Open-source Software Development and Distributed Innovation

By Bruce Kogut, Anca Metiu. 2001

573 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Business and International Management, Computer Science Applications

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5dbdabda3242e0f497af63e5d1dadeb1fe790692

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Business and International Management

In Computer Science Applications

Citations in the corpus

Impacts of Hedonic and Utilitarian User Motives on the Innovativeness of User-Developed Solutions: Motives for User-Developed Solutions (2015, unknown): “, 2012), learning/skill improvement (Bin, 2013; Hienerth, 2006; Lakhani and Wolf, 2005), and helping others (Kogut and Metiu, 2001; Lakhani and von Hippel, 2003).”
How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies (2003, background): “Kogut and Metiu (2001) report that more than 70% of the Linux and Apache contributors had made only one change to the source code tree.”
Open innovation: State of the art and future perspectives (2011, background): “Devoting scarce resources to innovation and then to give away the outcome for free seems highly unlikely for economists (e.g., Lerner and Tirole, 2005; Kogut and Metiu, 2001), but in some cases it makes good economic sense (von Hippel and von Krogh, 2006).”
A man on the inside: Unlocking communities as complementary assets (2006, background): “Given the altruisic story of FOSS communities (Kogut and Metiu, 2001; ee and Cole, 2003) we would expect the vast majority f users to work for the common cause and to receive o financial compensation for their involvement in the ommunity.”
A survey of the use of crowdsourcing in software engineering (2017, background): “This idea echoes the earlier book ‘The Wisdom of the Crowds’ [37] and also finds some resonance in the principles of Open Source Software (OSS) development [38].”
Internal Social Capital and the Attraction of Early Contributions in Crowdfunding (2015, background): “Norms of generalized reciprocity have been documented in the open source community (Metiu & Kogut, 2001) and in other online communities (Wasko & Faraj, 2005).”
Perceived Proximity in Virtual Work: Explaining the Paradox of Far-but-Close (2008, background): “…perceptions of proximity in the context of widely distributed groups, we believe that it also has relevance for other organizational arrangements and perceptions of proximity between any two entities; e.g. between a supervisor and a subordinate or between a team member and an external team leader.”
The Impact of Ideology on Effectiveness in Open Source Software Development Teams (2006, background): “The forking norm minimizes the hazard of competing versions of projects, which may reduce reputational benefits to contributors by decreasing the audience for each fork (Kogut and Metiu 2001).”
The Emergence of Governance in an Open Source Community (2007, background): “Recent scholarship on open source communities suggests that any governance system introduced must be meritocratic in order to attract high quality contributions from voluntary members (Lee and Cole, 2003; Moon and Sproull, 2002; Kogut and Meitu, 2001).”
Reflections on the 2013 Decade Award—“Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited” Ten Years Later (2015, background): “When problems are modular in nature, such communities of problem solvers have had a dramatic impact on problemsolving outcomes (see Kogut & Metiu, 2001, and Lakhani & von Hippel, 2003).”