1704
From ASP to Web Services
customers that the ASP business model offered
WKHPQHZEHQH¿WVIRURXWVRXUFLQJWKHLUEXVLQHVV
software applications.
Business Transformation
A more nebulous aspect to ASP is business t rans-
formation. With the growth in healthcare ICTs,
managers and medical practitioners are faced
with a confusing array of software applications
from a variety of ASP vendors. The business
transformational characteristics of different
offerings were not well articulated by ASP ven-
dors, as many were unable to provide practical
H[DPSOHVRISHUIRUPDQFHLPSURYHPHQWLQVSHFL¿F
healthcare/technology activities or tasks (Currie
et al., 2004). Today, many pundits claim that
Web services would integrate ICT with patient
care. They also suggest that using Web services
solutions would help the healthcare organizations
keep pace with the latest ICT and give them all
WKHEHQH¿WVRIRXWVRXUFLQJZKLFKKDGSUHYLRXVO\
DFFUXHGRQO\WRODUJH¿UPV)RUWKHKHDOWKFDUH
RUJDQL]DWLRQ VHYHUDO ¿QDQFLDO DQG IXQFWLRQDO
EHQH¿WVDUHUHDOL]HG*XDK&XUULH
• The internal and external divisions, partner
-
ships, and regulatory agency relationships
FDQEHUHDOLVWLFDOO\DXWRPDWHGIRUWKH¿UVW
WLPHVLQFHDFFHVVLV GH¿QHGE\:HEVHU-
vices.

• Systems integration costs are dramatically
reduced and interfaces are standardized, by
as much as an order of magnitude.
• Data integration is facilitated as database
proliferation ceases.
2XUUHVHDUFK¿QGLQJVVXJJHVWWKDWKHDOWKFDUH
organizations were aware of the hypothetical ben-
H¿WVRIHEXVLQHVV+RZHYHUWKH\ZHUHXQDEOHWR
UHODWHWKHVHEHQH¿WVWRWKHLUGD\WRGD\SUDFWLFDO
healthcare operations. Many NHS staff simply
GHVFULEHGWKH$63EXVLQHVVPRGHODV³DUHWXUQ
to service bureaus under a different name,” rather
than an ICT innovation which would enhance their
business processes. The business transformational
characteristics of the majority of ASP offerings
were also low, as this was dependent upon integra-
tion (Table 10.3). NHS did not deploy software
applications for critical healthcare activities, and
many managers were reluctant to do so because
of fears of data security.
RESULTS FROM THE
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY
$JDLQVW WKH EDFNJURXQG RI WKH ¿YH .3$V VHH
Currie, 2003) as discussed in the previous sec-
tion, the questionnaire survey was developed to
elicit data and information on how potential and
existing ASP customers evaluate a range of KPIs
in relation to their own business requirements.
Using a scale of 0–4 (0 = not applicable; 1 = not
important; 2 = quite important; 3 = very impor-

tant; 4 = critically important), respondents were
asked to rank each KPI across the approximately
six KPAs. A questionnaire survey instrument is
reproduced in Appendix 2. It is outside the scope of
WKHSUHVHQWFKDSWHUWRGLVFXVVDOOWKH¿QGLQJVIURP
the questionnaire survey, particularly the sample
organizations previous outsourcing experience.
All respondents gave their job title, company
address, and other details about product/service
offerings and size of company. For example, the
trade fairs attended in the health sector aimed to
sell the latest IT products and services to health-
care professionals. Many ASPs therefore targeted
VSHFL¿FYHUWLFDOVHFWRUVVXFKDVKHDOWKWRHQDEOH
them to penetrate this market more successfully,
as general e-business trade fairs were unlikely to
attract healthcare personnel.
Other variations in priorities emerged. For ex-
ample, whilst the health sector shared similar con-
cerns with the other sectors (apart from travel) in
g i v i n g a h i g h p r i o r i t y t o d a t a s e c u r i t y a n d i n t e g r i t y,
1705
From ASP to Web Services
LWDOVRLGHQWL¿HGallowing managers to concentrate
on their “core” competencies as an important KPI.
7KLVPD\UHÀHFWWKHVLJQL¿FDQWFKDQJHVZLWKLQ
the health sector marked by increased paperwork
and other forms of bureaucracy. Using an ASP
model was therefore perceived as having some
advantages in this activity.

