Applying the Open Source Development Model to Knowledge Work

framework. Since open source communities do not seem to get very far without a working version of the programme, virtually all authors are likely to have some features of the user-author. It is worth preserving this distinction however, as a way of keeping track of the distinction between the self-interest and collective interest motives of the participants. We may expect that the individuals we are calling authors may have a more flexible view of the implementation of the project, being primarily committed to aims other than their specific needs including, perhaps, the widespread use of the information good. The user-author, on the other hand, is motivated in the first instance by a desire to introduce specific changes relevant to his/her needs and is likely to have less of an interest in how widespread is the use of the information good. The flexibility that we have suggested is a distinguishing characteristic of the open source way of working makes it possible for user-authors to assume a wider vision of the collective use of the information good. It also makes it possible for authors to become user-authors, interested in shaping the evolution of the product towards their own specific needs. This discussion raises several implications for the processes of governance of these communities. A significant problem that the community may face is the introduction of major revisions by either authors or user-authors. Such revisions may not accord with the self-interest or the perceptions of what is the collective interest of a large number of individuals in the community. Such revisions raise the possibility that ‘hijacking’ or ‘forking’ of the project will occur (Raymond 1999; Mateos-Garcia and Steinmueller 2003). In a ‘hijacking,’ the individuals favouring the revision depose the project leader who has resisted the revision, leaving this original leader with no followers. In a ‘fork’, two distinct implementations emerge, one that remains with the original project leader who does not accept the