Communication Channels in Brazilian Software Projects:

An Analysis based on Case Study

Leandro Zocaratto Rezende

, Edmir Parada Vasques Prado

and Alexandre Grotta

1,2 c

IS Post-graduation Program (PPgSI), University of São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil

IS Graduation Program, Federal Institute of Sao Paulo (IFSP), São Paulo, Brazil

Keywords: Communication Management, Project Success, Software Development.

Abstract: Technology project management is challenging. However, there are few works in the literature related to

communication channels (CC) and project success. Therefore, this research aims to analyze the influence of

communication channels on the short and medium-term success of software development projects in a

Brazilian enterprise. This research is based on a literature review about communication channels and project

success. The research has a qualitative and descriptive approach and used an ex-post-facto strategy. Ten

software development project management professionals were interviewed at a large banking institution in

the first half of 2019. This research confirmed a positive association between CC and software project success

when considering efficiency, impact to the customer, and project staff. Besides, we also identified the two

most relevant CC for the context studied and identified a CC not mentioned in the literature.

1 INTRODUCTION

There is a perception among specialists that

information technology projects fail regularly. Only

36% of software projects are completed on time and

on-budget (Standish Group, 2015). Even worst, when

considering different points of view from researchers,

practitioners, and academics perspectives (Al-Ahmad

et al., 2009) there is still no single measure of

software project success (Shenhar & Dvir, 2007).

Even when a project is considered well-done, there

are still many reports of challenges and efforts to

overcome them (Al-Ahmad et al., 2009).

Most of the project issues are related to the human

aspects: behavioral, organizational, or managerial

aspects (Hartman & Ashrafi, 2002). Embracing all

these aspects, the communication process is

accountable for many issues, including both its inputs

and outputs (Lu, Liu, & Liu, 2009), including the

communication channels (CC).

Another research gap is that project data relating

to communication is not usually collected and

analysed in parallel with the project execution. These

research approaches gap to capture the project

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5543-9155

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3505-6122

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2549-138X

momentum data, such as CC data. Instead of that

approach, it is suggested to collect and analyze data

when the project is still going on or, if not possible, at

least when the project has just been finished (Shenhar

& Dvir, 2007; Lu, Liu, & Liu, 2009).

Even further, we performed a research and

discovered a gap that related communication and

software project success: there were only 11 papers in

IEEE Xplore and ACM databases relating these two

factors from 2010 to 2019. These researches were not

related to any developing country.

Given these gaps relating communication and the

project success, this research aims to answer the

following research question: What are the

contributions of CC on the success of software

development projects in a Brazilian enterprise?

The research goal is to analyse the influence of

CC on software development projects from both short

and medium terms perspectives. We aim to analyse

this goal through data gathered during project

development regarding three criteria: (1) project

efficiency; (2) impact to customer; and (3) impact to

team members. The research framework was

developed in the second semester of 2019.

Rezende, L., Prado, E. and Grotta, A.

Communication Channels in Brazilian Software Projects: An Analysis based on Case Study.

DOI: 10.5220/0010451303210328

In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2021) - Volume 2, pages 321-328

ISBN: 978-989-758-509-8

321

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Software Project Success

Project success might be defined as the project has

achieved its objectives and its benefits for the

organization (Shenhar & Dvir, 2007). This definition

sets at least three dimensions: cost, time, and scope

dimensions (Dvir, Raz & Shenhar, 2003). These

dimensions are also known as the triple constraint,

given they consider the project planning objectives.

We choose a multidimensional model to

accommodate both project success and user/business

perspectives. This model endorses five dimensions

(Shenhar & Dvir, 2007) as follows:

(1) Project Efficiency: the short-term measure

that addresses if the project was completed as

planned, especially schedule and budget aspects.

(2) Customer Impact: the importance of

customer requirements.

(3) Team Members/Staff Impact: satisfaction,

retention, and personal growth of team members.

(4) Business/Direct Success Impact: the direct

impact the project has on the organization.

