The study of Littlepage (1991) explain the relationship between task type and team size. Lin, Tsai and Liu (2016), Ellemers el (2013) and Huo and Binning (2008) demonstrates the factors of social identification related to teamwork productivity. This essay combines the perception of those four papers for discuss the productivity influencer in agile team. Agile team considers to be a consistent, high efficiency and well performance group in an organization. Claudia el (2012) mention that in information technology (IT) group, agile team of software development implicates a concept that this team can deliver software product or service frequently with high quality. Primely, team is the minimum management unit of an organization which usually include multiple persons. When a task should to be done, it is possible to assign to one or more person in team. Then, this action led to a fact that people is necessary to communication or collaboration to others. This communication or collaboration activity is so-called teamwork. Many Small team combine to generate a group, an organization, or a firm. Thus, the productivity of teamwork is one of key factors to affect the performance of firms. There are many influence factors of teamwork productivity. For agile team, the team size, task type, social identification and external environment are the most crucial factors of group performance.  


Agile team productivity has a lot to do with the team size and task type. In previous research, Littlepage (1991) tests Steiner’s model that the productivities of different task type in different team size included additive task and disjunction task in 2- size team or 10- size team. This research investigates the basic factors which impact team productivity, but lack of discussion the collaboration of task type of teams. Steiner (1972) proposed the team productivities was linked to the task type of a team. The task type can be divided to additive task or disjunction task. Littlepage (1991) discussed that the team productivities of additive task were linear increasing with the team size, but the team productivities of disjunction task were not linear increasing with the team size. Apparently, the additive task almost likely a simple task type which can be easily summed into team output. This type of task has less correlation and impaction for peer to peer. Individual work independently in a team. Teamwork productivities can be easily management and measurement. The disjunction task is different from additive task which is individual continuous task allows team to select less member to contribute. Most of the disjunction task related to intellectual task. Each of the step of task has deeply correlation which include computing, reasoning and induction etc. the team productivity of disjunction task depends on individual productivity not team size.  Littlepage (1991) research have not discuss about the complex situation like a team task to create software and collaboration cost between team to team. To manage agile team in IT group, the priority task should be organized team efficiency. Conway (1968) argues that the software architecture was linked to the organization communication structure. The communication time cost increase with the team size increase. Huge number of individuals in one team lead to a complex communication model. The agile software development team is handling the deeply intellectual task. The direct and indirect collaboration from individual to individual enormous influence teamwork productivity. Therefore, the task type, team size even organization structure are the crucial influencers of agile team productivity. Agile team advocates a small team size.


Social identification is critical factor of teamwork productivity which previous researcher usually research on. Perceived respect of team member is able to affect teamwork productivity. Lin, Tsai and Liu (2016) mentioned in research and development (R&D) or innovation team, the feeling of respect is directly impact team performance, which can be reduce cost, avoid negative affective and dysfunctional behavior. Huo and Binning (2008) says that psychology of respect could derive self-esteem health of personal well-being. The previous work comprehensive discussion about the respect to influence individual and team behavior. Ellemers el (2013) writes that perceived respect lead to positively related to individual in team. Team member feels value of self for the team that drive team member willingness to invest in team. Inclusion is other path to impact team performance in social identification. Ellemers el (2013) talked in the two-path model that inclusion of individual in the team makes the positive team identity to produce positive outcome. Individual feeling in team extremely important to team performance. Prior studies discussed the motives, behavior and psychology regarding to social identification, but not explicitly assess the sense of leadership personality of team. Leontis (2011) argues that agile team should work as geek team. Individual in team is full of passion, innovation and self-drive. It requires the team leadership hold the concept of transparency, impartial and inspiration. On the other hand, Moe, Dingsøyr and Dybå (2010) maintains that agile team management suggested to be a self-management driven model. Team members have equivalence ownership of project. Thus, Agile team productivity not only related to feeling respect and inclusion of team member, but also linked to the team leadership personality. Agile team emphasis respect individual.