The integration of ICT with the core busi-
ness was highlighted by health as important, but
less so for the other three sectors. In healthcare,
in particular, the lack of integration of ICT has
resulted in numerous disparate software applica-
tions, although efforts are now in place to devise a
national IT strategy for healthcare (Guah & Currie,
$QLQWHUHVWLQJ¿QGLQJZDVWKDWDstrate-
gic plan to increase IT outsourcing was given
relatively low priority in all sectors (apart from
health). Whereas the health sector was likely to
increase its IT outsourcing as a result of a national
IT strategy, the other sectors did not perceive this
.3,DVDKLJKSULRULW\:LWKLQWKHVHFWRUV¿QDQFH
IT, and manufacturing, IT outsourcing is now
relatively mature, as opposed to travel. Within the
area, business transformation, only two KPIs—to
integrate IT with the core business ¿QDQFHDQG
health) and to gain senior management support for
IT (health)—scored higher than 3. In the case of
the latter, it is not surprising that the centralized
nature of IT procurement in healthcare precludes
IT vendors from gaining access to key personnel
(Guah & Currie, 2004).
2QHRIWKHVXUSULVLQJ¿QGLQJVIURPWKHTXHV-
tionnaire survey in relation to the ASP vendor
rhetoric was in the area of integration. Contrary to
ASP sales and marketing literature, which empha-
sizes the importance of integration (particularly
enterprise application integration), no respondents

in the sample scored higher than 3 for any KPI
within this category. Indeed, the KPI, strategic
plan to increase ICT outsourcing, was not seen as
DQLPSRUWDQWSULRULW\E\VDPSOH¿UPVDQGgain-
ing senior management support for ICT was only
considered a priority in healthcare organizations.
It is therefore suggested that, without these two
KPIs being perceived as highly important, the
responsibility for negotiating SLAs is likely to
be delegated to more junior management and IT
staff, possibly increasing risk. This observation
has already been made in the outsourcing literature
(Willcocks & Lacity, 1998).
Our results, however, pointed to relatively
low scoring for these KPIs, suggesting that ASP
vendors had possibly misinterpreted the needs
of potential customers. Clearly, most of the sales
and marketing rhetoric of ASP vendors appeared
to echo the messages given to the large customer.
Questions therefore arise as to the extent these
messages were relevant for healthcare organiza-
tions, in particular, that a healthcare organization
would reduce its TCO of IT using an ASP solution
GHVSLWHDORZDQQXDO,7VSHQGRUWKDWHI¿FLHQF\
would be greatly improved with 24x7 software
availability.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This chapter has provided a snapshot of research
UHVXOWV GHULYHG IURP D ¿YH\HDU VWXG\ RQ WKH
deployment, hosting, and integration of ASP

(Currie, 2003; Currie et al., 2004). It focuses
VSHFL¿FDOO\RQWKH8.KHDOWKFDUHVHFWRUZKLFK
is receiving a major investment in IT over the
next 5 years. Whilst it is not possible to draw
GH¿QLWLYHFRQFOXVLRQVIURPWKHUHVXOWVWKHYDULD-
WLRQVLQWKHSULRULWLHVZLWKLQDQGDFURVVWKH¿YH
KPAs points to some interesting observations.
The results discussed in this paper are indicative
RI WKH SUREOHPV ZKLFKEHVHW WKH ¿UVW ZDYHRI
the ASP market, most notably, a failure of ASP
vendors to provide an attractive value proposi-
tion to organizations (Hagel, 2002). Existing
OLWHUDWXUHRQKHDOWKFDUHV\VWHPVKDYHLGHQWL¿HG
four basic types of applications detailed below
(Ferlie & Shortell, 2001; Haines, 2002; Majeed,
2003): group collaboration; healthcare support
1706
From ASP to Web Services
systems; business intelligence; and e-commerce.
The fourth category is a combination of one or
more of the other types but implemented using
Internet technology
Group Collaboration: The original purpose of
the Internet was essentially to enable (academic)
group collaboration. Proprietary group collabo-
ration applications in the NHS are consequently
under great pressure from their low-cost, tested,
and robust Internet equivalents (Laroia, 2002;
Majeed, 2003). Healthcare Process Systems:
Although the Internet does offer process systems

