Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective: Agile team collaboration relies on frequent, structured meetings that create a unique interaction environment and promote direct communication, continuous feedback, and close collaboration. However, little is known about how relational communication unfolds across different agile meeting types and how it is embedded in subsequent interaction patterns. In this study, we examine how agile teams communicate within and across these different meeting types, with a particular focus on relational communication as an expression of the social nature of agile team collaboration. Method: We analyzed 26,413 verbal behaviors recorded during 40 agile team meetings across stand-up, planning, and retrospective meetings. Meetings were video- and audio-recorded on-site and transcribed verbatim. Each verbal behavior was coded using the act4teams coding scheme. We followed a mixed-methods approach, applying quantitative comparisons, lag sequential analysis, and qualitative episode analyses. Results: Our quantitative analysis revealed significantly more relational communication during each agile team meeting type compared to a previous sample of regular non-agile team meetings. Using lag sequential analysis, we further identified distinct agile team interaction patterns in which relational communication was followed by more action-oriented behaviors and fewer counter-productive behaviors in the meeting. An ancillary qualitative analysis of the transcribed verbal interaction data revealed that the agile team meetings were substantially characterized by humor, personal opinion exchanges, and relational appreciation. Conclusions: Relational communication is more prevalent in agile than in non-agile meetings and is systematically embedded in functional interaction patterns across agile meeting types. These findings position relational communication as a key behavioral mechanism underlying the social nature of agile collaboration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kruger et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: