skip to main content
10.1145/2702123.2702366acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Communication through Boundary Objects in Distributed Agile Teams

Published:18 April 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Personal communication between User-Centered Design (UCD) specialists and developers is important for communicating user needs and design solutions in agile development. In distributed projects where opportunities for personal communication are limited, the design documentation is an important surrogate. This study has investigated the perceived effectiveness of boundary objects in a distributed agile team, and their role in communicating target user needs. Six in-depth interviews with UCD specialists showed that the boundary objects rarely communicate underlying needs of the users but rather focus on interaction with the system that is being developed. The used boundary objects also do not work as stand-alone deliverables; they need to be explained and elaborated. Making the boundary objects comprehensive enough to be stand-alone is seen as too time consuming and not worth the effort. For agile projects with distributed teams, this creates hand-over and follow-up problems.

References

  1. Åberg, J. Challenges with Teaching HCI Early to Computer Students. Proc. ITiCSE'10, ACM Press (2010), 3--7. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bayer, H. and Holzblatt, K. Contextual design: Defining customer centered systems. Morgan Kaugmann, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Brown, J., Lindgaard, G. and Biddle, R. Stories, Sketches, and Lists: Developers and Interaction Designers Interacting Through Artifacts. Proc. Agile'08, IEEE (2008), 39--50. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Blomkvist, S. Towards a model for Bridging Agile Development and User-Centered Design. In HumanCentered Software Engineering -- Integrating Usability in The Development Process, Springer (2005), 219--244.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Chamberlain, S., Sharp, H. and Maiden, N. Towards a Framework for Integrating Agile Development and User-Centered Design. In Extreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering, Springer (2006), 143--153. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Cooper, A. The inmates are running the asylum. Macmillan, USA, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Convertino G., Mentis H.M., Rosson M.B., Slavkovic A. and Carroll J.M. Supporting content and process common ground in computer-supported teamwork. Proc. CHI'09, ACM Press (2009), 2339--2348. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ferreira, J., Noble, J. and Biddle, R. Agile development iterations and UI design. Proc. Agile'07, IEEE (2007), 50--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Fox, D., Sillito, L. and Maurer, F. Agile Methods and User Centered Design: How These Two Methodologies Are Being Successfully Integrated in Industry. Proc. Agile'08, IEEE (2008), 63--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hsieh, H-F. and Shannon, S.E. Three approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qual Health Res 15, 9 (2005), 1277--1288.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Hussain, Z, Slany, W. and Holzinger, A. Investigating Agile User-Centered Design in Practice: A Grounded Theory Perspective. In HCI and Usability for einclusion, Springer (2009a), 279--289. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hussain, Z., Slany, W. and Holzinger, A. Current State of Agile User-Centered Design: A Survey. In HCI and Usability for e-inclusion, Springer (2009b), 416--427. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. ISO 9241--210:2010 Ergonomics of human-system interaction -- Part 210: Human-centered design for interactive systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiménez, M., Piattini, M. and Vizcaíno, A. Challenges and Improvements in Distributed Software Development: A Systematic Review. Advances in Software Engineering 2009, (2009). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Larman, C. and Basili V.R. (2003) Iterative and Incremental Development: A brief history. Computer 36, 6 (2003), 47--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Larman, C. Agile and iterative development: A manager's guide. Pearson, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Lee, S. and Yong, H-S. Distributed agile: project management in a global environment. Empir Software Eng 15, (2010), 204--217. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Miller, L. Case Study of Customer Input for a Successful Product. Proc. Agile'05, IEEE (2005), 225234. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Modi, S., Abbott, P. and Counsell, S. Negotiating Common Ground in Distributed Agile Development: A Case Study Perspective. Proc. Int. Conf. Global Software Engineering, IEEE (2013), 80--89. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Nielsen, J. Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Patton, J. Hitting the Target: Adding Interaction Design to Agile Software Development. Proc. OOPSLA'02, ACM Press (2002), 1--7. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Pruitt, J. and Adlin, T. The persona lifecycle: Keeping people in mind throughout product design. Morgan Kaufmann, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Redish, J., Bias, R.G., Bailey, R., Molich, R., Dumas, J. and Spool, J.M. Usability in Practice: Formative Usability Evaluations -- Evolution and Revolution. Proc. CHI'02, ACM Press (2002), 885--890. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Salah, D., Paige, R.F. and Cairns, P. A Systematic Literature Review for Agile Development Processes and User Centered Design Integration. Proc. Int. Conf. Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, ACM Press (2014). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Schwaber, K. Agile Project Management with Scrum. Microsoft Press, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Star, S.L. and Griesemer, J.R. Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907--39. Social Studies of Science 19, 3 (1989), 387--420.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Sliger, M. and Broderick, S. The software project manager's bridge to agility. Addison-Wesley, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Sy, D. Adapting Usability investigations for Agile UserCentered Design. Journal of Usability Studies 2, 3 (2007), 112--132.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Ungar, J. The design studio: Interface design for agile teams. Proc. Agile'08, IEEE (2008), 519--524 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Communication through Boundary Objects in Distributed Agile Teams

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2015
        4290 pages
        ISBN:9781450331456
        DOI:10.1145/2702123

        Copyright © 2015 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 18 April 2015

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI '15 Paper Acceptance Rate486of2,120submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

        Upcoming Conference

        CHI '24
        CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        May 11 - 16, 2024
        Honolulu , HI , USA

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader