Stephanie Freeman Governing hybrid open source freeman
Governing Hybrid Open Source Community Stephanie Freeman, PhD Post doc Researcher, INUSE (h:p://inuse.ﬁ) Department of Management and InternaDonal Business Aalto University stephanie.freeman@aalto.ﬁ
Freeman, S. 2011. Construc6ng a Community: Myths and Reali6es of the Open Development Model • How is the structure and membership constella;on of the community, speciﬁcally the rela;on between developers and users linguis;cally constructed in hybrid open development? • What characterizes Internet-‐mediated Mailing list discussion, personal interviews, “virtual” communi;es and how can web page wri;ngs, email exchanges, ﬁeld they be deﬁned? How do they diﬀer notes and other historical documents from hierarchical forms of knowledge produc;on on one hand and from Four case studies inside one: tradi;onal volunteer communi;es on the other? OpenOﬃce.org Groupware project OpenOﬃce.org Lingucomponent project Four Finnish public sector user organiza;ons The OpenOﬃce.org website
Theore;cal sensi;zing concepts • Collabora6ve community (Adler, 2006; 2007; 2007; see also Adler & Hecksher, 2008; Adler, Kwon & Hecksher, 2008): • Communi6es of prac6ce (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Holland & Lave, 2009; Wenger, 1998) • Community as objet-‐oriented ac6vity (Engeström, 1987) • Imagined community (Anderson, 1983; cf. Cohen, 1985; Delanty, 2010; Maﬀesoli, 1996)
Intermediary concepts used for developing a discursive-‐rhetorical approach 1. Cultural and discursive psychology (e.g. Billig Condor, Edwards, Gane, Middleton & Radley 1988; Harré, 1998; Mulhauser & Harré, 1990; Shofer, 1993), 2. cri;cal discourse analysis (e.g. Fairclough, 1992; see also van Dijk, 1993) 3. social psychology, speciﬁcally the work by Henri Tajfel (1981; 1982) on social categories (cf. Sacks, 1992), and 4. poli;cal science, speciﬁcally the work by Quen;n Skinner (2006) on changing poli;cal rhetoric.
ConcIusions I From hacker ethic and bazaar governance to more professionally and strategically regulated community • Empirical chapter 1. Open code and open dialogue cons;tu;ve to the success of volunteer-‐ ﬁrm-‐collabora;on -‐> also “openness” has boundaries • Empirical chapter 2. Volunteers’ changing paferns of mo;va;ons : “independent entrepreneurs” with mobile membership in search of collabora;ve community – dis;nc;on between work and hobby blurred and changing -‐> the concept of “volunteer” ques;onable • Empirical chapter 3. User freedom or user control? IT staﬀ as the “obligatory passage point” in the dissemina;on of open source to end-‐user organiza;ons -‐> also open source can be used for control purposes • Empirical chapter 4. “Community” -‐ a powerful word and strategic tool for orien;ng towards mul;ple real and imagined audiences -‐> open source communi;es are managed through the prac;ce of authoring
ConcIusions II New developer & user categories in OSS -‐ new innova;on intermediaries From user-‐developers and the core-‐periphery dis;nc;on to : 1) idea-‐genera;ng users 2) independent plug-‐in and extension tool providers 3) typical (end) users 4) ideological researcher-‐users 5) media;ng IT staﬀ 6) media;ng management • open development not collabora;ve from the start! • return to the developer-‐user paradox…? • Lead-‐users?
Methodological and theore;cal contribu;on • Discursive-‐ac;on community as a speciﬁc type of online engagement • Community authorship as a way of highligh;ng power rela;ons in communi;es • Runaway community characteris;c of online open source development