A dynamic view of the impact of network structure on technology adoption: The case of oss development

Information Systems Research

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 1087-1099

  Peng, Gang ^a   Dey, Debabrata ^b  

^a YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Dynamic view; Network centrality; Network closure; Network structure; Open source software; Software version control technology; Technology adoption

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; OPEN SYSTEMS; SOFTWARE ENGINEERING; SOFTWARE TESTING;

INFORMATION FLOWS; NETWORK CENTRALITIES; NETWORK STRUCTURES; OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE PROJECTS; SOFTWARE VERSIONS; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION;

OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE;

EID: 84891761356     PISSN: 10477047     EISSN: 15265536     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/isre.2013.0494     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Adler PS, Kwon S (2002) Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Acad. Management Rev. 27(1):17-40.
2. Agarwal R, Tanniru M, Wilemon D (1997) Assimilating information technology innovations: Strategies and moderating influences. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management 44(4):347-358.
3. Balkundi P, Harrison D (2006) Ties, leaders, and time in teams: Strong inference about network structures effect on team viability and performance. Acad. Management J. 49(1):49-68.
4. Boh WF, Slaughter SA, Espinosa JA (2007) Learning from experience in software development: A multilevel analysis. Management Sci. 53(8):1315-1331.
5. Borgatti SP, Foster PC (2003) The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. J. Management 29(6):991-1013.
6. Borgatti SP, Mehra A, Brass DJ, Labianca G (2009) Network analysis in the social sciences. Science 323(5916):892-895.
7. Brown S, Venkatesh V (2005) Model of adoption and technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household life cycle. MIS Quart. 29(3):399-436.
8. Burt RS (1992) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Harvard University Press, Boston).
9. Burt RS (2005) Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital (Oxford University Press, Oxford, NY).
10. Capaldo A (2007) Network structure and innovation: The leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability. Strategic Management J. 28(6):585-608.
11. Coleman JS (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital. Amer. J. Sociol. 94(Supplement):S95-S120.
12. Collins-Sussman B, Fitzpatrick BW, Pilato CM (2011) Version Control with Subversion. Accessed on April 29, 2012. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn-book.pdf.
13. Cross R, Cummings JN (2004) Tie and network correlates of individual performance in knowledge-intensive work. Acad. Management J. 47(6):928-937.
14. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Sci. 35(8):982-1003.
15. Dey D, Fan M, Peng G (2011) Computer use and wage returns: The complementary roles of IT-related human capital and non-routine tasks. ACM Trans. Management Inform. Systems 2(1):6:1-6:21.
16. DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW (1988) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 48(2):147-160.
17. Fichman R (2004) Going beyond the dominant paradigm for information technology innovation research: Emerging concepts and methods. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 5(8):314-355.
18. Gargiulo M, Benassi M (2000) Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital. Organ. Sci. 11(2):183-196.
19. Gargiulo M, Ertug G, Galunic C (2009) The two faces of control: Network closure and individual performance among knowledge workers. Admin. Sci. Quart. 54(2):299-333.
20. Goolsbee A, Klenow P (2002) Evidence of learning and network externalities in the diffusion of home computer. J. Law Econom. 45(2):317-343.
21. Granovetter M (1985) Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. Amer. J. Sociol. 91(3):481-510.
22. Greene WH (2003) Econometric Analysis (Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ).
23. Grewal R, Lilien GL, Mallapragada G (2006) Location, location, location: How network embeddedness affects project success in open source systems. Management Sci. 52(7):1043-1056.
24. Hansen M (1999) The search-transfer problem: The roles of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organizational subunits. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):82-111.
25. Hsieh JP, Rai A, Keil M (2008) Understanding digital inequality: Comparing continued use behavioral models of the socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged. MIS Quart. 32(1):97-126.