(5) Future Impact: the medium-term measure

that addresses the organization's readiness for future

projects.

2.2 Project Communication

Communication is an essential element of Project

Management (PM) given it ensures the successful

delivery of the project (Emmitt & Gorse, 2003).

Communication has seven elements as follows:

senders, encoding, the message itself, a transmission

channel, decoding, receivers, and feedback (Zulch,

2014).

Moreover, when analyzing the communication

process, it is important to consider their main

characteristics. Table 1 shows the four characteristics

most cited in the literature.

Table 1: Project communication characteristics.

Characteristics Citations

Degree of formality 18

Channels 17

Verbalization 10

Internalization 8

Thirteen other characteristics 25

Total 78

According to Djajalaksana, Zekavat, and Moon

(2017), these four characteristics could be defined as:

(1) Degree of Formality. There are two types of

communication formality: formal communication,

which is structured and officially enforced by the

management; and informal communication, which is

unstructured and made by the team members to

address deficiencies and minimize insecurity of the

formal communication system.

(2) Verbalization. Verbal communication

occurs through written, oral, heard, or spoken

communication; non-verbal communication refers to

paralinguistic communication or carried out through

expressions, emotions, or feelings.

(3) Internalization. Communication can be

internal when it occurs between members of the

project or the organization, or external when directed

to the client, investors, media, or other stakeholders.

An important feature of communication is its CC.

Thus, we describe the CC in more detail below.

2.3 Communication Channels

Project communication can be done through CC.

Each of them has advantages and disadvantages in

their use. According to Gillard and Johansen (2004),

the decision of the appropriate CC to be used –

telephone, videoconference, e-mail, face-to-face

conversation or gestures, a table, a graphic – is of

paramount importance. The CC affects the impacts

the recipient messages. For example, reading a

document can have a different impact than listening

to the same message on a conference call, due to the

inflections of voice and body language observed in a

conference call, but absent in a written document.

Choosing an appropriate CC can save time in

interpreting the message.

Bhalerao and Ingle (2010) studied the CC used

between members of the project team and between

them and the clients, in each phase of the project. The

research result showed that in all phases face-to-face

communication between team members prevails.

However, concerning communication with

customers, both e-mails and face-to-face

communication are used. These authors analyzed the

following CC: face-to-face, video, e-mail,

documents, telephone, and text messages. Chang and

Ehrlich (2007) and Johansen and Gillard (2005)

showed similar results.

Korkala and Maurer (2014) presented the concept

of synchronicity. Synchronicity is defined as the

extent to which a CC allows individuals to achieve a

shared pattern of coordinated work behavior. Thus,

video conferences and face-to-face communication

have a high level of synchronicity; conference calls

and chats have a medium level; while e-mail, voice

ICEIS 2021 - 23rd International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

322

messages, faxes, and documents are low. Hummel

and Rosenkranz (2013) present a table containing 23

CC and their respective synchronicity capabilities.

3 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK

3.1 Research Variables

The framework is composed of an independent

variable and the dependent variable. Figure 1

represents the research framework graphically and

these variables are detailed.

Figure 1: Research framework.

3.1.1 Independent Variable

The research model has a single independent variable:

communication channels (CC). This variable

represents the types of CC. Several authors classified

the CC in ten types (Chen et al., 2013; Kennedy,

McComb & Vozdolska, 2011; Bhalerao & Ingle,

2010; Korkala & Maurer, 2014; Tuomas et al., 2012):

• (C01) Software tools: development suites,

source codes, versions, and catalogs tools.

• (C02) Official documents: reports, bulletins,

specifications, standardized documents.

• (C03) Electronic mail: e-mail, mailboxes, or

distribution lists.

• (C04) Discussion or face-to-face

conversation: always involving only two people.

• (C05) Group meetings: always involving

more than two people.

• (C06) Telephone/voice messages:

messaging applications, answering machine,

telephone calls.

• (C07) Instant text messages: applications,

corporate programs, communicators.

• (C08) Conferences: audio, video, in person.

• (C09) Presentations: workshops, plenary

sessions, lectures.

