impediments
Nothing to highlight
Sharing ideas to the customer
Openness Find compromises between team members
Proactively ask for support
Express thoughts and impediments
Enhance relations between members
Absence of prevarications
Embrace seniors’ expertise
Find new paths to reach the objective
Respect Colleagues’ values and time
Visibility should be left to everyone
Avoid aggressive behaviours
Respect the roles of others
Weighting proposal of adjustments
Leaving no one behind
Others’ opinions & professionality
Transparency Everyone must be able to follow others work.
Nothing to highlight Share the current state of work
Transparency of processes
Objectives and timeboxes are clear
Process to reach the objective
Everyone always informed on the new tasks
Adaptation
Adapt ceremonies in function of the objectives and the context
Adapt ceremonies, techniques and tools to the team
Ceremonies & communication to facilitate interaction with remote workers
Ceremonies and communication adapted for remote workers
Allocation of members in function of what is challenging for them
Ceremonies adapted in function of people
Adaptation of ceremonies and tools in function of people
Self-organization
Micro-management is avoided
Avoid micro-management
Autonomy limited by need of coordination
No technique is imposed
Autonomous in managing deliverables
Employees choose the team to belong
Detecting the missing internal competencies
Cross functionality
Everyone has its specific role and is expert in his field
Possibility to learn from similar roles
Nothing to highlight Cross-pollination Trainings for competences development
Seniors facilitate juniors’ work
T-shaped competences
Customer centricity
Receive feedback to adjust the direction
Understand the right direction
Create value for the customer
Nothing to highlight Nothing to highlight Continuous discussion with him
Continuously consulted for feedbacks
Continuous improvement
Share ideas & best practices externally
Experimentation to achieve greater results
Iterative thinking and customer feedbacks
Nothing to highlight Learn from failures Iterative thinking Learn from unsuccess and its causes
Waste reduction
Fast communication Costs savings
Nothing to Highlight Just In Time documentation
Just In Time documentation
Increase process effectiveness
Nothing to highlight
Nothing to highlight
Table 40: Scrum profile
Results
114
4.7 Cross case findings
Connecting results from table 40, where each case defines the scrum variables
investigated, and tables 38 and 39, where cultural patterns are highlighted, it is possible
to extract relevant information to answer to the second research question.
Hereafter the most remarkable findings that will be better investigated in the following
paragraphs:
• F1: Coexistence of competing cultures inside the organization, as every case
defines the workplace as an informal and friendly environment, in correlation with
result-oriented success factors.
o F.1.1: most of the cases tend to have the clan culture as the most relevant
subculture.
o F.1.2: in all the different cases, the organizations invest a lot of their effort
on overcoming their competitors on the market, and so on their result-
orientation.
▪ F.1.2.1: no case shows an aggressive leadership style.
• F2: The management of employees’ dimension is always oriented to risk taking
and innovation, so to the adhocracy culture.
• F3: Hierarchical rates directly depends from the team’s structure and composition.
Indeed, the need of coordination is higher in the T&I case where many workers
are remote and in the Energy case where not all roles are allocated to one team,
so where there are architects, designers and analysts with transversal roles to
teams.
• F4: Considering the embedded approach, so the multiple unit of analysis within
the same context, the correlation of the scrum master’s and team’s maturity
impact over the dominant team’s subculture: seniority leads to a market and a
results orientation.
Results
115
4.7.1 Co-existence of competing values cultures
Our first finding highlights how, taking into consideration the agile teams interviewed, the
clan culture is the most relevant one, in terms of its use and values shared inside the team.
However, there is always a coexistence of competing values, meaning that relevant
cultures are plotted in opposite quadrants: in fact, the working place is informal and
friendly, the leadership style used by Scrum masters tries to exemplify teamworking,
leveraging on mentoring to shape the mindset of team members, and facilitating the way
of working; at the same time, success factors and strategic emphasis of the teams
interviewed are oriented to goal achievement at the defined milestones, to acquire a
dominant position in the market and to satisfy customers’ needs.
In particular, we found out that three out of six competing value dimensions are
principally related to the clan subculture: the dominant characteristic, the leadership style
and the organizational glue. This result is reflected by how teams have implemented the
Scrum methodology. Focusing on the team members, they have the courage to express
feedbacks (openness Scrum value), and thanks to this the general way of working is
improved: everyone in the team has the possibility to share his own ideas, creating a
proactive interaction between colleagues from which members can learn from the ones
with more expertise (Clan dominant characteristic of extended family). On the other hand,
Scrum masters give to teams the responsibility to self-organize (Self-organization): by
doing this, Scrum masters are able to avoid micromanagement, which sometimes may
limit employees’ motivation, moreover individuals have the freedom to choose how to
build the teams and, above all, how to perform the different ceremonies, so the Scrum
master acts only in case of need (Clan leadership style of mentoring). Finally, Scrum
masters always strive to increase the loyalty of people, because it is what creates this
sense of extended family inside the team and increases team’s wellbeing. Loyalty is
enhanced by the transparency of communication (which consequently enhances
individual participation and avoids potential misalignments) and also by the coexistence
of members with different competences in the same team, because it creates horizontal
learning, enhances synergies and makes everyone feel as unique and useful for the team
growth.
Results
116
Regarding the result orientation, evidences coming from the interviews point out how, in
all the cases studied, the success factors of the projects are defined according to the
market culture: to become the market leader by outpacing the competition. In fact, teams
must be able to continuously improve their solutions, because the pivot of their success
is to satisfy the customer’s expectations (customer centricity, continuous improvement).
So, Scrum masters are called to propose technical training to employees, increase velocity
and resilience of the teams in order to be able to respond quickly and with flexibility to
potential changes of the demand (Market strategic emphasis and success factor). It is
important to note that no cases showed evidences of the usage of an aggressive
leadership style: this may be the consequence of the large usage of a more preferred
mentoring leadership style, that facilitates team existence and favours team well-being
instead of threatening it.
In order to answer to the coexistence of this competing cultures, it is important to deeply
investigate their nature and look for possible connections: after the analysis of the within
findings, we found out that those two cultures are implicitly interconnected. In particular,
the market culture imposes the need of high-skilled team members in order to outpace
competition, and the only way to develop members’ skills is by doing continuous technical
trainings: the success factor of the clan culture is human development, so technical
training can be seen as the tool to satisfy success factors of both market and clan cultures.
On the other hand, the clan culture focuses on creating the above mentioned informal
working environment (Clan dominant characteristic) and on increasing the loyalty of
individuals: a direct consequence is the increase in motivation and so an increase of
productivity. This means that the creation of the ideal clan culture environment can
potentially bring to the creation of an effective solution, and consequently succeed in the
market (Market strategic emphasis and success factor).
4.7.2 Management of employees encourages risk taking to drive
innovation
This second finding underlies how, generally, employees are managed with the constant
objective to find new opportunities, to bring innovation both in products and in
procedures (Adhocracy management of employees of risk taking).
Results
117
However, an important clarification is needed: each informant pointed out that the risk is
never taken at the individual level, but at the team one. This clearly confirms what
explained in the previous finding - F1.1 - since everything is conceived and organized
considering the team as whole and not as sum of separate entities. Against this
background, even though the individuals make proposals, it is the team that decides
whether to pursue the riskier alternative, as it will be the one accountable in case of failure
(and of course success).
Therefore, employees are encouraged to take risks (courage Scrum value) and to focus on
experimentation, because it is from unknown challenges that it is possible to generate
innovation to better surprise, and consequently satisfy, the customer.
This generate two positive externalities, because in the first place they will be committed
to be proactive and responsible of own actions. Secondly, they will improve their
approach to failure. Indeed, if from one side they are encouraged to take risks, on the
other side they are forced to fail fast (Waste reduction), for two main reasons: first of all,
they can’t risk the company/department sake or to push the customer base to churn, and
then because they have to learn from those unsuccess, the faster is the learning from
market and customers’ feedbacks and the greater will be the competitive advantage
against competitors.
