2012 05

Controlling the uncontrollable: 'Agile' teams and illusions of autonomy in creative work
Author(s): Damian Hodgson and Louise Briand

Source: Work, Employment & Society, Vol. 27, No. 2 (April 2013), pp. 308-325
Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24442151
Accessed: 15-10-2018 09:04 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Work, Employment & Society
This content downloaded from 195.43.22.140 on Mon, 15 Oct 2018 09:04:26 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Article
Work, employment and society

nn\
Controlling the uncontrollable:

©The Author(s) 2013
Keprints and permissions:
'Agile' teams and illusions of sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.n

DOI: 10.1177/09500170124603 15
autonomy in creative work wes.sagepub.com
(DSAGE
Damian Hodgson
University of Manchester, UK
Louise Briand
Universite du Quebec en Outaouais, Canada
Abstract
The creative industries have recently been hailed as presenting a liberating model for the
work and a valuable terrain on which to examine purported new regimes of workplac
This article, based on the empirical examination of a Canadian video game developmen
traces the modes of control which operate on and through project teams in creative setti
impact of the adoption of an 'emancipatory', post-bureaucratic project management tec
'Agile', is critically examined through interviews and non-participative observation of man
technical and artistic labour within one project team. The potential for autonomy in such
teams is critically assessed within the managerial regime of creative production and th
power relations implied by the financial, organizational and institutional context.
Keywords
autonomy, creative industries, creativity, project management, teamwork
Introduction
In recent years, unprecedented attention has been paid to creative industries i

oped countries, industries which are often portrayed as a path to national com
advantage in the face of global competition in manufacturing and increasi
service industries (DCMS, 2008; Florida, 2002). In the midst of this celebr
creative labour in the 'new economy', many writers have also looked to c
industries for insights into how to square the circle of creativity and control in
Corresponding author:
Damian Hodgson, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Booth St West, Manchester
6PB.UK.
Email: damian.hodgson@mbs.ac.uk
Hodgson and Briand 309
traditional industries (Townley a

epitomize the virtue of empowe
tems - akin to Peters's 'liberated f
rebuke to the failure of the tradi
production processes and value
questioning emancipatory claims f
work in the creative industries m
2007; Smith and McKinlay, 2009
A key issue overlooked in much o
dominated by work and manageme
opment which has also been uncrit
withincreative industries is fundam
lar logic of action on the field, in t
ability (Hodgson and Cicmil, 200
emancipatory possibilities, moving
and fulfilling work which can liber
tivity (Peters, 1992; Roy and Aude
Hodgson, 2004), the project-based o
projects has been strengthened by
understand work in creative indus
nature of project-based organizing
management, from traditional, ne
invented in large-scale construction
methods which claim to offer mor
The intention of this article is ther
industry, video game development,
'emancipatory', post-bureaucratic p
of all, changing approaches to pro
broader context of research into c
creative technical and aesthetic wo
tory' forms of project managemen
The article examines the operation
the way in which work is structur
adoption of Agile project managem
Agile and Scrum emphasize collegia
study indicates how this is undermin
and also by the persistence of an e
power within the team and by mic
engineer decisions on the part of se
challenge to the management syste
animators to Agile monitoring syst
for some aspects of creative work. T
ness of such project management t
controlling the full round of creati
310 Work, employment and society 2 7(2)
Locating game development in the crea

The last 15 years have seen an increased focus on both
processes within traditional industry, often linked to
economy' (Coyle, 1998). This has been accompanied by
importance of creative work to current and future c
tries faced with the loss or relocation of the manufact
vice industries to developing countries (Bilton, 2007; F
of this discourse has been the use of creative industr
alternative to the 'old economy', representing inste
tional model characterized by self-employment, auton
skilled workforce of highly motivated freelance indivi
and networks of specialist knowledge and expertise' (B
The most widely-cited definition of the creative indu
work of the UK Department for Culture, Media and S
'which have their origin in individual creativity, skill
tial for wealth and job creation through the generatio
property' (DCMS, 2001: 5). The video game industry rep
the broadly defined 'creative industries' (NESTA, 2010
worth £30.9b worldwide (PricewaterhouseCoopers, 200
tion process, market and consumption pattern, the ind
tive industries such as film and popular music. Specific
particularly risky business, marked by a dialectic of
production costs and low reproduction costs, produ
2010; Hesmondhalgh, 2010). Consequently, as with oth
in this industry rely on repertoires to offset misses a
engineering artificial scarcity; the market for video an
the creation of genres, serials (franchises) and to som
extent, tight control of distribution/marketing is offse
tors' (Hesmondhalgh, 2010). Nonetheless, the video gam
comparative studies of creative industries and it remai
to film and TV, for instance.
One explanation for this neglect is in part due to pe
opment as primarily a technical industry, a subsector
ICT, perceptions which tend to obscure or dismiss
ludic dimensions of work in this sector. In the broade
try might be described as 'knowledge workers' insofar
'new economy'; their work is often varied and dynam
upon specialist expertise and they expect and require
roles (Benson and Brown, 2007). Indeed, the closest
ment might be expected to be software developers, wh
cal knowledge workers (Marks and Scholarios, 2007); a
the stratified nature of work in creative industries a
and Baldry, 2009).
In many senses, however, this def

