Coordination without discussion? Socio-technical congruence and Stigmergy in Free and Open Source So

The idea of congruence between the structure of technical and work dependencies has been demonstrated in commercial software development but has not been explored in detail in free and open source software (FLOSS) development. Previous work identified 103 task episodes, selected from two FLOSS projects, and found that 83 were performed by single actors. We analyze the 20 tasks with multiple actors and find that 14 were performed in the absense of any discursive communication between developers. The qualitative analysis of this evidence shows the paradox that, even if the developers do not seem to communicate explicitly, the software is nonetheless built as result of a collective effort, apparently without central coordination. In answer to this puzzle, this paper turns to the concept of stygmergic coordination as possible explanation. Stigmergy explains how actors can affect the behavior of other members of the community through the traces that their activities leave in shared artifacts. Such collaboration has implications for the socio-technical congruence analysis and the design of collaborative systems.

[1]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Socio-technical congruence: a framework for assessing the impact of technical and work dependencies on software development productivity , 2008, ESEM '08.

[2]  M. E. Conway.  HOW DO COMMITTEES INVENT , 1967 .

[3]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  FLOSSmole: A Collaborative Repository for FLOSS Research Data and Analyses , 2006, Int. J. Inf. Technol. Web Eng..

[4]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[5]  Andrea Omicini,et al.  Cognitive Stigmergy: Towards a Framework Based on Agents and Artifacts , 2006, E4MAS.

[6]  Mark Elliott.  Stigmergic Collaboration: The Evolution of Group Work: Introduction , 2006 .

[7]  Francis Heylighen,et al.  Why is Open Access Development so Successful? Stigmergic organization and the economics of information , 2006, ArXiv.

[8]  Carla Simone,et al.  Coordination mechanisms: Towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW systems design , 1996, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[9]  Tom Ziemke,et al.  Social cognition, artefacts, and stigmergy: A comparative analysis of theoretical frameworks for the understanding of artefact-mediated collaborative activity , 2001, Cognitive Systems Research.

[10]  Reijo Sulonen,et al.  Supporting virtual software projects on the Web , 1998, Proceedings Seventh IEEE International Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastucture for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE '98) (Cat. No.98TB100253).

[11]  Robert P. Smith,et al.  A model-based method for organizing tasks in product development , 1994 .

[12]  U. Yeliz Eseryel,et al.  The Role of Face-to-Face Meetings in Technology-Supported Self-Organizing Distributed Teams , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[13]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  The Modular Structure of Complex Systems , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[14]  Alan MacCormack,et al.  Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary Code , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[15]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Alone together: a socio-technical theory of motivation, coordination and collaboration technologies in organizing for free and open source software development , 2009 .

[16]  JoAnne Yates,et al.  Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordination Across Boundaries in Postbureaucratic Organizations , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[17]  Audris Mockus,et al.  An empirical study of global software development: distance and speed , 2001, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2001.

[18]  Yongqin Gao,et al.  A Research Collaboratory for Open Source Software Research , 2007, First International Workshop on Emerging Trends in FLOSS Research and Development (FLOSS'07: ICSE Workshops 2007).

[19]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[20]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogeneous Distributed Problem Solving , 1989, Distributed Artificial Intelligence.

[21]  R. Langlois.  Modularity in technology and organization , 2002 .

[22]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Identification of coordination requirements: implications for the Design of collaboration and awareness tools , 2006, CSCW '06.

[23]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Design Rules: The Power of Modularity , 2000 .