Knowledge Management Practices in GSD

A Systematic Literature Review Update

Romulo de Aguiar Beninca

, Elisa Hatsue Moriya Huzita

, Edwin Vladimir Cardoza Galdamez

Gislaine Camila Lapasini Leal

, Renato Balancieri

andYoji Massago

Computer Department, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil

Production Engineering Department, State University of Maringá, Maringá, Brazil

Keywords: Knowledge Management, Knowledge Management Practices, GSD, GSD Challenges.

Abstract: Software development is an activity that makes intensive use of knowledge. The reduction of face-to-face

communication in Global Software Development Environments (GSD), make exponentially important to

use Knowledge Management in these environments, which is performed by Practices of Knowledge

Management. This study presents an update of a systematic review of Practices of Knowledge Management

in GSD. The main contribution of this study relates to the identification of other practices, including sharing

of the "social conscience", which gives for people the ability to identify themselves within the work context,

improving the interaction, the performance of activities and also trust between individuals.

1 INTRODUCTION

The Global Software Development (GSD) is an

approach that allows achieving competitive

advantages such as cost reduction with teams in

other countries (offshore), with the outsourcing of

labor (outsourcing), greater proximity to customers,

in addition to possibility of maintaining an ongoing

project 24 hours per day (follow-the-sun). However,

the different levels of dispersion (cultural,

geographic, temporal) that characterize the GSD,

brings with them difficulties in communication,

team coordination, trust among developers and

reduce social consciousness about these work

environments (Herbsleb et al. 2000).

Software development is an activity that makes

intensive use of knowledge. The reduction of face-

to-face communication and the suppression of

contextual information resulting from different

levels of dispersion in GSD environments make

important the use of Knowledge Management in

these environments (Desouza et al. 2006; Zahedi and

Babar 2014; Madsen et al. 2014).

To accomplish the Knowledge Management

(KM), it is necessary the use of Knowledge

Management Practices (KMP), which are activities

performed regularly with the aim of supporting the

development of products and services generating

results, using this knowledge (Dalkir, 2011). Despite

of the importance of KMP to deal with challenges of

GSD, it was identified in the current literature, only

one study (Arshad et al. 2012). It presents a

systematic review on finding solutions to the

challenges of GSD arising from lack of KM and

KMP. The authors found that KMPs can be used for

mitigating some of GSD challenges such as: trust,

lack of common understanding and communication.

However, this research does not describe how to

implement KMPs identified and neither later works

were found, of those authors, that dealt the

implementation of these KMPs.

This paper aims to update the initial search

results found in Arshad et al. (2012). The framework

of practices and challenges should serve as support

for the specification of a support structure to deal

with the challenges of GSD with KM.

For this, it was carried out a search in the

literature in order to identify KMPs used in GSD by

a systematic literature review (SLR). The search was

based on the primary study performed by Arshad et

al. (2012), where was identified 27 papers relating to

KM practices in GSD, between the period

considering from 2002 to 2012 years. This study

extended the studies on this subject, considering

from 2012 to 2014 year and also including 11 new

studies found in current literature. From performed

365

de Aguiar Beninca R., Hatsue Moriya Huzita E., Vladimir Cardoza Galdamez E., Camila Lapasini Leal G., Balancieri R. and Massago Y..

Knowledge Management Practices in GSD - A Systematic Literature Review Update.

DOI: 10.5220/0005380103650373

In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2015), pages 365-373

ISBN: 978-989-758-097-0

 2015 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

analysis on these studies the practice sharing of

"social conscience" was identified.

This paper is organized as follows: Section 2

describes the methodology used to SLR. Section 3

presents the results of the studies and extracted data.

Section 4 presents a discussion on the challenges

and practices of KM. Section 5 describes the

conclusion.

2 METHODOLOGY

This research was conducted using systematic

literature review (SLR). SLR is a way to synthesize

results correlated with a specific problem of a

research. It is important for the practice of evidence-

based science. The benefits provided by this type of

approach allows reflection and creation of new

knowledge relevant to the scientific community

(Kitchenham et al. 2009).

