IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/arbeit/v26y2017i1p111-136n6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Koordination überbetrieblicher Wissensproduktion: Zum Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Unternehmen und Communities in Open-Source-Projekten mit Unternehmensbeteiligung

Author

Listed:
  • Feuerstein Patrick

    (Institut für Soziologie, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Platz der Göttinger Sieben 3, 37073 Göttingen, Deutschland, Germany)

  • Hanekop Heidemarie

    (Soziologisches Forschungsinstitut Göttingen (SOFI) an der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Friedländer Weg 31, 37085 Göttingen, Deutschland, Germany)

Abstract

Open-Source-Communities sind eine spezifische, durch Digitalisierung zugleich von Arbeitsprozessen und Produkten ermöglichte Form kollaborativer Innovationsarbeit, die wegen ihres besonderen Potenzials zur Organisation verteilter, überbetrieblicher Wissensproduktion zunehmend auch von Unternehmen für kommerzielle Zwecke genutzt wird. Doch obgleich digitale technische Infrastrukturen für diese Form von Innovationsarbeit zentral sind, ist das Gelingen von Community-basierten Innovationen auf jenseits der Technik liegende, sie stützende soziale Mechanismen von Gemeinschaftlichkeit angewiesen. Der Beitrag untersucht anhand einer Fallstudie die durch digitale Infrastrukturen vermittelte Koordination unterschiedlicher Akteure innerhalb einer Open-Source-Community mit spezifischem Blick auf Konflikte zwischen Unternehmen und Community und deren Bearbeitung durch die Akteure im Spannungsverhältnis von gemeinschaftlicher Governance in der Community und hierarchischer Governance in den Unternehmen.

Suggested Citation

  • Feuerstein Patrick & Hanekop Heidemarie, 2017. "Koordination überbetrieblicher Wissensproduktion: Zum Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Unternehmen und Communities in Open-Source-Projekten mit Unternehmensbeteiligung," Arbeit, De Gruyter, vol. 26(1), pages 111-136, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:arbeit:v:26:y:2017:i:1:p:111-136:n:6
    DOI: 10.1515/arbeit-2017-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/arbeit-2017-0006
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/arbeit-2017-0006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Samer Faraj & Georg von Krogh & Eric Monteiro & Karim R. Lakhani, 2016. "Special Section Introduction—Online Community as Space for Knowledge Flows," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 668-684, December.
    2. Joel West & Karim Lakhani, 2008. "Getting Clear About Communities in Open Innovation," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 223-231.
    3. Mateos-Garcia, Juan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2008. "The institutions of open source software: Examining the Debian community," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 333-344, December.
    4. David, Paul A. & Shapiro, Joseph S., 2008. "Community-based production of open-source software: What do we know about the developers who participate?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 364-398, December.
    5. Giuri, Paola & Rullani, Francesco & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2008. "Explaining leadership in virtual teams: The case of open source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 305-315, December.
    6. Dahlander, Linus & Magnusson, Mats G., 2005. "Relationships between open source software companies and communities: Observations from Nordic firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 481-493, May.
    7. Joel West & Siobhan O'mahony, 2008. "The Role of Participation Architecture in Growing Sponsored Open Source Communities," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 145-168.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. Becker, Markus C. & Rullani, Francesco & Zirpoli, Francesco, 2021. "The role of digital artefacts in early stages of distributed innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    3. Clement Bert-Erboul & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2018. "Personal And Social Proximity: Shaping Leadership In A Free Software Project," HSE Working papers WP BRP 84/STI/2018, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    4. F. Rullani & L. Zirulia, 2011. "A supply side story for a threshold model: Endogenous growth of the free and open source community," Working Papers wp781, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    5. Sebastian Spaeth & Georg von Krogh & Fang He, 2015. "Research Note —Perceived Firm Attributes and Intrinsic Motivation in Sponsored Open Source Software Projects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 224-237, March.
    6. Smirnova, Inna & Reitzig, Markus & Alexy, Oliver, 2022. "What makes the right OSS contributor tick? Treatments to motivate high-skilled developers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    7. Stam, Wouter, 2009. "When does community participation enhance the performance of open source software companies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1288-1299, October.
    8. Dolata, Ulrich, 2014. "Märkte und Macht der Internetkonzerne: Konzentration - Konkurrenz - Innovationsstrategien," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2014-04, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    9. Michiel Bijlsma & Paul de Bijl & Viktoria Kocsis, 2009. "Concurrentie, innovatie en intellectuele eigendomsrechten in software markten," CPB Document 181, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    10. Matt Germonprez & Julie E. Kendall & Kenneth E. Kendall & Lars Mathiassen & Brett Young & Brian Warner, 2017. "A Theory of Responsive Design: A Field Study of Corporate Engagement with Open Source Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 64-83, March.
    11. Nicolai j. Foss & Lars Frederiksen & Francesco Rullani, 2016. "Problem‐formulation and problem‐solving in self‐organized communities: How modes of communication shape project behaviors in the free open‐source software community," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(13), pages 2589-2610, December.
    12. Michiel Bijlsma & Jan Boone & Gijsbert Zwart, 2014. "Competition leverage: how the demand side affects optimal risk adjustment," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(4), pages 792-815, December.
    13. Zaggl, Michael A., 2017. "Manipulation of explicit reputation in innovation and knowledge exchange communities: The example of referencing in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 970-983.
    14. Colombo, Massimo G. & Piva, Evila & Rossi-Lamastra, Cristina, 2014. "Open innovation and within-industry diversification in small and medium enterprises: The case of open source software firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 891-902.
    15. Siobhan O'Mahony & Rebecca Karp, 2022. "From proprietary to collective governance: How do platform participation strategies evolve?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 530-562, March.
    16. Dahlander, Linus & Piezunka, Henning, 2014. "Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 812-827.
    17. Dolata, Ulrich, 2017. "Apple, Amazon, Google, Facebook, Microsoft: Market concentration - competition - innovation strategies," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2017-01, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    18. Rullani, Francesco & Haefliger, Stefan, 2013. "The periphery on stage: The intra-organizational dynamics in online communities of creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 941-953.
    19. West, Joel & Kuk, George, 2016. "The complementarity of openness: How MakerBot leveraged Thingiverse in 3D printing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 169-181.
    20. Matthias Müller & Wolfgang Vorraber & Wolfgang Slany, 2019. "Open Principles in New Business Models for Information Systems," JOItmC, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:arbeit:v:26:y:2017:i:1:p:111-136:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.