argues (2010: 226), 'there are clear
creative economies'. However, conf
thetic, cultural and experiential pr
are not symbolic goods dominated
and in the production of symboli
aesthetic creativity. Game developm
it involves 'a complex mix of techn
Simon, 2007: 587), combining the
engineers and animators as well as
this industry, unlike in many othe
artistic and technical creativity a
management, art and technology.
Managing creativity thro

Across the creative sectors, the 'i
(Caves, 2002) poses particular and
this production process (Lampel
2007). There is a widely accepted p
search for autonomy and the intan
in an abandonment of the traditio
society' (Thompson et al., 2009: 53
complicated by the romanticizatio
of an opposition between creati
management, the battle between
et al., 2009: 51).
Moving beyond this sterile oppos
which sets up individual creativity
of authors challenge the individual
collaborative, collective and even
second argument against this stere
ing creative and 'non-creative' labo
and the creative aspects of routine
a creative element' and, conversely
familiar component' (Smith and M
a much closer, less contradictory re
assumed, but also point towards a
the control of creative work. Tow
inherent tension between the free
manageable and productive bound
creativity and cost, autonomy and
in creative sectors is therefore dep
and market cultural products but
tion, which is the root of creating
3 12 Work, employment and society 2 7(2)
In terms of the control of labour in creative industries,

paid to the use of contracts as a mode of control (Caves, 2
intra-firm control systems. Caves thus argues that the un
ative products is dealt with by the use of open-ended
(2009) similarly suggest that creativity in such industr
product portfolio or distribution sphere rather than t
'unlike classic industrial or service work, or even tradit
as scientists or other expert labour, the tensions in the m
located largely outside the employment relationship' (
While contracting clearly forms part of the dynamic o
detailed technologies of project management in operat
tries dominated by 'project based organisations deploying
by labour in high-trust but ephemeral teams' (Smith an
its proponents, the project-based organizational form invo
bureaucratic and hierarchical structures and conveys a des
dency to control, so as to liberate worker initiative (Pe
2003). For other authors (Clegg and Courpasson, 2004;
based organizational form is the primary mechanism of w
industries, built upon 'modernist emphasis on compreh
reassertion of the importance of strict managerial contro
pline' (Hodgson, 2002: 810). The strong rationalist pri
tional project management, following the clear 'plan-
bounded by the 'iron triangle' of cost/time/quality and re
and quantification of labour would, on the surface, appear
tive industries, where success is predicated on inspirati
romantic genius. Nonetheless, where projects exist, pr
follow, accompanied by 'codified formulas and routines of
managing projects as distinct organizational units' (Gr
jarring conflict with the nature of work and the expectat
workers in creative industries.
The limitations of traditional project management are not unknown in the field -
indeed, it might be said that project management is in the process of reinventing itself,
reconsidering certain anachronistic assumptions which often result in approaches
which fail to deliver even in its traditional domains of engineering and construction
(Winter et al., 2006). The result has been a search for more flexible and emancipatory
ways to organize project work and the proliferation of alternative project management
methodologies and team structures (Beirne, 2008; Harley, 2001). These developments
echo many of the debates on teamworking in recent years. While teamworking has
been a persistent theme in the restructuring of work across a range of industries for
over half a century, several writers have identified distinct waves of adoption (Mueller
et al., 2000; Van den Broek, 2004). The revival of teamworking since the 1980s draws
its impetus from interest in TQM and Toyotaist production techniques, popularized as
'lean production'; and is often combined with moves towards 'high performance
work systems (Appelbaum et al., 2000). Many writers differentiate this recent wave
of interest in teamwork from earlier movements in the 1960s and 1970s due to its
instrumental philosophy, large

