To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.
... Open source hardware and peer production, both instances of Digital Commons applied to manufacturing, are believed to be the most radical, theoretical and organizational innovations to have emerged from the Internet (Raasch et al., 2009;Van Abel et al., 2010;Bonvoisin, et al. 2016;Moritz et al., 2016;Benkler, 2016;Sanguinetti, 2019). ...
... Open Source Hardware Innovation is a collaborative, product development process, in which building plan designs, assembly instructions and bills of material are made publicly available online for anyone to study, replicate, modify, distribute and sell, including hardware based on those designs (Raasch et al., 2009;Bonvoisin et al., 2016;. Thus, OSH is characterized by knowledge sharing and decentralization enabled by modern information and communication technologies (ICT) (Moritz et al., 2016). Ideally, OSH uses readily-available components, materials and standard processes, maximizing possibilities of mass participation as well as the means of deviating from conventional business models and a market economy (Troxler, 2019). ...
... The open source hardware and peer production phenomena as regards manufacturing force us to reevaluate the centrality of property to growth (Raasch et al., 2009;Bonvoisin, et al., 2016;Moritz et al., 2016;Benkler, 2017). Changes here are disruptive as they lead to changes in the firm-centric business model understanding of how firms seek to create and capture value. ...
Open source hardware (OSH) initiatives are collectively managed projects enabled by the internet and digital fabrication tools. They allow people to create products in a cheaper, faster, and more efficient manner. To date, there is no strategic and actionable framework using the commons theory for analyzing how these hardware initiatives develop economically effective and sustainable business models. Based on an analysis of the business models of 27 community-based and community-oriented OSH initiatives studied over a 3-year period, this chapter presents such a framework. The five-stages spiral framework offers to guide companies and startups involved in OSH to interact with their surrounding innovation ecosystems progressively, enrich their value propositions and grow in impact.
... Open-Source Hardware, (OSH) as part of the Design Global Manufacture Local model (DGML), are both instances of Digital Innovation Commons applied to manufacturing. They are believed to be the most radical, theoretical, and organizational innovations to have emerged from the Internet (Raasch et al., 2009;Van Abel et al., 2010;Bonvoisin et al., 2016;Moritz et al., 2016;Benkler, 2016). They force management scientists to reevaluate the centrality of intellectual property to growth, as they allow "anyone" to learn, teach, distribute, and sell the hardware based on those open designs. ...
... OSH is characterized by knowledge sharing and decentralization enabled by information and communication technologies (ICT) (Moritz et al., 2016). Ideally, OSH uses readily-available components, materials and standard processes, maximizing the possibility for others to make and use the hardware. ...
... Research has studied the components of OSHBM and has concluded that there is a blurring of boundaries between consumers and producers (Moritz et al., 2016;Thomson, Jakubowski, 2012). OSHBM appear to have "fuzzier systems and more units" (Pearce, 2012(Pearce, , 2017Menichinelli, 2015) and are proto business models, identified as being particularly value driven (Thomas, 2019;Unterfrauner, Voigt, 2017;Fjeldsted et al., 2012). ...
This research seeks to understand the interactions among stakeholders supporting Open-Source Hardware Business Models (OSHBMs). To answer our research question “what is the nature of the interaction among stakeholders in OSHBMs at a city level”, the authors conducted a qualitative explorative case study of the city of Barcelona, home to over 1,340 commons-based cooperative platforms.
Understanding OSHBMs is important as this addresses their long-term viability in the context of transitioning to a circular economy. Indeed, Open-Source Hardware (OSH) is the most disruptive, theoretical, and organizational innovation to have emerged from the Internet and has become crucial to attaining the Fab City objectives of making cities locally produce 50% of what they consume within the next 40 years.
Findings on the values and risks important to stakeholders are presented in a framework describing four synergy-catalyzing stages. Our contribution provides a pedagogical guide showing how OSH initiatives can leverage growth with external stakeholders.
... Free contributors have shown their willingness to participate in distributed, collaborative production of large/complex software projects (von Hippel 2001;Way 2002;Weber 2004;Bagozzi & Dholakia 2006 (Rubow 2008;Mellis & Buechley 2012;Kyriakou & Nickerson 2014;Moritz et al., 2016). In recent years, emergence of cheaper hardware development tools and maker spaces allow people to participate in global open source hardware projects in a distributed manner (Malinen et al., 2011;Hellenes 2016;Moritz et al., 2016). ...
... Free contributors have shown their willingness to participate in distributed, collaborative production of large/complex software projects (von Hippel 2001;Way 2002;Weber 2004;Bagozzi & Dholakia 2006 (Rubow 2008;Mellis & Buechley 2012;Kyriakou & Nickerson 2014;Moritz et al., 2016). In recent years, emergence of cheaper hardware development tools and maker spaces allow people to participate in global open source hardware projects in a distributed manner (Malinen et al., 2011;Hellenes 2016;Moritz et al., 2016). As opposed to an in-house product design process, in open design, volunteers discuss the product design with the project's leader(s) and each other in local get-togethers or virtual online forums. ...
... In non-profit-seeking open source hardware contexts, the community act as Developers and Interested Observers. They demonstrate collaborative, globally distributed and locally centralized characteristics (Moritz et al., 2016). He argued that depending on the openness of both product and process, the community would have different freedom of participation, therefore resulting in different behaviors (Bonvoisin et al., 2017). ...