26. Hsieh JP, Rai A, Keil M (2011) Addressing digital inequality for the socioeconomically disadvantaged through government initiatives: Forms of capital that affect ICT utilization. Inform. Systems Res. 22(2):233-253.
27. Jenkins SP (1995) Easy estimation methods for discrete-time duration models. Oxford Bull. Econom. Statist. 57(1):129-138.
28. Katz ML, Shapiro C (1986) Technology adoption in the presence of network externalities. J. Political Econom. 94(4):822-841.
29. Katz ML, Shapiro C (1994) Systems competition and network effects. J. Econom. Perspect. 8(2):93-115.
30. Kauffman RJ, McAndrews J, Wang Y (2000) Opening the "black box" of network externalities in network adoption. Inform. Systems Res. 11(1):61-82.
31. Krackhardt D (1997) Organizational viscosity and the diffusion of controversial innovations. J. Math. Sociol. 22(2):177-199.
32. Krackhardt D (1998) Simmelian ties: Super, strong and sticky.
33. Kramer RM, Neale MA, eds. Power and Influence in Organizations (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 21-38.
34. Lechner C, Floyd SW (2010) Task contingencies in the curvilinear relationships between intergroup networks and initiative performance. Acad. Management J. 53(4):865-889.
35. Lee A (1999) Inaugural editor's comments. MIS Quart. 23(1):v-xi.
36. Lerner J, Tirole J (2005) The scope of open source licensing. J. Law, Econom. Organ. 21(10):20-56.
37. McGrath C, Krackhardt D (2003) Network conditions for organizational change. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 39(3):324-336.
38. Mendez-Duron R, Garcia CE (2009) Returns from social capital in open source software networks. J. Evolutionary Econom. 19(2):277-295.
39. Molina-Morales FX, Martínez-Fernández MT (2009) Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: How an excess of intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms. Strategic Management J. 30(9):1013-1023.
40. Papa MJ (1990) Communication network patterns and employee performance with new technology. Comm. Res. 17(3):344-368.
41. Portes A (1998) Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Amer. Rev. Sociol. 24:1-24.
42. Reagans R, McEvily B (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Admin. Sci. Quart. 48(2):240-267.
43. Robert L, Dennis A, Ahuja M (2008) Social capital and knowledge integration in digitally enabled teams. Inform. Systems Res. 19(3):314-334.
44. Rodan S, Galunic C (2004) More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management J. 25(6):541-562.
45. Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations (Free Press, New York).
46. Shapiro C, Varian HR (1999) Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).
47. Shipilov A, Li SX (2008) Can you have your cake and eat it too? Structural holes' influence on status accumulation and market performance in collaborative networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 51(3):73-108.
48. Sykes TA, Venkatesh V, Gosain S (2009) Model of acceptance with peer support: A social network perspective to understand individual-level system use. MIS Quart. 33(2):371-393.
49. Tucker C (2008) Identifying formal and informal influence in technology adoption with network externalities. Management Sci. 55(12):2024-2039.
50. Valente TW (1995) Network Models of the Diffusion of Innovations (Hampton Press, Cresskill, NJ).
51. Venkatesh V, Brown S (2001) A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: Adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Quart. 25(1):71-102.
52. Venkatesh V, Davis FD, Morris MG (2007) Dead or alive? The development, trajectory and future of technology adoption research. J. Assoc. Inform. Systems 8(4):267-286.
53. Venkatesh V, Thong JYL, Xin X (2012) Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quart. 36(1):157-178.
54. Venkatesh V, Zhang X, Sykes TA (2011) "Doctors do too little technology": A longitudinal field study of an electronic healthcare systems implementation. Inform. Systems Res. 22(3):523-546.
55. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis F (2003) User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quart. 27(3):425-478.
56. Xu X, Venkatesh V, Tam KY, Hong SJ (2010) Model of migration and use of platforms: Role of hierarchy, current generation, and complementarities in consumer settings. Management Sci. 56(8):1304-1323.
57. Zaheer A, Bell GG (2005) Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management J. 26(9):809-825.
58. Zaheer A, Soda G (2008) Network evolution: The origins of structural holes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 54(1):1-31.
59. Zucker LG (1987) Institutional theory of organization. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 13:443-464.