• (C10) Collaborative informational

environments: wikis, forums, web pages.

3.1.2 Dependent Variables

The research framework has three dependent variables

based on the success dimensions (Shenhar & Dvir,

2007). These dimensions have negative or positive

impacts. Although there are five dimensions of

success, only the first three refer to short and medium-

term results, which are the scope of this research. The

three dimensions used by this research are:

(1) Project Efficiency (D1): measures the

contribution to achieving time, cost, and scope goals.

(2) Impact on the Customer (D2): it measures

the contribution to meet customer requirements,

satisfaction, and loyalty.

(3) Impact on Team Members (D3): it

measures the contribution to staff satisfaction,

employee retention, and professional growth of team

members.

3.2 Guiding Questions

We defined three guiding questions (Q1 to Q3) based

on the research main question and based on the

literature review (Mark & Wulf, 1999; Aranda et al.,

2010; Zulch, 2014; Djajalaksana, Zekavat & Moon,

2017):

Q1: Does CC have a positive impact on project

efficiency (D1)?

Q2: Does CC have a positive impact on customer

satisfaction (D2)?

Q3: Does CC have a positive impact on team

members (D3)?

4 RESEARCH METHOD

4.1 Organization Characteristics

The researched company is one of the largest banks

in Brazil with international projection. This Bank has

a well-defined IT area that is scaffolded by a generous

budget. This area has more than two thousand

employees working on several technology projects.

D1- Project

efficiency

D2 - Impact to

customer

D3 - Impact to

team

members

C01 Software tools

C02 Official

documents

C03 E-mail

C04 Presential

discussion

or conversation

C05 Group meetings

C06 Telephone

or voice

messages

C07 Instant

messaging

C08 Conferences

C09 Presentations

C10 Collaborative

environments

* Q1, Q2, and Q3 are research questions

Independent

variables

Dependent

variable

Contribution

to project

success

dimensions

Communication Channels in Brazilian Software Projects: An Analysis based on Case Study

323

These projects serve in all areas, in which there are

different sizing and different PM methods. These PM

methods are mainly based on waterfall, agile or

hybrid

approaches.

4.2 Participants and Project Criteria

The participants accepted to engage in this research,

which represented a unique and highly valuable

opportunity for a case study based on (Yin, 2015).

Criteria to select participants were: (1)

experience in software development projects within

the financial industry; (2) participation in at least

three different project phases; (3) education level

should include at least bachelor degree; (4)

professional experience of at least five years; (5)

professionals from several backgrounds, such as

software engineers, system developers or project

leaders, is important; and (6) at least ten IT

professionals as participants.

Criteria to select projects for this case study (Yin,

2015) were: (1) projects must have come from

different areas of the organization; (2) projects must

have been completed recently or are still in the final

stages or the post-implementation phase, to have

short/medium term data; (3) projects might have

different sizing and (4) projects must have a clear

methodology – agile, waterfall or

hybrid.

4.3 Data Acquisition

We adopted individual interviews as an instrument

for data collection due to the qualitative nature of the

research (Yin, 2015). The interviews were conducted

with ten professionals who participated in different

projects related to software development.

We adopted the semi-structured interview

(Selltiz, Wrigthman, & Cook, 1987) because it has a

pre-establish script that makes it easier to compare

information among participants. The first interview

was

used as a pre-test to guide the other interviews.

Interviews were conducted in the second half of 2019.

4.4 Data Processing

Data were processed using two different techniques.

First: content analysis, to categorize and interpret the

data collected in the interviews. According to

Neurendorf (2002), content analysis allows a

qualitative exploration of messages and information.

Second: judge analysis. This technique advocates

a judgment by a group of experienced experts in the

field (Medeiros et al., 2015). The expert group was

composed of participants from an individual

interview. They analysed the relationship between IC

and PS what was done previously one-by-one through

individual interviews. A group agreement means: the

number of specialists who agree with a statement is at

least double of those that do not agree with a

statement (Medeiros et al., 2015).