Free contributors have successfully shown the potential in large/complex software co-creation in the Free and Open Source Software Movement, triggering many discussions and exploration ventures from academia to industry and to the government. Though many research efforts explored whether the same level of co-creation efforts could take place broadly in the hardware realm, very few research studies focus on profit-seeking hardware projects initiated by companies. In fact, the specific nature of being tangible and profitable makes company-led open source hardware projects suspicious to be really “open” to contributors. Community has been identified as the critical driver in many open projects. By reviewing the evolution of company-community interactions over time and different community behaviors in different open development context, authors in this paper hope to identify best community- company interaction forms for open source hardware companies. Using grounded theory and case studies, we construct a framework to describe and identify company community's different behaviors and different roles.
... This is where the open source hardware (OSH) movement comes into play: With increasing maturation and dissemination of easy-to-use and affordable means of digital production (e.g. 3D printing), access to these in makerspaces and FabLabs as well as powerful tools and online platforms for virtual and collaborative product design the highly efficient and innovative mode of open source spilled over from software to hardware (Raasch, Herstatt, and Balka, 2009;Anderson, 2012;Pearce, 2012b;Gibb, 2014;Moritz et al., 2016). Hundreds of projects and online communities have evolved around physical artefacts and technologies ranging from cars, computers and electronics to environmental tech, robotics and drones as well as machine tools and MedTech where thousands Moritz, M, et al. 2019 On the Economic Value of Open Source Hardware -Case Study of an Open Source Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scanner. ...
... Starting from some of these projects, firms have evolved too that capture value by selling and distributing ready-to-use products or kits, components and spare parts or by offering service and building workshops (e.g. Arduino, Ultimaker, Sparkfun) (Raasch and Herstatt 2011;Moritz et al., 2016). ...
... The design and documentation (such as bill of materials, schematics, assembly instructions) of the products, however, can be freely accessed online by anyone to study, build, repair, adapt and sell products based on these designs and enable users to have full control of the technology (Open Source Hardware Association, 2018). Beyond potentials for rapid and low-cost product design and development, this decentralized and collaborative model of value creation which is based on openness (also known as bottom-up economics) offers opportunities for social, economic and ecological sustainability by empowering people all over the world to participate in a system of democratized value creation with ubiquitous access to knowledge and technology (Pearce, 2012a;Basmer et al., 2015;Redlich and Moritz, 2016). ...
Increasing maturation and dissemination of easy-to-use and affordable means of digital production (e.g. 3D printing), access to these in makerspaces and FabLabs as well as powerful tools and online platforms for virtual and collaborative product design enabled the highly efficient and innovative mode of open source to spill over from software to hardware. Open source technology has enormous potential to spur innovation and enhance technological literacy and thus contribute to socioeconomic and ecological sustainability. Like in software, open source hardware (OSH) projects and online communities have evolved in a broad range of technologies and applications. In these communities, people from all over the world with diverse backgrounds (students, researchers, consumers, users etc.) gather online to jointly develop, revise, improve and freely share hardware designs and documentation. Additionally, people may build, adapt, use and sell physical artefacts based on these designs in accordance with the notion of open source. The (potential) economic impact and value of open source hardware is hard to quantify as contributors usually do not get paid and users do not necessarily buy products from vendors. Nonetheless, value is created as in the case of Linux or Wikipedia. We applied established valuation methods for open source hardware to quantify cost savings and as a result the value of an open source magnetic resonance imaging device (MRI) currently under development by the Open Source Imaging Initiative (OSI2). Depending on the scenario and the valuation method, we found that savings for healthcare systems from US$1.8 million up to US$222 million per year are possible in the near future making the case for public funding and private investment in open source technology development.
... The review also includes an empirical study on makers in China and their position with regard to China's manufacturing culture (Lindtner, 2015). A cluster of papers referred to the open-source design of appropriate technologies in emerging economies, to stimulate economic activity and address clear societal needs such as solar PV panels to provide electricity (Kostakis & Papachristou, 2014;Moritz, Redlich, Grames, & Wulfsberg, 2016;Pearce, 2012;Pearce & Mushtaq, 2009;Redlich et al., 2016;Woolf, et al. 2017;Zelenika & Pearce, 2014). The papers classified as technical experiments, which often featured the design of lab equipment or tools in science research or education, also positioned their work as open-source design or open hardware, explicitly stating the wish to share their work with colleagues in contexts with fewer resources. ...
... Another distinct group of papers explicitly highlighted environmental sustainability as a normative concern, where communities of empowered citizens could collaborate on solutions for local resilience and self-sufficiency (e.g. Moritz et al., 2016). Studies either examined these community endeavors to determine implications for open design practices for sustainability in terms of social interaction in groups, or they piloted a specific project in order to gain competence in open design for sustainability and its technical implications (e.g. ...
OPEN ACCESS: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07370024.2019.1574225.
This study reports on the results of a systematic literature review on ‘open design’ in academic fields including and beyond design and HCI. The review investigates how studies are framed as open design and open-source design (including ‘open hardware’): how researchers contribute to conceptual theorizing about open design or study its practical operationalization, in do-it-yourself ‘making,’ manufacturing and practices in-between these domains. Most of the papers reviewed were empirical studies from diverse fields. Open design was analyzed not only as contributions and solutions, but also as open-to-participate processes, openly shared processes, and open, closed, and modular (open and closed) outcomes. Various research fields presented an open design framing as an alternative to the status quo: new ways to do business and/or to foster socio-environmental sustainability. On the manufacturing side, open design was sought especially to accelerate innovation cycles; on the making side, it was espoused to foster democratization. However, the studies reviewed indicated that companies do not appear to develop much beyond business-as-usual. From the research perspective, the conceptual potential of open design to promote sustainability saw little practical exploration. Additionally, issues around open design community governance and ownership, safety and reliability of open outcomes require further investigation.