Prior studies research individual and alone team related factors to influence teamwork productivities. In real world, team always belong to a group, organization or firms. The environment influence teamwork directly. The most probably factors of teamwork productivities are culture, process and measure. Different culture sharp different team model. Social culture and nation culture can gather people to be different small team. For instance, in multiple nation company should build an inclusion diversity culture for break the wall of different culture, even religion culture. Kent el (2001) announces the Manifesto of Agile is “Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. Working software over comprehensive documentation. Customer collaboration over contract negotiation. Responding to change over following a plan.” Agile culture gathers software developer to cherish the same ideals and follow the same path. The manifesto of agile embody the preference of software developer. So agile team can be considered as a culture driven team type. Process can impact agile team productivity directly. Melo el (2013) insists that group processes take effect of team outcomes. The chosen of communication process, collaboration process and work deliver process are significantly impact teamwork productivity. Moe, Dingsøyr and Dybå (2010) talks a learning loop teamwork process model. Agile team of software development should build monitoring, feedback and learn mechanism for support continuous evolution. The measurement of individual and team drive teamwork outcomes. Melo el (2011) discuss that the measurement of an agile team can be summarized into product quantity, costs, timeliness, autonomy, efficiency, quality, effectiveness, project success and customer satisfaction. Those of indicators are the external factors to influence agile team productivities. Individual and team be measured as productivity tendency. Those measurement also extends from engineering management to user feedback. Agile team embrace diversity culture and simplify process.


In conclusion, the studies of Littlepage (1991), Lin, Tsai and Liu (2016), Ellemers el (2013), Huo and Binning (2008) are comprehensive discuss about the individual behavior and psychology factors related to teamwork performance. The task type and team size are the fundamental of teamwork productivity and team cost management research which extremely important to team leadership to understand teamwork. The social identification theory has equal importance. The feeling of individual in team determine the person who whether willing to invest in team. The respect and inclusion are crucial targets which team leader to building a team. Nevertheless, a team is not existing lonely without organization. To build contemporary agile software developer team in information technology industry, more factors should be consideration. Most importantly, team’s cooperation should be formulating into cross region situation. The direct and indirect communication mechanism is a key influencer of team productivity.  Moreover, external environment factors can note be ignored. The team culture design should adopt the social and nation culture. Overwise, the potential conflict might hide in team. The establishment of process and measurement is still important. According to the new institutional economics, the implementation of institution and regulation conduct a direct economic result. In order to obtain optimized productivity of team. Management should establish moderated management strategy to agile team.



  1. Beck, Kent, et al. "Manifesto for agile software development." (2001): 2006.
  2. Conway, Melvin E. "How do committees invent." Datamation4 (1968): 28-31.
  3. de O. Melo, C., S. Cruzes, D., Kon, F., & Conradi, R. (2013). Interpretative case studies on agile team productivity and management. Information and Software Technology, 55(2), 412–427. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2012.09.004
  4. Ellemers, N., Sleebos, E., Stam, D. & de Gilder, D. (2013), Feeling Included and Valued: How Perceived Respect Affects Positive Team Identity and Willingness to Invest in the Team. British Journal of Management, 24: 21-37. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 8551.2011.00784.x
  5. Huo, Y. J. & Binning, K. R. (2008), Why the Psychological Experience of Respect Matters in Group Life: An Integrative Account. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2: 1570-1585. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00129.x
  6. Leontis, A. (2011). Modern Greek: A Small, Agile Team Player? Journal of Modern Greek Studies, 29(1), 127–131. doi:10.1353/mgs.2011.0001
  7. Lin, C., Tsai, Y. & Liu, M. (2016) Something good and something bad in R&D teams: Effects of social identification and dysfunctional behaviour. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 104: 191-199. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.01.001
  8. Littlepage, G.E. (1991). Effects of Group Size and Task Characteristics on Group Performance: A Test of Steiner's Model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(4): 449-456. doi: 10.1177/0146167291174014
  9. Moe, N., Dingsøyr, T., & Dybå, T. (2010). A teamwork model for understanding an agile team: A case study of a Scrum project. Information and Software Technology, 52(5), 480–491. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2009.11.004
  10. Melo, C., Cruzes, D., Kon, F., & Conradi, R. (2011). Agile Team Perceptions of Productivity Factors. AGILE Conference (AGILE), 2011 (pp. 57–66). IEEE Publishing. doi:10.1109/AGILE.2011.35