To achieve results with a high scientific value, a

systematic review should follow a strict research

protocol, where the search engines to be used are

identified, the search string and rigid rules of

inclusion and exclusion for performing a

classification of retrieved studies are also defined.

This study follows the approach of Kitchenham and

Charters (2007), to perform the SLR and it is

divided into three steps 1) Definition of the search

protocol; 2) Selection of the work; 3) Synthesis and

evaluation of results

Therefore, this study aims to identify and provide

a description of a set of KM practices that enables

mitigate the challenges posed by the lack of KM in

GSD.

So, three relevant research questions for this

study were identified:

RQ1: What GSD issues occur due to lack of

knowledge management (KM)?

RQ2: What KMPs are used in GSD projects?

RQ3: What GSD issues are addressed by existing

knowledge management practices (KMPs)?

A literature review was structured in three phases

outlined in the protocol described by the

(Kitchenham and Charters 2007):

 Search Strategy;

 Selection of works;

 Evaluation of the quality of the selected studies.

2.1 Definition of the Search Strategy

and Conducting the Searches

The definition phase of the search strategy was

divided into three sub-phases 1) Definition of the

search string, 2) Definition of the search engines,

and 3) Conduct of searches.

Aiming to define the search pilot studies were

performed to identify synonyms used for the KM

and GSD terms. It was done, in order to minimize

the possibility of no recovery works related to the

subject. The search string was the same used by

Arshad et al. (2012), which allowed the updating of

the work, plus the work recovered considering the

period 2012 to 2014. The search string used is

presented in Table 1 below:

Table 1: String of search.

GSD : (“Global Software development” OR

“distributed software development” OR “multi-site

software development” OR “global software

engineering” OR “global requirements

engineering” OR “distributed software

engineering” OR “distributed requirements

engineering” OR “multisite software development”

OR GSD OR GSE OR “offshore software

development” OR GRE)

KM: (“knowledge management” OR “knowledge

sharing” OR “knowledge acquisition” OR

“knowledge transfer” OR “knowledge creation”

OR “knowledge capture” OR “tacit knowledge”

OR “explicit knowledge” OR “knowledge

retention” OR “knowledge valuation” OR

“knowledge use” OR “knowledge application” OR

“knowledge discovery” OR “knowledge

integration” OR “knowledge theory” OR

“organization knowledge” OR “knowledge

engineering” OR “information management” OR

“information sharing” OR “information transfer”

OR “information reuse” OR “common

understanding” OR “shared understanding”

After defining the search string, shown in Table 1,

search engines to be used in SLR were chosen:

 Inspec, IET;

 IEEE Explore;

 ACM Digital Library;

 Science Direct;

 Springerlink;

 EICompendex.

To implement the search string minor

adjustments to suit the syntax and constraints

imposed by different search engines were needed.

The volume of papers retrieved from the

searches in this study and the primary studies

(Arshad et al. 2012), are presented on Table 2

below.

ICEIS2015-17thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems

366

Table 2: Search results for engines.

2002 to 2012 2012 to 2014

Inspec, IET, IEEE

38 35

ACM Digital Library

85 28

Science Direct

149 88

Springerlink

215 46

EiCompendex

107 17

Total 594 214

The primary study performed by Arshad et al.

(2012) recovered 594 works in 120 months. The

secondary study, concerned at 32 months (January

2012 to August 2014), 214 works were recovered. It

shows an average increase of 35% in searches

involving KM and GSD. This increase had also been

noticed by some authors of recent papers retrieved

(Kwan and Damian 2011; Arshad et al. 2012). After

the "recovery work" on the search engines the

analysis phase and the selection of relevant research

topic work was initiated.

2.2 Selection of Works

For selection of the papers the following criteria

were adopted:

1)Inclusion Criteria: the inclusion criteria defined

in the protocol of this systematic review, aim to set

strict rules and well defined to ensure the quality of

related work. They are:

 Studies that directly address GSD and KM

issues, and;

 Works that respond directly one of the research

questions RQ1, RQ2, RQ3.

2) Exclusion Criteria: they were defined and used

to filter the retrieved studies, in order to remove

those studies that do not contribute to the research.

Studies were excluded by the following criteria:

 Are not directly related to KM in the GSD

context;

 Studies describing GSD problems not related to

KM, and;

 Duplicated or repetitive papers.