... As of today, one can observe that the ongoing digitalization results in new patterns of production and value creation: there is a shift from traditional firm-centric, more or less top-down value creation practices towards more and more open, collaboration-based and often bottom-up practices. Based on this observation, there is an ongoing discussion about firm boundaries dissolving step-by-step (Anderson, 2012;Chesbrough, 2006;Moritz et al., 2016;Winsor, 2010). However, most companies still focus on traditional internal, closed and protected ways of innovating, which, considering their interests (e.g. ...
... Lately, companies have been evolving in this ecosystem that work with or around open source hardware. Thus, corporate entities should be aware of these developments and consider more open approaches in their value creation systems and processes (Moritz, Redlich, Grames, & Wulfsberg, 2016;Thomson & Jakubowski, 2012). ...
As new patterns on how to think of innovation and organization develop one can observe that the boundaries of companies dissolve more and more towards more open and collaborative practices. This article examines one part of this overall development, namely the opportunities as well as challenges of open production sites and the many ways companies are trying to integrate them not only into existing innovation processes but also into production processes. Incorporating or integrating such methods into existing corporate structures offers the opportunity of working with state of the art technology collaboratively, together with tinkerers, makers, engineers, architects, artists or artisans, and therefore to really “think outside the box”. Fostering innovative practices and production by integrating and exploiting the potential of more open ways of producing and innovating will very likely lead to a more sustainable and economical production of goods and services.
... As of today, one can observe that the ongoing digitalization results in new patterns of production and value creation: there is a shift from traditional firm-centric, more or less top-down value creation practices towards more and more open, collaboration-based and often bottom-up practices. Based on this observation, there is an ongoing discussion about firm boundaries dissolving step-by-step (Anderson, 2012;Chesbrough, 2006;Moritz et al., 2016;Winsor, 2010). However, most companies still focus on traditional internal, closed and protected ways of innovating, which, considering their interests (e.g. ...
... Lately, companies have been evolving in this ecosystem that work with or around open source hardware. Thus, corporate entities should be aware of these developments and consider more open approaches in their value creation systems and processes (Moritz, Redlich, Grames, & Wulfsberg, 2016;Thomson & Jakubowski, 2012). ...
Web-based co-creation with users represents a promising approach for firms to improve their innovativeness, to search for unconventional solutions and very often to outperform traditional inhouse research and development (R&D). Collaborating with online communities is one way to go, using crowdsourcing contests another one. These days, we also find interesting hybrid structures in so-called contest communities that combine the best of both worlds, collaboration and competition. We present new insights from a case study on a contest community with special focus on participating users. Our results show that users greatly differ among their backgrounds, motivation and behavior and, thus, must be treated accordingly. Based on these insights, we derive management implications for firms that want to tap into co-creation.
... As of today, one can observe that the ongoing digitalization results in new patterns of production and value creation: there is a shift from traditional firm-centric, more or less top-down value creation practices towards more and more open, collaboration-based and often bottom-up practices. Based on this observation, there is an ongoing discussion about firm boundaries dissolving step-by-step (Anderson, 2012;Chesbrough, 2006;Moritz et al., 2016;Winsor, 2010). However, most companies still focus on traditional internal, closed and protected ways of innovating, which, considering their interests (e.g. ...
... Lately, companies have been evolving in this ecosystem that work with or around open source hardware. Thus, corporate entities should be aware of these developments and consider more open approaches in their value creation systems and processes (Moritz, Redlich, Grames, & Wulfsberg, 2016;Thomson & Jakubowski, 2012). ...
In many industries, we observe a paradigm shift from traditional firm-centric and top-down value creation towards more open and collaborative bottom-up approaches. Firms’ boundaries dissolve, and external actors can enter the domain of industrial value creation by means of advanced information and communication technologies. Beyond that, we also find examples where people co-create value with others without industrial actors necessarily being involved (e.g. open source communities, makerspaces). Thus, rethinking business as usual in the era of bottom-up economics via the concept of co-creation offers great potentials for both, firms and prosumers.
... All over the world people engage in communities, jointly develop products, share designs and build upon each other's ideas [2], [3], [4]. Evolving from projects, businesses were created that capture value by selling and distributing ready-to-use products and kits, components or by offering workshops [5], [6]. Design and documentation of these products, however, is freely shared with anyone to study, build, adapt and sell products based on these designs. ...
... learning, sharing, participation), and user empowerment (e.g. repair, service, individualization) [5]. ...
Easy-to-use and affordable means of production (e.g. 3D printer), access to these technologies (e.g. in makerspaces) and powerful tools for online product design led to the emergence of open source hardware (OSH). Like in open source software, projects and online platforms have been evolving around physical products from various technologies where people jointly develop and freely share designs. We also find businesses that sell products made from these designs and offer complimentary services. This decentralized and collaborative model of value creation offers new opportunities for social, economic and ecological sustainability, but also calls for a different understanding beyond traditional notions. Results from an exploratory study on OSH projects and companies revealed that licensing is a critical issue, communities and partners play a key role in the open source ecosystem and modes of value creation are either centered around design or production in combination with a mix of complimentary services.
... The concept of open source machine tools was first used by Pat Delany, who designed and developed OSHW projects focused on machine tools for "do-it-yourself global development" [33]. Recent years have also seen collective efforts such as Open Source Ecology's Global Village Construction Set [34], which is a set of 50 open source industrial machines and machine tools required to build a small but sustainable civilization, as well as individual efforts from the maker community such as the PrintNC open source CNC mill [35] and the Voron, an open source 3D printer [36]. By applying OSAT design principles and open collaboration, these projects have been able to develop machine tools for a fraction of the cost of their commercial counterparts, and they have been successfully replicated by the community [37]. ...
