@article {43055,
	title = {Enabling Autonomous Teams and Continuous Deployment at Scale},
	journal = {IEEE IT Professional},
	year = {2023},
	publisher = {IEEE},
	abstract = {In this article, we give advice on transitioning to a more agile delivery model for large-scale agile development projects based on experience from the Parental Benefit Project of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration. The project modernized a central part of the organization{\textquoteright}s IT portfolio and included up to ten development teams working in parallel. The project successfully changed from using a delivery model which combined traditional project management elements and agile methods to a more agile delivery model with autonomous teams and continuous deployment. This transition was completed in tandem with the project execution. We identify key lessons learned which will be useful for other organizations considering similar changes and report how the new delivery model reduced risk and opened up a range of new possibilities for delivering the benefits of digitalization.},
	author = {Dings{\o}yr, T. and J{\o}rgensen, Magne and Carlsen, F. and Carlstr{\"o}m, L. and Engelsrud, J. and Hansvold, K. and Heib{\o}, M. and K, R{\o}e. and K. O. {S{\o}rensen}}
}
@article {43099,
	title = {A longitudinal explanatory case study of coordination in a very large development programme: the impact of transitioning from a first- to a second-generation large-scale agile development method},
	journal = {Empirical Software Engineering},
	volume = {28},
	year = {2023},
	month = {Jan-01-2023},
	publisher = {Springer Nature},
	abstract = {Large-scale agile development has gained widespread interest in the software industry, but it is a topic with few empirical studies of practice. Development projects at scale introduce a range of new challenges in managing a large number of people and teams, often with high uncertainty about product requirements and technical solutions. The coordination of teams has been identified as one of the main challenges. This study presents a rich longitudinal explanatory case study of a very large software development programme with 10 development teams. We focus on inter-team coordination in two phases: one that applies a first-generation agile development method and another that uses a second-generation one. We identified 27 coordination mechanisms in the first phase, and 14 coordination mechanisms in the second. Based on an analysis of coordination strategies and mechanisms, we develop five propositions on how the transition from a first- to a second-generation method impacts coordination. These propositions have implications for theory and practice.},
	keywords = {coordination mechanisms, inter-team coordination, large-scale agile development, multiteam systems, software development process, Software Engineering},
	issn = {1382-3256},
	doi = {10.1007/s10664-022-10230-6},
	url = {https://rdcu.be/c3FQ4},
	author = {Dings{\o}yr, T. and Finn Olav {Bj{\o}rnson} and Schrof, Julian and Sporsem, Tor}
}
@article {43124,
	title = {Enabling Autonomous Teams and Continuous Deployment at Scale},
	journal = {IT Professional},
	volume = {24},
	year = {2022},
	month = {Jan-11-2022},
	pages = {47 - 53},
	publisher = {IEEE Computer Society},
	address = {New York City},
	issn = {1520-9202},
	doi = {10.1109/MITP.2022.3209871},
	url = {https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10017407/http://xplorestaging.ieee.org/ielx7/6294/10017402/10017407.pdf?arnumber=10017407},
	author = {Dings{\o}yr, T. and J{\o}rgensen, Magne and Frode Odde {Carlsen} and Carlstr{\"o}m, Lena and Engelsrud, Jens and Hansvold, Kine and Heib{\o}-Bagheri, Mari and R{\o}e, Kjetil and Karl Ove Vika {S{\o}rensen}}
}
@misc {43101,
	title = {Right Thoughts \& Right Action: How to Make Agile Teamwork Effective},
	howpublished = {Amplify},
	volume = {35},
	year = {2022},