work', job enrichment and wo
Broek, 2004) with their roots
the Quality of Working Life mo
strong critical tradition which
new teamworking (Harley, 2001
tion of 'concertive control' (Bar
to further strengthen manageri
emphasize the need to pay close
(Bacon and Blyton, 2005; Proc
degree of meaningful autonomy
ings and effects of teamwork.
In many senses, the emergen
methodologies represents the
modern teamworking with pro
in a set of principles known a
February 2001 of 17 softwar
management of project mana
lated Manifesto states:
We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it.
Through this work we have come to value:
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working software over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan
That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more.
The supporting 'Twelve Principles' (Agile Alliance, 2012) reproduce the language of
modern teamworking literature, referring to projects 'built around motivated individu
als', reliance on trust, internal communication and internal reflection, dialogue and
adjustment. Various methodologies emerged following this to offer practical guides
operationalizing the principles of Agile. One of the most influential methodologies,
labelled Scrum (Schwaber and Beedle, 2002), combines regular internal communica
tion with intensive iterative cycles to solve production problems adaptively within an
'empowered' team structure. It is argued by proponents that Agile and methodologies
linked to Agile (eXtreme Programming, Scrum, etc.) deliver better results through the
flexibility and commitment which can be delivered by 'tight, self-organizing teams'
(Agile Alliance, 2012).
In the empirical research reported below, then, the following questions were explored.
First, how far did new forms of project management such as Agile/Scrum depart from
traditional rationalist approaches to the control of project work? Secondly and in light of
critical debates on teamworking, to what extent did such ap

autonomy to be delivered in project teams? Finally, to what
offer a substantive alternative for the management of colle
tive industries and more widely?
Methodology
The empirical focus on this research was a team working i
studio (approximately 200 developers) in the video game ind
'StudioOne'. The studio was a wholly owned subsidiary
lisher and developer, here referred to as 'Videocorp', whic
developers worldwide. The case study presented below f
research programme involving three video game developm
gramme aims to examine the control and autonomy of kn
project-based organizations in creative industries. The focu
team, 'Gameteam', within StudioOne.
Data collection was based primarily on semi-structu
participant observation techniques. Data collection aim
crucial dimensions of management' (Audet and Déry, 19
dinating and surveillance. Over a six-month period, 13
on site with 12 individuals (directors, producer, game
developers, the latter category covering programmer
Interviews lasted between 60 and 90 minutes and were tap
scribed. With the specific purpose of capturing the d
between team members, 11 full days of non-participan
ried out over the duration of the project. Non-participa
ting close by and listening to presentations and conv
members at meetings ('scrums', 'sprint reviews', 'plan
ning sessions', 'brainstorm sessions', 'project managem
and various casual encounters.
The fieldwork was conducted by one of the article authors and a research as
tant. To ensure reliability and validity, interviews were tape-recorded and fully tra
scribed before being shared with the first author who did not participate directly
fieldwork; transcriptions and observation notes were discussed by the entire resear
team regularly throughout the project. The data collected from the various sources
were analysed with the aim of describing and developing general conclusions on the
way creative projects are managed. In an inductive approach, the data collected were
analysed in an open-ended and exploratory manner to allow detection of patterns on
planning, coordinating and monitoring (Silverman, 2006). Key themes emergin
from detected patterns were discussed with the author not directly engaged in the
empirical research, who would challenge inferences, request corroboration/evidence
or propose alternative explanations in light of the 'enfolding literature' (Eisenhardt
1989). Through this critical dialogue, a detailed and plausible account emerged
the organization of Gameteam and its internal and external dynamics over the cour
of the project.
Gameteam and its environment
This section presents the general environment of Gameteam. It includes d