Moreover, employees are stimulated in taking personal lessons from failures, like being
more proactive, understanding own attitudes and in suffering less pressure to better
perform.
4.7.3 Hierarchical rates depend on teams’ structure
Broadly, the hierarchical culture is the one presenting the lowest values among the four
different cultures. This is due to the fact that in an agile and dynamic context, formal and
standard procedures, compelling documentations and stability of relationships do not find
much room (Beck et al. 2001, Schwaber et al. 2011). First of all, the adaptation scrum pillar
is basically in contraposition with everything that can be considered as extremely
standardized and formalized; secondly, it is the agile manifesto itself that strongly advise
to put in a subordinate level “comprehensive documentation”. Moreover, considering a
dynamic context like the tech intensive, the digital, in which developers receive several
Results
118
jobs offers, it is quite hard to recognize stability and security of employment as key aspects
to guarantee.
However, in peculiar cases, the need of coordination may arise, like in the T&I case where
many workers are remote and in the Energy case where not all roles are allocated to one
team, so where there are architect, designers and analysts that are transversal figures to
the whole agile organization.
The T&I case is a good example of the emphasis placed in making all the efforts possible
to keep everyone aligned, because their teams’ structure is composed by some units hired
as freelancers that works remotely from their home. For this reason, practitioners are
really committed to spread respect towards rules and guidelines, to continuously settle
and update them in order to overcome the so-called organizational inertia.
Regarding the Energy case, the need of coordination is combined with the need of
exploitation of synergies and efforts dedicated of transversal figures. Infrastructural
architect, UX/UI designers and some analysts are not dedicated to one specific team,
instead they have their own sub-team that is called to support operatively the Scrum
teams. Being the final client the same for all the Scrum teams, the transversal figures need
to be aware and updated about the work of all the teams, without forgetting timeboxes,
which means that roles and tasks need to be clearly assigned; therefore, what is pivotal
for them are transparency of rules and advancements, clear definition of roles, so
accountability and personal responsibility for own tasks.
Results
119
4.7.5 Seniority leads to results orientation
This last finding will narrow the focus on the cases included in the embedded approach:
having the possibility to analyse two different units of analysis for each case, we would
like to compare evidences coming from the four Scrum masters in order to find similarities
and differences between Junior Scrum masters and Senior Scrum masters.
As shown by figure 17, the results of
both junior Scrum masters are similar,
as the relevant cultures are clearly the
clan and the adhocracy ones, with a
medium emphasis on the result
orientation and neglecting the
hierarchical culture.
The reasons behind these evidences are multiple: first of all, scrum masters not fully
mature in using the Scrum methodology are usually assigned to teams composed by less-
mature Scrum users. The main objective of the Scrum master is to facilitate the
achievement of the “done” requested at each Sprint: this is why Junior Scrum masters
invest their efforts on the teams well-being, through the creation of a friendly
environment, inspiring the right mindset (Clan leadership style of facilitator), and on the
adaptation of the Scrum ceremonies in function of people (Adaptation), in order to obtain
easier results (Market orientation) by facilitating meetings execution. On the other hand,
there is a continuous research from their part in pushing teams to feel as entrepreneurs
of their own product and so on experimentation: their objective is to create a solid
relationship between teams and customers, in order to have a continuous flow of
feedbacks regarding their solutions, that can be useful to prepare the solutions to possible
market evolutions and to create learning opportunities from client’s feedbacks.
Figure 16: OCAI space juniors
T&I Case
T&D Case
Results
120
Senior Scrum masters instead,
having a high expertise regarding
the Scrum methodology, are
usually assigned to teams that
already worked before using
Scrum, with urgent results to be
delivered. Therefore, the need of
a mentoring leadership is
important but not fundamental,
since teams are supposed to be
already mastering the
methodology, its way of
approaching to problems and
working principles.
Here, the only objective of the Scrum master is to get the job done with positive results
on the market (Market orientation). The teams assigned to Senior Scrum masters already
reached a high degree of self-organization, and so this specific context underpins the
change of role of the Scrum master, from facilitating the operations to obtaining
efficiently the results requested. In fact, teams are continuously monitored, individuals
are assigned to challenging objectives and must be proactive in finding solutions
(Commitment Scrum value). They are constantly trying to avoid time wastes, so Just in
time documentation is produced when needed (Waste reduction).
In conclusion, the maturity of Scrum masters and teams doesn’t have an impact on the
success definition of the solution, as all the projects have the final objective of reaching a
competitive position in the market; their expertise, instead, changes the way of working
of the Scrum master, from a facilitating approach to a competitive one, adapting the
teams to the external market and to the business objective.
T&I Case T&D Case
Figure 17: OCAI space seniors
Discussion
121
5 Discussion
In this section we will detect, for each of our findings, whether they show similarities with
the extant literature and, in case, extend its boundaries.
Concerning the first finding: “Coexistence of competing cultures inside the organization,
as every case defines the workplace as an informal and friendly environment, in
correlation with result-oriented success factors” we can note, first of all, that Cameron
and Quinn theories corroborate it, since, as affirmed in their books, the Competing Values
Model is unlikely to reflect only one subculture, rather it stresses a reasonable balance
between opposite orientations; although some cultural types may be more dominant
than others, imposing paradoxical requirements for effective organizations (Cameron,
1986).
This evidence exemplifies the need of an ordinary balance between the two highlighted
subcultures in using the Scrum methodology, as also stated by Huisman et al. (2007) and
Iivari and Iivari (2011). In particular, concerning the Agile literature, we are in line with
what has been affirmed by Cockburn (2001) and Tolfo et al. (2011), regarding the
emphatization of clan values like teamworking, participation, sharing feedbacks, trust,
motivation, flexibility, and people adaptation; we are also in line with reference to the
market values defined in the Agile Manifesto, which indicates as essential the respect of
timeboxed deadlines, team effectiveness, goal achievement and productivity
enhancement.
So, going even deeper with our first two co-findings “clan culture as the mostly
widespread and market culture as the secondly diffused” we confirm, with the due
caution, that the evidences of our research are in line with those of Iivari and Iivari (2011)
and Othman (2016). However, attention must be addressed to their objective, since they
aimed to identify whether or not the Scrum methodology is compatible with each of the
four subcultures.
Instead, regarding the third co-finding “an aggressive leadership style has never been
found”, we append something to the extant literature, because we are stating that, in
order to be focalised to goals achievement, it is not necessary an aggressive and
Discussion
122
competitive driven leadership style; yet it is important to stimulate employees in working
compactly together, respecting the grid of the Scrum principles.
Like the first macro-finding and the third co-finding, our second evidence “the
management of employees is frequently risk oriented” is in line with the cultural theory
and compounds the Scrum one. So, from the cultural side, the CVF theory of the
probability to find more than one subculture is confirmed; from the Agile side we add
that, in order to establish iterative thinking and incremental development, typical of these
methodologies, it becomes important to support people in experimenting and not being
afraid of unsuccess.
Concerning the third finding, we both confirm and append the extant Scrum literature. In
particular, low hierarchical rates support that this subculture is dysfunctional and
incompatible with the use of the Scrum methodology (Iivari and Iivari, 2011; Othman et
al., 2016; Gupta et al., 2019). But, when they are higher, it is due to circumstances beyond
the team control, like the team structure and composition. So, our contribute is that, even
using Scrum, a true and great need of coordination arises when there are remote workers
or when key Scrum roles are transversal and so not dedicated to a specific team.
Lastly, regarding the maturity related finding, it is important to underline that, in order to
acquire greater validity, more evidences are needed as support; however, Huang et al.