	month = {03/2022},
	publisher = {Cutter Consortium, Arlington, MA, USA},
	abstract = {The authors offer their own Agile Teamwork Effectiveness Model via five teamwork components (shared leadership, peer feedback, redundancy, adaptability, and team orientation) along with three coordinating mechanisms (shared mental models, mutual trust, and communication). They describe the three main ways their model can be useful. First, colocated teams can better understand how their team works by reflecting on how well they meet each factor in the model and by using behavioral markers to identify ways to improve. Second, it helps distributed teams, multi-teams, and teams doing safety-critical development to evaluate themselves and make improvement. Third, it{\textquoteright}s a way for Agile teams not doing software development to better manage themselves, provided they{\textquoteright}re doing knowledge-intensive work.},
	url = {https://www.cutter.com/article/right-thoughts-right-action-how-make-agile-teamwork-effective},
	author = {Dings{\o}yr, T. and Strode, Diane and Lindsj{\o}rn, Yngve}
}
@article {43100,
	title = {A teamwork effectiveness model for agile software development},
	journal = {Empirical Software Engineering},
	volume = {27},
	year = {2022},
	month = {Jan-03-2022},
	publisher = {Springer Nature},
	abstract = {Teamwork is crucial in software development, particularly in agile development teams which are cross-functional and where team members work intensively together to develop a cohesive software solution. Effective teamwork is not easy; prior studies indicate challenges with communication, learning, prioritization, and leadership. Nevertheless, there is much advice available for teams, from agile methods, practitioner literature, and general studies on teamwork to a growing body of empirical studies on teamwork in the specific context of agile software development. This article presents the agile teamwork effectiveness model (ATEM) for colocated agile development teams. The model is based on evidence from focus groups, case studies, and multi-vocal literature and is a revision of a general team effectiveness model. Our model of agile teamwork effectiveness is composed of shared leadership, team orientation, redundancy, adaptability, and peer feedback. Coordinating mechanisms are needed to facilitate these components. The coordinating mechanisms are shared mental models, communication, and mutual trust. We critically examine the model and discuss extensions for very small, multi-team, distributed, and safety-critical development contexts. The model is intended for re- searchers, team members, coaches, and leaders in the agile community.},
	keywords = {agiel teams, agile leadership, agile methods, agile teamwork model, big five model of teamwork, mutual performance monitoring, peer feedback, redundancy, scrum teams, teamwork model, teamwork theory},
	issn = {1382-3256},
	doi = {10.1007/s10664-021-10115-0},
	url = {https://rdcu.be/cIINu},
	author = {Strode, Diane and Dings{\o}yr, T. and Lindsjorn, Yngve}
}
@techreport {43102,
	title = {Organisering av digitaliseringsprosjekter},
	journal = {Concept arbeidsrapport 2021-1},
	number = {1},
	year = {2021},
	publisher = {NTNU Concept},
	address = {Trondheim},
	abstract = {Stadig flere prosjekter inkluderer grader av digitalisering, spesielt prosjekter med innovasjon i produkter, tjenester eller arbeidsmetoder. Slike prosjekter har hatt utfordringer med {\r a} levere p{\r a} nytte, teknisk produktkvalitet, kostnadskontroll, tidskontroll eller effektivitet i prosjektarbeid. Et forbedringstiltak som er foresl{\r a}tt i en tidligere rapport er mer hensiktsmessig organisering av prosjekter. Denne rapporten beskriver erfaringer og forskningsfunn om organisering av store digitaliseringsprosjekt, med funn fra tre vellykkede store prosjekt i norsk offentlig sektor. Vi beskriver endring i