A man on the inside: Unlocking communities as complementary assets

Research Policy

Volumn 35, Issue 8 SPEC. ISS., 2006, Pages 1243-1259

  Dahlander, Linus ^a   Wallin, Martin W ^b  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Complementary assets; Free and open source software; Open innovation; Social network theory

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER NETWORKS; PROFESSIONAL ASPECTS; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

COMPLEMENTARY ASSETS; FREE AND OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (FOSS); GLOBALIZATION; TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION;

INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT;

EID: 33751178180     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.09.011     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Ahuja G. Collaboration networks, structural holes and innovation: a longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly 45 (2000) 425-455
2. Allen T. Managing the Flow of Technology: Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technological Information within the R and D Organisation (1977), The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
3. Amit R., and Schoemaker P.J.H. Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal 14 1 (1993) 33-46
4. Barney J. Strategic factor markets: expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science 32 (1986) 1231-1241
5. Baum J.A.C., Calabrese T., and Silverman B.S. Don't go it alone: alliance network composition and startups' performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal 21 3 (2000) 267-294
6. Bonacich P. Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 2 (1972) 113-120
7. Bonacich P. Power and centrality: a family of measures. American Journal of Sociology 92 (1987) 1170-1182
8. Borgatti S.P., Everett M.G., and Freeman L.C. UCINET for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis (2002), Analytical Technologies, Harvard
9. Burt R.S. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (1992), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
10. Burt R.S. Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology 110 2 (2004) 349-399
11. Chesbrough H. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology (2003), Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA
12. Chesbrough H. Open innovation: a new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In: Chesbrough H., Vanhaverbeke W., and West J. (Eds). Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm (2006), Oxford University Press, Oxford
13. Chesbrough H., Vanhaverbeke W., and West J. Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm (2006), Oxford University Press, Oxford
14. Chesbrough H., and Rosenbloom R.S. The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin-off companies. Industrial and Corporate Change 11 3 (2002) 529-555
15. Dahlander L., and Magnusson M.G. Relationships between open source software companies and communities: observations from Nordic firms. Research Policy 34 4 (2005) 481-493
16. David, P.A., Waterman, A.H., Arora, S., 2003. First full findings from FLOSS-US: The free/libre and open source developer survey for 2003. SIEPR working paper. Available at: http://www-cepr.stanford.edu/programs/OpenSoftware_David/David-Waterman-Arora(2003)_abs.html.
17. de Icaza, M., 2005. The Story of the GNOME project. Available at: http://primates.ximian.com/∼miguel/gnome-history.html.
18. de Nooy W., Mrvar A., and Batagelj V. Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York
19. Dyer H., and Singh H. The relational view: cooperative advantage and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review 23 (1998) 660-679
20. Dyer J.H., and Nobeoka K. Creating and managing a high-performance knowledge-sharing network: the Toyota case. Strategic Management Journal 21 (2000) 345-367
21. Fleming, L., Waguespack, B., 2005. Penguins, camels, and other birds of a feather: brokerage, boundary spanning, and leadership in open innovation communities. Working Paper.
22. Freeman C. Chemical process plant: innovation and the world market. National Institute Economic Review 45 (1968) 29-57
23. Freeman L.C. Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1 (1979) 215-240
24. Friedkin N.E. Theoretical foundations for centrality measures. American Journal of Sociology 96 (1991) 1478-1504
25. German D.M. The GNOME project: a case study of open source, global software development. Software Process Improvement and Practice 8 (2003) 201-215
26. Ghosh R.A., Glott R., Krieger B., and Robles G. Free/libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study. Part IV: Survey of Developers (2002), International Institute of Infonomics/Merit, Maastricht. http://flossproject.org/report/
27. Gnyawali D.R., and Madhavan R. Cooperative networks and competitive dynamics: a structural embeddedness perspective. Academy of Management Review 26 3 (2001) 431-445