(2010) demonstrated that their hypotheses: “The level of software process maturity
moderates the relationship between the clan culture and software process improvement
deployment” is statistically, but weakly, supported by their findings.
This indirectly confirms our finding: the more a team is mature, the less it will follow a
clan culture; by consequence, giving for granted our first finding (coexistence of clan and
market cultures), in correspondence of clan rates decrease, a growth on market values
coincides. As we have already explained, this is due by the lower need a team has on being
instructed in mastering the Scrum methodology, so a less emphasis on mentoring, cross-
contamination, self-organization and team well-being is required, at the expenses of being
more competitive and focused in overcoming the dynamic external context.
Discussion
123
Parallelly, concerning the enabled values, Strode et al. (2009) found: “the organization
values feedback and learning; social interaction in the organization is trustful,
collaborative, and competent; the project manager acts as a facilitator; the management
style is that of leadership and collaboration; the organization values that teamwork is
flexible, participative and encourages social interaction; the organization enables
empowerment of people; the organization is results oriented; leadership in the
organization is entrepreneurial, innovative, and risk-taker; and the organization is based
on loyalty, mutual trust and commitment” (Strode et al., 2009). Besides the previous list,
we can add: teams well-being should be emphasized, also providing them a discreet level
of self-organization; communication transparency inside teams has to be adopted; the
inclusion of different competencies inside teams gives the possibility to individuals to
grow by horizontal learning from their peers.
Conclusion
124
6 Conclusion
Thanks to our research, we have been able to deeply investigate the very diverse agile
world present in the Italian context. We have realized that even if everyone accepts and
do its best to respect the agile principles, each organization has its own way to exploit the
benefits and the way of working that agile can bring.
In this section we would like, first, to provide possible practical implication of this research
to Scrum practitioners and then to highlight its main limitations and correspondent
potential directions for future methodological adjustments.
6.1 Implications
The objective of this paragraph is to provide to Scrum masters possible implications of our
research, as direct consequences of the findings described in the previous section. The coexistence of the clan subculture and the market one implicitly demonstrates the
importance of technical trainings, horizontal learning and cross-competence pollination
in order to increase loyalty, mutual trust, develop a friendly environment and, at the same
time, increase commitment of individuals, which is translated in being more competitive
on the market with a product that effectively satisfies customer needs. This is why we
would like to suggest Scrum masters to continuously incentivize team members to do
trainings of different nature: in general, the result obtained will be beneficial for both
individuals and the company, as human growth and efficiency will be enhanced.
Another valuable implication regards the risk-taking mindset of team members: generally,
every case studied shows a strong willingness of the Product owner and Scrum master to
listen to new opportunities and new ideas coming from team members. This is why we
would like to advise Scrum masters to give more space to individuals’ idea propositions:
we believe that the Sprint Retrospective is surely a good moment to share ideas within
the team, but another moment can be placed in the middle of the Sprint to discuss about
potential innovations to process and product, in order to give the possibility to implement
eventual changes during the current sprint and not after the work done.
Conclusion
125
Then, an important suggestion can be provided to Scrum masters, to agile practitioners in
general, but also to those called to drive the agile transformation in terms of hierarchical
weights within teams.
In particular, even though general guidelines for internal communication are helpful,
imposing formal and standard procedures, useless production of comprehensive
documentation and, above all, letting shine the idea of team members, are not pairs and
equals.
Charging teams with harsh rules to comply with, hampers the realisation of a key scrum
pillar: the adaptation one. Being constrained obstructs the possibility to shape ceremonies
and tools in function of people and, in some cases, to lose responsiveness to market
changes.
Moreover, having the impression that only the opinion of a restricted number of workers
is taken into consideration, affects the respect and the openness towards others’ thoughts
and feedbacks and thus reduce the willingness to share innovative ideas or take risks with
a team they do not feel to belong.
Often Scrum masters are dedicated to a set of teams with variable maturity degree. This
led us to advise a customized approach in function of their ability in mastering the Scrum
principles.
The more a team is new in working with agile methodologies, the more it will be needed
a mentoring approach where teamwork, participation and horizontal learning are
facilitated. Instead, when a team is already mature, the Scrum master can shift his
behaviour towards a competitive approach, more oriented to business objective
achievements and market dominance.
Moreover, considering the dynamicity typical of the industries under consideration, we
suggest Scrum master to keep employees motivated with challenging objectives and
committed to the organization aims, especially all those (mostly developers) that have a
wide labour market capable to let them switch employment at utmost ease.
Conclusion
126
6.2 Limitations and future research
Even if the findings of this research are interesting and informative, the results should be
interpreted with the study’s limitations in mind: for each of them we propose possible
directions for future researches.
A preliminary consideration refers to different and sometimes fuzzy definitions of agile
and culture boundaries present in literature, which may affect results generalization.
Anyway, especially generalizability and internal validity (Eisenhardt, 1989) are challenged
by our data set, because the interviews/screenshots are obtained only in one time of time,
and by the numerosity of cases and of industries considered, that could not grant
statistical significance.
Not repeating the interviews in different moments of the team life cycle can neglect some
key aspects, related to the evolution of values investigated in function of the acquired
maturity in mastering the methodology. So, for future researches we suggest to at least
duplicate the experiment after a discrete amount of time, with the same interviewee, in
order not to jump to maturity conclusions without enough evidence.
Our sample analysis suggests findings that should be an approximation of the result for
the overall population, however there is always a probability of error, which increases
when the sample is small compared to the universe, the phenomenon is uncertain, and
the universe is diverse.
In exploratory researches, generally, the mostly used sampling class is the so called “non-
probability sampling” that can be distinguished in “judgement sampling”, “convenience
sampling” or “quota sampling” (Strauss and Corbin, 1997) because of the complexity in
reaching the selected segment of population (Henry, 1990).
To either save time or save money, in this sampling class, informants are chosen from the
population through subjective criteria, e.g. not 1000 people randomly selected but 20 that
are experts in a field or that are more accessible. Hence, it is not necessary representative
of the population and it is potentially biased.
Conclusion
127
In particular, we implemented the “convenience sampling” technique, since we
developed our selection process according to criteria of time, cost and easiness of reach.
The potential pool of participants has been identified exploiting, most of all, the LinkedIn
social media, looking for workers that are currently employed as Scrum masters,
dedicated to cross functional teams and available to perform the interview, in the Milan
metropolitan area.
So, even if the Milan metropolitan area can be a good representation of the Italian
context, it would be appropriate in the future to perform a wider research in the whole
territory. Regarding the “convenience sampling” technique, its use might lead to a sample
selection bias, attempting to undermine internal validity for differences or similarities
found in the sample at hand, because of a non-random informant selection in a restricted
geographical area.
In addition, since it is clear that people make voluntary choices on whether or not to be
present on the social platform or to express the job position or even to answer to our
requests, there might exist a self-selection bias; nevertheless, especially in exploratory
studies, scholars (like Gupta & George, 2016) leverage on LinkedIn in order to enter in
contact with the targeted industry professionals, who otherwise are difficult to reach.
It is also important to warn the reader that there are considerable cultural and
management differences between Italian and non-Italian firms (Hofstede, 2001), caution
must be exercised while making generalizations of the findings highlighted from this study
to non-Italian-based firms.
Case studies gather data mainly from informant words and from ethnographic/
behavioural observations, to provide a broad definition of the phenomenon and in order
to support, confirm or disprove the findings via data triangulation: it might be helpful to
lever also on a quantitative analysis, which is totally missing in this study and that can
ensure stronger statistical significance. Granting greater statistical significance gives a
solid support to the research, since it proves the reliability of results and not random
outcomes.