5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

5.1 Sample: The Participants

Ten people were selected for this research. We

analysed in the interviews the level of success

achieved by the projects and the research questions.

Interviews were named from I01 to I10. The first

interview served as a pre-test. We selected for the first

interview a specialist with more project experience

than the other ones to serve as a pre-test.

The questions and the script of the instrument

were validated by the pre-test, and the instrument was

adjusted to its final version based on these pre-test

results. We conducted individual interviews at a quiet

and private place in after-hours. The interviews were

recorded. We informed all interviewees about the

research goals and collect their consent before

recording the interview. Table 2 summarizes the

interviewees' most relevant characteristics.

Table 2: Participants’ sample summary.

Interview Age Gender Schooling University course Experience (years) Interview (minutes)

I01 29 Male Post-graduated Information Systems 9 82

I02 25 Male Post-graduated Engineering 5 60

I03 26 Female Post-graduated Engineering 5 94

I04 28 Male Bachelor Computer Science 7 76

I05 28 Female Post-graduated Computer Science 6 47

I06 28 Female Bachelor Engineering 5 60

I07 31 Male Post-graduated Engineering 8 54

I08 29 Male Post-graduated Information Systems 9 38

I09 32 Male Post-graduated Engineering 5 51

I10 36 Female Post-graduated Engineering 18 52

Average 29 7,7 61

ICEIS 2021 - 23rd International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

324

Table 3: Projects data sample summary.

ID Projects areas Success Project Team Approach Position

in Participation in

Achieved Status

Members

company* project phases**

M E S 1 2 3 4 5 6

I01 Pay-out system Succeed Finished 175 Agile ● ● ● ● ● ●

I02 Risk analysis Succeed Finished 55 Waterfall ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

I03 Technology Succeed Running 15 Agile ● ● ● ● ●

I04 Technology Partially Finished 10 Hybrid ● ● ● ● ● ●

I05 Risk analysis Failure Finished 5 Agile ● ● ● ● ● ●

I06 Technology Partially Finished 100 Agile ● ● ● ● ●

I07 Customer relationship Succeed Finished 10 Waterfall ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

I08 Banking agencies Succeed Finished 70 Waterfall ● ● ● ● ● ●

I09 Risk analysis Succeed Finished 11 Agile ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

I10 Human resources Succeed Finished 40 Hybrid ● ● ● ●

* M-manager; E-engineer; S-System analyst

** 1 ideation; 2 requirement definition; 3 software development; 4 test; 5 implantation; 6 post-implantation

5.2 Sample: The Projects

We selected ten projects with software development

activities in their scope, either in part or in full. These

have been started at different points in time between

2016 and 2019. The projects were developed in seven

different areas of the Bank: three in the technology

area, three in the risk analysis area, and the other ones

in four distinct areas.

Nine projects were finished during the field

research, which made it possible to identify short or

medium terms success criteria. The size of the teams

varied but an average was 49 members. The smallest

team had five members and the largest one had 175

members. Moreover, participants participated in at

least three distinct project phases. All projects

achieved full or partial success, except project I05,

which was discarded from the sample due to an issue

with data. Table 3 summarizes the relation between

projects and participants.

5.3 Use of Communication Channels

We present to interviewees the list of communication

channels identified in the literature. The purpose was

for them to rank the most used.

In interview I01, a CC not identified in the

literature was reported. The CC is called an

“interactive environment” by the organization. It is a

CC used in group meetings that have resources for

participant interaction. Examples of this interaction

are the rooms with walls, tables, and windows that

can be used for writing, besides the use of digital

panels. This CC is of recent use in the researched

organization. We did not find citations about it in the

scientific literature; however, it appears in

publications on innovation in organizations (Neves,

2018). This communication channel (C11) was added

to the relationship obtained from the literature.

The CC´s frequency of use was assessed using a

three-point Likert scale: (1) unused channel; (2) little

used channel; and (3) widely used channel. The CC´s

frequency of use reported in the interviews is shown

in table 4. We use the median statistic to separate the

most used from the least used CC. It should be noted

that C03 was used in all projects.

