IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ins/quaeco/qf0707.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Formulating an open source business model requires community segmentation and targeted marketing

Author

Listed:
  • Alberto Onetti

    (Department of Economics, University of Insubria, Italy)

  • Hal Steger

    (VP Marketing, Funambol Inc. (Redwood City, CA, USA))

Abstract

From a commercial open source company's point of view, open source is ideally the ultimate in “grass roots" marketing where people learn by word-of-mouth about the project and where they volunteer their time and effort, resulting in a vibrant community that benefits the company in many ways. This enables an open source company to enjoy major advantages that do not normally accrue to proprietary software companies e.g. they do not need to spend resources on traditional marketing activities and furthermore, having this community support can help ensure the longevity of the project and company. While this ideal may apply to a handful of open source projects, where they achieve a large critical mass of a community which lends itself to a natural form of monetization, for the vast majority of open source companies, it is not the case of “build it and they will come”. Instead, most open source companies need to understand who comprises their community so they can formulate a viable business model. In particular, they need to understand that communities are comprised of heterogeneous types of people, each of which have their own interests, motivation, needs and ability to be monetized. Open source companies need to identify the subgroups in their community, decide which ones to deliberately focus on, and choose the best way to leverage them. This is indispensable for determining how best to monetize the interest in their software, ideally without ruffling the community spirit that differentiates their software from proprietary offerings. And this is where “old fashioned” marketing can help. This means understanding your user base and what makes them tick, determining their needs, and formulating products and services that people are willing to pay for. The sooner an open source company understands that it needs to practice traditional marketing techniques such as segmentation and target marketing, the faster they will hit on the business model formula that enables their company to succeed. These techniques need to be adapted for the open source world, which requires the blending of traditional marketing techniques and community relations. The risk of treating one's community in an undifferentiated manner and applying a generic, formulaic business model is that a company will fail to generate significant revenue as well as alienate a community that could abandon them. As a community is perhaps the most distinctive asset of an open source company, losing its community is tantamount to death. If the community is not properly nurtured and leveraged, an open source company's potential will not be realized. This paper aims at describing, through case study research, a generic approach for how commercial open source companies can segment their community to aid in their formulation of a business model and marketing plans to reach their potential. It is for anyone who works in an open source company or project who is trying to determine a viable business model. The paper is structured in three parts: the first part outlines the research question and methodology. The second part proposes a way that an open source company can segment its community. The final part analyzes the Funambol experience, describing how the company segmented its community and created open source programs to nurture and leverage it.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Onetti & Hal Steger, 2007. "Formulating an open source business model requires community segmentation and targeted marketing," Economics and Quantitative Methods qf0707, Department of Economics, University of Insubria.
  • Handle: RePEc:ins:quaeco:qf0707
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.eco.uninsubria.it/RePEc/pdf/QF2007_7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ray Barrell & Nigel Pain, 1997. "The Growth of Foreign Direct Investment in Europe," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 160(1), pages 63-75, April.
    2. Gunnar Hedlund, 1984. "Organization in-Between: The Evolution of the Mother-Daughter Structure of Managing Foreign Subsidiaries in Swedish MNCS," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 15(2), pages 109-123, June.
    3. Borensztein, E. & De Gregorio, J. & Lee, J-W., 1998. "How does foreign direct investment affect economic growth?1," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 115-135, June.
    4. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    5. Lipparini, Andrea & Fratocchi, Luciano, 1999. "The capabilities of the transnational firm: accessing knowledge and leveraging inter-firm relationships," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 655-667, December.
    6. Mats Forsgren & Ulf Holm & Jan Johanson, 1995. "Division Headquarters Go Abroad ‐ A Step In The Internationalization Of The Multinational Corporation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(4), pages 475-491, July.
    7. Ronald Findlay, 1978. "Relative Backwardness, Direct Foreign Investment, and the Transfer of Technology: A Simple Dynamic Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 92(1), pages 1-16.
    8. Hopkins, Michael M. & Martin, Paul A. & Nightingale, Paul & Kraft, Alison & Mahdi, Surya, 2007. "The myth of the biotech revolution: An assessment of technological, clinical and organisational change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 566-589, May.
