References
- Jeremiah J. Survey: is agile the new norm? TechBeacon; 2015 [accessed 2020 Sept 20]. https://techbeacon.com/app-dev-testing/survey-agile-new-norm.
- Ochodek M, Kopczyńska S. Perceived importance of agile requirements engineering practices–a survey. J Syst Software. 2018;143:29–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.05.012.
- Zaitsev A, Gal U, Tan B. Coordination artifacts in agile software development. Inf Organ. 2020;30(2):2. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100288.
- Zhang W, Sun SL, Jiang Y, Zhang W. Openness to experience and team creativity: effects of knowledge sharing and transformational leadership. Creativity Res J. 2019;31(1):62–73. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1577649.
- Cram WA, Marabelli M. Have scholarly cake and eat it too? Simultaneously pursuing the knowledge-sharing benefits of agile and traditional development approaches. Inform Manage. 2018;55(3):322–39. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2017.08.005.
- Hannola L, Friman J, Niemimuukko J. Application of agile methods in the innovation process. Int J Bus Innov Res. 2013;7(1):84–98. doi:https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBIR.2013.050557.
- Tiwana A, Mclean ER. Expertise integration and creativity in information systems development. J Manage Inform Syst. 2005;22(1):13–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045836.
- Jia L, Shaw JD, Tsui AS, Park TY. A social-structural perspective on employee–organization relationships and team creativity. Acad Manage J. 2014;57(86):9–891. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0147.
- Kannabiran G, Sankaran K. Evaluation of determinants of software quality in offshored software projects: empirical evidence from India. Int J Inform Techno Proj Manage. 2020;11(1):32–54. doi:https://doi.org/10.4018/IJITPM.2020010103.
- Beranek M, Klein G, Jiang JJ. Building user engagement for successful software projects: meaningfulness, safety, and availability. Pac Asia J Assoc Inf Syst. 2013;32:175–200. doi:https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03207.
- Couger JD, Higgins LF, McIntyre SC. (Un) structured creativity in information systems organizations. MIS Quart. 1993;17(4):375–97. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/249584.
- Muller SD, Ulrich F. Creativity and information systems in a hypercompetitive environment: a literature review. Commun Assoc Inf Syst. 2013;32:175–200. doi:https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03207.
- Seidel S, Müller-Wienbergen F, Becker J. The concept of creativity in the information systems discipline: past, present, and prospects. Commun Assoc Inf Syst. 2010;27:217–42. doi:https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.02714.
- Cheng HH, Yang HL. The antecedents of collective creative efficacy for information system development teams. J Eng Techno Manage. 2014;33:1–17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2013.12.001.
- Huang LC, Shiau WL. Factors affecting creativity in information system development. Ind Manage Data Syst. 2017;117(3):496–520. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-08-2015-0335.
- Putta A, Paasivaara M, Lassenius C. Benefits and challenges of adopting the scaled agile framework (SAFe): preliminary results from a multivocal literature review. In International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement Proceedings. Cham: Springer; Nov 2018. p. 334–51.
- Dybå T, Dingsøyr T. Empirical studies of agile software development: a systematic review. Inform Software Tech. 2008;50(9–10):833–59. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.01.006.
- Niederman F, Lechner T, Petit Y. A research agenda for extending agile practices in software development and additional task domains. Proj Manage J. 2018;49(6):3–17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972818802713.
- Ancona DG, Caldwell DF. Rethinking coalition composition from the outside-in. In: Gruenfeld DH, editor. Research on managing groups and coalitions composition. Stamford (CT): JAI Press; 1998. p. 21–37.
- Dey C, Ganesh MP. Team boundary activity: a review and directions for future research. Team Perform Manage. 2017;23(5/6):273–92. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-06-2016-0029.
- Yan A, Louis MR. The migration of organizational functions to the work unit level: buffering, spanning, and bringing up boundaries. Hum Relat. 1999;52(1):25–47. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679905200103.
