Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions

2,133

Published on

Dr. Matthias Stürmer, Ernst & Young AG …

Dr. Matthias Stürmer, Ernst & Young AG
21 October 2010 at CERN, Geneva

Workshop on Open Source Software with Technology Transfer Perspective
http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=101453

Published in: Technology, News & Politics
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,133
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
32
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Dr. Matthias Stürmer, Ernst & Young AG 21 October 2010 at CERN, Geneva Workshop on Open Source Software with Technology Transfer Perspective
  • 2. Ernst & Young IT Risk & Assurance Advisory • IT Risk Management • Information Security • IMAS (Info. Mgmt. & Analysis) • IT Effectiveness 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Assurance • External IT Audit • Third Party Reporting • IT Due Diligence • IT Program Assurance Page 2
  • 3. Speaker 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions • Senior, Ernst & Young AG in Bern • Dr. sc. ETH Zurich: Research program of Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) on Open Source Dynamics at the Chair of Strategic Management and Innovation • lic.rer.pol. University of Bern: Licenciate of Business Administration and Computer Science • Board member of Swiss Open Systems User Group /ch/open: OpenExpo etc. • Secretary of the Parliamentarian Group of Digital Sustainability Dr. Matthias Stürmer Senior, Ernst & Young AG Page 3
  • 4. Agenda 1) Introduction on Open Source Communities 2) Benefits and Costs when Releasing Open Source Software 3) Balancing Act between Openness and Control 4) Case Studies in Community Building 5) Conclusions 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and InstitutionsPage 4
  • 5. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Introduction on Open Source Communities Page 5
  • 6. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and InstitutionsPage 6 Typical Structure of an Open Source Community Source: Matthias Stuermer „Open Source Community Building“ Active Users Developers, Leaders Initiators, Owners, Core Developers Contributors Joining Script Software • Source code • Binary files • Documentation Artefacts Inactive Users OpenSourceCommunity
  • 7. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Development Lifecycle Community- Building Initial Release of the Source Code Base • Developer • Firm • Public Institution Core Contributions Feedback from Users Bug Fixes, Extensions Forming of Service Provider Industry Linux Mozilla Firefox Apache Webserver etc. Page 7
  • 8. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Community Stakeholders Institution: Initiator and Software Development Institution: Software User and Code Contributor Institution: Software User and Commentor Institution: Software User and Client Software Development Firm Collaboration Platform Basis-A likation Core Application Software Requirements Implementation of Core Contributions Software Development Public Feedback Public Feedback Contribution of Bug Fixes and Extensions Internal Feedback Page 8
  • 9. Motivation to Contribute Reasons for individuals to contribute to open source software: 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Externalized Extrinsic Motivation • Reputation • Reciprocity • Learning • Own-use Intrinsic Motivation • Ideology • Altruism • Kinship • Fun Extrinsic Motivation • Career • Pay Source: G. F. von Krogh, S. Haefliger, S. Spaeth, M. W. Wallin “Open Source Software: a Review of Motivations to Contribute” Page 9
  • 10. Motivation to Contribute Reasons for firms to contribute to open source software: 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Business benefits • Low knowledge protection costs • Learning effects for the organization • Reputation gain • Lower costs of innovation • Lower manufacturing costs • Faster time to market Source: Matthias Stuermer, Sebastian Spaeth, Georg von Krogh, "Incentives and costs in implementing Private-Collective Innovation: A case study" Legal constraints • GPL demands contributions Page 10
  • 11. Benefits and Costs Releasing Open Source 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and InstitutionsPage 11
  • 12. Benefits when Releasing Open Source Software Incentives and their findings in the case 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Source: Matthias Stuermer, Sebastian Spaeth, Georg von Krogh, "Incentives and costs in implementing Private-Collective Innovation: A case study" Page 12 Incentive Findings in the Nokia case Low knowledge protection costs Revealing of source code, no protection required Learning effects Collaboration with external firms and individuals Reputation gain Increased attraction of Nokia as employer and building an own developer community Adoption of innovation Standard setting of the platform configuration Lower costs of innovation Reuse of Open Source Software, outsourcing of software testing and bug fixing and maintenance to open source communities Lower manufacturing costs No licensing fees for software platform Faster time to market Tapping of distributed technology expertise and high flexibility of software platform
  • 13. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Costs and Mitigations Strategies Page 13 Cost Findings in the Nokia case Mitigation strategy Difficulty to differentiate Released source code can be reused by competitors Partial revealing of source code to retain control of hardware integration and look and feel Guarding business secrets Plans for new products Selective revealing of future plans and protection of information through NDAs Reducing network entry barriers Investments for Software Development Kit, preview version of platform, device program, staff for community management, and increased communication effort Sharing the costs with other actors in the network Giving up control Development direction such as scope of functionality of Open Source projects are controlled by external parties Hiring of key developers and participation in upstream communities. No single vendor controls platform Organizational inertia Required internal restructuring of processes Adapt and open up processes Source: Matthias Stuermer, Sebastian Spaeth, Georg von Krogh, "Incentives and costs in implementing Private-Collective Innovation: A case study"
  • 14. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Balancing Act between Openness and Control Page 14
  • 15. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions How to Gain Control in an Open Source Project Community-driven OSS projects • Meritocracy: exercise of control on the basis of knowledge • Technical contributions and organizational-building • behavior lead to authority and control Firm-driven OSS projects • Business model: value creation and value appropriation • Firms need control to appropriate returns of investment • Balancing act between openness and control Page 15 Source: Matthias Stuermer, Defense Doctoral Thesis ETH Zürich “How Firms Make Friends: Communities in Private-Collective Innovation”
  • 16. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions How May Firms Influence on OSS Communities Influence of corporations increases when: • Firms reveal previously proprietary code • Firms employ core developers who previously contributed as unpaid volunteers • Firms contract intermediary OSS firms and individuals New challenges in firm-driven OSS projects: • Possible crowding-out effects of intrinsic motivation • Create incentives to attract external contributions Page 16 Source: Matthias Stuermer, Defense Doctoral Thesis ETH Zürich “How Firms Make Friends: Communities in Private-Collective Innovation”
  • 17. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Balancing Act Between Openness and Control Control decreases contributions • Transparency increases contributions strongly • Accessibility increases contributions slightly Balancing is difficult • Too little control: results may not serve the firm's goals • Too much control: communities may not contribute with all of their energy, interest, and creativity • Worst case: forking of the source code Page 17 Source: Matthias Stuermer, Defense Doctoral Thesis ETH Zürich “How Firms Make Friends: Communities in Private-Collective Innovation”
  • 18. Forking The Community‘s Sword of Damocles • Worst case scenario in a community when the project‘s governance failed • Division of open source community: same code but new name for the fork • Specialty of open source software: everyone can „make it their own“ • Success of a fork: tacit knowledge vs. explicit knowledge Famous cases of unfriendly forks: • OpenOffice.org became LibreOffice • MySQL became MariaDB • Compiere became ADempiere • SugarCRM became vTiger • Mambo became Joomla 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Fork Main Page 18
  • 19. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Case Studies in Community Building Page 19
  • 20. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Community Building by Nokia • Sale of 1500 discounted Tablets to active OSS developers • maemo.org for tutorials, road map, API docs, Wiki, Blog Planet... • 244 registered Maemo projects on garage.maemo.org [2007-06-30] • Mailing Lists (June 2005 - December 2006) and IRC chat • Developer: 6795 mails from 832 email addresses (79 Nokia) • User: 2534 mails from 511 email addresses (33 von Nokia) • Bugzilla for bug reporting: about 1000 reported issues • Maemo software development kit (SDK) • Sardine: development (unstable) version of the operating system Source: Matthias Stuermer, Sebastian Spaeth, Georg von Krogh, "Incentives and costs in implementing Private-Collective Innovation: A case study" Page 20
  • 21. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and InstitutionsPage 21 Community Building by IBM for Eclipse Active Code Committers in the Eclipse Open Source Community Source: Sebastian Spaeth, Matthias Stuermer, Georg von Krogh (2010) "Enabling Knowledge Creation Through Outsiders: Towards a Push Model of Open Innovation"
  • 22. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and InstitutionsPage 22 Community Building by IBM for Eclipse Contexts enabling the push model of open innovation 1. Preemptive generosity Revealing of initial Eclipse source code by IBM 2. Continuous commitment Constant number of IBM programmers in Eclipse Constant level of participation in newsgroups 3. Adaptive governance structures (giving up control) Non-profit foundation with equal membership of firms 4. Lowering barriers to entry Sub-projects by non-IBM people; modular architecture Source: Sebastian Spaeth, Matthias Stuermer, Georg von Krogh (2010) "Enabling Knowledge Creation Through Outsiders: Towards a Push Model of Open Innovation"
  • 23. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and InstitutionsPage 23 Community Building by European Commission OSOR – Open Source Observation Repository – www.osor.eu OSOR.EU • European information and development platform on open source • For open source projects of public authorities Hosting collaboration platform • For national and international open source projects Links all European open source collaboration platforms • Currently 2331 open source projects in public authorities Publishes • Established case studies about the use of open source in authorities • Well researched news about open source from all over Europe
  • 24. Adullact (France) OpenSource Plattform des Digitalen Österreich (Austria) Guadalinex forge (Andalucia, Spain) Software Repositorty of the Junta de Anadalucia (Andalucia, Spain) The Free Knowledge Forge of the RedIRIS Community (Spain) Forja.linex.org (Extremadura, Spain) Morfeo Free Software Community Forge lafarga.cat (Catalonia, Spain) ASC – Ambiente di Sviluppo Cooperativo (Italy) Mancomun forge (Galicia, Spain) Technology Transfer Centre (Spain) 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and InstitutionsPage 24 Community Building by European Commission National open source platforms linked to OSOR.EU
  • 25. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Conclusions Page 25
  • 26. Level 3: Community Building Building of a firm-sponsored open source community 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Open Source Adoption Levels Page 26 Level 2: Knowledge Revealing Revealing of proprietary source code under an open source license Level 1: Open Innovation Integration of externally available open source components Source: Matthias Stuermer “How Firms Make Friends: Communities in Private- Collective Innovation”
  • 27. 21 October 2010 Open Source Community Building by Firms and Institutions Open Source Adoption Matrix Page 27 Active Open Source Community Building Release of Open Source Software Use of Open Source Software Use of Proprietary Software Use of Software Software Development for own Use Software Development as Core Business Canton of Waadt Raiffeisen Canton of Solothurn Canton of Zug Canton of Basel-Stadt Canton of Bern Federal Administration OpenSourceAdoption Manor Mobiliar Postfinance Federal Court educa.ch Nokia Red Hat IBM Novell Day Oracle HP Fabasoft Microsoft Strategic Relevance of Software Data Sources • Blog www.digitale-nachhaltigkeit.ch “Bedeutung von Open Source Software in sieben internationalen Software- Unternehmen“ • Press releases of the Parliamentarian Group for Digital Sustainability • OpenExpo 2009 und 2010 speeches on www.openexpo.ch • Open Source Observatory and Repository for European public administrations www.osor.eu • PhD thesis of Dr. Matthias Stürmer 2009 “How Firms Make Friends: Communities in Private- Collective Innovation“
  • 28. Dr. Matthias Stürmer Senior, Ernst & Young AG matthias.stuermer@ch.ey.com Mobile: +41 58 289 61 97 Thank you!

×