capability, it is unsophisticated and unstable by
comparison to the tried-and-trusted but propri-
etary commercial equivalents. The Internet was
never designed to offer more than a very basic
transaction capability as is currently required to
support healthcare processes. Patient Intelligence:
Patient intelligence usually involves looking for
patterns within very large data sets, in the order of
m i l l i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l d a t a i t e m s . V i e w i n g r e p o r t s
and simple graphics is easily supported; however,
complex manipulation of graphical informa-
tion does not work well using today’s Internet
technology due to network capacity restraints.
E-Commerce: At its most basic, e-commerce is
buying and selling over the Internet, whether to
consumers or business to business. NHS systems
PD\QRWUHTXLUHD¿QDQFLDOWUDQVDFWLRQV\VWHPEXW
the need to interact with patients is promoting
e-commerce-type system to a higher position on
NHSIA strategic agenda.
Whilst the ASP market continues to undergo
large-scale change, which is a symptom of compet-
ing in a highly volatile and dynamic marketplace
(LVHQKDUGW0DUWLQWKHPDLQ¿QGLQJ
from the research study has been the failure of
vendors to create value for potential and some
existing customers. By delineating KPIs across
¿YH.3$VDVWKHUHVXOWVIURPWKHTXHVWLRQQDLUH
VXUYH\SRLQWWRVRPHLQWHUHVWLQJ¿QGLQJVZKLFK
provide a snapshot of how potential and existing

customers of ASPs evaluate the ASP or software-
as-a-service model. Further research is now
underway to provide more detailed vendor and
customer scenarios across vertical sectors (i.e.,
K H D O W K D Q G¿ Q D Q F H D QG SU R G X F W V H U Y LF H V RI IH U L Q J V 
LH(53WRSURYLGHVSHFL¿FH[DPSOHVRIKRZ
vendors may tailor their offerings to more closely
meet the needs of customers. This is particularly
important given the current cynicism and myths
surrounding the business value of e-business
(Howcroft, 2001).
$Q\KHDOWKFDUH RUJDQL]DWLRQWHPSWHG WR¿OO
the gaps with older technologies should be wary
of creating hybrids that will limit its options
when Web services alternatives become avail-
DEOH 3URSULHWDU\ H[WHQVLRQV WR ¿OO JDSV LQ WKH
features of Web services, for example, should
EHLPSOHPHQWHGDVPRGXOHVZLWKFOHDUO\GH¿QHG
interfaces (Kreger, 2003). In this way, it will be
easier to replace the proprietary extensions with
evolving Web services standards as they become
available.
Finally, a staged, pragmatic implementa-
tion of Web services at the edge of enterprises
is by no means without pitfalls. This approach
gives organizations time to learn about these
technologies and to develop insights into the
broader operational and strategic possibilities
of strategic collaborations. In the UK, NHS
executives were lulled into complacency by the

simple and mundane nature of Web services. By
their early tactical implementations, they have
overlooked the broader opportunities and lost
valuable time—NHS-Direct is a good example
(Wanless, 2002). It is management’s attitude that
will ultimately determine who creates value with
Web services (Gerowitz et al., 1996).
REFERENCES
Ahn, J.G., Leem, C.S., & Yang, J.H. (2001). Jae
Geun Ahn$IUDPHZRUNIRUFHUWL¿FDWLRQDQGDX-
dit of application service provider. Application
Service Provider, 10(3), 239–252.
1707
From ASP to Web Services
Amit, R., & Zott, C. (2001). Value creation in
e-business. Strategic Management Journal, 22,
493–520.
Arnott, S. (2002). Broadband NHS is in the pipe-
line. Computing, March, 1.
ASP Industry Consortium. (2000). Industry news.
www.Aspindustry.org
Avison, D.E., & Fitzgerald, G. (2003). Where now
for development methodologies? Communica-
tions of the ACM, 46(1), 79–82.
Banker, R., & Kauffman, R. (1988). Strategic
contributions of information technology: An
empirical study of ATM networks. Proceedings
of the Ninth International Conference on Infor-
mation Systems, Minneapolis, MN.
Bennet, C., & Timbrell, G. (2000). Application

