110
15. Федоров, А. (2008). Фразеологический словарь русского литературного языка: около
13000 фразеологических единиц. Publishe : Астрель.
16. Хайруллина, Р.Х. (2008). Фразеологическая картина мира: от мировоззрения к миро-
пониманию. Publishe : Уфа.
CZU 81`342.4
THE ROLE OF ASSERTIVENESS IN AGILE TEAM COMMUNICATION
Liliana COȘULEAN, Mas e o A s, Lec u e ,
Alecu Russo Bal i S a e Uni e si y
Liliana.cosulean@usa b.md
h ps://o cid.o g/0009-0002-2811-6569
Rezuma : Comunica ea e icien ă în echipele Agile se bazează pe in e acțiuni s uc u a e,
ca e po i analiza e p in Teo ia Ac elo de Vo bi e. Aceas ă luc a e explo ează modul în ca e
ac ele ilocuționa e ale lui Sea le – ase i e, di ec i e, comisi e, exp esi e și decla ații – mode-
lează ac i i ățile Agile p ecum s and-up-u ile, plani ica ea sp in ului, e ospec i ele și e iew-
u ile. Înțelege ea uncției ac elo de o bi e în cad ul Agile îmbună ățeș e cla i a ea, angajamen-
ul și colabo a ea. De asemenea, clasi ică ile al e na i e, inclusi ac ele locuționa e, ilocuționa e
și pe locuționa e ale lui Aus in, p ecum și eo iile lui Bach & Ha nish și B own & Le inson, o e ă
pe spec i e suplimen a e asup a dinamicii echipelo , s a egiilo de poli ețe și comunică ii
indi ec e. Ac ele de o bi e di ec e p edomină în comunica ea Agile da o i ă anspa enței și
e icienței lo , da cele indi ec e sun u ile pen u diplomație și adap abili a e cul u ală. Aceas ă
abo da e ling is ică aju ă echipele Agile să își op imizeze s a egiile de comunica e, îmbună ățind
colabo a ea și p ocesul de în ăța e con inuă.
Cu in e-cheie: comunica e Agile, Teo ia ac elo de o bi e, ac e ilocuționa e, o bi e di-
ec ă și indi ec ă, în âlni i Agile, analiză ling is ică, colabo a e în echipă.
Asse i e communica ion is a c i ical skill in Agile eam en i onmen s, enhancing colla-
bo a ion, con lic esolu ion, and decision-making. By os e ing a cul u e whe e indi iduals
can exp ess hei hough s clea ly and espec ully, Agile eams can cul i a e heal hie wo k
dynamics, imp o e anspa ency, and achie e g ea e e iciency in hei p ojec s. This beco-
mes e en mo e essen ial in di e se, global eams whe e English se es as a common language.
Fo non-na i e English speake s, asse i e communica ion can be challenging—no jus
because o language ba ie s, bu also due o cul u al di e ences in communica ion s yles.
Lea ning o balance cla i y and poli eness while con iden ly exp essing ideas is key o ensu-
ing e e y oice is hea d in Agile discussions.
The oo s o asse i e communica ion can be aced back o bo h linguis ics and
psychology, whe e ounda ional heo ies ha e shaped ou unde s anding o how language
in luences human in e ac ion. F om a linguis ic pe spec i e, John Sea le’s Speech Ac
Theo y (1969) p o ides aluable insigh s in o how communica ion unc ions no jus as he
exchange o in o ma ion, bu as a o m o ac ion. Sea le ca ego ized speech in o a ious ac s
highligh ing ha when we speak, we a e no me ely desc ibing eali y bu ac i ely shaping i .
In he cu en esea ch we in ended o demons a e ha in he con ex o Agile eams, asse i e
communica ion aligns wi h he “asse i e” speech ac , whe e indi iduals con iden ly exp ess
belie s, sha e knowledge, and con ibu e o decision-making p ocesses.
Complemen ing he linguis ic amewo k, he ield o cogni i e-beha io al psychology,
led by igu es like Albe Ellis and Aa on T. Beck, in oduced asse i eness as a beha io al
skill essen ial o men al well-being and e ec i e in e pe sonal ela ionships. Ellis’s Ra ional
Emo i e Beha io The apy (REBT) and Beck’s Cogni i e The apy emphasized he impo ance
111
o a ional hinking and clea sel -exp ession. Thei wo k unde sco ed ha asse i eness is no
me ely abou speaking up bu doing so in a way ha is espec ul o bo h onesel and o he s
– a p inciple ha esona es s ongly wi h Agile alues such as espec , cou age, and openness.