Similar to open source software, the open source hardware (OSHW) movement is seen as a technology driver which can enable developing economies to leapfrog their industries. While machine tools are a subset of OSHW, they have received relatively little academic attention compared to electronic OSHW. This study applies an explorative research approach and analyses open source designs for machine tools freely available on the internet. By coining, the term open source machine tools (OSMT), it determines their applicability in low resource contexts and identifies the potential of OSMTs in democratizing manufacturing technologies. OSMTs thereby encourage diversification, entrepreneurship, and inclusive industrial development, thus contributing to the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal no. 8 which aims to promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth. Specific areas for OSMT application in low-resource contexts and factors and barriers affecting their success are singled out.
... Scholars have proposed creating sustainable value in OSH (Moritz et al. 2017). Research has also proposed using OSH as a business model for companies (Li & Seering 2019), with the option of moving away from if they wanted, rather than basing the company around the OSH product(s). ...
Recent years have seen the rise of citizens as contributors to hardware product creation. This trend has increased attention to open source hardware (OSH): a phenomenon that extends the intellectual property management and development practices in open source software (OSS) into the design of physical objects. OSH projects are different from OSS projects due to product type, and distinct from traditional closed source new product development (NPD) ones due to their openness. These differences challenge the degree of applicability of existing project success definitions in the OSH context. To investigate project success in OSH, we conducted a qualitative survey with practitioners. We report characteristics of successful OSH projects through three identified themes: (a) value creation – the big-picture impact, (b) quality of output – the quality of the hardware and accompanying documentation and (c) project process – activities that contribute to success. We contextualise by comparing OSH with selected literature on the success of OSS and NPD project management. While our study confirms a similarity between OSS and OSH in defining project success, it also highlights themes that are uniquely important to the latter. These findings are helpful for OSH development practice and could provide lessons for OSS development and closed source NPD.
... In addition, since the machines (e.g. 3D printers, filament recyclers) are open-source hardware, they may also be replicated and reproduced, which offers enormous scaling potential [18]. ...
With the increasing use of the filament fabrication process, the in-house production of filament and the recycling of PLA waste is becoming more and more important. Small desktop filament extruders with associated peripherals enable small businesses and private users to carry out these recycling processes. Determing the right process parameters is of crucial importance here. These are usually only issued by the polymer manufacturer and the machine manufacturer. However, the development of own process parameters is important for new polymer compounds, as well as polymers with unknown manufacturers, as is typical in recycling. The common Taguchi method, which is used for process optimisation within the FFF process, was also used in this article to produce improved parameter sets for the production of filament using a single screw extruder (3devo Precision) with four heating zones. In this experimental field, the Taguchi method did not prove promising. Due to the small dimensions and compact design of such desktop filament extrusion machines, it was found that the setting parameters cannot be considered independently. The main parameters influencing the process were identified as the extruder screw speed, the cooling capacity and the temperature of the heating coil at the hopper. Nevertheless, parameter sets for PLA pellets and recycled PLA could be developed which have a better performance in terms of homogeneity of the diameter over time compared to the previously available parameter sets.
... The advantages of the open source dissemination of knowledge and data and the production of open source hardware based on this data become particularly evident in such crisis situations. For the user, the use of open source hardware offers lower acquisition costs, higher resource efficiency, faster and cheaper support from the community, significantly lower R&D costs and lower or no legal fees [27][28][29]. ...
Background
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to large-scale shutdowns in society. This resulted in global supply bottlenecks for medical protective equipment. The so-called Maker Movement recognized this emerging problem early on and, with the help of additive manufacturing (AM), began developing and manufacturing half masks or face shields as personal protective equipment (PPE). This knowledge has been made available in many places in form of open source product data, so that products could be adapted and improved, saving development time.
Methods
This production and innovation potential has been taken up and professionalized by the authors of this article. By means of a proof-of-principle we provide an overview of the possibility and successful unique introduction of a so-called professional “hybrid production” in a micro factory using 3D-printing at the place of greatest demand in a hospital by medical personnel to produce their own PPE. Furthermore the learning process and future benefits of on site 3D-printing are described.
Results
Our proof-of-principle successfully showed that the allocation of 3D-printing capabilities in the hospital infrastructure is possible. With assistance of the engineers, responsible for product design and development, the medical staff was able to produce PPE by means of AM. However, due to legal uncertainties and high material and production costs the usability is severely limited.
Conclusions
The practical research showed that a complete implementation of the concept and the short-term establishment of a 3D-printing factory for the autonomous supply of a hospital with PPE was not feasible without further efforts. Nevertheless, it has enabled the medical staff to use AM technologies for future research approaches.
... Low-cost microcontrollers and microcomputers (e.g., Arduino and Raspberry Pi, respectively) are becoming valuable IEQ measurement tools. Many devices use open-source hardware, which advances technological development through a community [80]. This approach means users can become developers, instead of consumers. ...