services providers, will they succeed? Information
Systems Frontiers, 2(2), 195–211.
Cassidy, J. (2002). Dot.con: The greatest story
ever sold. London: Penguin.
CBDI Report. (2003). Insight for Web service
and software component practice. Web Services
Usage Survey, February/March.
Currie, W., Desai, B., & Khan, N. (2004). Cus-
tomer evaluation of application services provision-
LQJLQ¿YHYHUWLFDOVHFWRUVJournal of Information
Technology, 19(1), 39–58.
Currie W.L. (2000). Expanding IS outsourcing
services through application service providers
(Executive Publication Series. CSIS2000/002).
Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J.A. (2000). Dynamic
capabilities: What are they? Strategic Manage-
ment Journal, 21, 1105–1121.
Ferergul, C. (2002). Best practices in Web hosting
service level agreements. Stamford, CT: Meta
Group. Retrieved May, 2002, from http//techup-
date.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/ main/
Ferlie, E.B., & Shortell, S.M. (2001). Improving
the quality of health care in the United Kingdom
and the United States: A framework for change.
Milbank Quarterly, 79, 281–315.
Gerowitz, M., Lemieux-Charles, L., Heginbothan,
C., & Johnson, B. (1996). Top management cul-
ture and performance in Canadian, UK and US
hospitals. Health Services Management Research,
6, 69–78.

Guah, M.W., & Currie, W.L. (2004). Application
service provision: A technology and working tool
for healthcare organisation in the knowledge age.
International Journal of Healthcare Technology
and Management, 6(1/2), 84–98.
Guah, M.W., & Currie, W.L. (2002). Evaluation
of NHS information systems strategy: Exploring
the ASP model. Issues of Information Systems
Journal, III, 222–228.
Hagel, J. III (2002). Out of the box: Strategies
IRUDFKLHYLQJSUR¿WVWRGD\DQGJURZWKWRPRUURZ
through Web services. Boston: Harvard Business
School Press.
Haines, M. (2002). Knowledge management in the
NHS – Platform for change. Retrieved November
2002, from www.healthknowledge.org.uk
Howcroft, D. (2001). After the goldrush: Decon-
structing the myths of the dot.com market. Journal
of Information Technology, 16(4), 195–204.
Institute of Medicine. (2002). Crossing the quality
chasm: A new health system for the 21
st
century.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Kakabadse, N., & Kakabadse, A. (2002). Software
as a service via application service providers
(ASPs) model of sourcing: An exploratory study.
Journal of Information Technology Cases and
Applications, 4(2), 26–44.
Kern, T., Lacity, M., & Willcocks, L. (2002).

Netsourcing: Renting business applications and
1708
From ASP to Web Services
services over a network. New York: Prentice
Hall.
.UHJHU+)XO¿OOLQJWKH:HEVHUYLFHV
promise. Communications of the ACM, 46(6),
29–34.
Laroia, A. (2002). Leveraging Web services to
connect the healthcare enterprise. Retrieved
February, 2002, from zq. net/wbs/
larois_1.html
Majeed, A. (2003). Ten ways to improve infor-
mation technology in the NHS. British Medical
Journal, 326, 202–206.
Orlikowski, W.J., & Tyre, M.J. (1994). Windows
of opportunity: Temporal patterns of technological
adaptation in organisations. Organisation Sci-
ence, May, 98–118.
Perseid Software Limited. (2003). The strategic
value of Web services for healthcare and the life
sciences. Retrieved August 2003, from www.
perseudsiftware.com
6OHHSHU%5RELQV%'H¿QLQJ:HE
services. Accessed April 2002, from www.sten-
cilgroup.com
Susarla, A., Barua, A., & Whinston, A.B. (2003).
Understanding the service component of applica-
tion service provision: An empirical analysis of
satisfaction with ASP services. MIS Quarterly,

27(1), 91–123.
Wanless, D. (2002). Securing our future health:
Taking a long-term view¿QDOUHSRUWRIDQ
independent review of the long-term resource
requirement for the NHS). London.
Walsham, G. (1993). Interpreting information sys-
tems in organisations. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Weill, P., & Vitale, M.R. (2001). Place to space–
Migrating to eBusiness models. Boston: Harvard
Business School Press.
Willcocks, L., & Lacity, M. (1998). Strategic
sourcing of information systems. Chichester,
UK: Wiley.
Wong, S. (2001). Web services: The next evolution
of application integration. Retrieved November
2002, from www.grgcc.com/pdf/WebServices
TheNextEvolutionofApplicationIntegration.pdf
Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design
and methods. Sage Publications.
Zmud, R.W. (1988). Building relationships
throughout the corporate entity. Washington,
DC: ICIT Press.
This work was previously published in Internet Strategy: The Road to Web Services Solutions, edited by M. Guah and W. Cur-
rie, pp. 149-177, copyright 2006 by IRM Press (an imprint of IGI Global).
1709
Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Chapter 5.20
Social Aspects of Open
Source Software:
Motivation, Organization, and Economics

