Prototypical Leadership in
Agile Software Development

The cases in this study involved five Swedish companies selected based on their agile software development teams. These companies represented different industries and varied in size, offering various perspectives. Some of these companies operated internationally, while the teams being studied were all located in Gothenburg, Sweden. One of the companies included in the study was a multinational corporation operating in the automotive sector, from which two teams were studied. Another company operated in the food and beverage industry. The study also included a digital solutions provider, a small startup with nine employees, and a company specializing in disruptive technologies in the automotive sector. To maintain anonymity, no further details can be disclosed about these organizations.

We employed a combination of convenience and purposive sampling strategies to select participants [23]. Our sampling approach aimed to ensure diversity in our dataset while meeting specific criteria: (1) Participants working within agile software development teams, and (2)Representation from organizations of different sizes and industries. Additionally, we sought to include participants with varying ages, genders, and professional backgrounds to capture a range of perspectives.

Nine men and two women between 24 and 61 years old participated. Six participants were selected from the same team, as all individuals expressed a will to participate. Additionally, two were from different groups within the same company, while the remaining three were from different companies. All participants were part of software development teams, although not all held development roles. Some participants had transitioned into management roles but had previous experience as developers.

Data saturation [24] was reached after the ninth interview. However, we conducted the two extra initially planned interviews to verify the data saturation. To ensure the participants’ anonymity, no additional details beyond what is presented will be disclosed, as individuals may be identified (see Table 1).

We gathered qualitative data through one-to-one interviews, which enabled us to obtain an in-depth understanding of the constructs. The interviews were semi-structured with mostly open-ended questions, allowing for a flexible conversation that helped us comprehensively understand the participants’ reasoning [22].

An initial interview guide was developed based on a literature review on the topic and the stated research questions.

We first conducted two pilot interviews with industry professionals to identify potential issues and areas for improvement in the interview guide. During the first pilot interview, we realized that the interview guide contained too many close-ended questions, limiting the conversation’s flexibility. Therefore, we modified our guide and conducted a second pilot interview to ensure our changes addressed the issue. After the second round, we realized some inconsistencies in the wording of specific questions, which we modified. The interview guide is available at Zenodo²²2 https://zenodo.org/records/13769850.

The pilot interviews were conducted solely in Swedish, as eight out of eleven participants were scheduled for interviews in Swedish. However, the interview guide was translated carefully to ensure consistency across all interviews.

The modified interview guide used to collect qualitative data contained seventeen mainly open-ended questions. The interview guide comprised four sections: an introduction that included questions to gather demographic information, questions grouped into two themes (Team and Leadership), and a closing section where participants could provide additional comments. The data collected during the pilot interviews were not included in the data analysis and were not considered part of the final sample of eleven participants.

Face-to-face interviews were conducted at the participants’ workplaces, except for one individual who had a remote interview due to logistical constraints. Before the interviews, we stated that the study would focus on team dynamics and leadership. The participants were also provided with information regarding the use of their data, the voluntary nature of their participation, and the confidentiality of their responses. Finally, with the participant’s consent, the interviews were audio recorded to ensure the accuracy of the data collected. The interviews lasted between 45 and 80 minutes and took place over three weeks.

Eight interviews were held in Swedish, while three were conducted in English. Interview materials were translated carefully to maintain consistency. The transcripts obtained from these interviews form the primary source of qualitative data. However, we also took notes during the interviews to highlight important parts and assist in guiding the conversation more effectively.

Descript³³3 https://www.descript.com/ was used to transcribe the interviews, and then we manually evaluated them to ensure accuracy. In addition, extraneous filler words were removed to make the transcripts more readable. Finally, all transcripts originally in Swedish were translated into English to simplify the coding process. We aimed at making the translation as accurate as possible by using DeepL⁴⁴4 https://www.deepl.com/translator and manually checking the accuracy. We provided the participants with a summary of their statements for verification, which they confirmed. One researcher transcribed all interviews. To keep everything organized and confidential, we gave each transcript and participant a unique number (see Table 1). We have taken an inductive approach in the data analysis, allowing the data to guide and shape our conclusions rather than beginning with preconceived notions [22]. The data were analyzed using the 6-step thematic analysis method proposed by Braun and Clarke [22] in ATLAS.ti⁵⁵5 https://atlasti.com/. Since our research focuses on understanding the experiences and perspectives of our participants, thematic analysis is particularly appropriate for our study. The process included the following steps: (1) Familiarizing with the data: the transcripts were reviewed multiple times. (2) Generating initial codes: interesting phrases or segments were highlighted by assigning codes. (3) Searching for themes: codes that appeared frequently and could be categorized into broader themes were grouped. (4) Reviewing themes: themes were reviewed, and a decision was made on whether to keep or drop them. (5) Defining and naming themes: names were given to the themes that reflected their content. (6) Producing the report: in section 4 of the report, the main findings and quotes supporting each theme are presented.

