graduate student from 01.11.2022 until now
LLC “GPB-IT1” (Senior Technical Expert)
Russian Federation
UDC 331
UDC 331.446.4
UDC 65
The article examines how the sequence and type of information influence decision-making processes in teams working within agile frameworks. Based on an adapted ELICIT model, an experiment was conducted involving 14 graduate students who were tasked with developing a marketing strategy for a mobile application. All teams received the same amount of information; the only difference was the order in which it was provided. The results showed that early exposure to irrelevant information contributed to the emergence of cognitive biases such as anchoring and inertia, while a balanced distribution of relevant inputs reduced their impact. The findings highlight the importance of considering the influence of cognitive biases in project teams, especially within agile project management frameworks.
Cognitive biases,group cognitive biases,individual cognitive biases,the impact of cognitive biases to decision-making,heuristic,mistakes in project management,ELICIT
1. Cooper R., Sommer A.I. Agile–Stage-Gate for Manufacturers: Changing the Way New Products Are Developed. Integrating Agile project management methods into a Stage-Gate system offers both opportunities and challenges // Research Technology Management. – 2018. – Vol.61, №2. – P. 17-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2018.1421380
2. Highsmith J. Agile Project Management: Creating Innovative Products. – 2nd ed. – Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2009. – 432 p.
3. Matthies C., Hesse G. Towards using data to inform decisions in agile software development: views of available data // Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Software Technologies (ICSOFT 2019). – 2019. – P. 552–559. – DOI:https://doi.org/10.5220/0007967905520559.
4. Kahneman D. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Moscow: AST Publishers, 2014. – 710 p. (In Russ.)
5. Kahneman D., Slovic P., Tversky A. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Kharkiv: Gumanitarnyi Tsentr Publ.; 2021. 540 p. (In Russ.)
6. Khamitov D.A. The impact of cognitive distortions on decision making in agile project management frameworks: current positions and perspectives in the academic community. Management Sciences. 2024;14(2):104–115. https://doi.org/10.26794/2304-022X-2024-14-2-104-115 EDN: https://elibrary.ru/DKZBYF
7. Mancuso V.F. Effects of cognitive biases on distributed team decision making // Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. – 2014. – Vol. 58, № 1. – DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581083.
8. Moe N.B., Šmite D., Paasivaara M., Lassenius C. Finding the sweet spot for organizational control and team autonomy in large-scale agile software development // Empirical Software Engineering. – 2021. – Vol. 26, № 5. – P. 1–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-021-09967-3; EDN: https://elibrary.ru/LZQZWC
9. Macedo K., Marinho M. Uncertainty Management in Software Projects: A Case Study in a Public Company // Journal of Convergence Information Technology. – 2019. – Vol. 14, № 1. – P. 61–67.
10. Marinho M., Sampaio S., Lima T. A systematic review of uncertainties in software project management // International Journal of Software Engineering & Applications. – 2014. – Vol. 5, № 6. – P. 1–21. – DOI:https://doi.org/10.5121/ijsea.2014.5601.
11. Janis I.L. Victims of groupthink: a psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. – Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1972. – 277 p.
