Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userHow Software Development Group Leaders Influence Team Members Behavior
112
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Luiz Capretz Dr.
Publication date
2017
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Evidence in the literature from several business sectors shows that exploratory and exploitative innovation strategies are complementarily important for competitiveness. Our empirical findings reinforced those evidences in the context of software development companies. The innovative behaviour of individuals is an essential ingredient to success in both types of innovations strategies and leaders can have a big influence on this behaviour. Adopting a leadership style that combines transactional and transformational practices is more likely to produce effective results in supporting innovative behaviour. In software development, project managers and other group leaders should be stimulated and supported in adopting such practices to create the conditions for innovative behaviour to thrive.
rate research
Read More
The development of AI applications is a multidisciplinary effort, involving multiple roles collaborating with the AI developers, an umbrella term we use to include data scientists and other AI-adjacent roles on the same team. During these collaborations, there is a knowledge mismatch between AI developers, who are skilled in data science, and external stakeholders who are typically not. This difference leads to communication gaps, and the onus falls on AI developers to explain data science concepts to their collaborators. In this paper, we report on a study including analyses of both interviews with AI developers and artifacts they produced for communication. Using the analytic lens of shared mental models, we report on the types of communication gaps that AI developers face, how AI developers communicate across disciplinary and organizational boundaries, and how they simultaneously manage issues regarding trust and expectations.
The operation of adding edges has been frequently used to the study of opinion dynamics in social networks for various purposes. In this paper, we consider the edge addition problem for the DeGroot model of opinion dynamics in a social network with $n$ nodes and $m$ edges, in the presence of a small number $s ll n$ of competing leaders with binary opposing opinions 0 or 1. Concretely, we pose and investigate the problem of maximizing the equilibrium overall opinion by creating $k$ new edges in a candidate edge set, where each edge is incident to a 1-valued leader and a follower node. We show that the objective function is monotone and submodular. We then propose a simple greedy algorithm with an approximation factor $(1-frac{1}{e})$ that approximately solves the problem in $O(n^3)$ time. Moreover, we provide a fast algorithm with a $(1-frac{1}{e}-epsilon)$ approximation ratio and $tilde{O}(mkepsilon^{-2})$ time complexity for any $epsilon>0$, where $tilde{O}(cdot)$ notation suppresses the ${rm poly} (log n)$ factors. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our second approximate algorithm is efficient and effective, which scales to large networks with more than a million nodes.
The Internet has been ascribed a prominent role in collective action, particularly with widespread use of social media. But most mobilisations fail. We investigate the characteristics of those few mobilisations that succeed and hypothesise that the presence of starters with low thresholds for joining will determine whether a mobilisation achieves success, as suggested by threshold models. We use experimental data from public good games to identify personality types associated with willingness to start in collective action. We find a significant association between both extraversion and internal locus of control, and willingness to start, while agreeableness is associated with a tendency to follow. Rounds without at least a minimum level of extraversion among the participants are unlikely to be funded, providing some support for the hypothesis.
Team composition is a central factor in determining the effectiveness of a team. In this paper, we present a large-scale study on the effect of team composition on multiple measures of team effectiveness. We use a dataset from the largest multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) game, Honor of Kings, with 96 million matches involving 100 million players. We measure team effectiveness based on team performance (whether a team is going to win), team tenacity (whether a team is going to surrender), and team rapport (whether a team uses abusive language). Our results confirm the importance of team diversity and show that diversity has varying effects on team effectiveness: although diverse teams perform well and show tenacity in adversity, they are more likely to abuse when losing than less diverse teams. Our study also contributes to the situation vs. personality debate and show that abusive players tend to choose the leading role and players do not become more abusive when taking such roles. We further demonstrate the predictive power of features based on team composition in prediction experiments.
Almost all research work in computational neuroscience involves software. As researchers try to understand ever more complex systems, there is a continual need for software with new capabilities. Because of the wide range of questions being investigated, new software is often developed rapidly by individuals or small groups. In these cases, it can be hard to demonstrate that the software gives the right results. Software developers are often open about the code they produce and willing to share it, but there is little appreciation among potential users of the great diversity of software development practices and end results, and how this affects the suitability of software tools for use in research projects. To help clarify these issues, we have reviewed a range of software tools and asked how the culture and practice of software development affects their validity and trustworthiness. We identified four key questions that can be used to categorize software projects and correlate them with the type of product that results. The first question addresses what is being produced. The other three concern why, how, and by whom the work is done. The answers to these questions show strong correlations with the nature of the software being produced, and its suitability for particular purposes. Based on our findings, we suggest ways in which current software development practice in computational neuroscience can be improved and propose checklists to help developers, reviewers and scientists to assess the quality whether particular pieces of software are ready for use in research.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