following: the organization of StudioOne, the project developed by Ga
standard structure of a project, a succinct statement of current policies acr
and the team composition and responsibilities assumed by the members.
Founded by Videocorp in 2005, StudioOne was a substantial game develo
dio with a staff of approximately 200 permanent developers (programmers
artists, etc.) supplemented by temporary workers, typically students from
grammes. The StudioOne general manager was assisted by a management te
of producers and managers from three departments: Communications, Op
Human Resources. The unit of analysis, Gameteam, was charged with develo
edition of an existing game for the Nintendo DS® console. The project wa
time frame of approximately nine months, with a deadline set for Septem
game to be published by Christmas. As the project moved ahead, Gameteam
human resources in accordance with requests put forward by the producer.
It should be noted that projects at Videocorp were structured around a
four predefined stages: ideation/conception, pre-production, production an
trol. Each stage referred to a set of specific activities (general description o
technology development, sound integration, etc.) and definite outputs
sequences of the game, full game, tested version of the game). The stages o
were typically subdivided into several sub-stages separated by 'decision ga
Stage-Gate® project management methodology. At each 'decision gate
approval had to be given before the team could progress to the next stage.
The sequence of stages implied variations in the team composition: the id
ception stage involved the 'core team members' only, e.g. producer, artist
game designer and team leaders, one for each trade (program, artistic, anima
pre-production stage, a few developers from each trade joined the core team
production stage required a full team (from 30 to 150 individuals). Finally, a
control stage, the team became smaller, now including only the core team
a few developers (primarily programmers) to carry out small adjustments
study began, Gameteam was already fully formed. The team consisted of ap
20 individuals: a producer, a game designer, three team leaders and a few
from each trade, whose number varied with each stage. By September 200
was down to a few developers, mostly programmers, who were busy correct
pointed out by the testers. At any given time, the team consisted of develo
average age was approximately 25 years. It is also worth stressing that th
mainly composed of men, but that all interviewees are here reported as 'he
protect their anonymity.
Moreover, at Videocorp, the activities of project teams were substantially
determined by the policies and decisions of the firm and the actions of the cro
departments at StudioOne. Videocorp set the policies and established very
lines concerning the delegation of authority; the main administrative system
finance and human resources) were centralized; reports on the progress of
scales and even the expense accounts of StudioOne's general manager, wer
and approved by Videocorp; the studio's profitabili

Videocorp through a centralized budget control system;
requirement, ensured by Videocorp.
The composition of Gameteam followed a set of rule
Operations and Human Resources departments. Operat
ing the optimal use of resources and did so by assignin
with a formula based on 'worker-months', depending o
question. Only senior management at Videocorp head
formula. Producers could ask for a particular resource
guarantee that requests would be granted as the re
assigned to a different project by the Operations depar
ducers were subject to corporate benchmarks, reflect
for each trade corresponding to a level of responsibilit
to optimize resources.
The main roles in the team were the producer, the de
three team leaders reflecting the three main specialis
artists), each in charge of a number of developers in e
while not involved in the actual production tasks, saw
for the production of the game, a role akin to a project
his head that was 'on the block'. The game designer de
nario of the game. It was his conception of the game that
stories - which were stored in a central file called the
responsible for deciding on and illustrating the appear
of the game (e.g. conveying the feeling of heat). He wo
of the artists' group. For their part, team leaders were
activities of the three different groups of specialists and
producer and game designer, in maintaining the backlo
ties, etc.). Finally, the developers were specialists belong
that is, programmers, animators and artists, straddling
of game development. The developers' role was to crea
ters and textures and so on, based on the scenario work
Managing creativity through Agile pro

This section presents details pertaining to the decision
ment and to implement this using Scrum methodology,
cal aspects of Agile and Scrum ('sprint, 'sprint review',
and an overview of the distribution of power within G
With the consent of StudioOne, Gameteam's core tea
adopt an alternative project management approach in o
support creativity. The chosen approach, 'Agile', reflec
for a flat, collégial structure, particularly in the relation
developers. Thus, the producer held the view that ther
the Agile team, arguing that he operated in 'convince m
the team. Although the game designer played a central
the game, this was described as m

or the way tasks would be carri
the hope that the developers wou
Basically, the main thing is this: we

... Our goal is really to have a team
them to take matters into their own
do things, they won't find their o
they can work out the problem for
the floor power over their own de
Similarly, the three team lead

selves not so much as leaders bu
The Agile Manifesto was poste
station and the team espouse
Gameteam's project timetable w
sprint started with a planning
mortem: these sessions involved
communication between trades
animators tended to remain silen
technical developers.
After planning sessions, the m
tasks, to agree their level of co
members. This information for
served as a key monitoring tool,
of the goals and keeping track of
in practice can be seen in the act
the man-hours allocated to each
process called 'poker planning'.
amount of work required for ea
the estimates differed, team me
person estimated again. This cy
then, 'poker planning' enabled o
viewpoints and thus exemplified
During the three-week sprints,
for each trade group. This meant
and animators held simultaneou
circle near the team work statio
chosen among and by each trade
ing by asking each developer to
difficulties he had encountered
lasted no more than 10 minutes
only the ScramMasters to supp
designer and team leaders did no
information or requests that cam
318 Work, employment and society 27(2)
ScrumMasters were therefore developers without posi