Indoor environment quality (IEQ) can negatively impact occupant health and wellbeing. Air quality, as well as thermal, visual and auditory conditions, can determine how comfortable occupants feel within buildings. Some can be measured objectively, but many are assessed by interpreting qualitative responses. Continuous monitoring by passive sensors may be useful to identify links between environmental and physiological changes. Few studies localise measurements to an occupant level perhaps due to many environmental monitoring solutions being large and expensive. Traditional models for occupant comfort analysis often exacerbate this by not differentiating between individual building occupants. This scoping review aims to understand IEQ and explore approaches as to how it is measured with various sensing technologies, identifying trends for monitoring occupant health and wellbeing. Twenty-seven studies were reviewed, and more than 60 state-of-the-art and low-cost IEQ sensors identified. Studies were found to focus on the home or workplace, but not both. This review also found how wearable technology can be used to augment IEQ measurements, creating personalised approaches to health and wellbeing. Opportunities exist to make individuals the primary unit of analysis. Future research should explore holistic personalised approaches to health monitoring in buildings that analyse the individual as they move between environments.
... Salem and Khatib analyzed the revenue streams of open designed electronics (Salem & Khatib 2004); Pierce stated the market potential of open source scientific equipment in the scientific and maker community (Pearce 2017). Howard suggested how project initiators could make revenue from open designed products (Howard et al. 2012 (Moritz et al. 2016). Bonvoisin et al focused on the relationships between different components in the canvas and studied 23 both nonprofit and for-profit open source projects to report an observation about relationships between the company, the customer and competitors (Bonvoisin et al. 2017). ...
The success of many open source software projects revealed the power of voluntary collaborative production of large/complex software systems. The research community is therefore curious about the viability of open source projects in other areas. In around 2000, open source practices started to take place in the commercial hardware realm, and so far, the phenomenon has not been fully explored. Using grounded theory, the authors studied 31 firms for an average of 2.3 years, discovering a 4-phase growth pattern of open source hardware firms, including starting the firm, identifying core competencies, business model improvement and business maturation. The firms behaviors in each stage are reported, as well as the evolution of community demography, behaviors and impact in different growth phases.
... The research studies of open source hardware are divided into three main categories. The first category discusses the definition of open source hardware, including the comparison with open source software (https://www.oshwa.org/definition/), the different measurements of openness (Aitamurto et al., 2013), the choice of licensing to protect the openness (Moritz et al., 2016), and the characteristics of open source hardware companies (Pearce 2017 (Gibbs 2014) including codesign procedures and guidelines (Bonvoisin et al., 2017), inventions of online co-design tool (Bonvoisin & Boujut 2015), and design outcomes as compared with in-house closed source designs (Malinen et al. 2011 (Mann 2006;Iansiti & Richards 2006;Wasserman 2009;Bonaccorsi et al., 2004;Asta et al., 2012). Proprietary software uses high margin licenses and software related services to generate cash flow (Turner 2015). ...
... The research studies of open source hardware are divided into three main categories. The first category discusses the definition of open source hardware, including the comparison with open source software (https://www.oshwa.org/definition/), the different measurements of openness (Aitamurto et al., 2013), the choice of licensing to protect the openness (Moritz et al., 2016), and the characteristics of open source hardware companies (Pearce 2017 (Gibbs 2014) including codesign procedures and guidelines (Bonvoisin et al., 2017), inventions of online co-design tool (Bonvoisin & Boujut 2015), and design outcomes as compared with in-house closed source designs (Malinen et al. 2011 (Mann 2006;Iansiti & Richards 2006;Wasserman 2009;Bonaccorsi et al., 2004;Asta et al., 2012). Proprietary software uses high margin licenses and software related services to generate cash flow (Turner 2015). ...
Analyzing value creation and capture mechanisms of open source hardware startup companies, this paper illustrates how an open source strategy can make economical sense for hardware startups. By interviewing 37 open source hardware company leaders, 12 company community members as well as analyzing forum data of 3 open source hardware companies; we realize that by open sourcing the design of hardware, a company can naturally establish its community, which is a key element for a company's success. Establishing a community can increase customer perceived value, decrease product development and sales cost, shorten product go-to-market time, and incubate startups with knowledge, experience and resources. These advantages can compensate for the risks associated with open source strategies and can make open source design a viable product development strategy for hardware startups.
... This project showed similarities with OSSD, since tasks were performed by an informal community of voluntary contributors operating a self-selection of tasks. Macul & Rozenfeld (2015) as well as Moritz et al. (2016) reported the case of Open Source Ecology, a grassroots project aiming at developing and building a 'Global Village Construction Set' , i.e., a set of 50 open source industrial machines allowing to 'build a small civilization with modern comforts' (Figure 2, left). 4 More recently, Boisseau (2017) reported the case of the POC21 innovation camp, a gathering which took place in Paris in 2015 and produced 12 OSH development projects (Figure 2, right). ...
Open Source Hardware (OSH) is an increasingly viable approach to intellectual property management extending the principles of Open Source Software (OSS) to the domain of physical products. These principles support the development of products in transparent processes allowing the participation of any interested person. While increasing numbers of products have been released as OSH, little is known on the prevalence of participative development practices in this emerging field. It remains unclear to which extent the transparent and participatory processes known from software reached hardware product development. To fill this gap, this paper applies repository mining techniques to investigate the transparency and workload distribution of 105 OSH product development projects. The results highlight a certain heterogeneity of practices filling a continuum between public and private development settings. They reveal different organizational patterns with different levels of centralization and distribution. Nonetheless, they clearly indicate the expansion of the open source development model from software into the realms of physical products and provide the first large-scale empirical evidence of this recent evolution. Therewith, this article gives body to an emerging phenomenon and contributes to give it a place in the scientific debate. It delivers categories to delineate practices, techniques to investigate them in further detail as well as a large dataset of exemplary OSH projects. The discussion of first results signposts avenues for a stream of research aiming at understanding stakeholder interactions at work in new product innovation practices in order to enable institutions and industry in providing appropriate responses.
