An Organizational Perspective on Free and Open Source Software Development

From a wider perspective, the production and exchange of knowledge is the result of a dynamic and chaotic process of local actions and exchanges of knowledge which spread and interact in unpredictable and uncontrollable ways. At the micro level, however, it is possible to identify fundamentally different models of agency and hybrids thereof. One is the restricted/close source (R/CS) model based on proprietary knowledge and private model of production, based on non-proprietary knowledge and non-economic motives. Between these two extremes, there are various combinations or hybrids, in the following referred to as free/open source (F/OS)-based agency. F/OS-based agency is interesting for several reasons. Firstly, it is a new, fast growing and theoretically rather immature field. Secondly, F/OS poses opportunities rather different from traditional innovation models. Last but not least, the distinct lack of F/OS advanced training opportunities at traditional institutions of higher educations points at F/OS projects. In the discussions, practical examples from software production are included. In conclusion, the paper identifies avenues for future research as well as important managerial and policy implications.

[1]  D. Teece.  Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy , 1993 .

[2]  John P. Ulhøi,et al.  Open source development: a hybrid in innovation and management theory , 2004 .

[3]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing , 2002, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[4]  Kieran Healy,et al.  The Ecology of Open-Source Software Development , 2003 .

[5]  Eugene Eric Kim,et al.  An Introduction to Open Source Communities , 2003 .

[6]  Paul A. David,et al.  From Keeping Natures Secrets to the Institutionalization of Open Science , 2001 .

[7]  Clayton M. Christensen.  EXPLORING THE LIMITS OF THE TECHNOLOGY S‐CURVE. PART I: COMPONENT TECHNOLOGIES , 1992 .

[8]  Sonali Shah.  Sources and Patterns of Innovation in a Consumer Products Field: Innovations in Sporting Equipment , 2000 .

[9]  Sven-Erik Sjöstrand,et al.  On the Rationale behind “Irrational” Institutions , 1992 .

[10]  H. Tsoukas.  The firm as a distributed knowledge system : A constructionist approach , 1996 .

[11]  W. Dugger.  The Economic Institutions of Capitalism , 1987 .

[12]  Sebastian Spaeth,et al.  Collective Action And Communal Resources in Open Source Software Development: The Case of Freenet , 2003 .

[13]  J. A. Russell.  Nature's secrets. , 1969 .

[14]  J. Ulhøi.  The social dimensions of entrepreneurship , 2005 .

[15]  Howard Rheingold,et al.  The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier , 2000 .

[16]  Giampaolo Garzarelli,et al.  Capability Coordination in Modular Organization: Voluntary FS/OSS Production and the Case of Debian GNU/Linux , 2003 .

[17]  G. Hodgson.  Economics and institutions , 1988 .

[18]  Amitai Etzioni,et al.  The Moral Dimension: Towards a New Economics. , 1990 .

[19]  G. Marwell,et al.  THE PARADOX OF GROUP SIZE IN COLLECTIVE ACTION: A THEORY OF THE CRITICAL MASS. II. * , 1988 .

[20]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[21]  W. Powell,et al.  The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis , 1993 .

[22]  J. M. Buchanan,et al.  An Economic Theory of Clubs , 1965 .

[23]  M. Olson,et al.  The Logic of Collective Action , 1965 .

[24]  Siobhan O’Mahony.  Guarding the commons: how community managed software projects protect their work , 2003 .