After defining the criteria for inclusion and

exclusion, the work passed through a primary and

secondary selection in order to ensure the scientific

quality of the selected papers.

2.3 Primary and Secondary Selection

The primary selection of study was performed by

application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, as

early described, on the titles and keywords of

retrieved papers. After the initial selection, 27

studies that underwent a secondary assessment

where chosen, on which were again applied the

inclusion and exclusion criteria, throughout the text

of the studies. At the end of secondary selection 16

papers remained, which were then assessed for their

quality.

The work resulting from the secondary

assessment were also evaluated for the quality and

clarity of content using seven criteria, following the

guidelines described by Kitchenham and Charters

(2007) (not shown here due to space limitations).

After the evaluation of quality 11 studies were

selected, since they show a clear description of

context. They were used for data extraction. On

Table II, all selected papers from the primary study

are presented in Arshad et al. (2012), with S1 to S27

index. The works selected from this study are

presented in the Appendix and are identified S28 to

S38. Selected papers in this study were used for data

extraction and assembly of the construction KMP

used in GSD.

For data extraction, each one of the eleven

selected papers was read, looking for data on how

the lack of KM impacts on the challenges of GSD.

KM practices used and / or that could be used to

mitigate these challenges were also identified. The

data extraction was performed by one of the authors,

and submitted for assessment of other authors, in

order to ensure the quality of the extracted data.

2.4 Data Synthesis

The extracted data allowed to identify the main

challenges of GSD that teams are exposed due to the

absence of KM. This motivated the search for KMP

that could be used to mitigate these challenges.

These data sets were merged with the results of

Arshad et al. (2012) and are presented in Section 3.

3 RESULTS

The results of this study were divided into: 1)

Challenges of GSD; 2) KMP's; 3) KMP's used to

mitigate the GSD challenges that are presented in

the following sub topics.

The results were merged with the results of the

primary study (Arshad et al. 2012). Table 3 presents

the challenges identified in the selected papers.

The challenges related to software engineering

for GSD were mainly mentioned in the

requirements, analysis and software development

phases, in selected works. However, due to its

nature, the ER has activities that are characterized as

KnowledgeManagementPracticesinGSD-ASystematicLiteratureReviewUpdate

367

Table 3: Challenges of the GSD by the lack of KM.

Challenges

Shared understanding

Knowledge sharing

Communication

Trust

Relationship building or team cohesion

Find the right people

Awareness

Software engineering in GSD

Context

having major difficulty for explicit knowledge. This

can be seen by the greater frequency with which

they have been dealt by the selected studies.

Desouza et al. (2006) argue that due to the

reduction in face-to-face communication between

members of a development team, in GSD context,

the use of KM becomes exponentially important.

Table 4 below shows the KMPs observed in the

context of GSD.

Table 4: KMP used in GSD.

KMP used in GSD Referencies

Collaborative technology

S28,S29,S32,S33,S34,

S35,S36,S37,S38

Knowledge sharing

S28,S31,S32,S33,S34,

S35

Transactive memory

S32,S33,S34,S35,S36,

S38

Asking the

developers/boundary

spanners/colleague

S29,S32,S33,S36,S38

Shared social context S29,S32,S34,S36,S37

Finding the right people S29,S31,S32,S33,S35

Documentation S34,S35,S36

Direct communication S31,S38,38

Standard tools and methods S31,S34,38

Information update S32,S35

Meetings or visits S31,S35

Transferring the

competence

S31

Guidelines/training

program

S31

Discussion board S32

Figure 1 show a bar graph displaying the frequency

in which KMPS were observed in the analyzed

studies.

Some of the practices found in the primary study

Figure 1: Frequency with which KMP are used in GSD.

were recurrent in this study, including the practices

Asking the Developers, Finding the Right People

and Transactive Memory. They were also found

more frequently in recent studies. Another KMP

which was detected only in this SLR was Shared

Social Context. The activities related to share of

social consciousness has been mentioned frequently

in recent studies (Jabar and Sidi 2012; Calefato and

Lanubile 2012.). In four of the eleven selected

studies from this SLR is suggested to use

Collaborative Technologies to support the practice

for Sharing Social Awareness. These technologies

can be used to store and retrieve contextual

information at the time in that they are useful for the

developer (Calefato et al. 2012; Basoglu et al. 2012).