- Marrone JA. Team boundary spanning: a multilevel review of past research and proposals for the future. J Manage. 2010;36:911–40. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309353945.
- Dey C, Mangadu Paramasivam G Team boundary activity in software development teams. In Academy of Management Proceedings. Briarcliff Manor, NY: Academy of Management; 2017. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2016.12484.
- Wu XJ, Huang WW, Jiang JJ, Klein G, Liu S. Boundary buffering: limiting interference and information leakage in design teams. Int J Oper Prod Man. 2020;40(3):293–313. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-03-2019-0180.
- Ratcheva V. Integrating diverse knowledge through boundary spanning processes–The case of multidisciplinary project teams. Int J Proj Manage. 2009;27(3):206–15. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.02.008.
- Levina N, Vaast E. The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Quart. 2005;29(2):335–63. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/25148682.
- Wing J, Andrew T, Petkov D. The changing nature of user involvement in information system development projects. In: 2017 Conference on Information Communication Technology and Society (ICTAS). Durban (South Africa): IEEE; 2017. p. 1–6.
- Faraj S, Yan A. Boundary work in knowledge teams. J Appl Psychol. 2009;94(3):604. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014367.
- Somech A, Khalaili A. Team boundary activity: its mediating role in the relationship between structural conditions and team innovation. Group Organ Manage. 2014;39(3):274–99. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601114525437.
- Drach-Zahavy A, Somech A. From an intrateam to an interteam perspective of effectiveness: the role of interdependence and boundary activities. Small Gr Res. 2010;41(2):143–74. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496409356479.
- Sabherwal R, Grover V. A taxonomy of political processes in systems development. Inform Syst J. 2010;20(5):419–47. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2009.00341.x.
- Besker T, Ghanbari H, Martini A, Bosch J. The influence of technical debt on software developer morale. J Syst Soft. 2020;167:1–25. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2020.110586.
- Licorish SA, MacDonell SG. Exploring the links between software development task type, team attitudes, and task completion performance: insights from the Jazz repository. Inf Software Techno. 2018;97:10–25. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2017.12.005.
- Khedhaouria A, Ribiere V. The influence of team knowledge sourcing on team creativity. Learning Organ. 2013;20(4/5):308–21. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/TLO-10-2012-0063.
- Ancona DG, Caldwell DF. Bridging the boundary: external activity and performance in organizational teams. Admin Sci Quart. 1992;37(4):634–65. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2393475.
- Howell JM, Shea CM. Effects of champion behavior, team potency, and external communication activities on predicting team performance. Group Organ Manage. 2006;31(2):180–211. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601104273067.
- Salem M, Van Quaquebeke N, Besiou M. How field office leaders drive learning and creativity in humanitarian aid: exploring the role of boundary‐spanning leadership for expatriate and local aid worker collaboration. J Organ Behav. 2018;39(5):594–611. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2246.
- Tippmann E, Scott PS, Parker A. Boundary capabilities in MNCs: knowledge transformation for creative solution development. J Manage Stud. 2017;54(4):455–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12253.
- Gong Y, Kim TY, Lee DR, Zhu J. A multilevel model of team goal orientation, information exchange, and creativity. Acad Manage J. 2013;56(3):827–51. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0177.
- He J, Wr K. The role of user participation in information systems development: implications from a meta-analysis. J Manage Inform Syst. 2008;25(1):301–31. doi:https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222250111.
- Jiang JJ, Klein G, Discenza R. Perception differences of software success: provider and user views of system metrics. J Syst Software. 2002;63(1):17–27. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(01)00135-2.
- Lettl C, Herstatt C, Gemuenden H. Users’ contributions to radical innovation: evidence from four cases in the field of medical equipment technology. R&D Manage. 2006;36(3):251–72. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00431.x.
- Sawyer S, Guinan P, Cooprider J. Social interactions of information systems development teams: a performance perspective. Inform Syst J. 2008;20(1):81–107. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2008.00311.x.