... Overcoming these obstacles that impede the 4 As will require feasible strategies that can arise from the current, complex system and yet simultaneously challenge it. A model for doing so can be Thus, corporate entities should be aware of these developments and consider more open approaches in their value creation systems and processes (Moritz, Redlich, Grames, & Wulfsberg, 2016;Thomson & Jakubowski, 2012). ...
Today’s societies are challenged by the increasing costs of healthcare and global inequality in the availability, accessibility, appropriateness and affordability of medical technologies. There are ways to improve equality and efficiency and decrease costs in this area without fundamentally changing current health systems and business models. Many services and products are experiencing a paradigm shift toward an open source economic model that can be extended to medical technologies in a way that will intrinsically promote sustainable growth and innovations while improving education and global health. This new way of thinking offers an infrastructure by which some sectors of global health can be democratized. Here we present an in-depth discussion of the advantages of open source medical technology for the public and private sectors, then provide a concrete example of the progress of our efforts to develop an open source magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner. Based on our calculations such an instrument could potentially result in cost savings of up to $3.3 billion within about 20 years for the German healthcare system alone. On a global scale the implications of an affordable open source MRI would be even more striking. We suggest a series of milestones to be met to a widespread development of open source medical technology with the aim of improving global health in a way that is less restricted by current political and economic borders.
... Furthermore, we observe an empowerment of users who jointly create value and who are not in need of companies or monetary incentives to do so (e.g. open source software [16][17][18]). ...
Co-creation with users in online communities proved to be a powerful means for product innovation. Crowdsourcing ideas in a contest setting within a community represents an effective method to gather a variety of ideas within a short time and with reasonable financial investment. Users benefit as well. They can be part of industrial value creation, enjoy interacting with a company and socializing with other users, and win a prize. Interestingly, many users not only compete for prizes, but also collaborate with others by giving feedback and exchanging ideas. Thus, we find high heterogeneity among users which asks for adequate community management (incentives, facilitation, communication etc.). In this study, we explore user roles and communication patterns in an industrial design contest community by applying cluster analysis based on network measures and content analysis. Four user roles were found that differ in communication and contribution behavior.
... B. in FabLabs) herzustellen. (von Krogh & von Hippel, 2006;Harhoff et al. 2003;Moritz et al., 2016) ...
Durch die webbasierte Einbindung von und Zusammenarbeit mit unternehmensexternen Individuen während der Ideengenerierung und Produktentwicklung ergeben sich für Unternehmen neue Möglichkeiten, um ihre Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu steigern. Insbesondere Ideenwettbewerbe sind unternehmensseitig ein vielversprechendes Instrument, um in kürzester Zeit und zu vergleichsweise geringen Kosten eine große Menge an kreativen und unkonventionellen Ideen zu einer bestimmten Problemstellung zu erhalten. Zugleich können Konsumenten, Hobby-Enthusiasten, Studenten etc. nunmehr Teil der (industriellen) Wertschöpfung von Unternehmen werden. In diesem Beitrag werden die Ergebnisse einer Umfrage unter den Teilnehmern der von Local Motors ausgerichteten Airbus Cargo Drone Challenge vorgestellt. Wir finden auch in diesem eher kompetitiv ausgerichteten Wettbewerb starke Anzeichen für kollaboratives Verhalten der Nutzer, was die These bestätigt, dass es auch auf individueller Ebene eine Form von “Koopetition” geben kann.
... Within the last decades, many scholars in the field of economics and organizational studies have analyzed the consequences of openness and open source principles for traditional companies (as spaces where innovation is created) and derived advices for action in order to secure the competitiveness of firms, for instance through implementing open design and open innovation principles and procedures that integrate users and consumers in the product development process [26,27]. Criticizing, but at the same time being trapped in neo-liberal rationales of the market economy, they are mostly drawing on the knowledge-based-view of the firm that considers knowledge as the central resource, from which a firm has to generate competitive advantage, and innovation as the main engine for economic growth. ...
Kurzzusammenfassung. Offene Werkstätten (FabLabs) als Teil einer sozio-technischen, gesellschaftlichen Bewegung, die mehr Beteiligung der Bürger an Technologie-und Produktentwicklung anstrebt, ermöglichen einen einfachen Zugang zu technologischem Wissen und Produktionsmitteln und bergen somit das Potential zur Stimulierung technischer Innovationen, Gründungsinitiativen und regionaler Entwicklung. Die vorliegende Studie untersucht, unter welchen Bedingungen sich diese Potentiale entfalten können, und fokussiert in diesem Zusammenhang die Kombination aus lokaler sozio-institutioneller und sozio-ökonomischer Einbettung der physischen Orte sowie der Einbettung in eine Infrastruktur, welche die Grundlage für virtuelle Kollaboration und Wissenstransfer auf globaler Ebene schafft. Erste Ergebnisse verweisen auf eine deutliche Diskrepanz zwischen der Vision der Bewegung und der empirischen Realität der Labs.
Abstract. Open Fabrication Laboratories that provide open access to technological knowledge and means of production have the potential for enhancing innovation capabilities and stimulating entrepreneurship and regional development at the grassroots level. The present study investigates under which conditions these outcomes might occur by analyzing the local socio-institutional and economic embedding as well as the embedding within a global virtual infrastructure for collaboration and knowledge transfer as the major variables that determine their performance and viability. Initial results show a significant discrepancy between the vision of the grassroots movement and its empirical reality. 1
... [13,14,15] Furthermore, we observe an empowerment of users and customers who are jointly creating value and who are not necessarily in need of companies or monetary incentives to do so (e.g. open source etc. [16,17,18]). Co-creating with users. ...