The use of collaborative technology reduces the

social distance and makes one person aware of the

others presence. It can help to build the team spirit

and enhancing the association of contextual

information of the interactions between developers

(Basoglu et al. 2012).

Collaborative Technology practice was the most

mentioned in both SLR. So, it was selected as an

important practice. This is due to the fact that it

supports other practices in GSD environments such

as: Knowledge Sharing, Transactive Memory,

Asking the Developers, and Shared Social Context

as aforementioned.

The primary study suggested that Collaborative

ICEIS2015-17thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems

368

Technologies do not allow overcoming challenges

related to temporal distance. Another limitation cited

by the Arshad et al. (2012) is the inability to mitigate

challenges related to lack of informal

communication using collaborative technologies.

This finding was supported in the study case

presented in Zahedi and Babar (2014), where an

attempt to simulate the informal conversations via

video cameras and screens installed in the resting

environment with coffee machines and water

coolers, were performed. However, this solution did

not show significant improvements in

communication and informal relationships among

developers.

This can be achieved through technological

approaches, not by trying to imitate informal

communication occurring in co-located

environments, but provide adequate support for

holding of informal conversations and sharing of

social consciousness. The sharing of contextual

information is available on social networks, as well

as on the physical characteristics of individuals

present in chats and embedded IDE.

With this, the share of social awareness for the

identification of individuals more communicative

can be performed by analyzing contextual

information (Basoglu et al. 2012; Calefato et al.

2012; Licorish and MacDonell 2014).

Therefore, these studies suggest that

collaborative technologies can improve the quality

of interactions and promoting the sharing of the

social consciousness of individuals. However, new

approaches that not only try to imitate informal

interactions with technology use, but provide greater

informal interaction through contextual and social

information sharing are necessary.

Another practice detected in the selected works

is Knowledge Sharing, that according to Serban and

Luan (2002), are activities that enable the exchange

of knowledge between people through interaction

among individuals. This practice is also mentioned

in the KM literature as a way for knowledge

conversion known as "socialization" (Nonaka and

Takeuchi 1997).

Knowledge sharing enables people to identify

where knowledge is. It is known as Transactive

Memory. It can be implemented by using knowledge

maps (Freitas, 2012). The S29 and S38 studies

present the use of the Transactive Memory as a

practice for other KMP's like: Developers Asking,

Shared Social Context (Madsen et al. 2014; Basoglu

et al. 2012).

Other KMPs cited by selected papers used to

mitigate the challenges of GSD were Documentation

Direct, Standard Tools and Methods. However, they

were cited with less frequency, less than 5, therefore,

are not presented in Table 4.

Table 5 shows the results of the GSD challenges

and practices that can be used to mitigate them. The

frequencies with which these practices were

observed in the primary and secondary studies are

also identified. Among the practices stands as a

contribution of this work to identify the social

conscience to mitigate challenges such as:

Knowledge sharing, Communication, Knowledge

transfer, Team cohesion, Trust and Awareness

Table 5: Challenges and Practices in GSD.

GSD Issues due

to lack of KM

KMPs used to address GSD

issues due to lack of KM

(Arshad et al. 2012)

Author

All

Shared

understanding

Collaborative technolog

3 3 6

Meetings

3 1 4

Documentation

3 1 4

Standard tools and

methods

2 2 4

Transactive memory

2 1 3

Asking the colleague

Guidelines/training

program

1 1 2

Reverse Presentation

method (RPM)

1 0 1

Knowledge

sharing

1 Collaborative technolog

4 2 6

2 Meetings 2 1 4

urviving the Babel towe

1 0 1

Process Knowledge

racer Cross continental

mini teams

1 0 1

5 Direct communication 1 1 4

6 Division of work 1 0 1

7 Shared infrastructure 1 0 1

8 Discussion board 1 0 1

9 Transactive memory 1 1 2

Shared social context

0 1 1

KnowledgeManagementPracticesinGSD-ASystematicLiteratureReviewUpdate

369

Table 5: Challenges and Practices in GSD (cont.).

GSD Issues due

to lack of KM

KMPs used to address GSD

issues due to lack of KM

(Arshad et al. 2012)

Author

All

Communication

1 Meetings/Visits 3 1 5

2 Asking the colleague 3 2 5

3 Collaborative technolog

2 2 2

Clear project and

organization structure

with clear roles and

responsibilities

2 1 4

5 Transactive memory 1

6 Information update 1 1 3

7 Adapt scrum process 1 0 3

Reverse Presentation

method (RPM

1 0 1

Knowledge centric

product life cycle

management

1 1 2

10 Documentation 1 0 1

11 Shared social context

0 1 1

Knowledge

transfer

1 Collaborative technology 2 2 4

2 Meetings 2 1 3

3 Asking the colleague 2 1 3

4 Documentation 2 1 4

5 Division of work 1 0 1

6 Transactive memory 1 3 4

Standard tools and

methods

1 0 1

urviving the Babel towe

1 0 1

9 Shared social context

0 1 1

Team cohesion

1 Visits/meetings 4 1 5

2 Mutual adjustment 1 0 1

Shared social context

1 0 1

Table 5: Challenges and Practices in GSD (cont.).

GSD Issues due

to lack of KM

KMPs used to address GSD

issues due to lack of KM

(Arshad et al. 2012)

Author

All

Trust

1 Meetings/Visits 3 3 6

2 Collaborative technology 2 1 3

Transactive memory

Shared social context

/consciênci

1 2 3

Finding the right

people

1 Transactive memory 3 1 4

2 Collaborative technolog

1 2 3

3 Meetings or Visits 1 2 3

4 Asking the colleague 1 1 2

Standard tools and

methods

1 2 3

Awareness

1 Collaborative technolog

0 3 3

Shared social context

0 3 3

3 Meetings 0 1 1

Software

Engineering in

GSD

1 Collaborative technolog

0 2 2

2 Knowledge Sharing 0 2 2

4 DISCUSSION

The "lack of common understanding" is the

challenge most mentioned among the studies

analyzed, being cited in 16 of the 38 selected papers.

Among the reasons of the lack of common

understanding are: cultural diversity and the

differences in standards in outsourcing

environments. According to Damian and Zowghi

(2007), “collaborative technologies” presented by

Peng and Lai (2012) can be used to provide a

common understanding in these environments.

The mediated communication can also be used to

make better the comprehension of design aspects.

Team leader who may define the more adequate way

to establish the communication among developers

can accomplish this.

However, this approach can also reduce the

autonomy of the team and the informal contact

ICEIS2015-17thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems

370

among team members, which, according to Damian

and Zowghi (2003), impacts on trust between

individuals.

Some studies indicate the sharing of knowledge

as a critical success factor in outsourcing

environments as well as in offshore environments

(Espinosa et al. 2007; Kumar et al. 2012; Kroll et al.

2014). According to Calefato et al. (2012),

knowledge sharing can be facilitated with the use of

collaborative technologies using personal and

contextual information to improve the quality and

the chances of successful interactions, allowing the

sharing of social consciousness.

Another challenge often cited in the literature is

communication. One of the difficulties related to

communication is the lack of informal face-to-face

meeting, which reduces the sharing of contextual

information about other developers and project

activities impacting on trust between them. This

impact, reported initially by Damian and Zowghi

(2003) was recovered in four of the mentioned

works (Calefato et al. 2007; Zahedi and Babar

2014b; Paasivaara and Lassenius 2014; Basoglu et

al. 2012).

The lack of trust between developers reduces the

"knowledge sharing" and also reduces social

awareness about the project members and activities,

interfering on performed activities and perceptions

about the relationship between tasks. Studies

performed by Calefato and Lanubile (2012) and

Basoglu et al. (2012) propose the sharing of context

information as a way to share social awareness and

increase the chances of recalling developers,

contacts, challenges such as reducing

communication and trust.

5 CONCLUSION

The study identified a 35% increase in volume

related to KM practices in GSD if compared to the

primary study (Arshad et al. 2012). Possibly, this

increase is due to the consensus both from

researchers as well as professionals of the computing

area related to the idea that the challenges of GSD

are arising from lack of KM.

