UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Communication in Open Source Innovation: Key Roles of Shepherds and Users and Their Implications for Entrepreneurs by Banji Li A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS INTERDISCIPLINARY GRADUATE PROGRAM CALGARY, ALBERTA September, 2010 c Banji Li 2010 Library and Archives Bibliothèque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l’édition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-69581-4 Our file Notre référence ISBN:978-0-494-69581-4 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non- L’auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l’Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non- support microforme, papier, électronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L’auteur conserve la propriété du droit d’auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author’s permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privée, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont été enlevés de thesis. cette thèse. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n’y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. Abstract This thesis uses several sources of new primary data to test how communication relates to inno- vation in four environments. Its main hypothesis is that particular kinds of innovation succeed when shepherds communicate in particular ways when working. However, more substantial hypotheses are generated and explored. Using narratives, working documents, decision notes, and correspondence from shepherds and stakeholders of several innovations, the analysis shows detriments of deviating from formal rules of innovation processes, and posits generalizations. ii Acknowledgements This thesis was supported by my supervisor, Dr. Cooper H. Langford, my supervisory com- mittee Dr. Richard Hawkins, Dr. Alan Smart, and Interdisciplinary Graduate Program Director Dr. Tom Keenan. I thank them for each taking a risk at this journey’s outset (and I thank IGP’s Pauline Fisk for masterfully managing the paperwork). I am grateful for helpful comments from Kris Kotarski, Dr. Peter Phillips, Dale Miller, Dan Meeking, Stefan Mendritzki, Christine Cheung, Mark Hopkins, and Ben Hoffman, and from the several anonymous reviewers of papers which became Chapter 3 and Appendix C. Several advisors and collaborators provided informal support and guidance, including Amal Umar, Teresa Woo-Paw, and Anila Umar in Calgary. Friends on other campuses gave perspectives about being a human graduate student, including Dylan Griffiths, Mary Chan, and Graeme Webb. Others helped me keep my research relevant to industry and policy. I learned much from Phase II of the Innovation Systems Research Network MCRI. I’m privileged to have worked with team members in Calgary, including Dr. Cami Ryan, Dr. Patrick Feng, Julie Alatiit, Kelly Bergstrom, Ray op’tLand, Sheila Taugher, Terry Ross, and others already mentioned. In addition, I am grateful for advice from several students and faculty on the ISRN team at Simon Fraser University, and to ISRN collaborators from elsewhere in Canada who contributed in various ways, and to SSHRC for funding the network. This thesis would not have been possible without teachers who provided interdisciplinary views of the world, despite the official curriculum: Mr. Gerry Ward and Mr. Taco Albrecht, nor without my parents for several reasons. Finally, I thank and acknowledge several international netizens, who wish to remain name- less, on whom I relied for access to many books and papers cited herein. iii iv Table of Contents Abstract . ii Acknowledgements . iii Table of Contents . iv List of Tables . viii List of Figures . ix 1 FOUNDATIONS AND LITERATURE REVIEW . 1 1.1 Why study change? . 2 1.2 Anthropological basis for studying innovation via computer mediated commu- nication . 3 1.3 Why study communications during change implementation? . 4 1.3.1 Communication during the innovation process . 4 1.3.2 Some unknowns . 6 1.4 Conceptual framework preview . 7 1.5 Definitions . 8 1.5.1 Enhancement process . 9 1.5.2 Communication . 11 1.5.3 Enhancement environment . 13 1.5.4 Shepherds . 14 1.5.5 Stakeholders . 14 1.6 Conceptual framework in depth . 15 1.6.1 Open enhancement processes . 17 1.6.2 Communication patterns within enhancement processes . 17 1.7 Summary . 18 2 METHODS . 19 2.1 Innovation and governance . 19 2.2 Grounded theory . 20 2.3 Content analysis . 21 2.4 Classification of innovations . 21 2.5 Why these methods . 22 2.6 Research data sources . 23 2.7 Research design ethics . 26 2.7.1 Participation . 26 2.7.2 Identity and privacy . 27 2.8 Approach . 30 3 STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS . 31 3.1 Introduction . 31 3.1.1 Innovation and governance . 32 3.1.2 Literature teview . 32 3.1.3 Powers of government . 33 3.1.4 Open enhancement environments . 34 3.2 Research questions . 35 v 3.2.1 Hypotheses . 35 3.3 Review of governance at the three organizations . 36 3.3.1 Similarities and differences . 36 3.3.2 Roles of contributors during enhancement processes . 39 3.4 Method and results . 40 3.4.1 Participation in innovative processes . 41 3.4.2 Public participation outside the enhancement process . 43 3.4.3 Lack of public participation outside the OEPs . 46 3.4.4 Public sources of ideas for enhancements in platforms and modules . 48 3.4.5 Core vs. periphery . 50 3.5 Social implications of governance in OEEs . 54 3.5.1 Hypotheses reviewed . 54 3.5.2 Differences between organizations’ processes . 55 3.5.3 Inclusiveness and participation . 57 3.5.4 Key findings . 57 3.5.5 Research limitations . 59 4 EXAMINING ENHANCEMENT PROCESSES . 60 4.1 Introduction . 60 4.2 Hypotheses . 64 4.3 Methods . 65 4.3.1 Grounded theory . 65 4.3.2 Field data collection . 66 4.3.3 Content analysis . 66 4.4 A pilot effort . 68 4.4.1 Shape of the initial data . 73 4.4.2 The revised procedure . 75 4.5 First impressions from the revised procedure . 80 4.5.1 Resources . 80 4.5.2 Enhancement processes . 81 4.6 Case Studies . 84 4.6.1 Case 0: Apache HTTP Server log rotation trigger (Bug 44427) . 84 4.6.2 Case 1: Apache HTTP Server enhancement to support SNI (Bug 34607) 87 4.6.3 Case 2: Firefox secure connection warning (Bug 327181) . 92 4.6.4 Case 3: Firefox “Home” button relocation (Bug 404109) . 95 4.6.5 Case 4: Threaded Firefox windows (Bug 40848) . 99 4.6.6 Case 5: ARIN Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region (2008-4) . 104 4.6.7 Case 6: ARIN WHOIS integrity policy proposal (2008-7) . 108 4.6.8 Case 7: ARIN Identify invalid WHOIS POCs (2008-7, second round) . 115 4.7 Categories of communication . 118 4.8 Summary of observed communication patterns . 120 4.8.1 Information sources . 123 4.8.2 Information flows . 124 4.8.3 Accessibility . 125 4.8.4 Use cases as evidence . 125 vi 4.8.5 Social factors . 126 4.8.6 Issues encountered . 127 4.9 Analysis . 129 4.10 Summary . 132 5 ANALYSIS . 134 5.1 Review of key findings . 134 5.1.1 Comparing the three open enhancement environments and their processes134 5.1.2 A modest emergent theory . 138 5.2 Eight emergent themes . 140 5.2.1 Theme A. Infrastructure facilitates but does not influence enhancement outcome . ..