Essence of distributed work: the case of the Linux kernel
Open accessAbstract
This paper provides a historical account of how the Linux operating system kernel was developed from three different perspectives. Each focuses on different critical factors in its success at the individual, group, and community levels. The technical and management decisions of Linus Torvalds the individual were critical in laying the groundwork for a collaborative software development project that has lasted almost a decade. The contributions of volunteer programmers distributed worldwide enabled the development of an operating system on the par with proprietary operating systems. The Linux electronic community was the organizing structure that coordinated the efforts of the individual programmers. The paper concludes by summarizing the factors important in the successful distributed development of the Linux kernel, and the implications for organizationally managed distributed work arrangements.
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?
Debian, as well as other OSS communities like Apache or Linux, came up with new ways of organizing distributed work that differed from traditional work practices in professional organizations.
“As a respond to mounting organizational challenges Debian as well as other OSS communities like Apache or Linux, came up with new ways of organizing distributed work that differed from traditional work practices as experienced in professional organizations (Franke and von Hippel, 2003, Lee and Cole, 2003, Moon and Sproull, 2000).”
From Transition of governance in a mature open software source community: Evidence from the Debian case (2008) · cites this paper as Moon and Sproull, 2000
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science
Hippel, E. V., & Krogh, G. V. (2003) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.14.2.209.14992 · Cited by 2,145 · see citing works
The 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
Gamalielsson, J., & Lundell, B. (2014) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2013.11.1077 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Transition of governance in a mature open software source community: Evidence from the Debian case
Sadowski, B. M., Sadowski-Rasters, G., & Duysters, G. (2008) · Information Economics and Policy · doi:10.1016/j.infoecopol.2008.05.001 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Trust and Community in Open Source Software Production
Osterloh, M., & Rota, S. (2004) · Analyse & Kritik · doi:10.1515/auk-2004-0115 · Cited by 23 · 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
- Authors
- Moon, J. Y., & Sproull, L.
- Venue
- First Monday
- Publisher
- University of Illinois Libraries
- Published
- 2000-11-05
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 11
- ISSN
- 1396-0458 (ISSN-L)
- 1396-0466
- OpenAlex
- W2132453971
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 47.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- First Monday (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Keywords
- Linux kernel, distributed work, open source software development, Linus Torvalds, developer communities, collaborative software development, open source communities, operating system development
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