Systematic Literature Review of Knowledge Sharing Barriers and Facilitators in Global Software Development Organizations Using Concept Maps <s> 4) CONTEXTUAL DIFFERENCE <s> Context: Software engineering is a knowledge intensive activity that is supported by documenting and sharing the required knowledge through a wide variety of artifacts. Global Software Development (GSD) teams heavily rely on artifacts as a vital means of knowledge sharing. However, there is little empirical knowledge about the key reasons and practices of using artifacts in GSD for knowledge sharing to support common understanding of technical specifications. Objective: This study aims at empirically studying the key motivators, practices, and drawbacks of artifact-based knowledge sharing for achieving common understanding of technical specifications in the context of GSD. Method: We conducted an exploratory case study in an organization that was involved in several GSD projects. Results: Our findings revealed the key challenges that necessitated the use of artifacts for sharing technical specification knowledge. We also present the practices that make up the artifact-based knowledge sharing system in the studied case. Finally, we shed some light on the caveats of knowledge sharing practices adopted by the studied company. The findings can provide useful insights into the artifact-based knowledge sharing practices and how it can be complemented by having certain level of social ties among distributed team members, even through asynchronous means. <s> BIB001 </s> Systematic Literature Review of Knowledge Sharing Barriers and Facilitators in Global Software Development Organizations Using Concept Maps <s> 4) CONTEXTUAL DIFFERENCE <s> In the context of Global Software Development (GSD), team members face a number of challenges that needs to be solved. One of them relates to the transfer of knowledge needed to fulfil the required tasks. The knowledge transfer process may be organized and implemented in various ways, as companies use varying strategies to transfer knowledge from onsite to offshore sites. However, without effective knowledge management practices, success in GSD will be difficult. In this paper, we aims to identify the process activities of knowledge transfer in globally distributed teams, challenges and suitable solutions for effective knowledge transfer. In order to achieve this objective, a systematic literature review (SLR) of the existing knowledge transfer literature is conducted. Our findings describing the process of knowledge transfer in globally distributed teams, a set of challenges and recommended practices for effective knowledge transfer. Finally, we conclude this study with a discussion of the directions for further and future research. <s> BIB002 </s> Systematic Literature Review of Knowledge Sharing Barriers and Facilitators in Global Software Development Organizations Using Concept Maps <s> 4) CONTEXTUAL DIFFERENCE <s> We present systematic literature review of 61 primary studies (2000September 2014) that empirically reported knowledge sharing challenges and practices in Global Software Development (GSD).We found knowledge sharing challenges and practices in GSD could be classified in 6 main themes: management, team structure, work processes/practices, team cognition, social attributes and technology.Regarding contextual settings, we found empirical studies were mainly conducted in offshore outsourcing collaboration model distributed between two sites. Most of the studied organizations were large enterprises. ContextGlobal Software Development (GSD) presents significant challenges to share and understand knowledge required for developing software. Organizations are expected to implement appropriate practices to address knowledge-sharing challenges in GSD. With the growing literature on GSD and its widespread adoption, it is important to build a body of knowledge to support future research and effective knowledge sharing practices. ObjectiveWe aimed at systematically identifying and synthesizing knowledge sharing challenges and practices. We also intended to classify the recurrent challenges and most frequently reported practices in different contextual settings. MethodWe used Systematic Literature Review (SLR) for reviewing 61 primary studies that were selected after searching the GSD literature published over the last 14 years (2000September 2014). We applied thematic analysis method for analysing the data extracted from the reviewed primary studies. ResultsOur findings revealed that knowledge sharing challenges and practices in GSD could be classified in 6 main themes: management, team structure, work processes/practices, team cognition, social attributes and technology. In regard to contextual settings, we found empirical studies were mainly conducted in an offshore outsourcing collaboration model distributed between two sites. Most of the studied organizations were large enterprises. Many of the studies did not report any information for several contextual attributes that made it difficult to analyse the reported challenges and practices with respect to their respective contexts. ConclusionWe can conclude: (a) there is a higher tendency among researchers to report practices than challenges of knowledge sharing in GSD. (b) Given our analysis, most of the reported knowledge sharing challenges and practices fall under the theme of work practices. (c) The technology related knowledge-sharing challenges are the least reported; we discussed the available technologies for supporting knowledge sharing needs in GSD. (d) The organizational contextual information is missing from a large number of studies; hence, it was not possible to investigate the potential relations between knowledge sharing challenges/practices and the contextual attributes of GSD teams. We assert the need of exploring knowledge sharing in the context of small/medium sized organizations to avoid the risk of findings being biased by specific empirical setting (e.g., large enterprises distributed between US and India). <s> BIB003 </s> Systematic Literature Review of Knowledge Sharing Barriers and Facilitators in Global Software Development Organizations Using Concept Maps <s> 4) CONTEXTUAL DIFFERENCE <s> While the literature offers several frameworks that explain barriers to knowledge sharing within software development teams, little is known about differences in how team members perceive these barriers. Based on an in-depth multi-case study of four software projects, we investigate how project managers, developers, testers and user representatives think about barriers to effective knowledge sharing in agile development. Adapting comparative causal mapping, we constructed causal maps for each of the four roles and identified overlap and divergence in map constructs and causal linkages. The results indicate that despite certain similarities, the four roles differ in how they perceive and emphasize knowledge-sharing barriers. The project managers put primary emphasis on project setting barriers, while the primary concern of developers, testers and user representatives were project communication, project organization and team capabilities barriers, respectively. Integrating the four causal maps and the agile literature, we propose a conceptual framework with seven types of knowledge-sharing barriers and 37 specific barriers. We argue that to bridge communication gaps and create shared understanding in software teams, it is critical to take the revealed concerns of different roles into account. We conclude by discussing our findings in relation to knowledge sharing in agile teams and software teams more generally. <s> BIB004
In globally distributed teams, individuals working in different contexts usually neglect to share the relevant information which may be beneficial to offshore team members. The reason for this behavior is the non-awareness of identification of information BIB002 required by the remote team members BIB003 and ambiguous nature of project  . This factor influences the capability to share knowledge and develop a common understanding with team members who are in different contexts BIB003 . Lack of understanding of business domain and context BIB001 e.g. banking regulation which is different for each country can make KS process challenging BIB004 .