The missing quantitative database shall include not only the aforementioned repeated
experiments, but also multiple units of analysis taken from the same company, in order
Conclusion
128
to generalize about the common values empowered by the same ambience; it should also
include multiple point of views from the same industry, in order to highlight eventual
common patterns in the same context; above all, a quantitative cross-industry analysis
should be performed, as it could provide a deeper generalization about the set of values
enabled by the Scrum methodology.
So, future research should be enriched with data from multiple sources, especially non-
LinkedIn sources and quantitative datasets, in order to provide further rigor and findings
that complement study’s results.
Another critical issue is represented by the fact that this research is placed among the
stream of literature that splits agile practices in two components, the social and the
technical one. As already stated in the open gap analysis, the focus in this study is intended
to investigate how the scrum methodology, in particular its social side, enables recurrent
cultural patterns of team subculture. For this reason, we believe that missing data
regarding how the scrum methodology, via its technical practices, has an impact on the
team subculture might cause information leakage about the potential set of values that
are particularly enabled by technical procedures. So, in order to avoid the risk of an
incomplete evaluation we advise to embed in the whole research process also the impact
of technical agile practices.
Then, clearly, being our unit of analysis represented by the team, we did not include inter-
team factors or, better, we did not include interconnections between teams managed by
different scrum master, but only those teams guided by the same scrum master. So, for
example, we did not encompass inter-team goals objectives, inter-team conflicts, inter-
team trainings, inter-team job rotations and knowledge sharing. As we suggested before
by replicating the interviews within the same company, it might be possible to overcome
this issue.
In conclusion, for future researches, starting from those limitations we would suggest to
study both social and technical agile practices, by interviewing more informants taken
from the same company, in several time stages, and to have a representative population
of different companies for each industry under scrutiny.
Appendix
129
Appendix
A. Questionnaire
Scrum assessment
• Present yourself, your role inside the organization and inside the teams
• What does it mean, in your opinion, to be agile? Which are the most important
values in order to be agile?
• Do you think that the 4 key-values of agile are respected in the
organization?(individuals and interactions over processes and tools; working
software over comprehensive documentation; customer collaboration over
contract negotiation; responding to change over following a plan) which one for
you is the most important?
• How many people are inside a team?
• Are your teams multifunctional? How are they created?
• How does an agile project start? How does specificities of the final product and
their priorities are chosen?
• How much does a sprint generally last? Can you describe what happens inside a
sprint?
• How much frequently the sprint backlog does change and how?
• What does happen generally during the daily stand up?
• How often sprint retrospective is done? What does it happen inside a
retrospective?
• In case of problems or delays in the actual sprint, which corrective actions are
taken and how?
• Is there a unique way of working/communicating for the teams, a common
standard?? (transparency)
Appendix
130
• Do you customize procedure and events in function of teams’ characteristics?
(adaptation)
• What does it need (time, tools etc.) to prepare all the different ceremonies? (stand
up, retrospective etc.)
• Who is the product owner and which is his role inside the organization?
Cultural discussion
• Which is the dominant characteristic of the organization? is it like an extended
family for the employees? Is it more an entrepreneurial place or only paying
attention to the result achieved? Does formal procedure have an important role?
• Which leadership style do you think is the most diffused in the organization? Does
it exemplify Mentoring, entrepreneurship, aggressive result-orientation or
coordination/efficiency?
• Which are the most valuable characteristics of the management style between
teamwork/facilitation, individual risk taking/innovation, hard driving
competitiveness between people/high demand and security of
employment/stability of relationships?
• What is the organizational glue that hold the organization together? Is it
loyalty/mutual trust, commitment to innovation and development, goal
accomplishment and formal rules/policies?
• What does the organization emphasize the most? openness/participation,
acquisition of new resources/search for valuable opportunities, competitive
actions/achievements and permanence/stability
• On which basis does the organization define a success? Development of human
resources/employee commitment, having the most unique product/innovator,
winning in the marketplace/outpacing the competition and efficiency/smooth
scheduling/low cost production
Appendix
131
Scrum as enabler
• Which was the tool that enabled the successful formation of the team?
• Was there the necessity to increase ceremonies/using specific tool in order to
create and “train” the new teams?
• How do you solve conflicts inside the team?
• Do you think that using a specific tool/performing a ceremony in a specific way can
help to solve those conflicts?
• How do you think that the use of scrum can impact teams’ culture?
• Which kind of value (between teamwork, entrepreneurship, efficiency and
competitiveness) do you think it is enabled by the use of Scrum methodology?
• Keep in mind those definitions from the Scrum guide:
Scrum values: commitment, focus, courage, openness and respect.
People personally commit to achieving the goals of the Scrum Team.
The Scrum Team members have courage to do the right thing and work on
tough problems.
Everyone focuses on the work of the Sprint and the goals of the Scrum
Team.
The Scrum Team and its stakeholders agree to be open about all the work
and the challenges with performing the work.
Scrum Team members respect each other to be capable, independent
people.
Scrum pillars: transparency, adaptation, inspection.
Scrum team must be: self-organized and cross functional.
Appendix
132
Structured questionnaire
COMPETING VALUES FRAMEWORK QUESTIONNAIRE (from Cameron & Quinn, 2011)
The following questionnaire consists in six sections. Each section has four alternatives. Divide 100
points (for each section) among these four alternatives depending on the extent to which this
alternative is similar to your organization. With organization we mean the unit of analysis under
investigation, i.e. the set of teams working with SCRUM in your company.
1. Dominant Characteristics Points
A The organization is a very personal place. It is like an extended family.
People seem to share a lot of personal information and features
B The organization is a very dynamic entrepreneurial place. People are willing
to stick out their necks
C The organization is very results oriented. A major concern is getting the job
done. People are very competitive and achievement- oriented
D The organization is a very controlled and structured place. Formal
procedures generally govern what people do
Total =100
2. Organizational Leadership
A The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify a
mentoring, facilitating, or nurturing
B The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify
entrepreneurship, innovation, or risk taking
C The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify a no-
nonsense, aggressive, results-oriented focus
D The leadership in the organization is generally considered to exemplify
coordinating, organizing, or smooth-running efficiency
Total =100
3. Management of employees
A The management style in the organization is characterized by teamwork,
consensus and facilitation
B The management style in the organization is characterized by individual risk
taking, innovation, freedom, and the uniqueness
C The management style in the organization is characterized by hard-driving
competitiveness, high demand, and achievement
D The management style in the organization is characterized by security of
employment, conformity, predictability and stability in relationships
Total =100
Appendix
133
4. Organizational Glue
A The glue that holds the organization together is loyalty and mutual trust.
Commitment to this organization runs high
B The glue that holds the organization together is commitment to innovation
and development. There is an emphasis on being on the cutting edge.
C The glue that holds the organization is an emphasis on achievement and
goal accomplishment
D The glue that holds the organization together is formal rules and policies.
Maintaining a smooth- running organization is important.
Total =100
5. Strategic Emphases
A The organization emphasizes human development. High trust, openness,
and participation persist.
B The organization emphasizes acquiring new resources and creating new
challenges. Trying new things and prospecting for opportunities are valued.
C The organization emphasizes competitive actions and achievement. Hitting
stretch targets and winning in the market place are dominant.
D The organization emphasizes permanence and stability. Efficiency, control
and smooth operations are important
Total =100
6. Criteria of Success
A The organization defines success on the basis of the development of human
resources, teamwork, employee commitment, and concern for people
B The organization defines success on the basis of having the most unique or
newest products. It is a product leader and innovator
C The organization defines success on the basis of winning in the marketplace
and outpacing in the competition. Competitive market leadership is key
D The organization defines success on the basis of efficiency. Dependable
delivery, smooth scheduling and low-cost production are critical.