Spyridoula Lakka
University of Athens, Greece
Nikolas E. Lionis
University of Athens, Greece
Dimitris Varoutas
University of Athens, Greece
ABSTRACT
Open source software/free software (OSS/FS),
also abbreviated as FLOSS/FOSS (free/libre
and open source software), has risen to great
prominence. Existing literature from diverse
disciplines or through interdisciplinary studies
have tried to explain the growth and success of the
phenomenon. This chapter describes and discusses
OSS/FS under the scope of three major aspects:
motivations that lead to OSS/FS, the organiza-
tion of OSS/FS communities and the economic
theory as a means of explaining the manifold phe-
nomenon. Furthermore, the chapter analyzes the
social implications that lie underneath the OSS/FS
diffusion, together with the social processes that
take place in OSS/FS communities in an effort to
enhance our understanding of the diverse mecha-
nisms that disseminate OSS/FS rapidly.
INTRODUCTION
³Free software” is a matter of liberty, not price.
Free software is a matter of the user’s freedom to
run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve
the software. In order to be able to make changes
and to publish improved versions, one must have

access to the source code of the program. There-
fore, accessibility to source code is a necessary
condition for free software. The freedom to im-
prove a program and release it to the public, so
1710
Social Aspects of Open Source Software
W K D W W KH ZK R O H F R P P X Q LW \ E H Q H ¿ W V  F R P S O LH VZ L W K 
the philosophy that introduced free software: the
prosperity and freedom of the public in general.
The idea of open software is not new for in-
stitutes and universities, yet its rapid growth and
VLJQL¿FDQFHWRPDLQVWUHDPinformation technol-
ogy (IT) business was not accomplished before the
Internet became widespread and the emergence of
electronic commerce (e-commerce). The spread
of the Internet made possible the collaboration of
communities and the ability to handle massive
G H F H Q W U D O L ] H G S URM H F W V  ZK L O H D V L J Q L ¿ F D QW S R U W L R Q 
of e-commerce runs on OSS/FS.
OSS developers from around the world col-
laborate, self-organize and rarely meet face-to-
face. Questions about their motivations, about
the organization of their communities, and the
ethics and social implications of the phenomenon
inevitably arise. This chapter, by presenting and
analyzing recent developments and discussions
of the existing literature, aims to contribute to the
understanding of the economic and social aspects
related to the open source phenomenon.
BACKGROUND

In 1985, Richard Stallman (1992) created the Free
Software Foundation (FSF) (2006) and designed
the GNU General Public License (GPL) (GNU
*HQHUDO 3XEOLF /LFHQVH  266)6¶V ¿UVW
formal licensing contract.
7KH)6)¶VGH¿QLWLRQRIIUHHVRIWZDUHVWUHVVHV
the abandonment of property rights, which it
WHUPV³copylefting.” Copyleft uses copyright law,
EXWÀLSVLWRYHUWRVHUYHWKHRSSRVLWHRILWVXVXDO
purpose; instead of a means of privatizing soft-
ware, it becomes a contractual means of keeping
software open.
The Open Source Initiative (OSI)
1
was founded
by Eric Raymond. While the FSF and the OSI
work to help each other, they are not the same
WKLQJ7KH)6)XVHVDVSHFL¿FOLFHQVHDQGSURYLGHV
software under that license. The OSI seeks sup-
port for all open-source licenses, including ones
from the FSF. The infrastructure and philosophy
of the two movements has sometimes led them to
divergence, yet the two groups are working toward
the same goal, which remains a conciliating fac-
tor. The terms OSS/FS and FOSS as used in this
document will refer to both movements.
ORGANIZATION OF OSS
COMMUNITIES
The OSS/FS organizational structure follows a
bottom-up approach that relies on generally ac-