It was also observed that the practices "common

understanding" and "knowledge sharing" are even

more frequent in the work of the past 12 years.

Among the contributions of this work are the

identification of KMP Shared social context, and the

remark about the need and the importance to use

new approaches to improve informal communication

among developers, and not just use solutions that

simulate informal interactions.

The KMP Shared Social Context enables

individuals to have a better understanding of the

activities and the work environment, enabling these

to have a better performance on activities developed.

Another possible improvement is trust among

developers and the ability to remember to more

details of the interactions at work (Basoglu et al.

2012; Calefato et al. 2007.).

The need to use new approaches supported by

collaborative technologies to enhance the informal

communication is an important advance in the

current state of the art, because they can deal with

challenges and they enable Trust, Knowledge

Sharing and Awareness.

The identification of the set of knowledge

management practices used to mitigate the

challenges of GSD, serves as a base for developing

future work to identify and describe the necessary

elements for implementation of these practices, such

as wikis, repositories or case tools. Identification and

description of these elements also allow the

construction of structures that provide adequate

support for GSD, mitigating the challenges with the

use of KM.

6 LIMITATIONS AND THREATS

TO VALIDATION

Even with the effort to reduce potential threats to

validity of the SLR, the research were not able to

mitigate the following limitations:

Searches were conducted from the State

University of Maringa, which allows access to

hundreds of databases of scientific papers, but could

not access all of the documents identified in the

search network.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thank Capes and Araucaria Foundation for funding

the research project.

REFERENCES

Arshad, S., Usman, M., Ikram, N., 2012. Knowledge

Management Practices in GSD : A Systematic

Literature Review. In ICSEA 2012, The Seventh

International Conference on Software Engineering

Advances. p. 516–523.

KnowledgeManagementPracticesinGSD-ASystematicLiteratureReviewUpdate

371

Basoglu, K. A., Fuller, M. A., Valacich, J. S., 2012.

Enhancement of recall within technology-mediated

teams through the use of online visual artifacts. ACM

Transactions on Management Information Systems,

v.3, n.1, p.1–22.

Calefato, F., Damian, D., Lanubile, F., 2012. Computer-

mediated communication to support distributed

requirements elicitations and negotiations tasks.

Empirical Software Engineering, v.17, n.6, p.640–674.

Calefato, F., Damian, D., Lanubile, F. 2007. An empirical

investigation on text-based communication in

distributed requirements workshops. In Global

Software Engineering, ICGSE 2007. p. 3-11.

Calefato, F., Lanubile, F., 2012. Augmenting Social

Awareness in a Collaborative Development

Environment. 5th International Workshop on Co-

operative and Human Aspects of Software

Engineering (CHASE). p.12–14.

Kwan, I., Damian, D., 2011. The Hidden Experts in

Software-Engineering Communication (NIER Track).

ICSE'11 Proceedings of the 33rd International

Conference on Software Engineering, p.800–803.

Dalkir, K., 2011. Knowledge management in theory and

practice. Routledge, Elsevier.

Damian, D. E., Zowghi, D., 2003. Requirements

Engineering challenges in multi-site software

development organizations. Requirements Engineering

Journal, v.8, p. 149–160.

Damian, D. E., Zowghi, D., 2007. The impact of

stakeholders geographical distribution on managing

requirements in a multi-site organization.

International Conference on Requirements

Engineering (RE’02), (July 2001), p.1–10.

Desouza, K. C., Awazu, Y., Baloh, P., 2006. Managing

Knowledge in Global Software Development Efforts:

Issues and Practices. IEEE Software, v.23, p.30–37.

Espinosa, J. et al., 2007. Team Knowledge and

Coordination in Geographically Distributed Software

Development. Journal of Management Information

Systems, 24 , p.135–169.

Freitas, L. R. M. M., 2012. Knowledge Management

Practices: Proposal for reference. Master's Thesis

submitted to the University Portucalense (in

Portuguese).