The analysis followed an iterative process; steps 2-5 were repeated multiple times until thematic saturation was achieved [22]. Thematic saturation was considered achieved when no new themes or meaningful insights emerged from the data.

In agile teams, participants emphasized that leadership is shared among team members, with different individuals taking on informal leadership roles based on their tasks and expertise. This approach allows each member to take responsibility and contribute as a leader in their expertise, which enables many team members to conduct leadership. If many team members share the leadership work, the leadership is perceived as stemming from the team members and thus being more prototypical. As one participant expressed:

“So, everyone has sort of an informal leadership in the task really all the time and then you have to try to adapt it to the person and what they need. ” [C4]

The participants’ emphasized that the team’s success rarely depends on just one person. Instead, everyone in the team works together and contributes to achieving common goals. Decisions are made by considering everyone’s input and expertise. As one participant said:

“But when it comes to implementation, those things, then I feel like it’s more the team.Because everyone kind of brings different expertise to the table. ” [C5]

In agile teams, leadership is a collective effort encompassing everyday interactions and knowledge sharing among all team members. It involves everyone contributing their expertise and supporting one another, regardless of their roles or tasks. Multiple participants expressed this understanding of leadership:

“That we stand up and help each other and teach each other. That is what makes us reach our goal.” [B1]

In agile teams, senior members or those with extensive experience often hold significant influence, as most participants recognized. They have a deep understanding of specific technologies and development approaches, contributing to successful project implementation. These senior members are defined by their prototypicality and often represent the values and norms of the team. One participant highlighted the impact of senior leaders, stating:

“Some of the best developed things are based on one of the most senior people taking the lead on something. And really got people on board with why you should have a certain technology or why you should develop this and that.” [F1]

Participants emphasized that senior members not only offer technical expertise but also actively share their extensive experience and guidance. As one participant highlighted:

“[name] has been developing for [many] years so [name] is also here to spread their knowledge to everyone else.” [C5]

Moreover, participants recognized that the perception of seniority in the workplace often means that their opinions are seen as more important and receive greater attention. As one participant explained:

“Seniority is often such a thing in the workplace that you listen to the person who has the experience or the person who has been doing the project the longest. That their opinions are somehow more valuable or and that they are heard more anyway.” [E1]

Most participants preferred team members as managerial leaders, despite potential concerns about group friction. They value leaders who know the team and their work, as highlighted by one participant:

“If you are in a role that can affect the job or my environment positively or negatively. I would rather have someone who knows what they do and what they work with. And who knows me or something like that and you really do if we have worked together.” [E1]

Regardless of whether the leader comes from within the team or externally, all participants stressed the significance of the leader aligning with the team’s values and working methods without imposing unnecessary changes. They stressed that a leader should represent and embody the values and essence of the group they lead. One participant [C3] compared a leader to a church tower that symbolizes and stands out for the entire church, highlighting the significance of this representation.

Participants also stressed the significance of leaders actively engaging with the team, including sharing meals and informal interactions. They prefer leaders who are present and involved, unlike those who lack meaningful contact with the team. One participant shared their preference:

“We usually eat lunch together. And I feel like that is important. I like that a lot better than someone coming in telling me what to do and then leaving and there’s no real interaction.” [C5]

The findings show some possible positive outcomes such as job satisfaction and reduced turnover when leaders have aligned with their team. One participant shared their experience about an external leader who came into the team:

“So, if we have a natural turnover of staff and then you suddenly get a leader who is liked and everything works well and no one is leaving because they like it, that’s an indicator. The only people who will leave are those who want to move on to some other development of some kind.” [A1]

On the other hand, leaders who are perceived as unproductive often struggle to align themselves with the team. This lack of alignment erodes trust, hindering effective teamwork. One participant shared their experience:

“Since he wasn’t in the group at all, no one trusted him, and he doesn’t trust the group either because he wasn’t in the group. So, he was constantly checking that everyone is doing the right thing.” [C2]

The findings highlight the nuanced nature of leadership in agile teams. Success in leadership extends beyond technical skills, requiring alignment with the team and active engagement. This alignment seems to contribute to positive collaboration, increased job satisfaction, and potentially lower the turnover.