cepted protocols of communication and a shared
notion of validity. The strength of these elements
is enhanced by the peculiar characteristics of the
software good and the structure of the OSS/FS
license.
Licenses are the basic element in the structure
of FOSS projects and there are almost as many
open licenses as OSS/FS projects. Most of these
projects are released under GPL copyleft license,
whose design allows attuning the incentive of the
FOSS developers, serving the goals of the FOSS
community better than other legal frameworks.
7KH*18*3/ZDVWKH¿UVWDQGLVVWLOOWKHPRVW
popular open license enacted, but there are also
other widely used licenses that are known to be
compatible with the GNU GPL, such as the GNU
library or Lesser General Public License (LGPL),
original MIT/X (The MIT License, 2006) and
BSD (The BSD License, 2006).
Copylefting is a means of copyrighting a
program, but at the same time a programmer
actually signs the GPL. With this arrangement,
the program is simultaneously freely usable,
but protected from becoming someone’s private
intellectual property. It is also a way of linking
the programmer and his contribution together
permanently, while the contribution is publicly
observable. This creates an environment where
programmers have an incentive to signal their
abilities via the copyleft community.

1711
Social Aspects of Open Source Software
Another characteristic of open licenses is
in the two kinds of agents it links together: the
agent who originally attaches an open license to
an asset, establishing it as an OSS/FS project,
and the agents who have subsequently obtained
the copylefted product. As using the product
constitutes implicit acceptance of the contractual
terms of the open license attached to it, an agent
becomes an adopter by procuring the copylefted
product. Together, program-creators and adopters
constitute a community (Von Hippel, 2001).
The abandonment of property rights, however,
has become a major controversy from an ethical
and sociopolitical point of view. Some research-
ers are skeptical (Lerner & Tirole, 2005; Marty,
Kevin, Don, & Keith, 2002; Mundie, 2001), while
governments remain inactive to the establishment
of a general legal framework. What if adopters
attempt to generate revenue by improving or dis-
tributing the copylefted product? The answer lies
LQWKHQDWXUHRIFRS\OHIWZKLFKE\LWVGH¿QLWLRQ
diminishes such a possibility. Lerner and Tirole
(2005) also talk about the problem that might
occur if the project leader decides to transition
IURPRQHOLFHQVHWRDQRWKHUPRUH³ÀH[LEOH´RQH
DQGWKH\¿QGWKDWDJDLQVXFKDSURFHGXUHDFWX-
ally would be impractical under the open source
GH¿QLWLRQ

Under this skepticism, FSF (Stallman, 1992)
argues that free knowledge requires free soft-
ZDUHDQGDIUHH¿OHIRUPDWDQGVXEVHTXHQWO\
it is essential to free the code as a contribution
to the social welfare. The FSF philosophy has
an increasing number of advocates, who in turn
become members of the community.
Managing the OSS/FS Community
It is apparent that OSS/FS communities are
organized and maintained under common goals
and beliefs that span traditional boundaries of
ownership. OSS/FS projects, however, pose a
JUHDW PDQDJHPHQW GLI¿FXOW\ LQ WKDW WKH SHHU
groups exist in a virtual community with a large
diversity of members, who may never see each
other face-to-face. However, many OSS/FS proj-
ects are successful, even if they appear to eschew
the traditional project coordination mechanisms,
such as formal planning, system-level design,
VFKHGXOHV DQG GH¿QHG GHYHORSPHQW SURFHVVHV
Many researchers (Crowston, Annabi, Howison, &
Masango, 2004; Elliott & Scacchi, 2003) believe
that FOSS is a growing component of software
engineering as a human and team practice, and it
is a good practice for those who seek to improve
the effectiveness of their projects, by learning
from the social and sociotechnical practices of
FOSS development teams.
First of all Internet technology has made it
possible to resolve communication problems and

handle massive decentralized projects. Elliott and
Scacchi (2003) in a sociotechnical study identify
the social processes that facilitate the successful
development of OSS/FS. The OSS/FS project
groups are characterized as occupational com-
munities (Trice & Beyer, 1993; Van Maanen &
Barley, 1984) with beliefs, values and norms that
LQÀXHQFHWKHLUVRIWZDUHGHYHORSPHQWSUDFWLFHV
LQFOXGLQJWRROFKRLFHVDQGFRQÀLFWUHVROXWLRQ,Q
fact, the OSS/FS developers share similar goals,
work practices, interests and value systems, and
they are bound by socially constructed rules and
ethics that promote formation of shared ideologies
and cultural forms. The study further showed that
strong organizational cultural beliefs in a virtual
FRPPXQLW\WLHVDJURXSWRJHWKHUVRWKDWFRQÀLFW
LVPRUHHDVLO\PLWLJDWHGDQG¿QDOO\UHVROYHG,W
DOVRSRLQWHGRXWWKDWFRQÀLFWVZLWKLQDJURXSFDQ
also be faced with the use of computer-mediated
communication, such as mailing lists and related
artifacts in the form of Internet-relay chat.
Bonaccorsi and Rossi (2003) identify two
factors that shape the lifecycle of a successful
OSS/FS project: a widely accepted leadership
that sets the project guidelines and drives the
decision process, and an effective coordination
mechanism among the developers based on shared
communication protocols.
1712
Social Aspects of Open Source Software

