Jan Ljungberg

The power of gifts: organizing social relationships in open source communities

Abstract. In writings on the open source software development model, it is often argued that it is successful as a result of the gift economy that embraces activities in online communities. However, the theoretical foundations for this argument are seldom discussed and empirically tested. Starting with the ‘classic’ theories of gift giving, we discuss how they need to be developed in order to explain gift‐giving practices in digital domains. In this paper, we argue that the gift economy is important, not only because it creates openness, but also because it organizes relationships between people in a certain way. Open source software development relies on gift giving as a way of getting new ideas and prototypes out into circulation. This also implies that the giver gets power from giving away. This power is used as a way of guaranteeing the quality of the code. We relate this practice to how gifts, in the form of new scientific knowledge, are given to the research community, and how this is done through peer review processes.

Open source movements as a model for organising

Open source software such as the operating system Linux has in a few years created much attention as an alternative way to develop and distribute software. Open source is to let anyone have access to the source code, so that they can modify it. Open source can be seen as a movement, where communities of highly skilled programmers collectively develop software, often of a quality that outperforms commercial proprietary software. These movements are based on virtual networking on the Internet and the web. They are loosely coupled communities kept together by strong common values related to hacker culture. Work seems to be totally distributed, delegated and loosely coupled. The highly skilled members contribute to the collective effort of free software development. In this paper the open source phenomenon is investigated from different perspectives. It is claimed that the open source movement is one key to the understanding of future forms of organizations, information work and business.

Rethinking competence systems for knowledge-based organizations

Existing competence systems are based on a rationalistic view of competence. While these competence systems might work in job-based organizations, we argue that in more dynamic settings, such as in knowledge-based organizations, the interest-informed actions that capture the emergent competencies of tomorrow require different types of information technology support. The main objective of this paper is to elaborate on the possibilities and implications of using interest-activated technology as a design rationale for competence systems. This paper is based on an action case study of an implemented interest-activated Intranet recommender system prototype at Volvo Information Technology AB in Gothenburg, Sweden. On the basis of how organizational members used this prototype to find information they were interested in, our research team was able to inquire into how personal interest, embodied in information-seeking activities, could be a means for identifying competence. Building on the relation between personal interest and competence, we discuss competence systems design and spell out explicit implications for managerial practice in knowledge-based organizations.

Practising peer review in organizations: a qualifier for knowledge dissemination and legitimization

A key issue in many organizations is how to disseminate information in an effective way and, more importantly, how to make use of this information in order to create new knowledge. One way of addressing this problem is to focus on how information is socially transformed into knowledge. This includes how knowledge is handled in practice and how the knowledge produced is qualified as being something worth knowing and acting upon. Two well-established practices for doing this are the refereeing system and the peer review process. These are used in scientific communities as a means of validating and legitimating knowledge, for example by reviewing journal papers before publishing or project proposals before granting funds, etc. This paper argues that peer review is a useful concept when looking at knowledge creation and legitimization in organizations. The social meaning of peer review is to legitimize new knowledge by organizationally sanctioning it and thereby creating a platform for collective sense making. This paper uses an example from a field study in a pharmaceutical company in order to illustrate this argument. The study took place in a quality support department where the quality of health care products and processes was assessed. The organization had a need for fast and reliable updating of information that could influence how the production process of pharmaceuticals should be carried out. In order to cope with these problems the department established an ‘evaluation loop’, which shared several characteristics with the peer review process.