The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 72 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toward Agile: An Integrated Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Field Data on Software Development Agility1
Abstract
As business and technology environments change at an unprecedented rate, software development agility to respond to changing user requirements has become increasingly critical for software development performance. Agile software development approaches, which emphasize sense-and-respond, self-organization, cross-functional teams, and continuous adaptation, have been adopted by an increasing number of organizations to improve their software development agility. However, the agile development literature is largely anecdotal and prescriptive, lacking empirical evidence and theoretical foundation to support the principles and practices of agile development. Little research has empirically examined the software development agility construct in terms of its dimensions, determinants, and effects on software development performance. As a result, there is a lack of understanding about how organizations can effectively implement an agile development approach. Using an integrated research approach that combines quantitative and qualitative data analyses, this research opens the black box of agile development by empirically examining the relationships among two dimensions of software development agility (software team response extensiveness and software team response efficiency), two antecedents that can be controlled (team autonomy and team diversity), and three aspects of software development performance (on-time completion, on-budget completion, and software functionality). Our PLS results of survey responses of 399 software project managers suggest that the relationships among these variables are more complex than what has been perceived by the literature. The results suggest a tradeoff relationship between response extensiveness and response efficiency. These two agility dimensions impact software development performance differently: response efficiency positively affects all of on-time completion, on-budget completion, and software functionality, whereas response extensiveness positively affects only software functionality. The results also suggest that team autonomy has a positive effect on response efficiency and a negative effect on response extensiveness, and that team diversity has a positive effect on response extensiveness. We conducted 10 post hoc case studies to qualitatively cross-validate our PLS results and provide rich, additional insights regarding the complex, dynamic interplays between autonomy, diversity, agility, and performance. The qualitative analysis also provides explanations for both supported and unsupported hypotheses. We discuss these qualitative analysis results and conclude with the theoretical and practical implications of our research findings for agile development approaches.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920638601200408 · Cited by 17,102
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
An introduction to cybernetics
Ashby, W. R. (1956) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.5851 · Cited by 7,578
Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory.
Willer, D., Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1989) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2073157 · Cited by 7,159
Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice
Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M.-C. (2000) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.00407 · Cited by 6,416
Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change
Beck, K. L., & Andres, C. (2000) · Cited by 5,902
Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change
Tushman, M. L., & O'Reilly, C. A. (1996) · California Management Review · doi:10.2307/41165852 · Cited by 4,950
Manifesto for agile software development
Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., & Thomas, D. A. (2001) · Cited by 4,284
Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development
Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.38.2.269.18845 · Cited by 3,748
Milliken, F. J., & Martins, L. L. (1996) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9605060217 · Cited by 3,413
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- Austin, 2003, Artful Making: What Managers Need to Know About How Artists Work
- Baskerville, 2006, Artful Planning, European Journal of Information Systems, 15, 113, 10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000622 · doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000622
- Chin, 1998, The Partial Least Square Approach to Structural Equation Modeling
- Clark, 1991, Product Development Performance
- Coad, 1999, Java Modeling in Color
- Qumer, 2008, An Evaluation of the Degree of Agility in Six Agile Methods and its Applicability for Method Engineering, Information and Software Technology, 50, 280, 10.1016/j.infsof.2007.02.002 · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2007.02.002
- Schwaber, 2002, Agile Software Development with Scrum
- Williams, 1998, Demography and Diversity in Organizations: A Review of 40 Years of Research, 77
Cited by
A decade of agile methodologies: Towards explaining agile software development
Dingsøyr, T., Nerur, S., Balijepally, V., & Moe, N. B. (2012) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2012.02.033 · Cited by 1,113
The impact of e-service quality and customer satisfaction on customer behavior in online shopping
Rita, P., Oliveira, T., & Farisa, A. (2019) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02690 · Cited by 917
Why do people share their travel experiences on social media?
Oliveira, T., Araujo, B., & Tam, C. (2020) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104041 · Cited by 359
The sensemaking-coevolution-implementation theory of software design
Ralph, P. (2015) · Science of Computer Programming · doi:10.1016/j.scico.2014.11.007 · Cited by 60
Wong, D. T. W., & Ngai, E. W. T. (2025) · Annals of Operations Research · doi:10.1007/s10479-023-05241-5 · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- Lee, G., & Xia, W.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2010-03-01
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 87-114
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1772749354
- Cited by
- 614
- References
- 72
- FWCI
- 95.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Toward Agile: An Integrated Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Field Data on Software Development Agility1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/20721416
- The paper
- Lee, G., & Xia, W. (2010). Toward Agile: An Integrated Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Field Data on Software Development Agility1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/20721416
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.