Herbsleb, J. D. et al., 2000. Distance , Dependencies , and

Delay in a Global Collaboration. In Proceedings of the

2000 ACM conference on Computer supported

cooperative work (CSCW ’00), p.319–328.

Jabar, M. A., Sidi, F., 2012. The effect of Organizational

Justice and Social Interdependence on knowledge

sharing. 2012 International Conference on Information

Retrieval & Knowledge Management, p.64–68.

Kitchenham, B. et al., 2009. Systematic literature reviews

in software engineering:a systematic literature review.

Information and Software Technology, 51, p.7–15.

Kitchenham, B., Charters, S., 2007. Guidelines for

performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software

Engineering. Technical Report EBSE-2007-01, School

of Computer Science and Mathematics, Keele

University.

Kroll, J. et al., 2014. Handoffs Management in Follow-

the-Sun Software Projects: A Case Study. 2014 47th

Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,

p.331–339.

Kumar, S. et al. 2012. An Approach to Effectively

Transfer Knowledge and Accelerate the Movement of

Software Services Offshore. 2012 IEEE Seventh

International Conference on Global Software

Engineering, p.212–216.

Licorish, S. A., MacDonell, S. G., 2014. Understanding

the attitudes, knowledge sharing behaviors and task

performance of core developers: A longitudinal study.

Information and Software Technology, v.56, n.12,

p.1578–1596.

Madsen, S., Bødker, K., Tøth, T., 2014. Knowledge

transfer planning and execution in offshore

outsourcing: An applied approach. Information

Systems Frontiers. v.17, n.1, p.67-77. Published

online: 9 July 2014.

Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H., 1997. Knowledge Creation In

Company 20th ed., Elsevier Brasil (in Portuguese).

Paasivaara, M., Lassenius, C., 2014. Communities of

practice in a large distributed agile software

development organization – Case Ericsson.

Information and Software Technology, v.56, n.12,

p.1556–1577.

Peng, R., Lai, H., 2012. DRE-specific Wikis for

Distributed Requirements Engineering: A Review.

2012 19th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering

Conference, p.116–126.

Serban, A. M., Luan, J., 2002. Overview of Knowledge

Management. New Directions for Institutional

Research. v.2002, n.113, p.5–16.

Zahedi, M., Babar, M. A., 2014a. Knowledge sharing for

common understanding of technical specifications

through artifactual culture. Proceedings of the 18th

International Conference on Evaluation and

Assessment in Software Engineering, p.1–10.

Zahedi, M., Babar, M. A., 2014b. Towards an

understanding of enabling process knowing in global

software development: a case study. Proceedings of

the 2014 International Conference on Software and

System Process - ICSSP 2014, p.30–39.

APPENDIX

S28) Basoglu, K. A., Fuller, M. A., Valacich, J. S., 2012.

Description in the references.

S29) Calefato, F., Lanubile, F., 2012. Description in the

references.

S30) Kumar, S. et al. 2012. Description in the references.

S31) Lindvall, M., Muthig, D., Dagnino, A., Wallin, C.,

Stupperich, M., Kiefer, D., May, J., Kahkonen, T.,

2004. Agile software development in large

organizations. Computer, IEEE. v.37, n.12, p.26-34.

S32) Calefato, F., Damian, D., Lanubile, F., 2012.

Description in the references.

S33) Madsen, S., Bødker, K., Tøth, T., 2014. Description

in the references.

ICEIS2015-17thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems

372

S34) Paasivaara, M., Lassenius, C., 2014. Description in

the references.

S35) Solis, C., 2012. An overview of a spatial hypertext

wiki and its applications. ACM SIGWEB Newsletter,

(Winter), 6.

S36) Zahedi, M.; Babar, M. A., 2014a. Description in the

references.

S37) Zahedi, M.; Babar, M. A., 2014b. Description in the

references.

S38) Zimmermann, S., Katzmarzik, A., Kundisch, D.,

2012. It Sourcing Portfolio Management for IT

Services Providers – An Approach for using Modern

Portfolio Theory to allocate Software Development

Projects to Available Sites. The Data Base for

Advances in Information Systems. v. 43, n. 1, p. 24-45.

KnowledgeManagementPracticesinGSD-ASystematicLiteratureReviewUpdate

373