5.4 Motivation for Use of

Communication Channels

One of the objectives of the research was to identify

the motivation for the use of a given CC. We analyzed

the most used CC, based on the responses collected

from the interviewees, which allowed us to classify

the motivations in seven categories:

• Project Life Cycle. This category includes

communications related to backlogs; alignment of

activities with project objectives; status and

milestones of the project; definitions of technical

solutions; and problem-solving.

• Communication with Stakeholders. Includes

conversations with the customer, users, executives,

and leaders. These communications refer to project

specifications, follow-up bulletins, status reports,

amongst others.

• Obligation. Refers to the communication of

mandatory project information. Among them, we

stand out the use of methodologies, organization

internal processes, and project ceremonies.

• Information Storage. In software projects, it

is necessary to store information related to the

versioning and cataloging of the software.

Communication Channels in Brazilian Software Projects: An Analysis based on Case Study

325

Table 4: Communication channels frequency of use.

Project Communication channels

Most used channels Less used channels

C03 C04 C07 C05 C02 C01 C06 C08 C10 C11 C09

E01 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3

E02 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1

E03 3 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 2 1 1

E04 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 1

E05 3 2 3 2 1 3 3 1 1 1 1

E06 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 3 3 2

E07 3 3 3 2 3 1 3 3 1 3 2

E08 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 1 1 1

E09 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 1 1 1 2

E10 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 1 2

Frequency 30 29 27 25 25 24 23 18 18 18 16

• Physical Distance. Certain CCs are more

effective when there is a physical distance between

teams.

• Number of Interactions. Some motivations

are related to CC that handles a lot of messages or

contacts well.

• Broadcast Communication. In some projects,

communication needs are greater or more complex

among the project team. Some communications needs

are met by group conversations, communication with

leaders, informal communication, and conversations

in a foreign language. In more complex cases,

organizations use war-room communication

(broadcast for critical issues).

Figure 2 shows the association between the CC

most used and the motivation for its use. Electronic

mail (C03), instant text messages (C07), and group

meetings (C05) are the three CC with more use

motivations. On the other hand, project life cycle and

broadcast communication are the two motivations

category more often reported.

C02. Official documents are also mandatory in

internal processes, in addition to being used for status

reports.

C03. Electronic mail has more motivations: it is

used to control activity lists and project backlogs, to

send progress reports and reports to clients, to specify

and define user requirements, to formalize strategic

decisions, to register and storage project decisions,

and to other formal communications.

C04. Face-to-face conversations took place to

discuss problems, define technical solutions, in

addition to project members' conversations in a

foreign language.

C05. The group meetings took place because it

was easy for everyone to be in the same physical

location and to discuss problems, define the technical

solution, ensure objectives alignment, and control the

to-do list of activities. Some meetings took place in

the war-room, a place that provides scale

communication for critical issues that involve various

groups of people. They avoid numerous phone calls

and large amounts of text messages.

Motivation Communication channels

C03 C07 C05 C04 C02

Project life

cycle

• • • •

Broadcast

communication

• •

•

Communication

with

stakeholders

•

Physical

distance

• •

Number of

interactions

• •

Obligation

•

Information

storage

•

Frequency 4 4 3 2 2

* F- frequency

Figure 2: Motivation to use communication channels.

C07. Instant text messages were used for

informal group conversations or hierarchical vertical

communication. Moreover, they were used to solve

doubts and quick points of the projects, define

technical issues, and provide communication for

teams in different locations.

C11. The interactive environment was used

predominantly in intrinsic project subjects, such as

technical definitions and problem-solving.

ICEIS 2021 - 23rd International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

326

5.5 Strengths and Weaknesses of

Communication Channels

This section addresses the factors that have positively

affected the success of projects by each CC. The first

analysis focuses on the strengths of the CCs most

often used in projects. Table 5 shows the channels’

characteristics that enabled the project's success.

Table 5: How Communication channels enabled project

success.

