Scrum, the most popular agile method and project management framework, is widely reported to be used, adapted, misused, and abused in practice. However, not much is known about how Scrum actually works in practice, and critically, where, when, how and why it diverges from Scrum by the book. Through a Grounded Theory study involving semi-structured interviews of 45 participants from 30 companies and observations of five teams, we present our findings on how Scrum works in practice as compared to how it is presented in its formative books. We identify significant variations in these practices such as work breakdown, estimation, prioritization, assignment, the associated roles and artefacts, and discuss the underlying rationales driving the variations. Critically, we claim that not all variations are process misuse/abuse and propose a nuanced classification approach to understanding variations asstandard, necessary, contextual,andclear deviationsfor successful Scrum use and adaptation.

Self-assignment, where software developers choose their own tasks, is a common practice in agile teams. However, it is not known why developers select certain tasks. It is important for managers to be aware of these reasons to ensure sustainable self-assignment practices. We investigated developers’ preferences while they are choosing tasks for themselves. We collected data from 42 participants working in 25 different software companies. We applied Grounded Theory procedures to study and analyse factors for self-assigning tasks, which we grouped into three categories:task-based,developer-based, andopinion-based. We found that developers have individual preferences and not all factors are important to every developer. Managers share some common and varying perspectives around the identified factors. Most managers want developers to give higher priority to certain factors. Developers often need to balance between task priority and their own individual preferences, and managers facilitate this through a variety of strategies. Morerisk-aversemanagers encourage expertise-based self-assignment to ensure tasks are completed quickly. Managers who arerisk-balancingencourage developers to choose tasks that provide learning opportunities only when there is little risk of delays or reduced quality. Finally,growth-seekingmanagers regularly encourage team members to pick tasks outside their comfort zone to encourage growth opportunities. Our findings will help managers to understand what developers consider when self-assigning tasks and help them empower their teams to practice self-assignment in a sustainable manner.

Abstract Self-assignment, a self-directed method of task allocation in which teams and individuals assign and choose work for themselves, is considered one of the hallmark practices of empowered, self-organizing agile teams. Despite all the benefits it promises, agile software teams do not practice it as regularly as other agile practices such as iteration planning and daily stand-ups, indicating that it is likely not an easy and straighforward practice. There has been very little empirical research on self-assignment. This Grounded Theory study explores how self-assignment works in agile projects. We collected data through interviews with 42 participants representing 28 agile teams from 23 software companies and supplemented these interviews with observations. Based on rigorous application of Grounded Theory analysis procedures such as open, axial, and selective coding, we present a comprehensive grounded theory of making self-assignment work that explains the (a) context and (b) causal conditions that give rise to the need for self-assignment, (c) a set of facilitating conditions that mediate how self-assignment may be enabled, (d) a set of constraining conditions that mediate how self-assignment may be constrained and which are overcome by a set of (e) strategies applied by agile teams, which in turn result in (f) a set of consequences, all in an attempt to make the central phenomenon, self-assignment, work. The findings of this study will help agile practitioners and companies understand different aspects of self-assignment and practice it with confidence regularly as a valuable practice. Additionally, it will help teams already practicing self-assignment to apply strategies to overcome the challenges they face on an everyday basis.

Self-assignment is a self-directed way of task allocation commonly practiced by members of agile teams. However, not much is known about different aspects of self-assignment in literature. This research focuses on two objectives with respect to self-assignment. The first objective is to explore what strategies agile practitioners follow to self-assign tasks of different nature (i.e. new feature, enhancement, and bug-fix). The second objective is to identify the challenges associated with self-assignment and investigate how agile practitioners overcome these challenges to achieve project outcomes. Grounded theory is chosen as the research methodology for this study with data collection through interviewing agile practitioners and observing teams practicing self-assignment. Based on the results, we would propose a theory for self-assignment as a task allocation practice and a set of context-driven guidelines. Knowing the proposed theory and guidelines will help the agile practitioners and companies to make self-assignment a valuable practice in their settings. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Task allocation is considered an important activity in software project management. However, the process of allocating tasks in agile software development teams has not received much attention in empirical research. Through a pilot study involving mixed open-ended and closed-ended interviews questions with 11 agile software practitioners working within a software development organization in India, we explain the process of task allocation as including three different mechanisms of workflow across teams: team-independent, team-dependent, and hybrid workflow; and five types of task allocation strategies: manager-driven, team-driven, individual-driven, manager-assisted and team-assisted. Knowing these workflow mechanisms and task allocation strategies will help software teams and project managers make more effective decisions around workflow and task allocation.