Figu e 1. Asse i eness py amid
In he cu en esea ch we will make an in ospec ion in o p o essional communica ion
in Agile managemen s yles wi h a n emphasis on speech ac s ela ed o di e en o ms o his
speci ic o m o communica ion. To s a wi h, Agile communica ion is an in e ac i e and
i e a i e p ocess ha elies on clea , di ec , and adap i e exchanges be ween eam membe s,
s akeholde s, and cus ome s. F om a linguis ic pe spec i e, aligning wi h Sea le’s Speech Ac
Theo y, speech is no jus in o ma i e bu pe o ma i e – d i ing decisions, commi men s,
and ac ions. Agile ce emonies like s and-ups, e ospec i es, and sp in e iews unc ion as
s uc u ed speech ac s ha acili a e alignmen and con inuous imp o emen .
Aus in’s O iginal Th ee Speech Ac Ca ego ies (1962). Be o e Sea le, J.L. Aus in
in oduced he i s model, di iding speech ac s in o h ee le els:
1. Locu iona y ac s → The ac o saying some hing (li e al meaning).
E.g.: “Can you send me he epo ?” (Jus he wo ds being spoken)
2. Illocu iona y ac s → The in ended unc ion behind he wo ds.
E.g.: Reques ing he epo o be sen .
3. Pe locu iona y ac s → The e ec he wo ds ha e on he lis ene .
E.g.: The lis ene ac ually sending he epo .
A decade la e , Sea le expanded on J.L. Aus in’s Speech Ac Theo y, classi ying speech
ac s in o i e ca ego ies:
1. Asse i es → S a emen s ha con ey in o ma ion o desc ibe eali y.
E.g.: “The sp in is ending omo ow.”
2. Di ec i es → Reques s o commands ha y o ge someone o do some hing.
E.g.: “Please comple e he epo by F iday.”
3. Commissi es → Commi men s o a u u e ac ion.
E.g.: “I will ix he bug by he end o he day.”
112
4. Exp essi es → Show emo ions, a i udes, o eelings.
E.g.: “I app ecia e you ha d wo k on his ea u e.”
5. Decla a ions → S a emen s ha change eali y when spoken.
E.g.: “I decla e his p ojec comple ed.”
E ec i e Agile communica ion balances asse i eness (clea exp ession o ideas) wi h
coope a i e discou se (ac i e lis ening and eedback), ensu ing ha discussions lead o mea-
ning ul ou comes. When eams communica e wi h cla i y and in en , hey os e anspa ency,
us , and agili y in p oblem-sol ing.
Below he e is a b ie desc ip ion o speci ic o ms o communica i e con ex s in Agile
ha will be analyzed u he in mo e de ail:
1. S and-up (also called Daily Sc um, Daily S and-up Mee ing); a sho daily mee ing
( ypically 15 minu es) whe e eam membe s sha e upda es on hei wo k, discuss blocke s,
and align on p io i ies. I helps main ain anspa ency and keep he sp in on ack.
2. Sp in Planning (also called I e a ion Planning, Agile Planning Mee ing): a mee ing
held a he beginning o a sp in whe e he eam discusses and selec s backlog i ems o wo k
on, de ines sp in goals, and plans how o comple e he wo k e icien ly.
3. Re ospec i es (Sp in Re o, Agile Re lec ion, Con inuous Imp o emen Mee ing): a
eam discussion a he end o a sp in ocused on e lec ing on wha wen well, wha didn’ , and
how o imp o e p ocesses o he nex sp in . The goal is con inuous lea ning and adap a ion.
4. Re iews (also called Sp in Re iew, Demo, Show-and-Tell): a session whe e he eam
p esen s comple ed wo k o s akeholde s, ga he s eedback, and discusses po en ial adjus -
men s. I ensu es alignmen be ween he de elopmen eam and business goals.
To be e unde s and he ole o communica ion in Agile eams, we e e o Speech Ac
Theo y, which explains how language is no jus a ool o exchanging in o ma ion bu a means
o pe o ming ac ions. By linking his linguis ic amewo k o key Agile ac i i ies, we can
analyze how di e en ypes o speech ac s—such as making commi men s, gi ing di ec i es,
and p o iding eedback—shape collabo a ion, decision-making, and con inuous imp o e-
men wi hin Agile wo k lows.
Agile ac i i ies, such as s and-ups, sp in planning, e ospec i es, and e iews, ely on
he abo e-discussed speci ic speech ac s o s uc u e eam in e ac ions and d i e
collabo a ion. He e’s how each ac i i y aligns wi h speech ac ca ego ies:
STAND-UPS 1. Commissi es: Team membe s commi o asks (“Today, I will comple e
he API in eg a ion.”). 2. Asse i es: Indi iduals epo p og ess and blocke s (“Yes e day, I
inished he UI design.”).
Func ion: S and-ups enable alignmen by using s a emen s ha es ablish accoun abili y
and sha e ac ual upda es.