prosjektorganisering, fra det vi beskriver som en kombinasjon av r{\r a}d fra prosjektledelse med r{\r a}d fra programvareutvikling i {\guillemotleft}f{\o}rstegenerasjons metoder for storskala smidig utvikling{\guillemotright}, til mer tilpassede m{\r a}ter {\r a} organisere digital produktutvikling i {\guillemotleft}andregenerasjon metoder for storskala smidig utvikling{\guillemotright}. Vi beskriver organisering gjennom praksiser, roller og artefakter brukt i prosjektene. Videre beskriver vi erfaringer og forskningsfunn p{\r a} spesielle utfordringer i store digitaliseringsprosjekt hvor mange team jobber i parallell med oppgaver som {\r a} definere behov og krav, utvikle og teste produkt. Spesielt ser vi p{\r a} h{\r a}ndtering av kundebehov, hvordan en sikrer gode tekniske l{\o}sninger og hvordan arbeid koordineres og kunnskap deles p{\r a} tvers av team. Denne rapporten gir et innblikk i intern organisering p{\r a} et felt hvor de finnes mange foresl{\r a}tte beste praksiser, men f{\r a} studier internasjonalt p{\r a} hva som faktisk gj{\o}res i praksis. Rike beskrivelser av organisering viser erfaringsbaserte praksiser som kan v{\ae}re nyttige for kommende digitaliseringsprosjekt.},
	url = {https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2739019},
	author = {Dings{\o}yr, T. and Finn Olav {Bj{\o}rnson} and Sporsem, Tor}
}
@book {SE.1.Dybaa.2004,
	title = {Process Improvement in Practice - a Handbook for IT Companies},
	year = {2004},
	publisher = {Kluwer Academic Publishers},
	organization = {Kluwer Academic Publishers},
	author = {Dyb{\r a}, Tore and Dings{\o}yr, T. and N. B. {Moe}}
}
@inproceedings {Simula.SE.555,
	title = {Towards Comprehensive Experience-Based Decision Support},
	journal = {Proceedings of Software Process Improvement: 11th European Conference (EuroSPI 2004)},
	year = {2004},
	pages = {34-45},
	publisher = {Springer},
	type = {Conference},
	isbn = {978-3-540-23725-9},
	author = {Jedlitschka, Andreas and Pfahl, Dietmar},
	editor = {Dings{\o}yr, T.}
}
@inbook {SE.5.Dingsoeyr.2004,
	title = {A Workshop-Oriented Approach for Defining Electronic Process Guides},
	booktitle = {Software Process Modelling},
	series = {The Kluwer International Series in Software Engineering,},
	year = {2004},
	publisher = {Kluwer Academic Publishers},
	organization = {Kluwer Academic Publishers},
	author = {Dings{\o}yr, T. and N. B. {Moe} and Dyb{\r a}, Tore and Conradi, R.},
	editor = {Silvia Teresita {Acu{\~n}a} and Juristo, Natalia}
}
@book {SE.1.Dybaa.2002,
	title = {Praktisk Prosessforbedring - En H{\r a}ndbok for IT-Bedrifter},
	year = {2002},
	publisher = {Fagbokforlaget},
	organization = {Fagbokforlaget},
	author = {Dyb{\r a}, Tore and Dings{\o}yr, T. and N. B. {Moe}}
}
@inproceedings {SE.5.Moe.2002,
	title = {Process Guides As Software Process Improvement in a Small Company},
	journal = {Proceedings of European Software Process Improvement Conference (EuroSPI{\textquoteright}2002)},
	year = {2002},
	month = {18-20 September,},
	type = {1},
	address = {N{\"u}rnberg, Germany},
	author = {N. B. {Moe} and Dings{\o}yr, T. and Dyb{\r a}, Tore and Johansen, T.}
}
@inproceedings {SE.5.Hanssen.2002,
	title = {SPI - Easy in Theory, Hard in Practice},
	journal = {Proceedings of European Software Process Improvement Conference (EuroSPI{\textquoteright}2002)},
	year = {2002},
	month = {18-20 September},
	type = {1},
	address = {N{\"u}rnberg, Germany},
	author = {Geir Kjetil {Hanssen} and Dyb{\r a}, Tore and St{\r a}lhane, T. and Dings{\o}yr, T. and Westerheim, H.}
}
@techreport {SE.7.Dybaa.2000,
	title = {SPIQ Metodeh{\r a}ndbok},
	number = {282},
	year = {2000},
	note = {ISBN 82-7368-230-7, ISSN 0806-3036},
	publisher = {Department of Informatics, University of Oslo},
	author = {Dyb{\r a}, Tore and K. J. {Wedde} and St{\r a}lhane, T. and N. B. {Moe} and Conradi, R. and Dings{\o}yr, T. and Sj{\o}berg, Dag Ingar Kondrup and J{\o}rgensen, Magne}
}
