Analysis of the interdependent co-evolution of product structures and community structures using dependency modelling techniques

Journal of Engineering Design

Volumn 23, Issue 10-11, 2012, Pages 807-828

  Le, Qize ^a   Panchal, Jitesh H ^a  

^a Washington State University   (United States)

Author keywords

complex networks; dependency modelling; evolution; open source; organisational structure; product structure

Indexed keywords

COMPLEX NETWORKS; OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE; OPEN SYSTEMS;

DEPENDENCY MODELLING; EVOLUTION; OPEN SOURCES; ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE; PRODUCT STRUCTURE;

PRODUCT DESIGN;

EID: 84866874125     PISSN: 09544828     EISSN: 14661837     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09544828.2012.695014     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Avritzer, A. 2010. Coordination implications of software architecture in a global software development project. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(10): 1881-1895.
2. Barber, M. J. 2007. Modularity and community detection in bipartite networks. Physical Review E, 76(6): 1-9.
3. Bird, C. Latent social structure in open source projects. In: Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering. November9-14. pp.24-35. Atlanta, GA
4. Blondel, V. D. 2008. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statictical mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(10): 1-12.
5. Bolici, F., Howison, J. and Crowston, K. Coordination without discussion? Socio-technical congruence and stigmergy in free and open source software projects. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on socio-technical congruence. pp.1-9. Vancouver, Canada May 19
6. Borgatti, S. P. 2000. Models of core/periphery structures. Social Networks, 21(4): 375-395.
7. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G. and Freeman, L. C. 2002. Ucinet for Windows: software for social network analysis, Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
8. Camuffo, A. and Cabigiosu, A. 2012. Beyond the mirroring hypothesis: product modularity and interorganizational relations in the air conditioning industry. Organization Science, [online], 1-18. doi:10.1287/orsc.1110.0655. Available from: http://orgsci.journal.informs.org/content/early/2011/05/17/orsc.1110.0655.abstract [accessed 9 June 2012].
9. Cataldo, M. and Herbsleb, J. D. Communication networks in geographically distributed software development. Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work. November8-12. pp.579-588. San Diego, CA: ACM.
10. Cataldo, M. Identification of coordination requirements: implications for the design of collaboration and awareness tools. In: ACM conference on computer-supported work. November4-8. pp.353-362. Banff, Canada
11. Cataldo, M., Herbsleb, J. D. and Carley, K. M. Socio-technical congruence: a framework for assessing the impact of technical and work dependencies on software development. Second ACM-IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement. October9-10, Kaiserslautern, Germany. pp.2-12. New York: ACM.
12. Colfer, L. and Baldwin, C. Y. 2010. The mirroring hypothesis: theory, evidence and exceptions. In: Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper, Paper Number: 10-058, Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.
13. Conway, M. E. 1968. How do committees invent. Datamation, 14(5): 28-31.
14. Doxygen. 2011. Generate documentation from source code, [online]. Available from: http://www.stack.nl/ dimitri/doxygen/index.html [accessed 24 January 2011].
15. Drupal. 2011. Drupal: community plumbing, [online]. Available from: http://www.drupal.org [accessed 24 January 2011].
16. Ducheneaut, N. 2005. Socialization in an open source software community: a socio-technical analysis. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(4): 323-368.
17. Ehrlich, K. An analysis of congruence gaps and their effect on distributed software development. In: Proceedings of the first international workshop on socio-technical congruence. May10. pp.1-10. Leipzig, Germany
18. Girvan, M. and Newman, M. E. 2002. Community structure in social and biological networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(12): 7821-7826.
19. Herbsleb, J. D. 2007. "Global software engineering: the future of socio-technical coordination". In In: FOSE '07 2007 future of software engineering, 188-198. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
20. Herbsleb, J. D. and Grinter, R. E. 1999. Architectures, coordination, and distance: Conway's law and beyond. IEEE Software, 16(5): 63-70.
21. Herbsleb, J. D. and Mockus, A. Formulation and preliminary test of an empirical theory of coordination in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 9th European software engineering conference held jointly with 11th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on foundations of software engineering. September1-5. pp.138-147. Helsinki, Finland
