CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,145Open Source Software InnovationsDigital Platforms and EconomicsInnovation and Knowledge Management

Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science

Open access
Hippel, Eric von, Krogh, Georg von·2003·Organization Science
DOI 10.1287/orsc.14.2.209.14992
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Currently, two models of innovation are prevalent in organization science. The “private investment” model assumes returns to the innovator result from private goods and efficient regimes of intellectual property protection. The “collective action” model assumes that under conditions of market failure, innovators collaborate in order to produce a public good. The phenomenon of open source software development shows that users program to solve their own as well as shared technical problems, and freely reveal their innovations without appropriating private returns from selling the software. In this paper, we propose that open source software development is an exemplar of a compound “private-collective” model of innovation that contains elements of both the private investment and the collective action models and can offer society the “best of both worlds” under many conditions. We describe a new set of research questions this model raises for scholars in organization science. We offer some details regarding the types of data available for open source projects in order to ease access for researchers who are unfamiliar with these, and also offer some advice on conducting empirical studies on open source software development processes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/orsc.14.2.209.14992

Cites

94 of 94 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • In OSS, maintenance challenges are magnified because contributors are not contractually obligated to maintain the software.

    “In the case of OSS, while users can benefit from reduced up-front costs, collective intelligence of the crowd, and flexibility to implement changes, the challenges of maintenance get magnified as contributors are not contractually obligated to maintain the software (von Hippel and von Krogh 2003, Nagle 2019).”

    From AI-Assisted Programming Decreases the Productivity of Experienced Developers by Increasing the Technical Debt and Maintenance Burden (2025) · cites this paper as von Hippel and von Krogh 2003

  • Ability to generalize an idiographic value path depends on factors including active user community, user motivation, and producer receptiveness.

    “Existing research suggests that the ability to generalize an idiographic value path in this way is dependent on several factors, including; the existence of an active user community (Di Gangi and Wasko 2009), the motivation of the user (Von Hippel and Von Krogh 2003), and the receptiveness of producer organizations to such innovations (Di Gangi and Wasko 2009).”

    From Recombination in the open-ended value landscape of digital innovation (2018) · cites this paper as Von Hippel and Von Krogh 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hippel, E. V., & Krogh, G. V.
Affiliations
University of St.Gallen (CH)
Corresponding author
Krogh, Georg von
ORCID
Venue
Organization Science
Publisher
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published
2003-04
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
209-223
ISSN
  • 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5455
DOI
10.1287/orsc.14.2.209.14992
OpenAlex
W3123293202
Cited by
2,145
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 55 · 2021: 100 · 2020: 79 · 2019: 101 · 2018: 94 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 120 · 2015: 123 · 2014: 124 · 2013: 155 · 2012: 131
FWCI
147.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Organization Science (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Digital Platforms and Economics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
Keywords
open source software, innovation models, intellectual property, public goods, market failure, software development process, research questions

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