2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-
Companion)
A Winning Team - What Personality Has To Do
With Software Engineering
Erica Weilemann
Faculty of Information Management
University of Applied Sciences Neu-Ulm
Neu-Ulm, Germany
erica.weilemann@hs-neu-ulm.de
Abstract—Nowadays, software is developed in teams. But how
should teams be put together in order to build a high quality
team?
This study shows how the different roles in a software
development team - project leader, requirements engineer, archi-
tect/designer, and developer/tester/maintainer - should be staffed
with respect to HEXACO personality traits in order to form a
high quality team.
We conducted a qualitative analysis by leading 12 semi-
structured interviews with interviewees who work in the software
engineering sector and have working experience of at least 2
years. We followed a Grounded Theory approach to derive
personality traits and link them to software engineering roles.
Our study shows that different personality profiles are indeed
beneficial for the different roles. A project leader e.g. should
have a more pronounced Agreeableness domain whereas the
Extraversion domain should be pronounced with a requirements
engineer.
Our results should support the composition of software en-
gineering teams with the aim to successfully build high quality
teams.
Index Terms—Engineering management - Business manage-
ment - Human resource management
Engineering management - Software development management
Software engineering team, Personality, HEXACO
I. P ROBLEM S TATEMENT
Software development nowadays in most cases is teamwork
[10][p. 83]. Thus the quality of the software strongly depends
on the appropriate composition of the development team [1].
But according to which aspects a software development team
should be composed? One possible factor is personality [12].
Personality traits are a common and also effective method for
assembling teams [11]. This research proposes how the differ-
ent roles in a software development team - project leader, re-
quirements engineer, architect, and developer/tester/maintainer
- should be assigned with respect to their personality traits
using the HEXACO personality model. The aim is to form
a successful software development team. We analyzed which
personality traits are demanded from the different software
engineering roles for the purpose of building high quality
software development teams from the point of view of experts
working in the IT branch. The interviewed experts cover a
wide range of IT sectors: finance, automotive, telecommuni-
cation, security, business management, municipal facilities, IT
service provider, and the event sector. Also the number of
employees of the involved enterprises ranged between 50 on
2574-1934/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE 252
DOI 10.1109/ICSE-Companion.2019.00100
the one side and more than 500 on the other side and therefore
cover small enterprises as well as large corporations. Our
interview partners cover all mentioned software engineering
roles. Thus our results should be applicable for a broad range
of software developing companies.
II. R ESEARCH M ETHOD
Our study was of inductive interpretivist character. Thus we
followed the Grounded Theory approach [4], [7]. Therefore ex-
perts of the IT branch were interviewed in order to learn which
attributes constitute ”high quality” members of a software
development team. We conducted semi-structured interviews
and therefore prepared a questionnaire which should guide us
through the interview. Furthermore participants who were not
able to answer the questions in a personal interview, had the
possibility to fill out the questionnaire.
For the composition of the set of our interview partners
we used criterion sampling [3][p. 409] with experts of the IT
branch which had at least 2 years of working experience in the
IT branch. We insured that with the number of our interviews
we gained theoretical [3] and data saturation.
In sum, we interviewed 12 people. The group of interviewed
people was composed of 10 male and 2 female people. The
age ranged between 29 and 41 years with 2 to 15 years of
experience in the IT branch. Branches covered the finance, au-
tomotive, telecommunication, security, business management,
municipal facilities, IT service provider, and the event sector.
We transcribed and coded the interviews openly and axially
[4]. After that we used a lexical approach and connected the
codes to the facet level scales of the HEXACO personality
inventory and their descriptions [9]. This resulted in individual
personality profiles for the different software engineering
roles.
III. R ESULTS
A. Project Leader
The project leader should have high scores on the Agree-
ableness domain. The interviewees mentioned qualities which
could be mapped to all four facet scales of the Agreeable-
ness domain. Interestingly, the social component as well as
methodological skills occupied the interviewees more than
professional skills. Interviewees demanded error friendliness,
a climate where errors can happen and it is possible to admit
them and talk about them.
The Conscientousness domain is apportioned very differ-
ently. On the one hand, high scores on the organization and
prudence scale are demanded, they should be helpful in leading
the project in a forward-thinking and structured way. On
the other hand, low scores on the perfectionism scale are
demanded which should also help to successfully complete
the project. Many of the interviewees mentioned that a team
is only as good as its team leader or project leader, if the team
has to follow her/his instructions.
B. Requirements Engineer
As a requirements engineer has to communicate in very
different directions, high levels on the Extraversion domain
are demanded. She/he has to communicate with both sides and
thus speak the language of both sides which also implies expert
knowledge - on the one hand of the domain of the customer
and on the other hand of the questions or problems which
developers might have. The requirements engineer has to be a
socializer and keep contact to customers and the development
team.