CC Enabling the success of the project through

C02 • Dissemination of the work

C03

• Rapid definition of requirements

• Formalization to improve understanding

• Speed and agility

C04

• Project alignment and clarification of doubts

• Generate discussions, clarify requirements,

avoid failures, and send bulk information

C05

• Project alignment and clarification of doubts

• Generate discussions, clarify requirements,

avoid failures and send bulk information

C07

• Communication tool between members of

different physical environments

5.6 Communication Channels and

Project Success

We perform Table 6 according to the project success

dimensions and CC interviews. This table

summarizes the results. CC influences short and

medium terms success in software development

projects under the three dimensions: project

efficiency (D1), impact on the customer (D2) and

impact on team members (D3). This result is in line

with the CC literature (Gillard & Johansen, 2004;

Bhalerao & Ingle, 2010; Hummel & Rosenkranz,

2013; Korkala & Maurer, 2014; Kennedy, McComb

& Vozdolska, 2011).

Table 6: Communication channels positive contribution

over the Project Success.

CC Success Dimension

Frequency

D1 D2 D3

C03

• • •

C04

• • •

C05

• • •

C07

•

C02

•

Frequency 4 4 4

5.7 Research Limitations

This section presents the limitations of the research

and its validity. They are mostly related to the data

analysis technique and the generalization of the

results:

(1) Data analysis technique. The data collected

in the interviews were analysed using the content

analysis technique. The interpretation of this data was

made by the author, which attributes subjectivity to

the results.

(2) Results generalization. All participants

belong to a single company and constitute a small

sample, which does not allow generalization of the

research results to other companies, based on 10

people that worked for software development

projects.

6 CONCLUSIONS

The goal of this paper was to analyse the influence of

CC on the software project success from both short

and medium terms perspectives within the context of

one large Brazilian banking. To achieve this goal,

qualitative and descriptive research was carried out

using the content analysis technique. This research

was carried out with 10 experienced professionals.

The answers to the research questions and the

contributions of this paper are presented below.

All the research questions had affirmative

answers. Thus, it was confirmed a positive

association between CC and software project success

when considering efficiency, impact to the customer

and project staff aspects. This result is in line with the

literature which emphasizes the importance of CC in

projects.

Furthermore, it was possible to obtain two

complementary results. First, a new CC was reported

in the projects: the interactive environments. This is a

CC related to group meeting environments and

conversations that have digital resources for

interaction between participants. Examples are rooms

with writable walls, glass tables and windows, digital

panels, and visual materials. This channel has very

recent use in Brazilian enterprises, which may be the

reason why we did not find reports about it in the

academic literature.

Second, it was possible to analyse the CC. We

classified the CC in three criteria: frequency of

citation in the literature, motivation for their adoption,

and positive contribution to project success. The two

most relevant CC for software projects within the

analysed context were email (C03) and group

Communication Channels in Brazilian Software Projects: An Analysis based on Case Study

327

meetings (C05). These two CCs were well classified

by the three criteria: they are amongst the most cited

in the literature, the ones that have the most

motivations for adoption, and the greatest

contribution to the success of software development

projects.

The contributions of this research allowed the

identification of the most effective CC for software

development projects in Brazilian companies.

Moreover, we identified a new CC (interactive

environment – C11) that contributes to project

success but has a high cost of implementation. This

can be a limiting factor for application in small to

medium-sized businesses.

Our project intends to analyze, as future work, the

use of digital CC in projects affected by mobility

restrictions of project members.

REFERENCES

Al-Ahmad, W., Fagih, K., Khanfar, K., Alsamara, K.,

Abuleil, S., & Abu-Salem, H. 2009. A Taxonomy of an

IT Project Failure: Root Causes. International

Management Review, 5(1), 93-104.

Aranda, G. N., Vizcaino, A., Palacio, R. R., & Moran, A.

L. 2010. What information would you like to know

about your co-worker? a case study. 5th IEEE

International Conference on Global Software

Engineering - ISSN 2329-6305. 135–144.

