The role of physical artefacts in agile software development collaboration and coordination

1
The role of physical artefacts in agile software
development collaboration and co-ordination

• Helen Sharp
• Centre for Computing Research
• The Open University, Walton Hall
• Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK
• AgileNorth 2007

2
What we will be exploring

• What (if anything) is special about the physical
  nature of collaboration artefacts?
• What properties or affordances does physical
  manifestation have?
• If electronic versions required, e.g. offshoring,
  distributed teams, what will be lost?

3
Overview

• Introduction motivation for the question
• Story cards and The Wall
• Group discussion and feedback
• Co-ordination and collaboration in agile teams
• Paper versus electronic evidence from CSCW and
  workplace studies
• Group discussion and feedback
• What does this mean for distributed teams?

4
Context agile software development

• eXtreme Programming
• Short (one week) iterations of implementation
• Minimal documentation/overheads
• Face-to-face communication
• Feedback

5
Story Card and the Wall

• Simple mechanisms
• Sophisticated and disciplined use
• Information-rich

6
What is a Story?

• A description of something system needs to do
• A unit of customer-visible functionality
• A promise of a conversation
• The fundamental unit of development in XP
• Usually written on a 3x5 index card

7
What is the Wall?

• A (vertical) physical space where story cards are
  displayed
• May be a wall, a flip chart, filing cabinets
• A central point of co-ordination

8
Group discussion

• Think of a paper/physical artefact you use for
  collaboration
• Identify what you like about it
• Consider what you see as disadvantages
• Think of an electronic artefact you use for
  collaboration
• Identify what you like about it
• Consider what you see as disadvantages

9
Co-ordination and Collaboration

• Simplicity but agreed discipline
• Artefacts are easy to see and understand,
• Artefacts hold minimal information
• Artefacts are flexible, can be moved around, are
  easy to carry and easily accessible
• Daily stand-ups
• Around the Wall
• Key co-ordination activity
• Responsibility for work associated with card
• Awareness of work
• Different coloured cards and annotation provides
  detailed progress-tracking information

10
Co-ordination and Collaboration

• Structure of the Wall carries information
• Physical location of the story cards
• Annotations and different coloured cards and
  stickers
• Complete picture for iteration
• Cards act as tokens giving the holder speakers
  rights
• Cards promote collaboration between developers
  and customers
• Activity and information exchange is accessible,
  and hence supports the sharing of knowledge

11
Co-ordination and Collaboration

• Information immediately relevant
• Physical movement raises awareness of others
• Cards support group reasoning and discussion
• Cards and Wall are integral to the work being
  done, rather than being an overhead.

12
Paper vs electronic

• Whittaker and Schwarz (1999) found that the
  public and visible nature of a physical wallboard
  meant that schedule manipulations were often done
  in a social context, and that there was a
  permanent awareness of the work of others.
• Bellotti and Rogers (1997) found tangible
  representations promote a general awareness of
  ongoing work and state-of-play that are not
  available through electronic tools that are
  principally for individual-user task requirements

13
Paper vs electronic (2)

• Bellotti and Rogers (1997) found that physical
  artefacts sometimes represent tokens of
  responsibility
• Whittaker and Schwarz (1999) found that the
  manual process involved in manipulating artefacts
  encourages more thorough reflection, while the
  simpler activities involved in changing an
  electronic document reduces the level of
  reflection.

14
Paper vs electronic (3)

• Sellen Harper (2003) found that paper is
  sometimes used to hold knowledge that has to be
  explained before it can be shared. Electronic
  documents on the other hand have (relatively)
  unlimited storage capacity and so large amounts
  of data can be easily stored.
• Physical artefacts are easy to consult and less
  easy to ignore than electronic reminders,
  especially when the artefact is changing
  regularly (Bellotti and Rogers, 1997 Sellen and
  Harper, 2003)

15
Paper vs electronic (4)

• Use of pen and paper implies provisionality. One
  of the tenets of XP is that processes should be
  regularly reviewed and improved as appropriate.
  The use of pen and paper materials is sometimes
  used to imply provisionality, e.g. in early
  stages of design, and in encouraging the
  consideration of alternative designs (Fish and
  Scrivener, 1990).

16
Group discussion

• Think again about paper/physical artefacts you
  use for collaboration
• What actions does it facilitate?
• What actions are difficult or not possible?
• Think again about an electronic artefacts you use
  for collaboration
• What actions does it facilitate?
• What actions are difficult or not possible?

17
How to cope with distribution

• Duplication of physical in electronic form
• Spreadsheets
• Database of stories
• Wiki to track progress
• Story card templates for printing

18
Wrap-up discussionAny questions/comments?
h.c.sharp_at_open.ac.uk