Total =100
Appendix
134
B. Coding trees: cultural profile and scrum profile
T&D case Senior
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions subculture
Ambience is friendly DC: Extended family
Empathy Clan culture
Listening LS: Mentoring
Continuous dialogue
Regard to other values and time ME: Teamwork
Explain the problem and the solution OG: Loyalty
Share ideas SE: Participation
Open innovation DC: Entrepreneurial place
Sharing new ideas let you reason outside the box
Interest in bringing innovation
Adhocracy culture
Entrepreneur of the own product
People are encouraged in proposition LS: exemplify innovation
Everyone is able to follow other work
But fail fast ME: risk taking orientation
Proactivity in presenting and solving issues
Taking others’ tasks
Learn From the unsuccess
Each one has his role and is expert in his field OG: cutting edge
To meet new potential needs SE: prospecting new opportunities
Skilling and re-skilling
Share ideas and best practices externally
Line up with external digital players
Tools are key for coordination LS: coordination Hierarchical culture Look for compromises ME: stability of
relationship Punctuality
Continuous track SE: control
Cost savings SF: efficiency
Brilliant, young and full of ideas employees are ro DC: result orientation
Market culture Scrum motivates result orientation
Risk but fail fast ME: competitive
Taking others’ tasks
Proactivity in presenting and solving issues
Negotiation of stories charge OG: goal accomplishment
Challenging objectives but feasible
Enabled by tools
Well trained people need to impose own ideas SE: win the marketplace
Share same vision
Train employees to be better than competitors SF: outpace compet
Appendix
135
Codes from text Values Overarching
Challenging objectives but feasible Commitment
Share same vision
Scrum values Scrum motivates result orientation
Proactivity in presenting and solving issues
Taking others’ tasks Courage
To share impediments
Everyone is able to follow other work Openness
Explain the problem and the solution
Find compromises
Share same roadmap Focus
Regard to other values and time Respect
Punctuality
Negotiation of stories charge in relation to team velocity Adaptation
Resilience of actions and frameworks
Scrum pillars Ceremonies and tools are adapted in function of objectives and context
Continuous monitoring via burn down, burn up and velocity charts
Transparency
Same communication standard between developers and SMEs generates cues of business
Explain the problem and the solution
In big companies you can’t expect that everyone sees each dashboard
No micromanagement Self-organization
Trainings in function of context Cross-functionality
Scrum maturity
Each one has his role and is expert in his field
Only customer collaboration Customer centricity
Near to his needs
Lean principles Feedback to understand if the direction is right
Value of the community
Share ideas and best practices with external companies and partners Continuous improvement
Line up with external digital players
Looking for compromises Waste reduction
“liberating structure” for conflict resolution
Cost savings
Fast communication
Appendix
136
T&D case Junior
Codes from text CVF dimensions subculture
improve way of working DC: Extended family
Create a positive mood Clan culture ask for support (proactivity)
LS: Mentoring Inspire the right mindset
Everyone feels unique in terms of competences ME: Teamwork
Rowing in the same direction
Stakeholders feedbacks helps in adjusting orientation and hold organization since you know you are not wasting efforts
OG: Loyalty
All team members must be collocated SE: Participation
Teams propose how to
Leave visibility to everyone
Support horizontal learning SF: Human development
Open people mind to new ideas
Enhancing cross-contamination
Skilling and reskilling
Stimulation of pioneering spirit DC: Entrepreneurial place
Spur decision making
Entrepreneur of the own product Adhocracy culture Ownership of initiatives LS: innovation
Experimentation creates learning opportunities from market and client’s feedbacks
ME: risk taking orientation
Learn From failed experiments
High impact factor of skills OG:cutting edge
Experimentation is pushed SE: prospecting new opportunities
Unsuccess is awarded
Learning from unsuccess as opportunity for the next sprint
Responsiveness and velocity SF: being product leader
satisfy new customer needs
Strategic management push towards to be tech leader
Numerical approach SE: control Hierarchical culture All the “done” is reached SF: efficiency
Exploring new paths in dynamic context leads to grater goals DC: result orient
Market culture
Introduction of procedures and tools only if strictly needed ME: competitive
Trainings in function of context
See that there is always something to do OG: goal accomplishment Share same vision
To reach the business objective SE: win the marketplace
Responsiveness thanks to cross skills
Train employees to be better than competitors SF: beat compet
Appendix
137
Codes from text Values Overarching
Challenging objectives but feasible Commitment
Scrum motivates result orientation
Proactivity in presenting and solving issues
Taking others’ tasks Courage
To share impediments
Everyone is able to follow other work Openness
Explain the problem and the solution
Find compromises
Share same roadmap Focus
Share same vision
Regard to other values and time Respect
Punctuality
Negotiation of stories charge in relation to team velocity Adaptation
Resilience of actions and frameworks
Scrum pillars Ceremonies and tools are adapted in function of objectives and context
Continuous monitoring via burn down, burn up and velocity charts
Transparency
Same communication standard between developers and SMEs generates cues of business
Explain the problem and the solution
In big companies you can’t expect that everyone sees each dashboard
No micromanagement Self-organization
Trainings in function of context Cross-functionality
Scrum maturity
Each one has his role and is expert in his field
Only customer collaboration Customer centricity
Near to his needs
Lean principles Feedback to understand if the direction is right
Value of the community
Share ideas and best practices with external companies and partners Continuous improvement
Line up with external digital players
Looking for compromises Waste reduction
“liberating structure” for conflict resolution
Cost savings
Fast communication
Appendix
138
T&I case Senior
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions CVF subculture
People can speak without any dominance or bias DC: Extended family
Autonomy is limited by need of coordination LS: Mentoring Clan culture
Encourage straightforwardness
Share current state of work ME: Teamwork
Not to be aggressive and having understanding of others
OG: Loyalty
Express thoughts, impediments SE: Participation
Constant collaboration
Everyone is called to speak
People are encouraged in exposing impediments
Cross-pollination SF: Human development
Mandatory technical trainings (workshop and online tests)
People are encouraged to propose new ideas, the best idea win
LS: exemplify innovation
Doesn’t matter from where the idea came from Adhocracy culture Design thinking
SE: prospecting new opportunities
Be aware of the continuous changing trends
Elasticity in structure
Create value for the customer SF: being product leader
Ability to respond to change
Committed to follow rules, as some members are in remote
DC: formal place
No misalignments, continuous settlement for remote workers
LS: exemplify coordination
Hierarchical culture
Continuous needs of updates
Need to overcome inertia
Common guidelines OG: rules
Monitor that things are getting done SE: control
Budget, time and quality of development must improve
SF: efficiency
Goals must be clear and achievable DC: result orientation
Customer must communicate that something useful is done
Acquisition of analytical mindset SE: win the marketplace
Market culture
Capability to associate the right value of features in function of the moment and the context
Always improve responsiveness
Enabling iterative thinking SF: outpace competition
Top managers push to market assault
Appendix
139
Codes from text Values Overarching
Deliver MVPs Commitment
Respecting releases Scrum values
“Spike” technique to better understand how to reach the objective
Acquisition of analytical mindset Courage
People are encouraged to propose new ideas, the best idea win
Express thoughts, impediments Openness
Expose own issues
Everyone is called to speak
Budget, time and quality of development must improve Focus
Always improve responsiveness
Not to be aggressive and having understanding of others
Respect
People can speak without any dominance or bias
Starting from feedbacks, the right techniques are chosen
Adaptation
Adapt ceremonies and communication Above all for remote workers Scrum pillars Elasticity in structure
Share current state of work
Transparency
No misalignments, Continuous settlement for remote workers
Autonomy is limited by need of coordination Self-organization
Cross-pollination Cross-functionality
Create value for the customer
Customer centricity
Increase value to the customer
Customer must communicate that something useful is done
Lean principles
Customer feedbacks for continuous improvements Continuous improvement
Enabling iterative thinking
Express feedbacks to avoid conflicts Waste reduction
Encourage straightforwardness
Documentation Just in time
No too much room for mentoring
Appendix
140
T&I case Junior
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions CVF subculture
Informal workplace DC: Extended family
Listening LS: Mentoring Clan culture
Mindset coaching made in groups and available also on-line.
Boosting teamworking to exploit synergies ME: Teamwork
Continuous relations OG: Loyalty
Mutual trust of team members
Foster human interactions SE: Participation
Constant collaboration
Cross-pollination
SF: Human development
Mandatory technical trainings (workshop and online tests)
Presence of entrepreneurial mindset DC: Entrepreneurial place
Fail fast ME: risk taking orientation
Adhocracy culture
Support iteration to deliver a unique product OG: being on the cutting edge
Everyone does his best in his role
find new paths working in group SE: prospecting new opportunities
Design thinking
Be aware of the continuous changing trends
strive in order to create a unique and innovative product SF: being product leader
Deliver unique product
Risks may be compromising for the team ME: stability of relationship Hierarchical
culture Formal rules NEVER are organizational glues OG: rules
Coordination of teams with remote workers SE: control
Budget, time and quality of development must improve
SF: efficiency
Goals must be clear and achievable DC: result orientation
Acquisition of analytical mindset
SE: win the marketplace
Market culture
Capability to associate the right value of features in function of the moment and the context
Enabling iterative thinking SF: outpace competition
deliver innovative products
Top managers push to market assault
Appendix
141
Codes from text Values Overarching
Strive in order to create a unique and innovative product
Commitment
Acquisition of analytical mindset Courage Scrum values
Share current state of work Openness
Continuous relations
Goals must be clear and achievable Focus
Listening Respect
Everyone does his best in his role
Adapt ceremonies and communication Above all for remote workers
Adaptation
Starting from feedbacks, the right techniques are chosen
Scrum pillars
Transparency of processes thanks to ceremonies
Transparency
No technique is imposed, they choose what they prefer
Self-organization
“Personality matching” technique for members allocation
Scrum maturity
Cross-pollination Cross-functionality
Enabling iterative thinking Continuous improvement
Feedbacks In order to avoid conflicts Waste reduction
Lean principles
Solve conflicts with one-to-one discussion
Absence of misalignments is fundamental for remote workers
Documentation Just in time
Appendix
142
Energy case
Codes from text CVF dimensions subculture
Informal place DC: extended family
Facilitation of expressing issues of any kind, at any moment
Freedom to use the tools that teams prefer LS: exemplify mentoring
Clan culture One to one sessions of coaching
Teams are put at their ease
Use of “common sense” ME: teamwork and facilitation
Continuous transition of competencies
Deep sensibility for others’ propositions OG: mutual trust
Prevarications do not exist
Individuals are motivated to share impediments always SE: participation
Members allocated in function of whats challenging for them DC: entreprene. place
Commitment to find new opportunities Adhocracy culture People encouraged in being proactive (not much indulgence) ME: individual
risk taking Take ownership of initiatives
Exploit customer feedbacks SE: prospecting new opportunities
Explore new business opportunities
Boost forecast process after failures
Commitment in respecting rules DC: Controlled and structured place.
Production of compliance documentation
Transversal figures control the overall view over the teams
Normative assessment
“Form Storm Norm Perform” technique for team building and execution
LS: exemplify coordination
Hierarchical culture
Everything is clear ME: stability of relationship
Punctuality
Clear use of standard references OG: rules
Defined timebox
Roles and tasks are clearly assigned
Velocity SF: efficiency
Cost savings
Procedures improvements
Respect timelines DC: result orientation
Members do their best and know that others do the same
Objectives are clear and they know how to reach them
General agreement in what to do OG: goal accomplishment
Market culture Focus on delivering MVPs before the release
Follow constantly regulation evolutions SE: win the marketplace
Individuals are incentivized to propose skilling trainings
Effective products granting economic retourn SF: outpace competition
Consolidate competitive vantage
Product continuously improved
Appendix
143
Codes from text Values Overarching
Hire people with the right mindset Commitment
To respect normative context Scrum values To goal achievement without being assertive
Objectives are clear and members know how to reach them
Individuals are motivated to share impediments at any moment Courage
Proactivity in making proposals, with not much indulgence
Informal place Openness
Deep sensibility for others’ propositions
Effectiveness Focus
In finding new business opportunities
In producing the compliance documentation
By weighting proposal of adjustments Respect
Prevarications do not exist
Punctuality
No mandatory communication standards
Adaptation
Members are allocated in function of what is challenging for them
Scrum pillars
Follow constantly regulation evolutions
General agreement in what to do
Every team has its own way of communication, so it is internal transparency Transparency
It is key for alignments
Standard reference documentation to mandatory follow for the most important deliverables
Roles and tasks are clearly assigned
In particular internal communication and tools
Self-organization
Individuals are incentivized to propose trainings to develop competences
Scrum maturity
Autonomy in managing deliverables
Ownership of initiatives
“Form Storm Norm Perform” technique Cross-functionality
Internal transition of competencies
Different roles are clearly assigned
A transversal architect connects and aggregates the work
Feedbacks exploitation Customer centricity
It is internal Lean principles Members are invited in proposing ideas for increasing
velocity and quality of sprint activities Continuous improvement
Exploit failures for fostering procedures
Iterative and incremental thinking
Respect timelines and timebox Waste reduction
Increase velocity and cost savings
Appendix
144
E-commerce case
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions subculture
Everyone is equal DC: Extended family
Expressing feedbacks is a way of respecting others
Continuous dialogue
Clan culture No micro-management
LS: exemplify mentoring and facilitating
People are guided when they are called to build teams
People are left free to follow own attitudes
Coaching on way of working
No one can be left behind ME: teamwork and facilitation
Face to face clarifications
Mutual respect OG: mutual trust and team commitment
Punctuality
Transparency
Creating a stimulating environment
SE: participation
Providing tools for personal growth
Everyone is called to speak
Take ownership of initiatives LS: exemplify innovation and entrepreneurship
Via team building Adhocracy culture Courage in making and finalizing propositions ME: individual risk
taking Don’t worry if unsuccess occur
Teams must have valuable cross-competencies SE: prospecting new opportunities
Provide common guidelines LS: coordination
Team’s settled rules
OG: rules
Hierarchical culture Punctuality
All teams have the same protocol in writing stories
Cost reduction
SF: efficiency
Boost ROI and BE
Increase productivity
Evaluation on results DC: result orientation
Continuous evaluation Market culture Stimulation in doing more
ME: competitive Continuous performance evaluation
People are trained in working in optimal condition
Be faster with propositions, reduce TTM
SF: outpace competition
Be always ready near consumerism events
People are encouraged in doing what they are best in
Perform technical trainings
Increase market share
Appendix
145
Codes from text Values Overarching
To team growth by putting together seniors and juniors (technically and methodologically) Commitment
In enabling the iterative thinking Scrum values In respecting deadlines
In finding own attitudes
Responsibility of own actions Courage
Of ownership and to accomplish of initiatives
Embrace seniors’ wisdom and expertise Openness
To new challenges
To embrace others’ feedback
In delivering faster, reducing the time to market Focus
In reducing inefficiencies
In delivering MVPs
Transparency Respect
Punctuality
No one can be left behind
Teams’ objectives are settled according internal attitudes Adaptation
Teams adapt ceremonies in function of people
Scrum pillars
To common guidelines concerning way of conducting ceremonies, writing stories and backlog, definition of defects acceptance criteria
Everyone should be able to understand other teams’ work by looking in their dashboard Transparency
Clearly describe the done and the what to be done