The item "motivation" (fig. 6) in this paper is incorrect. Please see this file for corrected result. I am sorry!
... [13,14,15] Furthermore, we observe an empowerment of users and customers who are jointly creating value and who are not necessarily in need of companies or monetary incentives to do so (e.g. open source etc. [16,17,18]). Co-creating with users. ...
Web-based collaboration (co-creation) between companies and users proved to be a powerful concept of value creation for innovation related aspects like idea generation, product development and problem solving. One form of co-creation is represented by so-called innovation/idea/design contests where an organization initiates a web-based competition by posting a problem or task and invites people to submit their solutions or concepts on a platform. Interestingly, it was shown that even in a competitive challenge environment where the winner takes all, collaboration among users via commenting and feedback has been observed. The concept of “communitition” proposed by Hutter et al. claims that collaboration and competition (co-opetition) may co-exist in innovation contests and having a positive influence on the challenge outcome. In this paper and with regard to the concept of “communitition”, we present selected findings from the user survey conducted in the community of the “Airbus Cargo Drone Challenge” which was held and hosted by Local Motors in 2016. Our results show that participating users have a competitive attitude (motivation, expectation, compensation) on the one hand, but behave in a collaborative manner in the course of the challenge on the other hand, thus, confirming the existence of co-opetition in innovation contests.
This paper deals with the development of Vitals E-Medic Plus-- an Open-source Hardware (OSH) derived work medical device built for a Cloud-based Patient Monitoring System. Vitals E-Medic Plus comprises two sets of open-source medical sensors: (1) open-source medical sensors for a patient's vital sign monitoring and (2) open-source medical sensors for medical diagnostic tests.
Vitals E-Medic Plus, medical sensors for patient's vital sign monitoring include temperature, blood pressure, arterial oxygen saturation (SP02), heart and pulse rate, and respiratory rate. In contrast, open-source medical sensors for medical diagnostic tests include sensors for Capillary Blood Glucose (using glucometer), Electromyography (EMG), and Electrocardiogram (ECG/EKG).
The two sets of open-source medical sensors were collectively organized and attached to an open-source Bio-Shield Platform atop NodeMCU System-on-chip module.
Vitals E-Medic Plus device was developed under an Iterative Prototyping Engineering Design Methodology and employed Iterative Software Development Methodology for its software development. This device was tested and evaluated by Barangay Health Workers from the Philippines based on its efficiency, effectiveness, and reliability in gathering vital signs and diagnosing diabetes and heart diseases from a sizeable collection of patients during a one-day medical mission.
Historically, open source agriculture (OSA) was based on grassroots technology generally manufactured by hand tools or with manual machining. The rise of distributed digital manufacturing provides an opportunity for much more rapid lateral scaling of open source appropriate technologies for agriculture. However, the most mature distributed manufacturing area is plastic, which has limited use for many OSA applications. To overcome this limitation with design, this study reports on of a completely 3D-printable planetary roller screw linear actuator. The device is designed as a parametric script-based computer aided design (CAD) package to allow for the easy adaption for a number of applications such as food processing at different scales. The planetary roller screw is fabricated in dishwasher-safe polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG) on an open source machine and tested using an open source testing platform to determine if it could maintain a constant load without slipping and the maximum force. Then, this output is compared to a direct screw press using the same materials. The results found that the maximum force is more than doubled for the roller screw actuator using the same materials, making them adequate for some food processing techniques. Future work is outlined to improve the performance and ease of assembly.
In Unternehmen, Behörden und Organisationen finden regelmäßig Wechsel von Mitarbeitern statt. Dies geschieht durch Beförderungen, Renteneintritt, Berufseinstieg oder Ortswechsel. Im Jahr 2017 lag der Fluktuationskoeffizient in Deutschland bei 33 % (Bundesagentur für Arbeit 2018:139). Das bedeutet, dass gemessen an der Gesamtbeschäftigung, ein Drittel aller sozialversicherungspflichtigen Beschäftigungsverhältnisse jährlich neu begonnen oder beendet wurden. Diese Zahl ist ein deutliches Maß für den Wechsel von Mitarbeitern, der in deutschen Organisationen stattfindet und für den Bedarf an Wissenstransfer, der dadurch entsteht. Wissenstransfer lebt davon, dass dabei auf das alltagserprobte und gereifte Erfahrungswissen von Wissensträgern zurückgegriffen wird. Wird dieser Rückgriff auf Bewährtes unterlassen, kommt es langfristig zu Wissensverlusten, die die ge- samte Organisation betreffen (vgl. Lehner 2012:6f). Von einer für diese Arbeit befragten Expertengruppe aus über 20 verschiedenen Branchen bestätigen 79 %, dass Erfahrungswissen für ihre tägliche Arbeit wichtiger sei, als formalisiertes Wissen – warum also diese Res- source nicht umfassend nutzen? Der Wissenstransfer von Erfahrungswissen könnte mit existierenden Methoden bereits gemanagt werden, allerdings ist die Anwendung dieser Methoden in der Arbeitswelt nicht verbreitet. In weniger als jeder zweiten untersuchten Wissenstransfersituation wird überhaupt methodische Unterstützung eingesetzt, obwohl 92 % der befragten Experten denken, dass damit das Risiko des Wissensverlusts steige. Es stellen 78 % der befragten 112 Wissenstransferexperten fest, dass dies am Zeitmangel liege, dass aber auch die bereits große Anzahl von Nebenaufgaben und Wissensegoismus zwischen Abteilungen und Teams eine Rolle spielten. Mit dieser Arbeit wurde ein Konzept entwickelt, das diese Hauptstörgrößen des organisationalen Wissenstransfers berücksichtigt. Aus über 30 etablierten Methoden des Wissensmanagements wurden solche ausgewählt, die am resistentesten gegenüber diesen Störgrößen sind. Diese wurden analysiert und zu einem situativ anpassbaren Gesamtkonzept weiterentwickelt. Ein Expertenpool von 112 Wissenstransferexperten steuerte wesentliche Anregungen zu dessen Ausgestaltung bei, bevor dieses Entwurfskonzept des Wissenstransfers dann heuristisch an sechs realen Wissenstransferfällen getestet und optimiert wurde. Hieraus entstand das evaluierte 7-W-Fragen-Konzept des Wissenstransfers, welches in dieser Arbeit vorgestellt wird und damit als Handlungsleitfaden für Wissensträger und Wissensmanager in Unternehmen und Organisationen nutzbar ist.