SPRINT PLANNING: 1. Di ec i es: The P oduc Owne and eam nego ia e wo k dis i-
bu ion (“Le ’s p io i ize his ea u e o he nex sp in .”). 2. Commissi es: De elope s com-
mi o comple ing backlog i ems (“I will ake owne ship o his use s o y.”).
Func ion: This session d i es decision-making h ough eques s, ag eemen s, and com-
mi men s.
RETROSPECTIVES: 1. Exp essi es: Team membe s e lec on he sp in (“I app ecia ed
how well we collabo a ed las sp in .”). 2. Di ec i es: Sugges ions o imp o emen a e made
(“We should imp o e ou es ing p ocess.”).
Func ion: Re ospec i es os e lea ning by combining sel -exp ession wi h ac ionable
sugges ions.
SPRINT REVIEWS: 1. Asse i es: The eam demons a es comple ed wo k (“This ea-
u e now mee s all accep ance c i e ia.”). 2. Exp essi es: S akeholde s p o ide eedback
(“This is a g ea imp o emen o use expe ience.”).
113
Func ion: Sp in e iews alida e p og ess and encou age cons uc i e eedback.
Each Agile ac i i y se es as a s uc u ed speech e en , whe e speci ic speech ac s
(asse i es, di ec i es, commissi es, and exp essi es) shape eam collabo a ion. Unde s an-
ding Agile communica ion h ough his lens helps eams engage mo e e ec i ely, ensu ing
ha discussions lead o clea commi men s, in o med decisions, and con inuous imp o emen .
Bea ing in mind wha he main poin s o he asse i eness py amid a e, we ha e b oken
down he p ocesses in o mo e speci ic pa s ha ma ch he py amid le els. Thus, we could
single ou he ollowing cases o bo h success ul and lawed communica ion in Agile:
AGILE Communica ion
Success
Failu e
Issue
Exp essing Opi-
nions Clea ly
“I belie e his app oach will
help us mee he sp in goal
mo e e icien ly.”
“Wha e e you all decide
is ine wi h me.”
The pe son is ague
o o e ly passi e,
which can lead o
poo decision-making
because hei
aluable inpu is no
hea d.
“In my opinion, we should
p io i ize his ask because i
has a highe business impac .”
“I’m no su e i his is
igh , bu maybe we could
y some hing else… o
no , i ’s okay.”
Se ing
Bounda ies
“I unde s and he u gency, bu
I won’ be able o deli e his
by omo ow wi hou comp o-
mising quali y.”
“Su e, I’ll ge i done by
omo ow, no p oblem.”
(E en when o e loaded)
Ag eeing o un ealis-
ic deadlines o ex a
wo k wi hou consi-
de ing pe sonal limi s
can cause bu nou and
lowe -quali y
ou comes.
“I’m cu en ly a capaci y.
Can we discuss ealloca ing
some o hese asks?”
“I guess I can ake on
mo e asks, e en hough
I’m al eady behind.”
Gi ing
Cons uc i e
Feedback
“I no iced he code e iew
p ocess was delayed las sp in .
Maybe we can se clea e
deadlines o imp o e his.”
“This ea u e is jus bad.”
(Blun c i icism wi hou
help ul sugges ions)
Ei he being o e ly
ha sh o a oiding
eedback al oge he
can ha m eam mo ale
and p e en g ow h.
“I app ecia e you e o on
his ea u e, bu I hink we
could enhance he use expe i-
ence wi h a simple design.”
“I ’s ine, no eedback.”
(When he e a e clea
a eas o imp o emen )
Making
Reques s
Poli ely bu
Fi mly
“Could you cla i y he accep-
ance c i e ia o his s o y so I
can p oceed con iden ly?”
“I don’ know, maybe i
you ha e ime, could you
possibly look a his?”
Being oo indi ec
may esul in he
eques being
igno ed, while being
oo o ce ul can
c ea e ension.
“I’d like us o e isi he
backlog p io i iza ion o
ensu e alignmen wi h he
la es business goals.”
“You need o ix his now.”
(Demanding wi hou
espec )
Acknowledging
o he s while S an-
ding you G ound
“I see you poin , and i makes
sense. Howe e , I s ill eel ha
we should conside he
po en ial echnical deb .”
“You’ e w ong. This is he
only way o do i .”
Dismissing o he s’
inpu o a oiding con-
lic leads o poo
collabo a ion and
missed oppo uni ies
o be e solu ions.
“I espec you opinion, bu
based on he da a we’ e ga he-
ed, I hink a di e en app oach
would be mo e e ec i e.”
“Yeah, you’ e p obably
igh .” (Quickly ag eeing
jus o a oid con lic , des-
pi e ha ing alid conce ns)
114
Taking
Owne ship
“I’ll ake esponsibili y o his
ask and ensu e i ’s comple ed
by he end o he sp in .”