For finding best solutions for the customer (and the pro-
grammer) the requirements engineer might have to consider
unusual solutions or think outside the box. Thus high scores on
the creativity and unconventionality facet scales are demanded.
On the Conscientiousness domain, high levels on the organi-
zation and prudence facet scale are demanded. Circumspection
and forward-thinking are requested, because the requirements
engineer is the ”place” where serious decisions are made for
the developers. Here also higher scores on the perfectionism
scale are helpful.
C. Architect
For the architect role the destilled personality facets are
broad in scope. Higher scores in the Extraversion domain level
are beneficial, but compared to the requirements engineer they
do not have to be as pronounced. Low scores on the anxiety
facet scale and high scores on the prudence facet scale were
demanded because if difficulties occur, the architect has to stay
calm and rationally think of possible solutions. Beneficial are
low scores on the perfectionism facet scale. Just as the project
leader, the architect has to make decisions which might accept
imperfect software if the project should be finished in time and
in budget.
D. Developer/Tester/Maintainer
For Developer/Tester/Maintainer great emphasis is placed
on the Conscientiousness domain level. High scores on the
organization, perfectionism and prudence facet scale were
demanded by the interviewees.
Concerning social skills we found a clash of demands. For
developers, the sociability scale is a certain contradiction.
Some interview partners mentioned, communication skills
are of importance which would mean higher scores on the
sociability scale. Other interview partners said, communication
253
skills are not important, which means that low levels on the
sociability scale are not disadvantageous.
Also the opinions on the ability for teamwork varied. Some
said this is essential, others do not think it’s so important. A
developer should not feel the urge to deliver a one-man show.
And - unlike the other roles - there was a demand for self
motivation. Unfortunately, this skill cannot be matched to a
personality facet. We identified creativity and unconvention-
ality as desired facets which supports the research results of
e.g. Amin et al. [2] and Graziotin [5].
A developer should not be a ”babbler”. The majority of the
interviewees demanded that the developer should be able to
express her/his needs, to address problems openly, and to be
open to criticism - as giver as well as receiver.
Many of the interviewees demanded from developers to
have a feeling for the needs of the customer because in the
end, the customer - and not the developer - has to like the
product.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The present work as part of the EVELIN project was funded
by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
(Bundesministerium fr Bildung und Forschung) under grant
number 01PL17022E. The authors are responsible for the
content of this publication.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. T. Acuña, M. N. Gómez, J. E. Hannay, N. Juristo, and D. Pfahl. Are
team personality and climate related to satisfaction and software quality?
aggregating results from a twice replicated experiment. Information and
Software Technology, 57:141–156, 2015.
[2] A. Amin, M. Rehman, S. Basri, and M. F. Hassan. A proposed
conceptual framework of programmer’s creativity. In 2015 International
Symposium on Technology Management and Emerging Technologies
(ISTMET), pages 108–113, Piscataway, NJ, 2015. IEEE.
[3] A. Bryman. Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press Oxford,
5 edition, 2016.
[4] J. M. Corbin and A. L. Strauss. Basics of qualitative research:
Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. SAGE, Los
Angeles and London and New Delhi and Singapore and Washington DC
and Boston, fourth edition edition, 2015.
[5] Daniel Graziotin. The dynamics of creativity in software development.
In Proceedings of the PROFES 2013, pages 1–6, 2013.
[6] U. Flick. Qualitative Sozialforschung: Eine Einführung, volume 55694
of Rororo Rowohlts Enzyklopädie. rowohlts enzyklopädie im Rowohlt
Taschenbuch Verlag, Reinbek bei Hamburg, 8. auflage, originalausgabe
edition, August 2017.
[7] B. G. Glaser and A. L. Strauss. Grounded theory: Strategien qualitativer
Forschung. Programmbereich Gesundheit. Verlag Hans Huber, Bern, 3.,
unveränderte auflage edition, 2010.
[8] T. Kanij, R. Merkel, and J. Grundy. An empirical investigation of
personality traits of software testers. In Eighth International Workshop
on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering, CHASE
2015, pages 1–7, Piscataway, NJ, 2015. IEEE.
[9] K. Lee and M. C. Ashton. The hexaco personality inventory - revised -
scaledescriptions, 2009.
[10] J. Ludewig and H. Lichter. Software Engineering: Grundlagen, Men-
schen, Prozesse, Techniken. Dpunkt.verl., Heidelberg, 3., korr. aufl.
edition, 2013.
[11] R. P. Tett and D. D. Burnett. A personality trait-based interactionist
model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3):500–
517, 2003.
[12] D. Winsborough and T. Chamorro-Premuzic. Great teams are about
personalities, not just skills, 2017.