Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
The impact of Multi-site Software Governance on Knowledge Management
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

The impact of Multi-site Software Governance on Knowledge Management


Published on

This is the presentation of the paper "The impact of Multi-site Software Governance on Knowledge Management" from ICGSE2011 (Helsinki)

This is the presentation of the paper "The impact of Multi-site Software Governance on Knowledge Management" from ICGSE2011 (Helsinki)

Published in: Education, Business

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. THE  IMPACT  OF     MULTI-­‐SITE  SOFTWARE  GOVERNANCE     ON  KNOWLEDGE  MANAGEMENT  Chris&na  Manteli,  Bart  van  den  Hooff,  Antony  Tang,  Hans  van  Vliet   VU  UNIVERSITY  AMSTERDAM  
  • 2. MULTI-­‐SITE  SOFTWARE  DEVELOPMENT   GOVERNANCE  •  SoHware  development  governance  ensures  that  processes   meet  the  requirements.  •  A  governance  model  should  have1   –  A  structural  perspec7ve:  “what  governance  looks  like”   –  A  func7onal  perspec7ve:  “what  governance  does”  •  Challenges  to  define  a  SoHware  Governance  Model   increase  when  development  ac&vi&es  are  distributed   among  remote  loca&ons.  •  Challenges  on  KM  increase  when  development  goes  global  1.  P.L.  Bannerman,  “SoHware  development  governance:  A  meta-­‐management  perspec&ve”,  in  Proceedings  of  the  2009  ICSE  Workshop  on  SoHware  Development  Governance,  ser.  SDG’09.  IEEE  Computer  Society,  2009,  pp.  3-­‐8    
  • 3. RESEARCH  APPROACH  •  A  structural  approach  to  a  Mul&-­‐site  SoHware   Governance  Model  (SGM)  •  Main  Knowledge  Management  (KM)  Challenges  in   Global  SoHware  Development.     Multi-site SGM ? KM ChallengesHow    do  the  different  mul7-­‐site  governance  structures   influence  the  knowledge  management  challenges?  
  • 4. MULTI-­‐SITE  SOFTWARE  DEVELOPMENT   GOVERNANCE  •  Business  Strategy:  the  outsourcing  strategy  with   the  remote  partners,  including  the  legal  implica&ons.  •  Team  Structure  &  composiGon:  team  size,  role   descrip&ons  and  role  distribu&ons.  •  Task  AllocaGon:  how  work  is  distributed  across   sites.    
  • 5. KNOWLEDGE  MANAGEMENT  CHALLENGES  •  CommunicaGon:  communica&on  speed  and   frequency.  •  Knowledge  creaGon  &  storage:  capture   informa&on,  record  it  in  a  medium,  transform  it  and   encode  it  as  knowledge.    •  Knowledge  transfer:  knowledge  s7ckiness,   transac&ve  memory  systems  (TMS)  
  • 6. CASE  STUDY  OVERVIEW  •  Océ  is  a  mul&na&onal  company  in  prin&ng   systems  (Canon  Group).  •  Qualita&ve  data  analysis   –  20  interviews     •  SoHware  Engineers,  Testers,     Site A Architects,  Project  Managers.   –  3  loca&ons   –  1  project   Site B Site NL
  • 7. CASE  STUDY  OVERVIEW  •  Different  governance  structures  iden&fied:   Site NL-Site A Site NL-Site B Business Different Companies: Legal Same Company: No legal barriers Strategy barriers between sites between sites • Site NL flat organization; Site A • Site NL flat organization; Site B Team hierarchically structured hierarchically structured Structure • Role descriptions differ between • Role descriptions differ between & sites sites Composition • Unequal team sizes • Unequal team sizes Co-development of distributed Independent development of Task components: Tightly coupled distributed components: Loosely Allocation activites coupled activities
  • 8. THE  IMPACT  OF  BUSINESS  STRATEGY  ON  KM  •  Knowledge  is  not  freely  shared  between  site   NL-­‐  site  A   –  Site  A  relies  only  on  the  available  knowledge   –  Site  A  lacks  “system-­‐generic”  knowledge  •  Knowledge  shared  from  site  NL  to  site  A  needs   to  be  filtered   –  More  &me  and  effort  spent  to  share  knowledge  
