IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/elmark/v32y2022i2d10.1007_s12525-022-00557-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Archetypes of open-source business models

Author

Listed:
  • Estelle Duparc

    (TU Dortmund University)

  • Frederik Möller

    (TU Dortmund University
    Fraunhofer Institute for Software and Systems Engineering (ISST))

  • Ilka Jussen

    (TU Dortmund University)

  • Maleen Stachon

    (TU Dortmund University)

  • Sükran Algac

    (TU Dortmund University)

  • Boris Otto

    (TU Dortmund University
    Fraunhofer Institute for Software and Systems Engineering (ISST))

Abstract

The open-source paradigm offers a plethora of opportunities for innovative business models (BMs) as the underlying codebase of the technology is accessible and extendable by external developers. However, finding the proper configuration of open-source business models (OSBMs) is challenging, as existing literature gives guidance through commonly used BMs but does not describe underlying design elements. The present study generates a taxonomy following an iterative development process based on established guidelines by analyzing 120 OSBMs to complement the taxonomy's conceptually-grounded design elements. Then, a cluster-based approach is used to develop archetypes derived from dominant features. The results show that OSBMs can be classified into seven archetypical patterns: open-source platform BM, funding-based BM, infrastructure BM, Open Innovation BM, Open Core BM, proprietary-like BM, and traditional open-source software (OSS) BM. The results can act as a starting point for further investigation regarding the use of the open-source paradigm in the era of digital entrepreneurship. Practitioners can find guidance in designing OSBMs.

Suggested Citation

  • Estelle Duparc & Frederik Möller & Ilka Jussen & Maleen Stachon & Sükran Algac & Boris Otto, 2022. "Archetypes of open-source business models," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 727-745, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:elmark:v:32:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s12525-022-00557-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s12525-022-00557-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12525-022-00557-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12525-022-00557-9?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Täuscher, Karl & Laudien, Sven M., 2018. "Understanding platform business models: A mixed methods study of marketplaces," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 319-329.
    2. Kimmo Karhu & Robin Gustafsson & Kalle Lyytinen, 2018. "Exploiting and Defending Open Digital Platforms with Boundary Resources: Android’s Five Platform Forks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 479-497, June.
    3. Jan Abendroth & Lara Riefle & Carina Benz, 2021. "Opening the Black Box of Digital B2B Co-creation Platforms: A Taxonomy," Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organization, in: Frederik Ahlemann & Reinhard Schütte & Stefan Stieglitz (ed.), Innovation Through Information Systems, pages 596-611, Springer.
    4. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2006. "Two-Sided Competition of Proprietary vs. Open Source Technology Platforms and the Implications for the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1057-1071, July.
    5. Marko Sarstedt & Erik Mooi, 2019. "A Concise Guide to Market Research," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, edition 3, number 978-3-662-56707-4, August.
    6. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2006. "The Architecture of Participation: Does Code Architecture Mitigate Free Riding in the Open Source Development Model?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1116-1127, July.
    7. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    8. Saebi, Tina & Foss, Nicolai J., 2015. "Business models for open innovation: Matching heterogeneous open innovation strategies with business model dimensions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 201-213.
    9. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M. & Wallin, Martin W., 2021. "How open is innovation? A retrospective and ideas forward," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    10. Fabian Hunke & Daniel Heinz & Gerhard Satzger, 2022. "Creating customer value from data: foundations and archetypes of analytics-based services," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 503-521, June.
    11. Jens Passlick & Sonja Dreyer & Daniel Olivotti & Lukas Grützner & Dennis Eilers & Michael H. Breitner, 2021. "Predictive maintenance as an internet of things enabled business model: A taxonomy," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(1), pages 67-87, March.
    12. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rainer Alt, 2022. "Electronic Markets on platform transformation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 401-409, June.

    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. Tessmann, R. & Elbert, R., 2022. "Multi sided platforms in competitive B2B networks with varying governmental influence – a taxonomy of Port and Cargo Community System business models," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 132320, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    2. Ruben Tessmann & Ralf Elbert, 2022. "Multi-sided platforms in competitive B2B networks with varying governmental influence – a taxonomy of Port and Cargo Community System business models," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 829-872, June.
    3. Cenamor, Javier, 2021. "Complementor competitive advantage: A framework for strategic decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 335-343.
    4. Shaikh, Maha & Levina, Natalia, 2019. "Selecting an open innovation community as an alliance partner: Looking for healthy communities and ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    5. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    6. Bitzer, Jürgen & Geishecker, Ingo, 2010. "Who contributes voluntarily to OSS? An investigation among German IT employees," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 165-172, February.
    7. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2017. "Breadth of external knowledge sourcing and product innovation: The moderating role of strategic human resource practices," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 261-272.
    8. Bjorn Remneland Wikhamn & Alexander Styhre, 2019. "Open Innovation Groundwork," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(02), pages 1-29, January.
    9. Colin C. J. Cheng & Eric C. Shiu, 2021. "Establishing a typology of open innovation strategies and their differential impacts on innovation success in an Asia-Pacific developed economy," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 65-89, March.
    10. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel & Müller, Bettina, 2009. "Open Source, ICT infrastructure and firm performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Călin Florin Băban & Marius Băban, 2022. "An Orchestration Perspective on Open Innovation between Industry–University: Investigating Its Impact on Collaboration Performance," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(15), pages 1-23, July.
    12. Călin Florin Băban & Marius Băban & Adalberto Rangone, 2022. "Outcomes of Industry–University Collaboration in Open Innovation: An Exploratory Investigation of Their Antecedents’ Impact Based on a PLS-SEM and Soft Computing Approach," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, March.
    13. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & Gastón Llanes, 2011. "Mixed Source," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1212-1230, July.
    14. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    15. M. Markus, 2007. "The governance of free/open source software projects: monolithic, multidimensional, or configurational?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 11(2), pages 151-163, May.
    16. Nambisan, Satish & Wright, Mike & Feldman, Maryann, 2019. "The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    17. Laurin Arnold & Jan Jöhnk & Florian Vogt & Nils Urbach, 2022. "IIoT platforms’ architectural features – a taxonomy and five prevalent archetypes," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(2), pages 927-944, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Junic Kim & Jaewook Yoo, 2019. "Platform Growth Model: The Four Stages of Growth Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, October.
    20. Fu, Shihui & Sun, Yi & Gao, Xue, 2022. "Balancing openness and control to improve the performance of crowdsourcing contests for product innovation: A configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Business models; Open source; Open-source business models; Strategic open source; Platforms; Archetypes; Taxonomy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L17 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Open Source Products and Markets

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:elmark:v:32:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s12525-022-00557-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.