Raymond’s (1999a) bazaar metaphor is a
famous model of the OSS/FS process. Develop-
ers are likened as merchants in a bazaar, who
autonomously decide how and when to contribute
to project development. While popular, the bazaar
metaphor has been broadly criticized. It disregards
important aspects of the OSS/FS process, such as
the importance of project leader control and the
existence of hierarchical organization.
For instance, in the Debian Project (Debian,
2006), the project leaders were elected by the
developers, but had total authority over those who
worked on their projects. Mozilla (Mozzila.Org,
2006) is an example of open-source management
structure that demonstrates control. A small group
of Netscape employees oversee the Mozilla com-
munity and play the role of benevolent dictators
who arbitrate what happens in a module.
Most successful FOSS projects, display a clear
hierarchical or onion-like organization (Crowston
et al., 2004), with a small core group of developers
at the center, surrounded by codevelopers, active
XVHUVDQG¿QDOO\WKHSDVVLYHXVHUV$OWKRXJKLW
is obvious that the core is at the highest level of
the hierarchy and is responsible for oversight
2
of
the design and evolution of the project, the roles
within the hierarchy are not strictly assigned.
As the project grows, the authority of the project

leaders (core group) arises naturally from a bot-
tom-up investiture, as a result of the contributions
to the commonly agreed goal.
A widely known successful project with an
onion-like hierarchy is Linux. The most important
feature of Linux is its small and compact kernel.
The system can be extended by independent
PRGXOHVZKLFKDUHFRQ¿JXUHGDQGLQVHUWHG
inside the Linux kernel, obtaining a monolithic
kernel. In this way, programmers can add modules
without interfering with other parts of the pro-
JUDP%DU¿HOG'LHJR7DQDEH+LQHV6KDIIQHU
& Yelden, 2003).
OSS/FS projects may not always be success-
ful. There is a danger of information overload
DQGEXUQRXWDQGWKHSRVVLELOLW\RIFRQÀLFWVWKDW
cause a loss of interest in a project or forking, that
appear in many projects (Bezroukov, 1999). In
these cases, the leadership plays an important role
E\VHOHFWLQJWKHEHVW¿WWLQJVROXWLRQ7KHVXSSRUW
of the members of the community is also crucial
for the project to be viable. A mitigating fact is
that agents choose freely to focus on problems
WKDWWKH\WKLQNEHVW¿WWKHLURZQLQWHUHVWVDQG
capabilities. Under these conditions, a developer
could achieve the best of his/her performance. In
general, the coordination mechanisms of OSS/FS
communities are successful, despite the obstacles
of diversity, size and distance.
Motivation of OSS/FS Contributors

It is true that the OSS/FS movement has chal-
lenged traditional reasoning by suggesting that
individuals behave altruistically and contribute to
a public good, despite the opportunity to free-ride.
As explained above, one of the reasons that devel-
opers join the OSS/FS community is because of
their beliefs. Lerner and Tirole (2002) also made
a thorough analysis of the programmer’s incen-
tives to OSS/FS. They argue that a developer’s
participation in an OSS/FS project aspires to net
EHQH¿WVIURPWKHZRUNZLWKQHWWKHEHQH¿WEDVHG
on both immediate and delayed rewards.
Immediate rewards include monetary com-
SHQVDWLRQDVZHOODVWKHRSSRUWXQLW\WR¿[DEXJ
RUFXVWRPL]HDSURJUDPIRUWKHLURZQEHQH¿W
Delayed rewards stem from the signaling incen-
tive (Lerner & Tirole, 2002). This includes the
career concern incentive, which refers to future
job offers, shares in commercial open source-
based companies or future access to venture
capital, and the HJRJUDWL¿FDWLRQLQFHQWLYH which
expresses the desire for peer recognition. Though
different in some regards, both have been shown
to be stronger when the work is visible to people
the programmer wants to impress (colleagues,
1713
Social Aspects of Open Source Software
venture capitalists, the IT market, etc.). Signal-
ing incentive prevails, where the spotlight on the
programmer’s contribution counts most.

