When Plans do not Work Out: How Plans are Used in Software Development Projects

Abstract

Based on empirical material from the area of software engineering, this article discusses the issue of plans and planning as an integral part of and prerequisite for software development work. It relates observed practices to literature produced by the Computer Supported Cooperative Work community. Empirical studies of software development practice seldom address re-planning. By analyzing the empirical material from one project we are able to show how certain kinds of co-ordination problems arise and how they may be dealt with. The empirical research does not focus primarily on the character of plans; instead, it raises the question 'what means are necessary and should be provided in order to cope with situations when plans do not work out? In relation to plans, especial emphasis is on ''due process'', i.e. how the project plan and the company wide project model are maintained to enable the identification and articulation of deviations from it. On the basis of our empirical analysis we propose to support the articulation and coordination work necessary in situations where plans do not adequately work out.

Calendars: Time Coordination and Overview in Families and Beyond

“…According to Rönkkö et al (2005), empirical research on plans has thus far focused on two main goals in that scholars have sought to understand not only the relationship between plans and actions, but also how organisational members orient themselves to plans to make sense of their work in contextually specific ways. Several empirical studies have explored how plans are used as artefacts for the coordination of work activities, analysing how plans' relevance is occasioned in the circumstances of their use (Bossen and Markussen, 2010;Button and Sharrock, 1998;Dant and Francis, 1998;Koskinen, 2000;Randall and Rouncefiel, 2011;Rönkkö et al, 2005;Schmidt, 1999).…”

ECSCW 2011 Conference Supplement: European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work Aarhus, 24.-28. September 2011

“…The research is focused on the character of plans in the apron tower. My aim is to contribute to the discussion on plans and situated actions in the CSCW community (Button, Sharrock, 1994;Bardram, 1997;Schmidt, 1999;Dant, Francis, 1998;Koskinen, 2000;Rönkkö et al, 2005;Harper et al, 2000) with my analysis on how the use of the 'apron' in an Italian airport is planned.…”

“…Rönkkö et al (2005) instead have highlighted that 'plans "necessarily" underdetermine situated actions' because 'no rule dictates its own application ' (p. 436).…”

“…This way, an increasing theoretical interest in situated activities has led to the analysis of plans as 'guidance for work' and away from the study of how protocols, checklists, and programs might determine the coordination of work in organizations. Nevertheless, several studies in the last twenty years in the CSCW community (Button, Sharrock, 1994;Bardram, 1997;Schmidt, 1999Schmidt, , 2011Dant, Francis, 1998;Koskinen, 2000;Rönkkö et al, 2005;Harper et al, 2000;Randall, Rouncefield, 2007) have shown that the false dichotomy between plans and situated actions can be removed. Bardram, for example, suggests that it is possible to talk about situated planning (Bardram, 1997) as plans themselves are implemented in situ in that they are made out of situated actions.…”

“…Bardram, for example, suggests that it is possible to talk about situated planning (Bardram, 1997) as plans themselves are implemented in situ in that they are made out of situated actions. Rönkkö et al (2005), on the other hand, have highlighted that 'plans "necessarily" underdetermine situated actions' because 'no rule dictates its own application' (p. 436). So their research focused on the importance of plans even when they do not work out and re-planning is necessary.…”