Progressing to the Center: Coordinating Project Work
Abstract
Project forms of organizing are theorized to rely upon horizontal as opposed to vertical lines of authority, but few have examined how this shift affects progression—how people advance in an organization. We argue that progression without hierarchy unfolds when people assume lateral authority over project tasks without managing people. With a longitudinal study of a mature, collectively managed open source software project, we predict the individual behaviors that enable progression to lateral authority roles at two different stages. Although technical contributions are initially important, coordination work is more critical at a subsequent stage. We then explore how lateral authority roles affect subsequent behavior—after gaining authority, individuals spend significantly more time coordinating project work. Our research shows how people progress to the center as opposed to up a hierarchy, and how progression differs by stage and specifies the theoretical relationship between lateral authority roles and the coordination of project work.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
People can move between positions of peripherality and centrality.
“First, this reaffirms research such as Dahlander and O'Mahony (2011) and Christian and Vu (2021) who demonstrate people can move between positions of peripherality and centrality.”
From Freeriding and Rebellion: An Investigation of Open Source Vendor Relicensing and Member Hard Forking Events (2026) · cites this paper as Dahlander and O'Mahony (2011)
Cites
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557 · see citing works
Bourdieu, P. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621749 · Cited by 17,271 · see citing works
How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?
Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839588 · Cited by 10,641 · see citing works
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093 · see citing works
The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits
Hansen, M. T. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667032 · Cited by 5,809 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Individuals who span subproject boundaries may help transfer knowledge (Hansen 1999), identify new ideas (Allen 1977, Hargadon and Sutton 1997), enhance awareness of the broader project environment (Ancona and Caldwell 1992), and expose unattended or unidentified project interfaces (Sosa et al.…”
BackgroundCommunities of Practice and Social Learning Systems
Wenger, E. (2000) · Organization · doi:10.1177/135050840072002 · Cited by 4,274 · see citing works
Market, Hierarchy, and Trust: The Knowledge Economy and the Future of Capitalism
Adler, P. S. (2001) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.12.2.215.10117 · Cited by 1,512 · see citing works
Counterfactuals and Causal Inference: Methods and Principles for Social Research
Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2007) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804564 · Cited by 1,146 · see citing works
Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study
von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K. R. (2003) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(03)00050-7 · Cited by 1,025 · cited 2× · see citing works
“From this literature, we identified three behaviors that could predict progression to a lateral authority role: the degree to which individuals engaged in (1) technical contributions, (2) technical communication, and (3) coordination work.”
BackgroundThe Emergence of Governance in an Open Source Community
O'Mahony, S., & Ferraro, F. (2007) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2007.27169153 · Cited by 899 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Digital governance: A conceptual framework and research agenda
Hanisch, M., Goldsby, C. M., Fabian, N. E., & Oehmichen, J. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113777 · Cited by 267 · see citing works
Maruping, L. M., Daniel, S. L., & Cataldo, M. (2019) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2019/13928 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Understanding the Usages, Lifecycle, and Opportunities of Screen Readers’ Plugins
Momotaz, F., Ehtesham-Ul-Haque, M., & Billah, S. M. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/3582697 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Foster, D., & Germonprez, M. (2026) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.70060
- Authors
- Dahlander, L., & O'Mahony, S.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Boston University (US)
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2011-08
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 961-979
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2134904454
- Cited by
- 211
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 21.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organization Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Keywords
- open source projects, collective management, hierarchy, project work, individual behavior
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