Share process of reaching the objective
In team building (objectives and composition) Self-organization
When and how ceremonies should be Scrum maturity No micromanagement
Discover own attitudes
Seniors are called to facilitate juniors’ work Cross-functionality
Juniors learn technicalities from seniors, not necessary from the same domain
Each team must have all the competencies for developing end-to-end features
Once MVP and design are ready, collect his feedback Customer centricity
Continuous discussion
Consumerism events are pivotal Lean principles Enhance personal expertise Continuous
improvement Incremental developing
Prioritization of enhancement actions
“meet after” formula for solving impediments Waste (Time) reduction
Strengthen synthesis skill
Cost curve improved sprint after sprint
Identify and solve impediments
Appendix
146
Pharmaceutical case
Codes from text CVF 6 dimensions subculture
Sense of belonging DC: extended family
Share of problems
One to one coaching session LS: exemplify mentoring and facilitating
Clan culture
Choose right tools in function of people
Keep employees committed and not bored
Find a matching person for conflict resolution ME: teamwork and facilitation
Harmony
Standardized dashboards
Professional trust OG: mutual trust and team commitment
Everyone is equal
Mutual aid
Transparency of communication
People ask for specific training SE: participation
Listen others’ propositions
Everyone is involved
Stimulate iterative thinking LS: exemplify innovation
Experiment best working practices Adhocracy culture Circumvent issues and postpone their resolution ME: individual risk
taking Everyone is called in making propositions
Learn from unsuccess SE: prospecting new opportunities
Understand causes of unsuccess
Exploit customer’s feedbacks
Larger preliminary meetings LS: exemplify coordination
No misalignments Hierarchical culture No inter and intra team competition ME: stability of
relationship No vertical movements
Respect milestones SF: efficiency
Find always improvement actions
The job must be done DC: result orientation
Achievements are always visible Market culture No matter how is achieved the goal
ME: competitive Each one has its own goal, constantly monitored
Team work compactly to OG: goal accomplishment
Actions and achievements are always visible
Clear milestones and detailed plan
Technical trainings SE: win the marketplace
Adapt to its dynamicity
Stay in line with its trends
Customer and sponsors satisfaction SF: outpace competition
Intra team union to stupefy stakeholders
By improving internal performances
Appendix
147
Codes from text Values Overarching
Ask for personal skilling Commitment
To accomplish the scope at each step Scrum values
In working together compactly toward the objective
To directly share ideas to the customer Courage
Share impediments
Switching point of view Openness
To find new paths to reach the objective
On iterative thinking Focus
On prioritized items
Following metrics evolution
On the job to be done
Each opinion has the same value Respect
Professional
The detailed plan
Standardized dashboards Adaptation
Of ceremonies and tools in function of people Scrum pillars
To the business context
Experiment procedures till optimal working way is found
A matching person is called to favour conflict resolution
Actions, stories, achievements and feedbacks continuous monitoring Transparency
Of communication generate motivation
Business part always kept informed dev team on new tasks
Detect internal missing competences Self-organization
Talk directly with the customer Scrum maturity
Mutual aid Cross-functionality
Each one has own goal
T-shaped competences
Continuous and direct communication
Customer centricity
Exploit his feedbacks to adjust backlog and directions
Lean principles
Constant demand for feedbacks
Continuous improvement
Always find an action in the retrospective as improvement for the team
Learn from unsuccess and its causes
Provide the asked trainings and courses
Find the optimal working conditions Waste reduction
Respect milestones
Bibliography
148
Bibliography
A. Cockburn, J. Highsmith, Agile software development: the people factor, Computer 34
(11) (2001) 131–133.
A. Kroeber, C. Kluckhohn, Culture: a critical review of the concepts and definitions,
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1952.
A. Qumer, B. Henderson-Sellers / Information and Software Technology 50 (2008) 280–
295
Alesina, Alberto, and Paola Giuliano. "Culture and institutions." Journal of Economic
Literature 53.4 (2015): 898-944.
Allaire, Yvan, and Mihaela E. Firsirotu. "Theories of organizational culture." Organization
studies 5.3 (1984): 193-226.
Alsaqaf, Wasim, Maya Daneva, and Roel Wieringa. "Quality requirements challenges in
the context of large-scale distributed agile: An empirical study." Information and software
technology 110 (2019): 39-55.
Anthony, Robert Newton. Planning and control systems: A framework for analysis [by].
Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University,
1965.
Barley, Stephen R., and Gideon Kunda. "Design and devotion: Surges of rational and
normative ideologies of control in managerial discourse." Administrative science quarterly
(1992): 363-399.
Beck, K., Beedle, M., Van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M.,
Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R. and Kern, J., 2001. Manifesto for agile
software development.
Beck, Kent, and Erich Gamma. Extreme programming explained: embrace change.
addison-wesley professional, 2000.
Beck, Kent, et al. "The agile manifesto." (2001): 2009.
Bibliography
149
Besley, Timothy, and Torsten Persson. "The Joint Dynamics of Organizational Culture,
Design, and Performance." unpublished typescript (2017).
Boyd. R. and P. J. Richerson, 1985, Culture and the Evolutionary Process, Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Boyd, R. and P. J. Richerson, 2005, The Origin and Evolution of Culture, Oxford University
Press.
C. Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, Basic Books, New York, 1973.
C. Tolfo, R.S. Wazlawick, M.G. Gomes Ferreira, F.A. Forcellini, Agile methods and
organizational culture: Reflections about cultural levels, Software Process Improvement
and Practice, 2011.
C. Tolfo, R.S. Wazlawick, The influence of organizational culture on the adoption of
extreme programming, The Journal of Systems and Software 81 (2008) 1955–1967.
C.-C. Shih, S.-J. Huang / Information & Management 47 (2010) 271–281.
Cameron, K. S. & Quinn, R. E. (2011). Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture:
Based on the Competing Values Framework (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cameron, K.S. Effectiveness as paradox: consensus and conflict in conceptions of
organizational effectiveness, Management Science 32 (5) (1986) 539–553.
Cavaye, Angèle LM. "Case study research: a multi‐faceted research approach for IS."
Information systems journal 6.3 (1996): 227-242.
Clark, S. M., Gioia, D. A., Ketchen, Jr. D. J., Thomas, J. B., 2010. Transitional identity as a
facilitator of organizational identity change during a merger, Administrative Science
Quarterly, 55(3): 397-438.
Cohen, David, Mikael Lindvall, and Patricia Costa. "An introduction to agile methods."
Advances in computers 62.03 (2004): 1-66.
Corvera Charaf, Marianne, Christoph Rosenkranz, and Roland Holten. "The emergence of
shared understanding: applying functional pragmatics to study the requirements
development process." Information Systems Journal 23.2 (2013): 115-135.
Bibliography
150
Czarniawska-Joerges, Barbara. Exploring complex organizations. Sage Publications, 1992.
D.E. Strode, S.L. Huff, A. Tretiakov, The impact of organizational culture on agile method
use, in: Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference onSystem Sciences,
IEEE, 2009.
Dahlgaard, Jens J., and Su Mi Dahlgaard-Park. "Lean production, six sigma quality, TQM
and company culture." The TQM magazine 18.3 (2006): 263-281
Deemer, Pete, et al. "A lightweight guide to the theory and practice of scrum." Ver 2
(2012): 2012.
Denison, Daniel R., and Gretchen M. Spreitzer. "Organizational culture and organizational
development: A competing values approach." Research in organizational change and
development 5.1 (1991): 1-21.
Derby, Esther, Diana Larsen, and Ken Schwaber. Agile retrospectives: Making good teams
great. Pragmatic Bookshelf, 2006.
Diegmann, P., & Rosenkranz, C. (2016). Improving software development efficiency–How
diversity and collective intelligence shape agile team efficiency.
Dingsøyr, T., Nerur, S., Balijepally, V. and Moe, N.B., 2012. A decade of agile
methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development.