emphasized that they were not 'anyone's boss' and that
tors', 'to help get the job done'. ScrumMasters' primary co
often had to prevent last-minute requests from above fr
gress of the team, an interesting challenge for a develop
What we're looking for [in a ScrumMaster] is soft skills, beca

that might get in the team's way and prevent it from delivering
floor and ask the team to tweak something, I know the Scrum
if you ask for that, you're going to have to drop such and su
don't want to drop that. Okay, I won't ask then. Thanks.' (Pro
In accordance with the Scrum methodology, the team ke

the 'burn-down chart' displayed on a wide screen next to
updated on a real-time basis through the backlog and it
The system could also provide charts for each team mem
A perceived strength of Agile/Scrum was therefore the
tions from across the team, retaining flexibility as far as
ity on the shoulders of developers and not just managem
arrangements was the perception that the team operate
nificant degree of autonomy. All of the team members in
that the developers were not confined to simply carrying
intimate knowledge of their specialism to develop innov
developers could suggest changes to the scenario, althoug
responsible for the game scenario. Similarly, the develope
their own time within the limits imposed by the needs of
various interdependencies in work tasks and, vitally, as lo
of the sprint, which they felt they had helped to define. Th
of goals, targets and deadlines served as a powerful mec
onto developers, in the belief that these are self-imposed
process.
Analysis and discussion

In this section the previously discussed challenges and contradictions that face the crea
tive industries are explored through a detailed case study. The analysis is structured
around three sections. In the first, the persistent framework of power relations within
Gameteam is described, providing a context for an examination of the limited autonomy
allowed to Gameteam in light of the dominant regulation of team behaviour by the studio
and the wider corporation. Finally, particular attention is paid to the way in which artists
and animators within the team evaded or refused to participate in the project manage
ment technologies implemented in Gameteam; and to the alternative forms of control
used to influence the aesthetic labour component of the team.
Despite regular affirmations of the flat, democratic and egalitarian culture in opera
tion in the team, various observed encounters undermined such claims. Despite the use
Hodgson and Briand 3 19
of Agile/Scrum methodology, the pers

operation of various elements of Scru
sions where the durations of tasks w
while the procedure was applied in fu
the team leader's point of view tending
with junior members of the team learn
to match that of the senior members.
the discussion was therefore a key ex
undermining the appearance of ration
to the collective decisions of the sessio
largelyreflected informal power hiera
Although such hierarchies were larg
Gameteam felt it necessary at a certa
the team, so as to encourage the develo
So,during a sprint review attended by
opportunity to clarify and emphasize
Gameteam. The organization chart wa
sented by a specific colour and accom
1) Producer and game designer (pink

2) Team leaders (yellow): 'decision
3) Experts (purple): no reference ma
The perceived need to articulate an e

higher-level concern with the flat, col
the specific kind of participation. Ho
planning' session, it would be more ac
hierarchy did not disappear as a resul
coloured the application of Scrum me
Autonomy for Gameteam was fur
Videocorp and of StudioOne at each s
structure his team as he saw fit, he
hierarchy of responsibility establis
major deadlines and decided wheth
pleted. In practice, this largely under
management, since Videocorp often
manager explained, 'Head office does
thing, it's always for tomorrow.' Par
stories' were often turned upside dow
in particular, from Videocorp.
It was possible for a team to attemp
graphical distance that separated the
producer still found it necessary to a
with regard to the number of request
and methods were controlled by Gam
quality standards and targets, the appointment of pr

leaders - were made by StudioOne or Videocorp itself,
The team, it seemed, were at best semi-autonomous (G
decisions, but in conditions not of their own choosing.
However, a more substantive challenge to the operati
by the failure of members of the team to comply wit
While the key components of Agile/Scrum methodolo
ning sessions and so on - were embraced by the progr
resisted by members of the other two specialist groups
reported by a team manager:
We have a problem because the artists aren't Agile. They de

on board with Agile. One of the Agile ScrumMasters is a
problem. There's a dual system happening here. (Producer
As a result, the surveillance of their activities was ne