22. Hoetker, G. 2006. Do modular products lead to modular organizations?. Strategic Management Journal, 27(6): 501-518.
23. Hu, D. and Zhao, J. A comparison of evaluation networks and collaboration networks in open source software communities. In: Americas conference on information systems. August14-17. pp.227Toronto, CA: AMCIS.
24. Kratzer, J., Gemuenden, H. G. and Lettl, C. 2008. Revealing dynamics and consequences of fit and misfit between formal and informal networks in multi-institutional product development collaborations. Research Policy, 37(8): 1356-1370.
25. Kwan, I., Schroter, A. and Damian, D. 2011. Does socio-technical congruence have an effect on software build success? A study of coordination in a software project. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 37(3): 307-324.
26. LaMantia, M. J. Analyzing the evolution of large-scale software systems using design structure matrices and design rule theory: two exploratory cases. In: Seventh working IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture. February18-22. pp.83-92. Vancouver, Canada
27. MacCormack, A., Rusnak, J. and Baldwin, G. 2005. Exploring the structure of complex software designs: an empirical study of open source and proprietary code. Management Science, 52(7): 1015-1030.
28. MacCormack, A., Rusnak, J. and Baldwin, C. 2008a. Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: a test of the 'mirroring' hypothesis. Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper, 08-039.
29. MacCormack, A., Rusnak, J. and Baldwin, C. 2008b. The impact of component modularity on design evolution: evidence from the software industry, Harvard University. Report Number: 08-038.
30. Madey, G., Freeh, V. and Tynan, R. 2005. "Modeling the free/open source sofware community: a quantitative investigation". In Free/open source software development, Edited by: Koch, S. 203-220. Hershey, PA: IGI.
31. Malone, T. W. 1988. What is coordination theory?. Coordination theory workshop, National Science Foundation, Report Number: SSM WP-2051-88.
32. Malone, T. W. and Crowston, K. 1994. The interdisciplinary study of coordination. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 26(1): 87-119.
33. Merlo, F., Slaughter, S. and Francalanci, C. The co-evolution of social networks and software structures: a study of open source and closed source projects, academy of management best paper proceedings. Chicago, IL: Organizational Communications and Information Systems Division (OCIS), Academy of Management.
34. Milev, R., Muegge, S. and Weiss, M. 2009. Design evolution of an open source project using improved modularity metric. International Federation for Information Processing, 299(2): 20-33.
35. Newman, M. E.J. 2006. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(23): 8577-8582.
36. Ngamkajornwiwat, K. An exploratory study on the evolution of OSS developer communities. In: Proceedings of the 41st annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences. pp.305-305. Waikoloa, HI
37. Rand, W. M. 1971. Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering motheds. Journal of American Statistical Association, 66(336): 846-850.
38. Rusovan, S., Lawford, M. and Parnas, D. 2004. Open source software development: future or fad?, Cambridge: MIT Press. Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software.
39. Sack, W. 2006. A methodological framework for socio-cognitive analyses of collaborative design of open source software. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15(2-3): 229-250.
40. Simon, H. A. 1962. The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106(6): 467-482.
41. Sosa, M. E. 2008. A structured approach to predicting and managing technical interactions in software development. Research in Engineering Design, 19(1): 47-70.
42. Sosa, M. E., Eppinger, S. D. and Rowles, C. M. 2003. Identifying modular and integrative systems and their impact on design interactions. Journal of Mechanical Design, 125(2): 240-252.
43. Sosa, M. E., Eppinger, S. D. and Rowles, C. M. 2004. The misalignment of product architecture and organizational structure in complex product development. Management Science, 50(12): 1674-1689.
44. Steward, D. V. 1981. The design structure system: a method for managing the design of complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 78(3): 71-74.
45. Van De Ven, A. H., Delbecq, A. L. and Koenig, R. Jr. 1976. Determinants of coordination modes within organizations. American Sociological Review, 41(2): 322-338.
46. Wagstrom, P. A., Herbsleb, J. D. and Carley, K. A social network approach to free/open source software simulation. In: First international conference on open source systems. July11-15. pp.16-23. Genova, Italy
47. Xu, J. and Madey, G. 2004. Exploration of the open source software community, Pittsburgh, PA: NAACSOS.
48. Xu, J. A topological analysis of the open source software development community. 38th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. January3-6. Hawaii 198a (1-10).