- Kellogg KC, Orlikowski WJ, Yates J. Life in the trading zone: structuring coordination across boundaries in postbureaucratic organizations. Organ Sci. 2006;17(1):22–44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0157.
- Parolia N, Jiang JJ, Klein G, Sheu TS. The contribution of resource interdependence to IT program performance: a social interdependence perspective. Int J Proj Manage. 2011;29(3):313–24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.03.004.
- Ancona DG, Caldwell D. Beyond boundary spanning: managing external dependence in product development teams. J High Techno Manage Res. 1990;1(2):119–35. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/1047-8310(90)90001-K.
- Hansen MT. The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organizational subunits. Admin Sci Quart. 1999;44(1):82–111. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2667032.
- Perry-Smith JE, Shalley CE. The social side of creativity: a static and dynamic social network perspective. Acad Manage Rev. 2003;29(1):89–106. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2003.8925236.
- Dierdorff EC, Bell TB, Belohlav JA. The power of ‘We’: effects of psychological collectivism on team performance over time. J Appl Psychol. 2011;96(2):247–62. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020929.
- Jiang JJ, Klein G, Chen HG. The effects of user partnering and user non-support on project performance. J Assoc Inform Syst. 2006; 7(2): 68–90. http://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol7/iss1/6.
- Druskat VU, Wheeler JV. Managing from the boundary: the effective leadership of self-managing work teams. Acad Manage J. 2003;46:435–57. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/30040637.
- Bettencourt LA, Lostrom AL, Brown SW, Roundtree RI. Client coproduction in knowledge-intensive business services. Calif Manage Rev. 2002;44(4):100–28. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/41166145.
- Hoegl M, Gemuenden GG. Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: a theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organ Sci. 2001;12(4):435–49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.4.435.10635.
- Denision DR, Hart ST, Kahn JA. From Chimneys to cross-functional teams: developing and validating a diagnostic model. Acad Manage J. 1996;4:1005–23. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/256721.
- Sivo SA, Saunders C, Chang Q, Jiang JJ. How low should you go? Low response rates and the validity of inference in IS questionnaire research. J Assoc Inform Syst. 2008;7(6):351–414. doi:https://doi.org/10.17705/1JAIS.00093.
- Bowen NK, Guo S. Structural equation modeling – pocket guides to social work research methods. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2011.
- MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM. Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(2):130–49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130.
- Miller LA, Lovler RL, McIntire SA. Foundations of psychological testing: a practical approach. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 2012.
- Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Marketing Res. 1981;18(1):39–50. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104.
- O’Leary-Kelly SW, Vokurka RJ. The empirical assessment of construct validity. J Oper Manage. 1998;16(4):387–405. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(98)00020-5.
- Podsakoff PM, Mackenenzie SB, Jeong-Yeon L, Podsakoff NP. A common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879–903. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
- Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS. Outliers and multicollinearity: diagnosing and solving regression problem. In: Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003. p. 390–430.
- Gopal A, Gosain S. The role of organizational controls and boundary spanning in software development outsourcing: implications for project performance. Inform Syst Res. 2010;21:960–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1080.0205.
- Dhillon G, Syed R, De Sá-soares F. Information security concerns in IT outsourcing: identifying (in)congruence between clients and vendors. Inform & Mgmt. 2017;54(4):452–64. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.10.002.
- Han K, Mithas S. Information technology outsourcing and non-IT operating costs: an empirical investigation. MIS Quart. 2013;37(1):315–31. doi:https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.1.14.
- Ko DG, Lee G, Keil M, Xia W. Project control, coordination, performance in complex information systems outsourcing. J Comput Inform Syst. May 2019;1–11. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2019.1606687.
- Lynn ML. Organizational buffering: managing boundaries and cores. Organ Stud. 2005;26(1):37–61. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840605046348.
- Bode C, Wagner SM, Petersen KJ, Ellram LM. Understanding responses to supply chain disruptions: insights from information processing and resource dependence perspectives. Acad Manage J. 2011;54(4):833–56. doi:https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.64870145.