IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v24y2022i4p2293-2309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should We All Work in Sprints? How Agile Project Management Improves Performance

Author

Listed:
  • Tobias Lieberum

    (TUM School of Management, Technical University of Munich, 80333 Munich, Germany)

  • Sebastian Schiffels

    (Lancaster University Management School (Campus Leipzig), 04109 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Rainer Kolisch

    (TUM School of Management, Technical University of Munich, 80333 Munich, Germany)

Abstract

Problem definition : Agile project management, in particular Scrum, is enjoying increased use in practice despite only scant scientific validation. This article explores how agile project management impacts project performance and execution. We compare the effects of agile sprints—short-term project phases characterized by time-boxed progression from one sprint to the next and self-imposed, phase-specific output goals—with those of traditional project management. Methodology/results : We decompose the two sprint elements of time-boxed progression and self-imposed, phase-specific output goals as factors in a 2 × 2 experimental design. We then conceptualize project execution as a simple real-effort task and conduct a controlled laboratory study. For a given duration, participants perform better with time-boxed progression as, without it, that is, with flexible progression, they spend too much time on early project phases at the expense of later ones. We refer to this effect as “progression fallacy” and show how it differs from well-known behavioral effects that cause project delays. Introducing self-imposed, phase-specific output goals in combination with time-boxed progression, as proposed by Scrum, does not significantly improve performance when compared with time-boxed progression alone. However, the combination of self-imposed, phase-specific output goals and flexible progression, as is common in traditional project management, amplifies the progression fallacy with the result that goal-setting has a negative performance effect. In two control treatments, we show that the progression fallacy is robust to planning and progression prompts despite some mitigation. Managerial implications : This study contributes evidence of higher project performance when working in agile sprints, which mitigate behavioral flaws present in traditional project management. Not only do these behavioral insights apply to project management; they are also relevant in the broader context of task completion.

Suggested Citation

  • Tobias Lieberum & Sebastian Schiffels & Rainer Kolisch, 2022. "Should We All Work in Sprints? How Agile Project Management Improves Performance," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 2293-2309, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:24:y:2022:i:4:p:2293-2309
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2022.1091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.1091
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2022.1091?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:24:y:2022:i:4:p:2293-2309. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.