certain respects and the backlog and burn-down c
approach was used to assess and divide up the tasks, t
for keeping track of the work to be carried out and the
the artist-developers, not 'being Agile', sometimes fail
meetings central to Agile/Scrum - the daily scrums, th
so on - relied upon accurate information and hence reg
ability of the system to see the current state of progress
thus undermined by the actions of the artists who had
into the database.
With indivisible and immeasurable tasks to perform and inspired by a belief in indi
vidual ownership of work instead of the interactions and dynamic calculations of the
programmers, artists and animators appeared to exist outside of the Agile project
management:
The challenge for artists is that things can be very hard to identify. In programming, everything
is very Cartesian. Their tasks are very mathematical and can be quantified. But in art, for one,
it's hard to quantify the work; and for two, there are days when you're inspired and days when
you're not and it's hard to manage that. (Team leader)
As a result, alternative approaches were used to monitor and assess the work of the
animators and artists. For senior management within Gameteam, the pragmatic response
was to turn to personal monitoring to capture in an informal manner information on the
artists' and animators' progress:
We [the senior managers and team leaders] have learned to ask them how things are going: 'So,
what are you working on? Have you had any problems with it?' We got that from Agile. But
tracking tasks, poker planning and all that, we don't use any of that for the artists. We reserve
that for the programmers. But try telling the artists: 'We need your decors ready for such and
such a date'? Good luck! (Producer)
Although the animators and art

time monitoring systems, poker
of their work, this did not imply
work, although imaginative and
director and the 'concept art' he
consistent set of animations imp
leader have a direct and persona
tion team leader stated:
My role is to standardize. One animator will tend to be more extravagant, one will animate
more 'bang bang' and it does not work ... [When playing a game, one must not see] that there
are four different animators who made the animations. (Team leader)
Reliance upon such personalized and time-intensive forms of control recalled long
established practices in craft labour (Sennett, 2009) and a distinct logic of control as
compared with that of Agile/Scrum.
Interestingly, it was also observed that spaces where autonomy was afforded to staff
were not necessarily sought or valued by developers. Between projects, the developers
were typically allocated some 'off-project' time. In the eyes of the producer and team
leaders, this time represented the freedom to explore new avenues and do 'crazy things'
- in other words, to be creative. However, it appeared that developers put very little effort
into these activities, which they saw as a waste of time or, worse, a sign that their talent
was not appreciated. This phenomenon challenges the assumption that creative workers
seek and value autonomy. Instead, it seems, several appear to perceive non-directed work
time as a challenge to their sense of worth, rather than an opportunity to escape manage
rial control.
To sum up, the adoption of the Agile/Scrum methodology by Gameteam had limited
success in initiating real autonomy within Gameteam or any of its individual members.
The limited autonomy implicit in Agile project management resulted in a degree of con
flict with the parent organization whose structures, decisions and impromptu demands
overrode local agreements. Moreover, observation of the processes in action indicated
that despite the rhetoric, power hierarchies persisted in practice within the team, evident
in the process of enacting the methods of Agile/Scrum and eventually requiring a re
articulation of the power structure. Finally, the control imperative within the arrange
ment became explicit where it faced its limit in the refusal of the artists and animators to
participate in Agile project management practices, thus undermining the viability of the
system.
Conclusion
The key aim of this article has been to consider the novelty and effectiven
forms of control which operate on and through project teams in creative indu
study above provides evidence that the nature of work in game developmen
obstructs many traditional modes of control, leading to attempts to introd
control technologies such as, here, Agile project management, enacted using
methodology. While Agile/Scram here resulted in a sy