    9. Anoop Madhok & Thomas Osegowitsch, 2000. "The International Biotechnology Industry: A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 31(2), pages 325-335, June.
    10. Mytelka, Lynn & Farinelli, Fulvia, 2000. "Local Clusters, Innovation Systems and Sustained Competitiveness," UNU-INTECH Discussion Paper Series 2000-05, United Nations University - INTECH.
    11. Barrell, Ray & Pain, Nigel, 1997. "Foreign Direct Investment, Technological Change, and Economic Growth within Europe," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(445), pages 1770-1786, November.
    12. Junkunc, Marc T., 2007. "Managing radical innovation: The importance of specialized knowledge in the biotech revolution," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 388-411, May.
    13. Forsgren, Mats, 1990. "Managing the international multi-centre firm: Case studies from Sweden," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 261-267, June.
    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. Alessia Pisoni & Alberto Onetti & Luciano Fratocchi & Marco Talaia, 2010. "Managing R&D activities in the Italian red biotech industry. A comparison between Italian independent firms and multinational companies," Economics and Quantitative Methods qf1003, Department of Economics, University of Insubria.
    2. Sbia, Rashid & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Hamdi, Helmi, 2014. "A contribution of foreign direct investment, clean energy, trade openness, carbon emissions and economic growth to energy demand in UAE," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 191-197.
    3. Mielnik, Otavio & Goldemberg, Jose, 2002. "Foreign direct investment and decoupling between energy and gross domestic product in developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 87-89, January.
    4. Abdul Khaliq & Ilan Noy, 2007. "Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from Sectoral Data in Indonesia," Working Papers 200726, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    5. Kwon, Chul-Woo & Chun, Bong Geul, 2015. "The effect of strategic technology adoptions by local firms on technology spillover," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 13-20.
    6. Kose,Ayhan & Ohnsorge,Franziska Lieselotte & Ye,Lei Sandy & Islamaj,Ergys, 2017. "Weakness in investment growth : causes, implications and policy responses," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7990, The World Bank.
    7. Garita, Gus, 2009. "How Does Financial Openness Affect Economic Growth and its Components?," MPRA Paper 20099, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Lewis Davis & Claudia R. Williamson, 2018. "Open Borders for Business? Causes and Consequences of the Regulation of Foreign Entry," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(2), pages 508-536, October.
    9. Yip, Paul S.L. & Yao, S.T., 2006. "Removing foreign direct investment's exchange rate risk in developing economies: the case for a foreign exchange custodian board," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 294-315.
    10. Uppenberg, Kristian & Riess, Armin, 2004. "Determinants and growth effects of foreign direct investment," EIB Papers 3/2004, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    11. Balcao Reis, Ana, 2001. "On the welfare effects of foreign investment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 411-427, August.
    12. Mohamed Saadi, 2011. "Technology Transfer, Foreign Direct Investment, Licensing and the Developing Countries’ Terms of Trade," Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 5(4), pages 381-420, November.
    13. Kutan, Ali M. & Yigit, Taner M., 2007. "European integration, productivity growth and real convergence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(6), pages 1370-1395, August.
    14. Dirk Clercq & Jolanda Hessels & André Stel, 2008. "Knowledge spillovers and new ventures’ export orientation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 283-303, October.
    15. Walid Hejazi & Daniel Trefler, 2019. "Implications of Canada’s restrictive FDI policies on employment and productivity," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(2), pages 142-166, June.
    16. Griffith, Rachel & Redding, Stephen & Simpson, Helen, 2002. "Productivity Convergence and Foreign Ownership at the Establishment Level," CEPR Discussion Papers 3765, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Rachel Griffith & Helen Simpson, 2004. "Characteristics of Foreign-Owned Firms in British Manufacturing," NBER Chapters, in: Seeking a Premier Economy: The Economic Effects of British Economic Reforms, 1980–2000, pages 147-180, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Jenny Berrill & Martha O’Hagan-Luff & André Stel, 2020. "The moderating role of education in the relationship between FDI and entrepreneurial activity," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1041-1059, April.
    19. Chen, Feiqiong & Zhong, Fangfang & Chen, Yao, 2014. "Outward foreign direct investment and sovereign risks in developing host country," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 166-172.
    20. Sawhney, Aparna & Kahn, Matthew E., 2012. "Understanding cross-national trends in high-tech renewable power equipment exports to the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 308-318.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ins:quaeco:qf0707. 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: Segreteria Dipartimento (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feinsit.html .

    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.