  • 9. THE  IMPACT  OF  TEAM  STRUCTURE  &   COMPOSITION  ON  KM  •  Hierarchical  structures  create  boSlenecks  in   knowledge  sharing.  •  Too  much  focus  on  agility  stresses  tacit   communica&on.  Documenta&on  remains  outdated.  •  Different  role  descrip&ons  make  knowledge  difficult   to  locate.  •  Knowledge  tends  to  s7ck  where  the  majority  of  the   teams  are,  or  where  the  larger  teams  are  located.  
  • 10. THE  IMPACT  OF  TASK  ALLOCATION  ON  KM  •  Site  NL-­‐Site  A:  Co-­‐development   –  Higher  communica&on  frequency.   –  Increased  need  for  knowledge  sharing.   –  Increased  need  for  codified  knowledge.  •  Site  NL-­‐Site  B:  Independent  development   –  Communica&on  frequency  depends  more  on  the   development  phase.   –  Knowledge  s&cks  the  more  ‘independent’  teams.  
  • 11. COMMUNICATION  FREQUENCY  &  TASK   ALLOCATION   High Site NL - Site ACommunication Frequency medium Site NL - Site B Low Requirements Architecture Design Coding Testing Integration Maintenance
  • 12. SUMMARY  Multi-site SGM KM Challenges• Business Strategy • Communication• Team Structure • Knowledge creation & Composition & storage• Task Allocation • Knowledge transfer
  • 13. LESSONS  LEARNED    •  The  impact  of  mul&-­‐site  governance  structures   on  knowledge  management:   –  Legal  barriers  increase  the  effort  and  &me  spent  on   managing  the  crea&on,  storage  and  transfer  of   knowledge   –  Unbalanced  team  structure  &  composi&on  impedes   smooth  flow  of  knowledge.     –  Tightly-­‐coupled  ac&vi&es  among  remote  teams   increases  communica&on  frequency  as  well  as  the   need  and  effort  spent  for  knowledge  sharing.  
  • 14. FUTURE  RESEARCH    •  Expand  and  improve  the  3  structural  aspects   of  the  mul&-­‐site  soHware  governance  model.  •  Create  a  mul&-­‐site  soHware  governance   framework:   –  How  organiza&on  and  development  ac&vi&es   should  be  structured  to  best  align  business  and   development  goals.  
  • 15. THANK  YOU.  Chris&na  Manteli,  Bart  van  den  Hooff,  Antony  Tang,  Hans  van  Vliet   VU  UNIVERSITY  AMSTERDAM  
  • 16. Knowledge Management Multi-site Software Governance Challenges • No direct documentation due to Site NL-Site A: information barriers. • They are different companies • Information sent from Site NL to and information barriers exist Site A needs to be filtered. between the remote sites • Communication frequency is higher. Business Strategy Site NL-Site B: • They are the same company and no information barriers exist between the remote sites Site NL-Site A: • Site NL is a flat organization, while Site A is hierarchically • Hierarchical structures create structured. bottlenecks in knowledge sharing. • Role descriptions differ between • Too much focus on agility stresses sites. tacit communication andTeam Structure • Unbalanced team sizes. documentation remains outdated.& Composition Site NL-Site B: • Different role descriptions makes • Site NL is a flat organization, knowledge difficult to locate. while Site B is hierarchically • Knowledge tends to stick where the structured. majority of teams, or where the larger • Role descriptions differ between teams are located. sites. • Unbalanced team sizes. • Tightly coupled activities increase Site NL-Site A: the need for knowledge sharing. • They co-develop a function and • Co-development creates a greater their activities are tightly coupled. need for codified knowledge. • Communication frequency is high.Task Allocation Site NL-Site B: • Knowledge tends to stick to the independent development teams. • They develop independently and • Communication frequency depends their activities are loosely on the release phase. coupled.