Bhalerao, S., & Ingle, M. 2010. Analyzing the modes of

communication in agile practices. In: 3rd International

Conference on Computer Science and Information

Technology, 3, 391–395.

Chang, K., & Ehrlich, K. 2007. Out of sight but not out of

mind? Informal networks, communication, and media

use in global software teams. In: Proceedings of the

conference of the center for advanced studies on

collaborative research, pp. 86–97.

Chen, Q.-L. et al. 2013. A model for project communication

medium evaluation and selection. Concurrent

Engineering, 21(4), 237–251.

Djajalaksana, M. L., & Zekavat, P. R. & Moon, S. (2017).

Effectiveness of on-site communication in residential

housing projects. ISARC. Proceedings of the

International Symposium on Automation and Robotics

in Construction, 34, 1-6.

Dvir, D., Raz, T., & Shenhar, A. (2003). An Empirical

Analysis of the Relationship between Project Planning

and Project Success. International Journal of Project

Management, 21, 89-95.

Emmitt S. and Gorse A.C. 2003. Investigating Interpersonal

Communication During Construction Progress

Meetings: Challenges and Opportunities. Engineering,

Construction and Architectural Management, 10(4),

234-244.

Gillard, S., & Johansen, J. 2004. Project management

communication: a systems approach. Journal of

Information Science, 30(1), 23–29.

Hartman, F., & Ashrafi, R. 2002. Project management in

the information systems and information technologies

industries. Project Management Journal, 33(3), 5–15.

Hummel, M., & Rosenkranz, C. 2013. Measuring the

impact of communication in agile development: A

research model and pilot test. In: 19

Americas

Conference on Information Systems.

Johansen, J., & Gillard, S. 2005. Information resources

project management communication: personal and

environmental barriers. Journal of Information Science,

31(2), 91–98.

Kennedy, D. M., McComb, S. A., & Vozdolska, R. R. 2011.

An investigation of project complexity’s influence on

team communication using Monte Carlo simulation.

Journal of Engineering and Technology Management,

28(3), 109–127.

Korkala, M., & Maurer, F. 2014. Waste identification as the

means for improving communication in globally

distributed agile software development. Journal of

Systems and Software, 95, 122–140.

Lu, X., Liu, L., & Liu, L. 2009. Relationship research

between communication activities and success indexes

in small and medium software projects. 1st

International Conference on Information Science and

Engineering, ICISE 2009, IEEE, 5022-5025.

Mark, G., & Wulf, V. (1999). Changing interpersonal

communication through groupware use. Behaviour &

Information Technology, 18(5), 385–395.

Medeiros et al., 2015. Modelo de validação de conteúdo de

Pasquali nas pesquisas em Enfermagem. Revista de

Enfermagem Referência, 4, 127-135.

Neurendorf, K. A. 2002. The Content Analysis Guidebook.

California: Sage.

Neves, H. 2018. Por que algumas empresas estão

implementando laboratórios de inovação maker

internos? Available: <https://epocanegocios.globo.com

/colunas/noticia/2018/05/por-que-algumas-empresas-

estao-implementando-laboratorios-de-inovacao-

maker-internos.html>.

Selltiz, C., Wrightsman, L. S., Cook, S. W. 1987. Research

Methods in Social Relations. Brazil: EPU.

Shenhar, A. J., & Dvir, D. 2007. Reinventing project

management: The diamond approach to successful

growth and innovation. Boston: Harvard Business

School Press.

Standish Group. 2015. CHAOS Report. Available at

https://www.standishgroup.com/sample_research_files

/CHAOSReport2015-Final.pdf

Tuomas, N. et al. 2012. Reflecting the choice and usage of

communication tools in global software development

projects with media synchronicity theory. Journal of

Software: Evolution and Process, 24(6), 677–692,

2012.

Yin, 2015. Case Study Research and Applications: Design

and Methods. USA; Sage.

Zulch B. 2014. Communication: The Foundation of Project

Management. Procedia Technology.

ICEIS 2021 - 23rd International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

328