28. Gulati R. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal 19 (1998) 293-317
29. Gulati R., Nohira N., and Zaheer A. Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal 21 (2000) 203-215
30. Hargadon A., and Sutton R.I. Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly 42 4 (1997) 716-749
31. Hausman J., Hall B.H., and Griliches Z. Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents R&D relationship. Econometrica 52 (1984) 909-938
32. Henkel J. Selective revealing in open innovation processes: the case of embedded Linux. Research Policy 35 7 (2006) 953-969
33. Hertel G., Niedner S., and Herrmann S. Motivation of software developers in open source projects: an internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel. Research Policy 32 (2003) 1159-1177
34. Holmstrom B. Managerial incentive problems: a dynamic perspective. Review of Economic Studies 66 (1999) 169-182
35. Hopkins M.M., and Nightingale P. Strategic risk management using complementary assets: organizational capabilities and the commercialization of human genetic testing in the UK. Research Policy 35 (2006) 355-374
36. Jeppesen L.B., and Frederiksen L. Why do users contribute to firm-hosted user communities? The case of computer-controlled music instruments. Organization Science 17 1 (2006) 45-63
37. Klevorick A.K., Levin R.C., Nelson R.R., and Winter S.G. On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities. Research Policy 24 (1995) 185-205
38. Kogut B., and Metiu A. Open-source software development and distributed innovation. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 17 2 (2001) 248-264
39. Langlois R.N. The vanishing hand: the changing dynamics of industrial capitalism. Industrial and Corporate Change 12 2 (2003) 351-385
40. Laursen K., and Salter A.J. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among UK manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal 27 (2006) 131-150
41. Lawrence P.R., and Lorsch J.W. Differentiation and integration in complex organization. Administrative Science Quarterly 12 1 (1967) 1-47
42. Lee G.K., and Cole R.E. From a firm-based to a community-based model of knowledge creation: the case of the Linux kernel development. Organization Science 14 6 (2003) 633-649
43. Lerner J., and Tirole J. Some simple economics of open source. Journal of Industrial Economics 50 2 (2002) 197-234
44. Lorenzoni G., and Lipparini A. The leveraging of interfirm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability: a longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal 20 (1999) 317-338
45. Mitsubishi Research Institute, 2004. Free/libre/open source software Japanese developers online survey (FLOSS-JP). Available at: http://oss.mri.co.jp/floss-jp/report_en.html.
46. O'Mahony S. Guarding the commons: how community managed software projects protect their work. Research Policy 32 (2003) 1179-1198
47. O'Mahony, S., Ferraro, F., 2004. Hacking alone? The effects of online and offline participation on open source community leadership. Working Paper.
48. Powell W.W., Koput K.W., and Smith-Doerr L. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 41 1 (1996) 116-145
49. Rosenberg N. Perspectives on Technology (1976), Cambridge University Press, New York, NY
50. Rothwell R., Freeman C., Horlsey A., Jervis V.T.P., Robertson A.B., and Townsend J. SAPPHO updated-project SAPPHO phase II. Research Policy 3 (1974) 258-291
51. Shan W., Walker G., and Kogut B. Interfirm cooperation and startup innovation in the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal 15 (1994) 387-394
52. Stuart T.E. Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in high-technology industry. Strategic Management Journal 21 8 (2000) 791-811
53. Teece D.J. Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy 15 6 (1986) 285-305
54. Teece D.J., Pisano G., and Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 18 7 (1997) 509-533
55. Tushman M.L. Special boundary roles in the innovation process. Administrative Science Quarterly 22 (1977) 587-605
56. von Hippel E. The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process. Research Policy 5 (1976) 212-239
57. von Hippel E. The Sources of Innovation (1988), Oxford University Press, New York, NY
58. von Hippel E. Democratizing Innovation (2005), The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
59. von Hippel E., and von Krogh G. Open source software and the 'private-collective' innovation model: issues for organization science. Organization Science 14 2 (2003) 209-223
60. von Krogh G., Spaeth S., and Lakhani K.R. Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy 32 (2003) 1217-1241
61. Wasserman S., and Faust K. Social Networks: Methods and Applications (1994), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
62. Wernerfelt B. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5 2 (1984) 171-180