Integrating pair programming as a work practice

Context: Pair programming (PP) is more relevant than ever. As modern systems grow in complexity, knowledge sharing and collaboration across teams have become essential. However, despite well-documented benefits of PP, its adoption remains inconsistent across software teams. Objective: This study aims to understand the factors that facilitate or hinder team members’ adoption as well as lasting engagement in PP. Method: We have conducted an exploratory single-case study in a mature agile company in Norway. We collected data through two rounds of interviews with team members in different roles and performed a thematic analysis of the interviews. Results: Our key finding is that multiple factors, related to the perceptions of how PP contributes to daily work, social dynamics and learning, efforts associated with engaging in PP sessions, company and team attitudes, resources, infrastructure, and task characteristics, affect PP engagement. Conclusion: Long-term engagement in PP requires expected benefits with the practice being confirmed in firsthand experiences. Adapting the practice to each unique team, with insights drawn from collective learning, is also beneficial. Our findings will be beneficial for software practitioners seeking to make PP an integrated part of their team’s workflow.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Systems and Software
Published
2025-12-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2025.112730
Primary Topic
Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Integrating pair programming as a work practice

Anastasiia Tkalich, Arne Söderbom, Darja Šmite, Viktoria Stray et al.
Journal of Systems and Software
Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
article

Integrating pair programming as a work practice

Anastasiia Tkalich, Arne Söderbom, Darja Šmite, Viktoria Stray, Nils Brede Moe, Nina Haugland Andersen, Ola Hast
article en

Abstract

Context: Pair programming (PP) is more relevant than ever. As modern systems grow in complexity, knowledge sharing and collaboration across teams have become essential. However, despite well-documented benefits of PP, its adoption remains inconsistent across software teams. Objective: This study aims to understand the factors that facilitate or hinder team members’ adoption as well as lasting engagement in PP. Method: We have conducted an exploratory single-case study in a mature agile company in Norway. We collected data through two rounds of interviews with team members in different roles and performed a thematic analysis of the interviews. Results: Our key finding is that multiple factors, related to the perceptions of how PP contributes to daily work, social dynamics and learning, efforts associated with engaging in PP sessions, company and team attitudes, resources, infrastructure, and task characteristics, affect PP engagement. Conclusion: Long-term engagement in PP requires expected benefits with the practice being confirmed in firsthand experiences. Adapting the practice to each unique team, with insights drawn from collective learning, is also beneficial. Our findings will be beneficial for software practitioners seeking to make PP an integrated part of their team’s workflow.

Journal of Systems and SoftwareVol. 234
SINTEF (NO), University of Oslo (NO), Cultura Bank (NO), NTNU Samfunnsforskning (NO), Blekinge Institute of Technology (SE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.