Sheen S. Levine * Linux, Napster, and Sobig: A Framework for Understanding Collective Open Source Innovation (was: [ox-en] Conference documentation / Konferenzdokumentation)
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2005 14:05:19 +0200
Linux, Napster, and Sobig: A Framework for Understanding Collective Open Source Innovation
==========================================================================================
Sheen S. Levine [sslevine at sslevine.com]
The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Center for Knowledge Governance, Copenhagen Business School
Road Map
========
o Collective Open Source Innovation (COSI)
o Prevalent and has significant economic impact
o Created by coordinated collectives
o Products and services available to anyone
o Poses a puzzle for theory and practice - Why? When?
o Research sites and methods
o Framework:
o Non-rival Goods & Identifiability
o Generalized Exchange & Coordination Institutions
o Implications & future research
COSI has Important Economic Impact
==================================
o Open source software has become a viable alternative to
commercial products
(Guth 2003; Lohr 2003)
o File sharing is extremely common, and arguably causes substantial
revenue loss
(Madden & Lenhart 2003; Napster court case)
o Viruses and other attacks cause wide-ranging disruptions to
businesses and individuals
(Guth & Machalaba 2003; Thompson 2004)
COSI is Created by Collectives
==============================
o Operate in coordination
o Accomplish innovative goals
o Products or services have economic value and impact
o No formal hierarchy or organization
o Little social information & interaction
o Strong orientation to accomplish goals rather than preserve
relationships
Openly Available
================
o The products and services are freely available to anyone
o No attempt to limit access, although technologically feasible
o No legal protection, except to protect open access
A Puzzle to Theory
==================
o Why COSI is sustainable
How it avoids the "tragedy of the commons"?
o Why COSI is effective
How it undermines commercial products?
o Can we predict when COSI will emerge?
Research Site & Method
======================
o Three Usenet groups that are a clearinghouse for requests for
digital music
o Users post requests and files
o Universal access, non-moderated
o Content analysis of 2,000 messages
o Semi-structured interviews
Advantages of Research Site
===========================
o Most interaction is observable
o Little private communication
o Interaction is archived
o Asynchronous, easy to obtain and analyze
o Goods offered are generic
o Rules out learning benefits
(von Hippel & von Krogh 2003}
o Identities are cloaked
o Rules out reputational effects
(Lerner & Tirole 2002)
Findings in Brief
=================
o Individuals send requests for files
o Benefactor posts files in response or voluntarily
o No payment or direct exchange
o Accessible to anyone
o Free riding is common and acknowledged
o Strict adherence to established rules
o Little social "off-topic" interaction
Framework
=========
o Non-rival good
o Perception of fairness
=> Sustainability
o Based on generalized exchange
o Coordinated through institutions
=> Efficiency
Non-Rival Good
==============
o When one's consumption of the good doesn't interfere with
another's consumption of the same good.
o Rival goods: food, clothes, housing
o Non-rival goods: radio, road, safety
Non-Rival Goods Sustain COSI
============================
o Proposition #1:
o COSI is more likely to be sustainable when the product or service
is a non-rival good.
ADD
===
o Low cost of replication
o Positive chance of reciprocation
o Explains why not limit access, but share freely
o But doesn't explain why people don't feel violated fairness
Perception of Fairness
======================
o People don't want to be treated unfairly
(Kahneman, Knetsch and Thaler 1986)
o Willing to suffer cost to punish a free-rider
(Fehr and Gächter 2000)
o Will withdraw if sense exploitation
Violations Don't Cause Withdrawal
=================================
o Why violations don't lead to withdrawal of contributions?
o People are less willing to punish an unidentified offender
o More willing to assist an identifiable beneficiary
(Small and Loewenstein 2003)
(Non) Identifiability Sustain COSI
==================================
o Proposition #2:
o COSI is more sustainable when the beneficiaries are identifiable,
while defectors are non-identifiable.
Generalized Exchange
====================
o Reception constitutes obligation to reciprocate to any other
member
(Ekeh 1974:48)
o Neither immediate reciprocity nor obligation to a specific
benefactor
o Previously documented
e.g. pacific islanders, CEOs, immigrant communities, lawyers
(Malinowski 1920; Westphal & Zajac 1997; Portes &
Sensenberger 1993; Lazega 2001)
Direct vs. Generalized Exchange
===============================
** Unable to import figure Levine.png **
Gen. Exchange Facilitates COSI
==============================
o Allows contributions from unacquainted others
o Lets neophytes ("newbies") participate
o Cuts on cost of bargaining and transacting,
o Especially fit for knowledge and intangibles
Gen. Exchange Facilitates COSI
==============================
o Proposition #3:
o Collective open innovation is more efficient when based on
generalized exchange rather than direct exchange.
Coordination Institutions
=========================
o Collective develops routines and defines acceptable patterns of
action
o Formalizes and communicates them
o Designates and mans roles
o Designated forum to meet and produce (e.g. mailing list)
o centralized collection of knowledge (e.g. archive)
o Handbook of procedures (e.g. FAQ)
o Enforcer of violations (e.g. FAQman)
Coordination Instit. Facilitate COSI
====================================
o Proposition #4:
o Collective open innovation is more efficient when coordinated
through institutions.
Framework
=========
o Non-rival good
o Perception of fairness
=> Sustainability
o Based on generalized exchange
o Coordinated through institutions
=> Efficiency
Conclusions
===========
o COSI is important in and beyond software
o Framework accounts for individual motivation and collective
coordination
o Fits more cases than competing explanations
o Offers testable propositions
o Questions remain:
o How applicable off-line? Why some projects are more
successful?
ADD
===
o Sport enthusiasts - off-line COSI
o Wireless networks
o On-line forums
o "COSI: The Emergence of a New Economic Actor"
o Is there an important distinction between open and free software?
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: http://www.oekonux.de/projekt/
Contact: projekt oekonux.de