“The Second Vice is Lying, the First is Running into Debt.” Antecedents and Mitigating Practices of Social Debt: an Exploratory Study in Distributed Software Development Teams
2021
- 124Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage124
- Downloads106
- Abstract Views18
Artifact Description
Although much is known about the concept of technical debt in software development, less is known about its social counterpart, also known as social debt. Social debt refers to future consequences of decisions related to people and their interactions. Omissions in social interactions or reduction of communication can foster social debt – and in turn result in negative outcomes in the long run. In this paper, we explore what factors drive and mitigate social debt in distributed agile software development teams. Utilizing an exploratory case study approach, we derive insights from two case organizations. We present antecedents and mitigating factors of social debt related to communication, collaboration, and coordination.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know