Gameteam, collectively, had influence over the choice of t
degree, quality standards, more substantial decisions rela
resource allocation and the selection of team members w
nally. The team's developers and leaders enjoyed autonom
wherein governing and surveillance mechanisms were def
or authorities outside the team. The article also explores th
agement control systems impinging upon the day-to-day
ing and management. Despite repeated assertions that
devolution of power to the team, the empirical research
power hierarchies within and around the project team. In
some way short of'self-managing' (Nijholt and Benders, 2
these attempts to reinvent control in projects do little t
tures around projects and even within projects themselve
'Through introducing such "emancipatory" mechanisms a
ers are increasingly adopting the seductive veil of "facilita
in order to mask the pervasive reapplication of traditional
the interests of capital accumulation.'
There, are, however, limitations to the reach of these ne
nologies, particularly given the need for a control system
aesthetic work in this sector. Within Gameteam, the arti
Agile/Scrum managed to evade control technologies to
ment were forced to fall back on modes of personalized con
industries. This finding lends some support to those, suc
are sceptical regarding the effectiveness of project manag
ing that 'it remains to be seen the extent to which indus
management bureaucratize such tacit knowledge, and whet
vations target the technical and economic aspects of crea
trated by the elusiveness of "creative" labour' (2009a: 25).
Although a limited study in terms of scope, this detail
both the effectiveness and the limitations of an explicitly
patory system of project management. Agile project mana
as an approach which supports emancipation of knowledge
their own initiative and creativity and offering an altern
bureaucratic processes for the management of knowledge-
lar, creative organizations. Even 'enlightened'Agile projec
resent, it is argued, a set of management tools which are
mechanisms, certainly, but ones which nonetheless sustain
the extent to which claims of emancipation and autonom
bers, they offer the possibility of a powerful ideological f
thetic and symbolic labour appears relatively resistant to su
the limited possibilities of such new project management
vogue for the adoption of Agile and similar methodologies
more extensive, cross-sectoral and critical research into its
sequences for control.
Funding
The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research
Council of Canada (SSHRC) who provided funding for this research.
References
Agile Alliance (2012) The Agile Manifesto. Available (consulted 25 September 2012) at: ww
agilealliance.org
Appelbaum E, Bailey T, Berg P and Kalleberg A (2000) Manufacturing Advantage. Ithaca,
Cornell University Press.
Audet M and Déry R (1996) La science réfléchie: quelques empreintes de l'épistémologie des
ences de l'administration. Anthropologie et sociétés 20(1): 103-23.
Bacon N and Blyton P (2005) Worker responses to teamworking: exploring employee attribut
of managerial motives. International Journal of Human Resource Management 16(2): 238
Banks M (2007) The Politics of Cultural Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Barker JR (2005) Toward a philosophical orientation on control. Organization 12(5): 787-97
Beirne M (2008) Idealism and the applied relevance of research on employee participation. Wo
Employment and Society 22(4): 675-93.
Benson J and Brown M (2007) Knowledge workers: what keeps them committed; what turns th
away. Work, Employment and Society 21(1): 121-41.
Bilton C (2007) Management and Creativity: From Creative Industries to Creative Managem
Oxford: Blackwell.
Caves RE (2002) Creative Industries: Contracts between Art and Commerce. London: Harvard
University Press.
Clegg S and Courpasson D (2004) Political hybrids: Tocquevillean views on project organizations.
Journal of Management Studies 41(4): 525—47.
Cohendet P and Simon L (2007) Playing across the playground: paradoxes of knowledge creation
in the videogame firm. Journal of Organizational Behavior 28(5): 587-605.
Coyle D (1998) The Weightless Economy. London: Capstone.
DCMS (2001) Creative Industries Mapping Document. London: Department for Culture, Media
and Sport.
DCMS (2008) Creative Britain: New Talents for the New Economy. London: Department for
Culture, Media and Sport.
Dymek M (2010) Industrial phantasmagoria: subcultural interactive cinema meets mass-cultural
media of simulation. Doctoral thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management
Review 14(4): 532-50.
Florida R (2002) The Rise of the Creative Class. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gallie D, Zhou Y, Felstead A and Green F (2012) Teamwork, skill development and employee
welfare. British Journal of Industrial Relations 50(1): 23-36.
Grabher G (2002) Fragile sector, robust practice: project ecologies in new media. Environment and
Planning A 34(11): 1911-26.
Harley B (2001) Team membership and the experience of work in Britain: an analysis of the
WERS98 data. Work, Employment and Society 15(4): 721—42.
Hesmondhalgh D (2010) The Cultural Industries. London: Sage.
Hesmondhalgh D and Baker S (2011) Creative Labour: Media Work in Three Cultural Industries.
Abingdon: Routledge.
Hodgson DE (2002) Disciplining the professional: the case of project management. Journal of
Management Studies 39(6): 803-21.
Hodgson DE (2004) Project work: the legacy of bureaucrat

