Distributed Developers and the Non-Use of Web 2.0 Technologies

A Proclivity Model

University of California, IrvineBan Al-AniYi WangErik TrainerDavid Redmiles

PUCRS University, BrazilSabrina Marczak

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Trust

• Which factors influence trust in distributed development teams?

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Assumptions

• Tools adopted by developers to support their collaboration would play a role in the development of trust

• Web 2.0 technologies would be amongst the tools adopted

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Our intended goal

• To understand the role that Web 2.0 technologies play in supporting the development of trust in globally distributed development teams

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Surprising finding

• Less than 25% of our participants reported using Web 2.0 technologies

• Many participants reported the disadvantages of adopting them

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

New goal

• To understand the factors that led to the USE and NON-USE of these technologies in distributed teams

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Research questions

• Why do developers NOT use Web 2.0 technologies?

• Who DOES use these technologies?

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Six factors

QUALI

• Non-alignment

• Lack of support

• Mistrust of information

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Six factors

QUALI

• Non-alignment

• Lack of support

• Mistrust of information

QUANTI

• Age

• Experience

• Communication tools

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Our empirical approach

• Mix of QUALI and QUANTI methods

• 5 fortune 500 multinational organizations

• 61 interviewees

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

The profile

• 18 female, 43 male

• 34 US

• 18 Brazil

• 2 Mexico

• 1 Costa Rica, Ireland, Israel, Poland, China, Taiwan, Malaysia

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

The profile

• 21 managers

• 35 developers

• 5 support staff

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

The profile

• Working experience

• 11 years with global teams

• 12 years in the organization

• 21 years in the market

• 6 months working in the project

• 13.5 months experience in their team

• Knowledge about Web 2.0

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

The interview protocol

• Based on a single distributed project

• Participant and project background

• Scenarios

• Experience reports

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

The analysis

• Coded references to tools

• Categorized the codes

• Quali and Quanti analysis

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• Focused on identifying the causal reasons subjects revealed for NON-USE of Web 2.0 technologies

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The non-alignment of the technologies to the work practices (Qual.1)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The non-alignment of the technologies to the work practices (Qual.1)

“the use is not billable”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The non-alignment of the technologies to the work practices (Qual.1)

“the use is not billable”

“it is extra paperwork”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The non-alignment of the technologies to the work practices (Qual.1)

“the use is not billable”

“it is extra paperwork”

“does not extend current communication”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The lack of support for these technologies (Qual. 2)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The lack of support for these technologies (Qual. 2)

“not available to some members”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The lack of support for these technologies (Qual. 2)

“not available to some members”

“not adopted by some sites”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The lack of support for these technologies (Qual. 2)

“not available to some members”

“not adopted by some sites”

“prohibited by the organization”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The participant’s mistrust of information provided through these technologies (Qual. 3)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The participant’s mistrust of information provided through these technologies (Qual. 3)

“information is not accurate”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The participant’s mistrust of information provided through these technologies (Qual. 3)

“information is not accurate”

“many times it is not useful”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Qualitative findings

• The participant’s mistrust of information provided through these technologies (Qual. 3)

“information is not accurate”

“many times it is not useful”

“anyone can write anything to everyone”

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Quantitative findings

• Focused on 8 potential influential demographic variables

• Language

• Education

• Gender

• Age

• Exp@GSD

• Managerial job

• Technical job

• # Commun. tech.

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Quantitative findings

• 3 influential variables

• Language

• Education

• Gender

• Age

• Exp@GSD

• Managerial job

• Technical job

• # Commun. tech.

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Quantitative findings

• Older participants are less likely to use Web 2.0 technology (Quan.1)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Quantitative findings

• Those who with more experience in distributed development are more likely to use such technologies (Quan. 2)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Quantitative findings

• Developers who reported the use of diverse communication tools are more likely to use Web 2.0 technology (Quan. 3)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

The Proclivity model

Group Factors

Individual Factors

Age (Quan. 1)Exp@DSD (Quan. 2)

Usage of Other Tools (Quan. 3)

Organizational Use Policy (Qual. 2)

Tool Work Alignment (Qual. 1)

Trust on Tools (Qual. 3)

Use�������� �������

P1

P2

P3

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Conclusions

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Conclusions

• The work-technology alignment is positively associated with distributed developer’s trust towards collaboration tools (P1)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Conclusions

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Conclusions

• The experience of being exposed to distributed development is positively associated with distributed developer’s trust towards collaboration tools (P2)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Conclusions

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Conclusions

• The encouraging organization policies on collaboration tools are positively associated with distributed developer’s usage of traditional collaboration tools (P3)

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

Limitations

• Recruitment process

• “Traditional” teams

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

What have we learned?

• Previous factors

• that motivates

• in-house development

• small teams

• that inhibits

• non-adoption by a “critical mass”

• time needed to explore the technology

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

What have we learned?

QUALI

• Non-alignment

• Lack of support

• Mistrust of information

QUANTI

• Age

• Experience

• Communication tools

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

What is new?

• In-site study

• Team dynamics

• Role independent

• Availability does not mean adoption

B. Al-Ani, O. Yi Wang, S. Marczak, E. Trainer, D. Redmiles

So what?

• Horizontal integration

• Integrating Web 2.0 mechanisms across tools can influence team member’s attitudes towards these tools and increase usage

• Vertical integration

• Future designs need to consider non-developers’ needs also

Thank you for your attention!

Questions?Comments?Suggestions?

Sabrina MarczakPUCRSsabrina.marczak@pucrs.br

Presented by

Ban Al-AniUCIbalani@ics.uci.edu

Main contact for this work