Generally, with OSS/FS, a programmer is
his/her own boss and can take full responsibility
for the success or failure of a task. In typical com-
mercial projects, programmers have to work with
(or around) their supervisor, thus the individual
contribution is harder to measure.
The proprietary nature of the code generates
LQFRPHPDNLQJLWSRVVLEOHIRU¿UPVWRUHZDUG
programmers immediately with salaries. Unlike
the commercial projects, however, OSS/FS proj-
ects have the advantages of alumni effect and that
of customizing projects for personal use (Lerner
 7LUROH  7KH ¿UVW DGYDQWDJH UHIHUV WR
open-source products, as knowledge acquired
from their school time and, therefore, is more
familiar. Secondly, programmers like to be free
WRXVHWKHPRGL¿HGSURJUDPVLQPDQ\ZD\VWKDW
is, for improving their work.
)LQDOO\LQ266)6SHRSOHKDYHJUHDWHUÀH[-
ibility when moving from one project to another,
EXLOGLQJNQRZOHGJHDQG³WRROV´DVWKH\JR%\
FRQWUDVWLQFRPPHUFLDO¿UPVSHRSOHDUHUHVWULFWHG
E\SURSULHWDU\FRGHVSHFL¿FWRWKDW¿UP6RLQ
a sense, they have to start all over again when
they switch jobs.
A number of surveys have been conducted
to measure developers’ motivations. The Boston
&RQVXOWLQJ*URXS%&*VXUYH\LGHQWL¿HV
the top motivations for participating in OSS/FS
and divides developers into four major groups:

those for learning and stimulation: for skill im-
provement and fun by 29%; hobbyists: need the
code for a nonwork reason by 27%; professionals:
for work needs and professional status by 33.8%;
and community believers: believe source code
should be open by 19%. The FLOSS Survey
(Ghosh, *ORWW.ULHJHU5REOHV¿QGV
similar results with 79% saying they joined to
learn and develop new skills and 50% saying they
joined to share their knowledge and skills.
The BCG survey (2003) took things one step
further and compared the different motivations
cited by paid versus volunteer contributors. The
comparison showed that those who are paid to
contribute to OSS are motivated by the desire
to do their job more effectively. This shows that
¿QDQFLDO UHZDUGV DUH QRW D SULPDU\ GULYHU RI
OSS/FS communities.
Motivations for IT Enterprises
However, unpaid volunteers are not the only pos-
sible source of labor for OSS/FS. IT enterprises
PD\KDYHLQFHQWLYHVWR³DFFRPPRGDWH´ODERUIRU
the development of open source, and, in several
cases, it has been done in some extent. The main
incentive remains revenue, yet business may ben-
H¿WE\LQGLUHFWVDOHYDOXHV)RULQVWDQFHIXQGLQJ
an OSS/FS project could stimulate the demand
IRURWKHUSURGXFWVRUVHUYLFHVRIWKH¿UP6SROVN\
(2002) argues that investing in open source would
prove a good business strategy for enterprises.

This argument is based on the idea that every
product in the marketplace has substitutes and
complements. A substitute is another product
RQHPLJKWEX\LIWKH¿UVWSURGXFWLVWRRFRVWO\
while a complement is a product that one usually
buys together with another product. Since the
demand for a product increases, when the prices
of its complements decrease, companies try to
commoditize their products’ complements. For
many companies supporting OSS/FS products,
turning a complementary product into a com-
PRGLW\UHVXOWVLQSUR¿WJURZWK,QWKLVVLWXDWLRQD
company will want to have extensive knowledge
about the OSS/FS movement and may even want
to encourage and subsidize OSS/FS contributions.
Both reasons will lead company to allocate some
programmers to an OSS/FS project.
In addition, many commercial companies
released some existing proprietary code in order
to further develop it as an open source project.
7KLVNLQGRISDUWLFLSDWLRQE\FRPPHUFLDO¿UPV