The affective, behavioural and cognitive outcomes of agile project management: A preliminary meta‐analysis.
Saved in:
| Title: | The affective, behavioural and cognitive outcomes of agile project management: A preliminary meta‐analysis. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Koch, Jan, Drazic, Ivana, Schermuly, Carsten C. |
| Source: | Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology. Sep2023, Vol. 96 Issue 3, p678-706. 29p. 2 Diagrams, 3 Charts, 2 Graphs. |
| Subjects: | Behavioral assessment, Evaluation of medical care, Psychology information storage & retrieval systems, Affect (Psychology), Medical information storage & retrieval systems, Meta-analysis, Management of medical records, Effect sizes (Statistics), Systematic reviews, Health outcome assessment, Conceptual structures, Medical records, Job satisfaction, Descriptive statistics, Cognitive testing, Commitment (Psychology), Data analysis software, Psychological stress, Corporate culture, Behavior modification |
| Abstract: | Agile project management (APM) refers to a set of project management frameworks that are increasingly common in a range of industries. Even though the positive effects of APM for employees and organizations are widely assumed, no systematic account of affective, behavioural and cognitive outcomes appears in the academic literature. In this pre‐registered meta‐analysis, we examine the effects of APM based on K = 40 records (with k = 41 independent studies, N = 73,825). Our analyses indicate the beneficial effects of APM across outcomes: For the affective outcomes of job satisfaction, affective strain and organizational commitment, the effect sizes were, on average, small. For the behavioural outcomes of performance and innovative behaviour, the effect sizes were medium to large. For the cognitive outcome of psychological empowerment, the results of our meta‐analysis suggest a medium effect. Furthermore, we explore the moderating effects of contextual (team size, occupational groups, culture) and methodological boundary conditions (publication status, study design, levels of analysis, study quality). Compared to studies conducted with software developers, the effect sizes are stronger in other occupations, such as manufacturing, health care and logistics. Moreover, stronger effect sizes are found in published than in unpublished records. We conclude by discussing the state of quantitative APM research and highlight avenues for future study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Agile project management (APM) refers to a set of project management frameworks that are increasingly common in a range of industries. Even though the positive effects of APM for employees and organizations are widely assumed, no systematic account of affective, behavioural and cognitive outcomes appears in the academic literature. In this pre‐registered meta‐analysis, we examine the effects of APM based on K = 40 records (with k = 41 independent studies, N = 73,825). Our analyses indicate the beneficial effects of APM across outcomes: For the affective outcomes of job satisfaction, affective strain and organizational commitment, the effect sizes were, on average, small. For the behavioural outcomes of performance and innovative behaviour, the effect sizes were medium to large. For the cognitive outcome of psychological empowerment, the results of our meta‐analysis suggest a medium effect. Furthermore, we explore the moderating effects of contextual (team size, occupational groups, culture) and methodological boundary conditions (publication status, study design, levels of analysis, study quality). Compared to studies conducted with software developers, the effect sizes are stronger in other occupations, such as manufacturing, health care and logistics. Moreover, stronger effect sizes are found in published than in unpublished records. We conclude by discussing the state of quantitative APM research and highlight avenues for future study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09631798 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/joop.12429 |