“Tha ’s no my aul , so-
meone else handled ha
pa .”
Shi ing blame o a oi-
ding esponsibili y
damages us and
accoun abili y wi hin
he eam.
“I missed ha issue in he las
deploymen . I’ll add ess i and
imp o e my es ing p ocess
mo ing o wa d.”
“I didn’ no ice he bug,
bu i ’s p obably because
he equi emen s we en’
clea .”
Table 1. Successes and ailu es in Agile communica ion
In Agile and Sc um en i onmen s, di ec speech ac s a e he dominan mode o commu-
nica ion, as hey align wi h Agile p inciples o anspa ency, e iciency, and collabo a ion. As
a esul , Agile p omo es cla i y, quick decision-making, and open eedback, all o which e-
qui e di ec s a emen s. Fo ins ance, a eam membe migh say, “I will comple e his ask by
omo ow” (Commissi e) o “We need o ix his bug be o e he elease” (Di ec i e). By using
di ec speech ac s, eams ensu e ha esponsibili ies, expec a ions, and issues a e communi-
ca ed wi hou ambigui y, which in u n educes he isk o misunde s andings and delays.
Ne e heless, indi ec speech ac s also play a ole in main aining diplomacy and os e ing
a posi i e eam a mosphe e, pa icula ly in di e se, mul icul u al en i onmen s whe e commu-
nica ion s yles a y. Fo example, ins ead o di ec ly s a ing, “You missed some edge cases”,
a mo e ac ul app oach migh be, “I migh be help ul o check i all edge cases a e co e ed.”
Simila ly, a he han saying, “You app oach is inco ec ”, a eam membe migh sugges ,
“Could we conside a di e en app oach o his ea u e?”. In his way, indi ec o mula ions
so en c i icism, making eedback easie o accep while s ill encou aging imp o emen .
To ensu e e ec i e asse i e communica ion in Agile, i is essen ial o balance bo h
s yles. On he one hand, di ec speech ac s should be used o commi men s, decisions, and
eedback, ensu ing cla i y and e iciency. On he o he hand, indi ec speech ac s a e use ul
o so ening c i icism, making sugges ions, and main aining poli eness in sensi i e discus-
sions. Tha being said, cla i y should always be pai ed wi h espec —being di ec should no
come ac oss as ude o dismissi e. Fu he mo e, eams should adap hei communica ion
s yle based on hei cul u e and dynamics—some eams may alue a highly di ec app oach,
while o he s unc ion be e wi h a mix o di ec and indi ec communica ion.
Ul ima ely, he e a e a ew ecommenda ions o asse i e communica ion in Agile:
✓ Use di ec speech ac s o commi men s, decisions, and eedback o a oid ambigui y.
✓ Use indi ec speech ac s when so ening c i icism, making sugges ions, o main aining
poli eness in sensi i e discussions.
✓ Balance cla i y wi h espec – being di ec should no mean being ude o dismissi e.
✓ Adap o he eam’s cul u e – some eams may p e e a mo e di ec s yle, while o he s
bene i om a mix o di ec and indi ec communica ion.
In conclusion, asse i eness in Agile is abou being clea , con iden , and espec ul, using
he igh balance o di ec ness and diplomacy o os e p oduc i e and posi i e eam in e ac-
ions. By inding his balance, Agile eams can c ea e an en i onmen whe e communica ion
is bo h e ec i e and suppo i e, ul ima ely leading o s onge collabo a ion and be e esul s.
Re e ences:
1. Aus in, J. L. (1962). How o Do Things wi h Wo ds. Ox o d Uni e si y P ess. 168 p.
2. Bach, K., & Ha nish, R. M. (1979). Linguis ic Communica ion and Speech Ac s. MIT P ess.
324 p.
3. Beck, A. T. (1976). Cogni i e The apy and he Emo ional Diso de s. In e na ional
Uni e si ies P ess. 356 p.
115
4. B own, P., & Le inson, S. C. (1987). Poli eness: Some Uni e sals in Language Usage.
Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. 345 p.
5. Cockbu n, A. (2006). Agile So wa e De elopmen : The Coope a i e Game (2nd ed.).
Addison-Wesley. 504 p.
6. Ellis, A. (1994). Reason and Emo ion in Psycho he apy: Re ised and Upda ed. Ci adel P ess.
560 p.
7. Schwabe , K., & Su he land, J. (2020). The Sc um Guide: The De ini i e Guide o Sc um.
Sc um.o g. 30 p.
8. Sea le, J. R. (1969). Speech Ac s: An Essay in he Philosophy o Language. Camb idge
Uni e si y P ess. 203 p.
