Abstract
Software developed and producedin open source projects has become an importantcompetitor in the software industry. Since itcan be downloaded for free and no wages arepaid to developers, the open source endeavorseems to rest on voluntary contributions byhobbyists. In the discussion of this puzzle twobasic patterns of argumentation stand out. Inwhat we call rent-seeker approaches, emphasisis put on the fact that although no wages arepaid to contributors, other pay-offs may turntheir effort into a profitable investment. Inwhat we call donator approaches the point ismade that many people contribute to open sourceprojects without expecting to ever receive anyindividual rewards.
We argue that the basic institutionalinnovation in open source has been the craftingof a governance structure, which enablesrent-seeking without crowding out donations.The focus of the presented analysis lies on thespecific institutional mechanisms, by which theopen source governance structure achieves toreconcile the interests of rent-seekers anddonators.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alchian, A.A. and H. Demetz: 1972, “Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organization”, The American Economic Review 62: 777–795.
Bessen, J.: 2001, Open Source Software: Free Provision of Complex Public Goods, Working Version 5/01.
Cusumano, M.A.: 1991, Japan's Software Factories: A Challenge to U.S. Management (New York: Oxford University Press).
Cusumano, M.A. and R.W. Selby: 1995, Microsoft Secrets: How the World's Most Powerful Software Company Creates Technology, Shapes Markets and Manages People (New York: Simon andSchuster).
Dafermos, G.N.: 2001, “Management and Virtual Decentralised Networks: The Linux Project”, First Monday 6: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue6_11/dafermos/index.html.
Dalle, J.-M. and N. Jullien: 2003, “‘Libre’ Software: Turning Fads into Institutions?”, Research Policy 32: 1–11.
Fama, E.F. and M.C. Jensen: 1983, “Separation of Ownership and Control”, Journal of Law & Economics 26: 301–325.
Fehr, E. and A. Falk: 2002, “Psychological Foundations of Incentives”, European Economic Review 46: 687–724.
Frank, R.H. and P.J. Cook: 1995, Winner-Takes-All Society: Why the Few at the Top Get so Much MorethantheRest of Us (New York: Free Press).
Franck, E. and C. Jungwirth: 2001, “Warum ‘geniale Ideen’ für wissenschaftlichen Erfolg nicht ausreichen”, Arbeitspapier des Lehrstuhls für Unternehmensführung und-politik Nr. 1: Zürich.
Franck, E. and C. Jungwirth: 2003, “Governance von Open Source Projekten”, Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft (ZfB) 73 (forthcoming).
Frey, B.S. and R. Jegen: 2001, “Motivation Crowding Theory”, Journal of Economic Surveys 15: 589–611.
Frey, B.S. and M. Osterloh: 2000, “Motivation, Knowledge Transfer, and Organizational Forms”, Organization Science 11: 538–550.
Hansmann, H.B.: 1980, “The Role of Nonprofit Enterprise”, Yale Law Journal 89: 835–901.
Harhoff, J. Henkel and E. von Hippel: 2000, “Profiting from Voluntary Information Spillovers: How Users Benefit by Freely Revealing Their Innovations”, MIT Sloan School of Management Working Paper 4125.
Hecker, F.: 1999, “Mozilla at One: A Look Back and Ahead”, http://www.mozilla.org/mozilla-at-one.html.
Hertel, S. Niedner and S. Herrmann: 2002, “Motivation of Software Developers in Open Source Projects: An Internet-based Survey of Contributors to the Linux Kernel”, Research Policy Special Issue on Open Source Software Development2003, //opensource.mit.edu/papers/rp-hertelniednerherrmann.pdf (forthcoming).
Lakhani, K. and E. von Hippel: 2002, “How Open Source Software Works: ‘Free’ User-to-User Assistance”, Research Policy 31: 1–21.
Lerner, J. and J. Tirole: 2002, “Some Simple Economics of Open Source”, The Journal of Industrial Economics 50: 197–234.
Ludsteck, W.: 2001, “Microsoft: Von einem Monopol zum anderen”, Sueddeutsche Zeitung 10 2001.
Milgrom, P. and J. Roberts: 1992, Economics, Organisation and Management (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.).
Moody, G.: 2001, Rebel Code: The Inside Story of Linux and the Open Source Revolution (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Publishing).
Moon, J.Y. and L. Sproull: 2000, “Essence of Distributed Work: The Case of the Linux Kernel”, Firstmonday5, http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue5_11/moon/.
Osterloh, S. Rota and B. Kuster: 2002, “Open Source Software Production: Climbing on the shoulders of Giants”, Working Paper University of Zurich, http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/ osterlohrotakuster.pdf.
Raymond, E.S.: 2000a, “The Cathedral and the Bazaar”, http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/ cathedral-bazaar/.
Raymond, E.S.: 2000b, “Homesteading the Noosphere”, http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/ cathedral-bazaar/homesteading/.
Rota, M. von Wartburg and M. Osterloh: 2002, “Trust and Commerce in Open Source - a Contradiction?”, Working Paper University of Zurich.
Steinberg, R.: 1993, “The Role of Nonprofit Enterprise' in 1993: Hansmann Revisited”, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 22: 297–316.
Tzouris, M.: 2002, “Software Freedom, Open Software and the Participant's Motivation: A Multidisciplinary Study”, The London School of Economics and Political Science, Summer Dissertation 2002, http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/tzouris.pdf.
von Cube, F.: 2002, Lust an der Leistung. Die Naturgesetze der Führung (München: Piper).
von Hippel, E.: 2001, “Innovation by User Communities: Learning from Open-Source Software”, MIT Sloan Management Review 42: 82–86.
Zeitlyn, D.: 2003, 'Gift Economies in the Development of Open Source Software: Anthropolo-gical Reflections”, Research Policy Special Issue on Open Source Software Development 2003, http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/rp-zeitlyn.pdf (forthcoming).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Franck, E., Jungwirth, C. Reconciling Rent-Seekers and Donators – The Governance Structure of Open Source. Journal of Management & Governance 7, 401–421 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026261005092
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026261005092