organization. Organization 11(1): 81-100.
Hodgson DE and Cicmil S (2006) Making Projects Critical. B
Knights D and McCabe D (2000) 'Bewitched, bothered and b
ence of teamworking in an automobile company. Human
Lampel J, Lant T and Shamsie J (2000) Balancing act: learn
tural industries. Organization Science 11(3): 263-9.
Lawrence TB and Phillips N (2002) Understanding cultural
Inquiry 11(4): 430-41.
Marks A and Baldry C (2009) Stuck in the middle with wh
workers. Work, Employment and Society 23(1): 49-65.
Marks A and Scholarios D (2007) Revisiting technical work
identities in the software industry. New Technology, Wor
Mueller F, Procter S and Buchanan D (2000) Teamworking i
and dimensions. Human Relations 53(11): 1387-424.
NESTA (2010) The Money Game: Project Finance and Vid
London: National Endowment for Science, Technology an
Nijholt JJ and Benders J (2010) Measuring the prevalence of
of defining characteristics. Work, Employment and Societ
Peters T (1992) Liberation Management. New York, NY: Pa
PricewaterhouseCoopers (2008) Global Media and Enterta
PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Procter S and Currie G (2004) Target-based teamworking: g
the UK civil service. Human Relations 57(12): 1547-72.
Roy M and Audet M (2003) La transformation vers de nouvelle
une cadre de référence. Gestion 27(4): 43-9.
Schwaber K and Beedle M (2002) Agile Software Developme
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Sennett R (2009) The Craftsman. London: Penguin.
Sewell G (1998) The discipline of teams: the control of team-based industrial work through
electronic and peer surveillance. Administrative Science Quarterly 43(2): 397-429.
Silverman D (2006) Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analyzing Talk, Text and Interac
tion. London: Sage.
Smith C and McKinlay A (2009a) Creative industries and labour process analysis. In: McKinlay
A and Smith C (eds) Creative Labour: Working in the Creative Industries. London: Palgrave,
3-28.
Smith C and McKinlay A (2009b) Creative labour: content, contract and control. In: McKinlay
A and Smith C (eds) Creative Labour: Working in the Creative Industries. London: Palgrave,
29-50.
Thompson P, Jones M and Warhurst C (2009) From conception to consumption: creativity and the
managerial missing link. In: McKinlay A and Smith C (eds) Creative Labour: Working in the
Creative Industries. London: Palgrave, 51-71.
Townley B and Beech N (eds) (2010) Managing Creativity: Exploring the Paradox. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Townley B, Beech N and McKinlay A (2009) Managing in the creative industries: managing the
motley crew. Human Relations 62(7): 939-62.
Tschang FT (2007) Balancing the tensions between rationalization and creativity in the video
games industry. Organization Science 18(6): 989-1005.
Van den Broek D (2004) 'We have the

centre operations. New Technology,
Warhurst C (2010) The missing middle
Beech N (eds) Managing Creativity: E
Press, 217-36.
Winter M, Smith C, Morris PWG an
management: the main findings of a
Journal of Project Management 24(
Damian Hodgson is Senior Lecture

School, University of Manchester.
of expert labour, with a particular
Louise Briand is Associate Professo

du Québec en Outaouais (UQO) in
Centre de Recherche sur les Inn
issues of control and resistance in
Date submitted June 2011
Date accepted January 2012

2012 05

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2012 05

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Controlling the uncontrollable: 'Agile' teams and illusions of autonomy in creative work

Author(s): Damian Hodgson and Louise Briand

Work, employment and society

Controlling the uncontrollable:

'Agile' teams and illusions of sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.n

autonomy in creative work wes.sagepub.com

In recent years, unprecedented attention has been paid to creative industries i

traditional industries (Townley a

Locating game development in the crea

In many senses, however, this def

Managing creativity thro

In terms of the control of labour in creative industries,

instrumental philosophy, large

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools

Working software over comprehensive documentation

Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Responding to change over following a plan

critical debates on teamworking, to what extent did such ap

Gameteam and its environment

This section presents the general environment of Gameteam. It includes d

and approved by Videocorp; the studio's profitabili

Managing creativity through Agile pro

the game, this was described as m

Basically, the main thing is this: we

Similarly, the three team lead

ScrumMasters were therefore developers without posi

What we're looking for [in a ScrumMaster] is soft skills, beca

In accordance with the Scrum methodology, the team ke

Analysis and discussion

of Agile/Scrum methodology, the pers

1) Producer and game designer (pink

The perceived need to articulate an e

quality standards and targets, the appointment of pr

We have a problem because the artists aren't Agile. They de

As a result, the surveillance of their activities was ne

Although the animators and art

methodology. While Agile/Scram here resulted in a sy

Hodgson DE (2004) Project work: the legacy of bureaucrat

Van den Broek D (2004) 'We have the

Damian Hodgson is Senior Lecture

Louise Briand is Associate Professo

Date submitted June 2011

Date accepted January 2012

Вам также может понравиться