Dingsøyr, Torgeir, et al. "Exploring software development at the very large-scale: a
revelatory case study and research agenda for agile method adaptation." Empirical
Software Engineering 23.1 (2018): 490-520.
Dingsøyr, Torgeir, Tor Erlend Fægri, and Juha Itkonen. "What is large in large-scale? A
taxonomy of scale for agile software development." International Conference on Product-
Focused Software Process Improvement. Springer, Cham, 2014.
Dybå, Tore, and Torgeir Dingsøyr. "Empirical studies of agile software development: A
systematic review." Information and software technology 50.9-10 (2008): 833-859.
E.C. Conforto et al., The agility construct on project management theory / International
Journal of Project Management 34 (2016) 660–674
Bibliography
151
E.H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1985.
Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. "Agency theory: An assessment and review." Academy of
management review 14.1 (1989): 57-74.
Eisenhardt, Kathleen M., and Melissa E. Graebner. "Theory building from cases:
Opportunities and challenges." Academy of management journal 50.1 (2007): 25-32.
Evans, J.R., Lindsay, W.M., 2005. The Management and Control of Quality, 6th ed. South-
Western, Mason, OH.
Franke, Richard H., Geert Hofstede, and Michael H. Bond. "Cultural roots of economic
performance: A research note." Strategic management journal 12.S1 (1991): 165-173.
Fruhling, Ann L., and Alvin E. Tarrell. "Best Practices for Implementing Agile Methods."
IBM center for the Business government (2008).
Gagliardi, Pasquale. "The creation and change of organizational cultures: A conceptual
framework." Organization studies 7.2 (1986): 117-134.
Gioia, Dennis A., Kevin G. Corley, and Aimee L. Hamilton. "Seeking qualitative rigor in
inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology." Organizational research methods
16.1 (2013): 15-31.
Glaser, Barney, and Anselm Strauss. "Grounded theory: The discovery of grounded
theory." Sociology the journal of the British sociological association 12.1 (1967): 27-49.
Gregory, Kathleen L. "Native-view paradigms: Multiple cultures and culture conflicts in
organizations." Administrative science quarterly (1983): 359-376.
Gupta, Manjul, Joey F. George, and Weidong Xia. "Relationships between IT department
culture and agile software development practices: An empirical investigation."
International Journal of Information Management 44 (2019): 13-24.
H. Robinson, H. Sharp, Organizational culture and XP: three case studies, in: Proceedings
of the Agile Development Conference (ADC-05), 2005.
Henry, Gary T. Practical sampling. Vol. 21. Sage, 1990.
Bibliography
152
Hofstede, G. , Hofstede, G.J. , Minkov, M. , 2010. Cultures and Organizations: Software of
the Mind, 3rd McGraw Hill, New York .
Hofstede, Geert. "Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context." Online
readings in psychology and culture 2.1 (2011): 8.
Hofstede, Geert. Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and
organizations across nations. Sage publications, 2001.
Hummel, M., Rosenkranz, C., & Holten, R. (2015). The role of social agile practices for
direct and indirect communication in information systems development teams.
Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 36(1), 15.
J. Iivari, N. Iivari / Information and Software Technology 53 (2011) 509–520
J. Lett, The Human Enterprise. A Critical Introduction to Anthropological Theory, Westview
Press Inc., Boulder, 1987.
Juhani Iivari and Magda Huisman / MIS Quarterly, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Mar., 2007), pp. 35-58
K.V. Siakas, E. Siakas, The agile professional culture: a source of agile quality, Software
Process Improvement and Practice 12 (2007) 597–610.
Kalenda M, Hyna P, Rossi B. Scaling agile in large organizations: Practices, challenges, and
success factors. J Softw Evol Proc. 2018;30:e1954.
L. Smircich, Concepts of culture and organizational analysis, Administrative Science
Quarterly 28 (3) (1983) 339–358.
Leidner, Dorothy E., and Timothy Kayworth. "A review of culture in information systems
research: Toward a theory of information technology culture conflict." MIS quarterly 30.2
(2006): 357-399.
Marshall, Martin N. "Sampling for qualitative research." Family practice 13.6 (1996): 522-
526.
Maruping, L. M., Venkatesh, V., & Agarwal, R. (2009). A control theory perspective on agile
methodology use and changing user requirements. Information Systems Research, 20(3),
377–399.
Bibliography
153
Nerur, Sridhar, and Venu Gopal Balijepally. "Theoretical reflections on agile development
methodologies." Communications of the ACM 50.3 (2007): 79-83.
Nerur, Sridhar, RadhaKanta Mahapatra, and George Mangalaraj. "Challenges of migrating
to agile methodologies." Communications of the ACM 48.5 (2005): 72-78.
One, Version. "State of agile development survey results." Version One 5 (2012).
Othman, H.B., Zouaoui, M. and Hamdoun, M. (2016), “Organizational culture and the
acceptance of Agile methodology”, Digital Economy (ICDEc), Carthage, Tunisia, April 28–
30, 2016, IEEE, pp. 16-23.
Ozcan-Top, Ozden, and Onur Demirörs. "Assessment of agile maturity models: a multiple
case study." International Conference on Software Process Improvement and Capability
Determination. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013.
Paul Brunet, Adam, and Steve New. "Kaizen in Japan: an empirical study." International
Journal of Operations & Production Management 23.12 (2003): 1426-1446.
Quinn, Robert E., and John Rohrbaugh. "A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards
a competing values approach to organizational analysis." Management science 29.3
(1983): 363-377.
R. Keesing, A. Strathern, Cultural anthropology, third ed., A Contemporary Perspective,
Harcourt Brave College Publishers, Fort Worth, 1998.
Rolland, Knut, et al. "Problematizing agile in the large: alternative assumptions for large-
scale agile development." 39th International Conference on Information Systems.
Association for Information Systems (AIS), 2016.
Schwaber, Ken, and Jeff Sutherland. "The scrum guide." Scrum Alliance 21 (2011): 19.
Sedano, Todd, Paul Ralph, and Cécile Péraire. "The product backlog." Proceedings of the
41st International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Press, 2019.
Silverman, D. (1998). Qualitative research: Meanings or practices? Information Systems
Journal, 8(1), 3-20.
Bibliography
154
So, Chaehan, and Wolfgang Scholl. "Perceptive agile measurement: New instruments for
quantitative studies in the pursuit of the social-psychological effect of agile practices."
International Conference on Agile Processes and Extreme Programming in Software
Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009.
Spiegler, Simone V., Christoph Heinecke, and Stefan Wagner. "Leadership Gap in Agile
Teams: How Teams and Scrum Masters Mature." International Conference on Agile
Software Development. Springer, Cham, 2019.
Strauss, Anselm, and Juliet M. Corbin. Grounded theory in practice. Sage, 1997.
Sutherland, Jeff, and Ken Schwaber. "The scrum guide." The definitive guide to scrum: The
rules of the game. Scrum. org 268 (2013).
Torgeir Dingsøyr, Sridhar Nerur, VenuGopal Balijepally, Nils Brede Moe / A decade of agile
methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development / The Journal of Systems
and Software 85 (2012) 1213– 1221
V. Stray et al. / The Journal of Systems and Software 114 (2016) 101–124
VersionOne, Collabnet. "12th Annual State of Agile Report. (2018)."
VersionOne, Collabnet. "13th Annual State of Agile Report. (2019)."
Wendorff, Peter. "Organisational culture in agile software development." International
Conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement. Springer, Berlin,
Heidelberg, 2002.
Williams, L. What agile teams think of agile principles (2012) Communications of the ACM,
55 (4), pp. 71-76
Yin, Robert. "case study research. Beverly Hills." (1984).
Yin, Robert K. Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage
publications, 2017.