1. 1.

   Since agile teams share leadership work, the leadership is perceived as more prototypical.

2. 2.

   Not only one leader but the senior members of agile teams take on more leadership work, meaning it is also more prototypical then if only having one senior person who leads.

3. 3.

   Effective managerial leadership in agile teams goes beyond technical expertise and requires alignment with the team’s goals and values, also showing the positive effects of prototypical leadership.

Our research reveals the perception of prototypical leadership in agile software development in various ways. To comprehend these findings and address RQ1, we draw upon two theories: Social Identity Theory [15] and Social Identity Theory of Leadership [16]. The former theory explains the formation of agile teams based on shared traits, norms, and values, mirroring the categorization of individuals into groups. The study aligns with this theory, emphasizing that team formation centers on shared traits, norms, and values.

As team members collectively define their identity in relation to the group, they also become more representative of the group, a concept known as group prototypicality [16]. This aligns with the Social Identity Theory of Leadership, where group members depend on leaders who embody the group’s traits and values, attracting followers and support.

The above results show that, in agile teams, many leaders are likely to embody leader prototypicality since the leadership is more shared. Team members who assume leadership positions tend to exhibit the defining traits of the group, becoming prototypical leaders [11]. This phenomenon can also extend to managerial roles within the team, as senior members often progress to managerial positions. Additionally, external managerial leaders who share values and traits with the team tend to exhibit prototypical leadership. This concept may explain why teams accept some appointed leaders but reject others. A potential conflict can arise between various types of leaders within a team: those who emerge naturally and embody the team’s ideal characteristics (prototypical), and formally appointed managers. To mitigate this conflict, it is advisable to ensure that an appointed manager’s values and traits align closely with those of the team. However, if the team’s emerging values and norms diverge significantly from the organization’s, it becomes crucial to proactively establish team norms during the team formation process. This approach can help bridge the gap between organizational goals and team dynamics, fostering a more cohesive and effective work environment.

This study highlights the significant role of prototypical leadership in agile software development teams, bridging theoretical foundations with practical realities. Our findings reveal that team members who embody the characteristics of prototypical leaders facilitate shared leadership by aligning with the team’s values, norms, and shared traits. Drawing from the Social Identity Theory of Leadership [16], we observe that these leaders play a crucial role in shaping and reinforcing the team’s social identity. In the context of agile development, where leadership is often distributed and collaborative [3], prototypical leaders emerge as key figures who embody the team’s identity, contributing to success by sharing knowledge, guiding peers, and supporting team members. This aligns with Moe et al.’s [4] findings on the positive impact of shared leadership on team performance and member satisfaction in agile environments.

Our study reveals that senior members within agile teams often assume the role of prototypical leaders, retaining significant influence and naturally attracting followers. This phenomenon can be explained through the Social Identity Theory of Leadership, which posits that effective leaders are those who best represent the group’s defining characteristics [16]. The support these senior members receive aligns with previous research indicating that prototypical leaders often receive backing even when their actions might be perceived as unfair [25, 17]. This unconditional support stems from the belief that prototypical leaders act in the team’s best interest [11], a perception reinforced by their track record of contributing to the team’s success. In our observed agile team context, senior members significantly influence both technical work and social identity formation.

The presence of prototypical leaders in agile teams appears to have a positive impact on team dynamics and performance. This impact can be attributed to enhanced group-oriented behavior, which van Knippenberg and Hogg [17] identify as crucial for leadership effectiveness in organizations. In agile teams, this translates to improved collaboration and a stronger focus on collective goals. Furthermore, the alignment of prototypical leaders with team values and norms facilitates more effective decision-making processes, supporting Moe et al.’s [4] findings on the positive impact of shared leadership on team performance. Our study suggests that the presence of prototypical leaders contributes to higher job satisfaction among team members, which can be attributed to the leader’s ability to represent and promote the group’s identity, as highlighted by the Social Identity Theory of Leadership [16].

In conclusion, prototypical leadership seems to have a positive impact on agile teams. Agile teams benefit from leaders who align with the team’s values and exhibit group-oriented behavior, which then seems to lead to higher job satisfaction.