Skip to content

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

Sep 2026 · Journal of Enterprise Information Management · 0 citations · 123 references

TL;DR

An agility paradox linking reactive, efficiency-oriented AI adoption to potential constraints on proactive agile capabilities is developed, linking reactive, efficiency-oriented AI adoption to potential constraints on proactive agile capabilities.

Abstract

Agile software development research increasingly treats artificial intelligence (AI) as a knowledge-creating agent yet rarely examines how its outputs become credible project knowledge. 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. 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. 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. 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. The paper's originality lies in reframing AI in agile software development work as a question of knowledge credibility, decision authority, trust and governance.

View source

Similar papers

Conference Open access Aug 2026

Enacting Explainability: Knowledge Practices Around Generative AI in a Consulting Firm

As generative AI becomes embedded in knowledge-intensive work, organizations face a central paradox: AI systems produce influential outputs while their inner workings remain opaque. Although explainability research has largely focused on technical methods, less attention has been given to how organizational actors prac...

Magnus Erga Skreden, Per Olav Eide Svendsen, Eli Hustad · 0 citations
Review Open access Sep 2026

Dynamic Human Resource Architecture and Knowledge Integration in Innovation Projects

This article develops a dynamic human resource architecture for innovation projects and explains how organisations mobilise, integrate, protect, and reconfigure knowledge as project requirements evolve. It addresses fragmentation across human resource architecture, project-based organising, knowledge integration, emplo...

M. Mitrović, Dejan Igov · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

The Evolution of Discussions on Knowledge Transfer in Project Management: A Systematic Review

This study maps the literature on Knowledge Transfer (KT) within Project Management (PM) and analyses the evolution of their discussions. To examine the intersection of these two constructs, we conducted a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) using Rayyan for screening and ATLAS.ti for coding, grouping and categorisation...

Valdemilson de Assis Alves de Araújo, I. Scafuto, F. Bizarrias et al. · 0 citations
#generative ai Review Open access Aug 2026

Does AI strengthen business leadership decision making: literature review

AI does not replace the role of executive leaders; instead, it serves as a cognitive aid that frees up a leader's capacity from routine operational tasks, yet it still requires the contextual intuition and ethical governance of human leaders.

Alifah Widya Rachmawati, Syamsul Hadi, Eni Purnasari et al. · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

The invisible hand of generative AI: quasi-agency and knowledge transformation in data-driven decision-making

This study aims to examine how generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) reshapes knowledge management (KM) in data-driven decision-making (DDDM), reconfigures principal–agent relations and creates new challenges for epistemic governance. It focuses on how GenAI influences the construction, synthesis, justificatio...

Matteo Cristofaro, A. Bañón‐Gomis, Pier Luigi Giardino · 0 citations
Conference Open access Aug 2026

Duality of AI in Knowledge Management: Correlating Utility Perceptions with Implementation Challenges

A dual perception is revealed in which optimism regarding AI’s potential coexists with recognition of the organizational adjustments it demands, revealing a dual perception in which optimism regarding AI’s potential coexists with recognition of the organizational adjustments it demands.

M. Nakash, E. Bolisani · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 30, 2026

Q&A: Hey AI, who should I vote for this year?

MIT professors Adam Berinsky and Chara Podimata discuss a new project to track how AI chatbots are responding to questions about the 2026 U.S. midterm elections.

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 30, 2026

From synthetic enterprise data evaluations to real Microsoft Copilot AI confidence

Evaluating Microsoft Copilot at enterprise scale requires test data that captures the full complexity of real organizations, yet real enterprise data contains sensitive information that cannot be used for evaluation under any circumstances. The post From synthetic enterprise data evaluations to real Microsoft Copilot AI confidence appeared first on Microsoft Research.

GPT-Lab Oct 30, 2026

Black October? The Week AI Changed the Cybersecurity Conversation

Critical flaws, compromised release channels and agentic AI threats landed within days of each other in mid-October 2026. Why “Black October” may say more about how well we now find weaknesses than about the attacks themselves. The post Black October? The Week AI Changed the Cybersecurity Conversation appeared first on GPT-Lab.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.