Problematisation and reconfiguration of knowledge in AI-embedded agile software development

IF 9.1 3区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Fangyuan Shen,Tingyu Quan
{"title":"Problematisation and reconfiguration of knowledge in AI-embedded agile software development","authors":"Fangyuan Shen,Tingyu Quan","doi":"10.1108/jeim-04-2026-0622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Agile software development research increasingly treats artificial intelligence (AI) as a knowledge-creating agent yet rarely examines how its outputs become credible project knowledge. Design/methodology/approach Grounded in the knowledge-based view (KBV), this paper adopts a two-study design. Study 1 systematically reviews 33 Q1 journal articles, using the Antecedents-Decisions-Outcomes (ADO) framework to map reported patterns and a problematisation analysis to derive six theory-informed, structured factors. Study 2 then applies fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) with 52 screened software practitioners to examine their perceptions of the directional relationships among those factors. Findings Study 1 establishes four problematisations and conceptually derives six factors shaping knowledge outcomes: AI intensity of use, explainability and transparency, team decision autonomy, trust, governance tightness, and agile performance. Study 2 indicates that trust has the highest prominence in the pre-specified network. Research limitations/implications The paper extends the KBV through a problematisation that distinguishes computational outputs from credible project knowledge and derives structured factors shaping knowledge outcomes in AI-embedded agile projects. The paper also develops an agility paradox linking reactive, efficiency-oriented AI adoption to potential constraints on proactive agile capabilities. Practical implications AI-generated outputs should be treated as provisional knowledge that requires contextual review. Software firms could pilot a lightweight validation record for consequential AI-supported decisions, review these records during retrospectives, and calibrate governance. Originality/value The paper's originality lies in reframing AI in agile software development work as a question of knowledge credibility, decision authority, trust and governance.","PeriodicalId":47889,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Enterprise Information Management","volume":"25 1","pages":"1-31"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Enterprise Information Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jeim-04-2026-0622","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose Agile software development research increasingly treats artificial intelligence (AI) as a knowledge-creating agent yet rarely examines how its outputs become credible project knowledge. Design/methodology/approach Grounded in the knowledge-based view (KBV), this paper adopts a two-study design. Study 1 systematically reviews 33 Q1 journal articles, using the Antecedents-Decisions-Outcomes (ADO) framework to map reported patterns and a problematisation analysis to derive six theory-informed, structured factors. Study 2 then applies fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) with 52 screened software practitioners to examine their perceptions of the directional relationships among those factors. Findings Study 1 establishes four problematisations and conceptually derives six factors shaping knowledge outcomes: AI intensity of use, explainability and transparency, team decision autonomy, trust, governance tightness, and agile performance. Study 2 indicates that trust has the highest prominence in the pre-specified network. Research limitations/implications The paper extends the KBV through a problematisation that distinguishes computational outputs from credible project knowledge and derives structured factors shaping knowledge outcomes in AI-embedded agile projects. The paper also develops an agility paradox linking reactive, efficiency-oriented AI adoption to potential constraints on proactive agile capabilities. Practical implications AI-generated outputs should be treated as provisional knowledge that requires contextual review. Software firms could pilot a lightweight validation record for consequential AI-supported decisions, review these records during retrospectives, and calibrate governance. Originality/value The paper's originality lies in reframing AI in agile software development work as a question of knowledge credibility, decision authority, trust and governance.
嵌入式ai敏捷软件开发中的知识问题化与重构
敏捷软件开发研究越来越多地将人工智能(AI)视为知识创造代理,但很少研究其输出如何成为可信的项目知识。本研究以知识为基础,采用双研究设计。研究1系统地回顾了33篇Q1期刊文章,使用前因-决策-结果(ADO)框架来绘制报告的模式,并进行问题化分析,得出六个理论知情的结构化因素。研究2然后应用模糊决策试验和评估实验室(DEMATEL)与52筛选软件从业者检查他们的感知这些因素之间的定向关系。研究1建立了四个问题分析,并从概念上推导出塑造知识成果的六个因素:人工智能使用强度、可解释性和透明度、团队决策自主性、信任、治理紧密性和敏捷性能。研究2表明,信任在预先设定的网络中具有最高的突出性。本文通过问题化来扩展KBV,将计算输出与可信的项目知识区分开来,并在嵌入人工智能的敏捷项目中推导出塑造知识结果的结构化因素。本文还提出了一个敏捷性悖论,将被动的、面向效率的人工智能采用与主动敏捷能力的潜在约束联系起来。人工智能产生的产出应被视为需要上下文审查的临时知识。软件公司可以为相应的人工智能支持的决策试点轻量级验证记录,在回顾期间审查这些记录,并校准治理。本文的独创性在于将敏捷软件开发工作中的人工智能重新定义为知识可信度、决策权威、信任和治理的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.80
自引率
6.20%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Journal of Enterprise Information Management (JEIM) is a significant contributor to the normative literature, offering both conceptual and practical insights supported by innovative discoveries that enrich the existing body of knowledge. Within its pages, JEIM presents research findings sourced from globally renowned experts. These contributions encompass scholarly examinations of cutting-edge theories and practices originating from leading research institutions. Additionally, the journal features inputs from senior business executives and consultants, who share their insights gleaned from specific enterprise case studies. Through these reports, readers benefit from a comparative analysis of different environmental contexts, facilitating valuable learning experiences. JEIM's distinctive blend of theoretical analysis and practical application fosters comprehensive discussions on commercial discoveries. This approach enhances the audience's comprehension of contemporary, applied, and rigorous information management practices, which extend across entire enterprises and their intricate supply chains.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书