\section{Research Design}
\label{sec:researchdesign}

Our analysis was guided
by the following research questions:

\textbf{RQ1.} {How to well combine teams with different management processes
in a government-academia collaboration project?}

In this first moment, we describe what changes in the management model and the
development process have improved interactions between institutions, as well as
internally. To map the benefits obtained by these movements, we use evidence
obtained from interviews and online surveys with members on both sides, after
project closure. We also collect data from management and communication tools
used throughout the project.

In a second moment, we address our analysis to issues related to organizational
differences and diversity of project members in terms of maturity and experience
in collaborative development. The harmony between teams sought not only to
approximate the mind-set and culture of teams but also to delimitate the
interactions between different roles and responsibilities. Evaluating this
synergy generates the second research question:

\textbf{RQ2.} \textit{Which boundaries should be established between government
and academia teams in collaboration interactions?}

We highlight positive and negative effects of boundaries created among project
member using evidences from interview responses and open field responses from
online surveys.

To answer the two research questions presented, we
designed an interview and two questionnaires with quantitative and
qualitative questions addressed to project members. We also collect data from
tools that supported the project management activities.

\subsection{Surveys}

We conducted after-project surveys divided into three target groups of
project participants:

\begin{enumerate}
 \item \textit{MPOG Staff:} two government-side employees who have acted
directly in the platform development process. They were separately interviewed and each interview took an average
of 2 hours with 28 open questions divided by subject: Professional profile;
Organization, communication and development methodologies in the context of
government and project; Satisfaction with the developed platform; Lessons
learned.
 \item \textit{UnB undegraduated students:} 42 undergraduate students who
participated in any time of the project as developer and received scholarship. A
questionnaire with 45 closed and six open questions was sent through emails using
online form platform. The topics covered were: Organization, communication
and development activities between the respondents and the different groups of
the project; Learning acquired; Professional learning; Experience with free software
projects. We received a total of 37 responses.
 \item \textit{Senior Developers:} eight advanced level researchers, MSc students or
IT market professionals who participated in some period of the project. A
questionnaire with 29 closed questions and 10 open questions addressed the
follow topics: Organization, communication and relationship between respondents
and distinct groups of the project; Development process; Experience with Free
Software. All eight recipients answered the questions.
\end{enumerate}

\subsection{Data Collection}

%TODO: quais dados?
In a second round, we also collected post-mortem data from Gitlab - an open source and web-based repository manager integrated to SPB platform
used for management, communication and code versioning during the 30-month
project. These all data are open and available
for access at any time on the SPB Portal. This data analyze composes and ratifies
the evidences obtained in the previous round (surveys). The results
represent, in terms of volume, interactions and the evolution of these
interactions between the government and academia teams, and, in terms of
development complexity, the platform size and quantity of software releases
delivered.

\subsection{Respondents profile}

\subsubsection{MPOG Staff}

The two analysts interviewed are more than 30 years old and have been government
employees for more than 7 years. Only one of them continues working in the same
ministry. Both reported that the collaborative project studied was their first
experience in collaborative projects between government and academia.

\subsubsection{UnB undergraduated students}

The average age of the 37 respondents is 25 years old and 91.9\% of them are male.
Currently, 35.1\% continue at university as undergraduate or graduate students,
18.9\% work as developer in a small company and 18.9\% in medium or large
companies, 10.8\% are entrepreneurs, 8.1\% are unemployed and the others work as
teachers or civil servants.

\subsubsection{Senior Developers}
The average age is 32 years old and 87.5\% are male. They have an average of 11
years of experience in the IT market, and currently 62.5\% of respondents are
company employees, 37.5\% are freelance developers, 25\% are master's degree
students and 25\% entrepreneurs. They have worked on average in 5 companies and
participated in 4 to 80 projects. They participated in the collaborative project
studied between 7 to 24 months.

% And finally, we analized Colab code before and after the project to evaluate how much effort was spent to use this software as a component of the platform.