Describing criteria for selecting a scrum tool using the technology acceptance model

Abstract

Scrum teams extensively use tools to support their processes, but little attention has been given to criteria a Scrum team applies in its selection of such a tool. A greenfield approach was used to explore these criteria. To this extent twelve Scrum teams were asked to list criteria and assigned weights in their decision processes. After having chosen and used a tool for a number of Sprints, the teams also evaluated the selected tools. Using the Technology Acceptance Model to structure findings, two major categories were identified: Perceived usefulness, alias criteria directly related to Scrum, and perceived ease of use. Most teams listed more or less the same criteria. Within the categories several specific subcategories were distinguished, for instance burn-down chart support or multi-platform aspects. Teams evaluated more issues, positive or negative, within the Scrum-related criteria. The findings indicate that Scrum teams prefer perceived usefulness over perceived ease of use. In other words: Specific support of Scrum, especially its artefacts, are of greater value to a team than general tool considerations.