The successful adoption of the open model in software industry inspires people to explore developing hardware products using similar models. In recent years, a growing number of open source hardware startups are being established, with an emphasis on opening both software and hardware design and development. Though previous studies show that open hardware entrepreneurs hold strong beliefs regarding the value of open spirit, the majority of the entrepreneurs are still reluctant on creating a business with a complete open model. Until now, the studies about business models for open source hardware startups are currently not mature enough to provide systematic and insightful guidance for entrepreneurs to manage their open business. Historically, value proposition and value creation are regarded as the core for the success of startup companies. Here, the author interviewed twenty open source hardware startup founders about the value propositions and revenue model they offer and use to run their business. It turns out that community identity is a new value to attract customers and promote sales. In order to characterize revenue models of open source hardware companies, revenue taxonomy is proposed and used to characterize the interviewed companies.
In diesem Werk wird die Wertschöpfung der Zukunft auf Grundlage neuster Forschungsergebnisse im Rahmen eines interdisziplinären Ansatzes von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern aus den Technik-, Wirtschafts-, Sozial- und Rechtswissenschaften diskutiert. Technologische Treiber und rechtliche Aspekte werden dabei ebenso beleuchtet wie die ökonomischen und soziokulturellen Chancen und Herausforderungen, die sich infolge zunehmend kollaborativer und dezentraler Wertschöpfungsprozesse ergeben.
Der Inhalt
• Wertschöpfung weiter denken: Artefakte, Prozesse und Strukturen
• Digitale Technologien als Treiber und Befähiger
• Leben und Lernen in der Arbeitswelt von morgen
• Kollaborative Wertschöpfung als Chance für soziale, ökonomische und ökologische Nachhaltigkeit
Die Zielgruppen
• Dozierende und Studierende der Fachgebiete Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften sowie Ingenieur- und Rechtswissenschaften
• Interdisziplinär Forschende sowie Fachleute in den Bereichen Bildung, Arbeit und Wirtschaft
Die Herausgeber
Dr. Tobias Redlich ist Leiter der Arbeitsgruppe „Wertschöpfungssystematik“ am Laboratorium Fertigungstechnik an der Helmut-Schmidt-Universität Hamburg. In seiner Forschung beschäftigt er sich mit neuen Wertschöpfungsmustern.
Manuel Moritz ist Doktorand am Laboratorium Fertigungstechnik an der Helmut-Schmidt-Universität Hamburg und forscht zu kollaborativen Wertschöpfungs- und Innovationsprozessen.
Prof. Dr. Jens P. Wulfsberg leitet das Laboratorium Fertigungstechnik an der Helmut-Schmidt-Universität Hamburg.
Globalization and the use of technology call for an adaptation of value creation strategies. As the potential for rationalization
and achieving flexibility within companies is to the greatest possible extent exhausted, approaches to the corporate reorganization
of value creation are becoming increasingly important. In this process, the spread and further development of information
and communication technology often provide the basis for a reorganization of cross-company value nets and lead to a redistribution
of roles and tasks between the actors involved in value creation. While cooperative, decentralized and self-organizing value
creation processes are in fact being promoted, the associated potential for development and production engineering is being
underestimated and hence not implemented sufficiently. This contribution will introduce a value creation taxonomy and then,
using its notion and structure, describe the emerging transformations in value creation on the basis of case studies. Finally
an adequate framework for analysing and configuring value creation will be presented.
KeywordsValue creation–Production systems–Production management
Much of the widespread poverty, environmental desecration, and waste of human life seen around the globe could be prevented by known (to humanity as a whole) technologies, many of which are simply not available to those that need it. This lack of access to critical information for sustainable development is directly responsible for a morally and ethically unacceptable level of human suffering and death. A solution to this general problem is the concept of open source appropriate technology or OSAT, which refers to technologies that provide for sustainable development while being designed in the same fashion as free and open-source software. OSAT is made up of technologies that are easily and economically utilized from readily available resources by local communities to meet their needs and must meet the boundary conditions set by environmental, cultural, economic, and educational resource constraints of the local community. This paper explores both the open source and appropriate technology aspects of OSAT to create a paradigm, in which anyone can both learn how to make and use needed technologies free of IP concerns. At the same time anyone can also add to the collective open source knowledge ecosystem or knowledge commons by contributing ideas, designs, observations, experimental data, deployment logs, etc. It is argued that if OSAT continues to grow and takes hold globally creating a vibrant virtual community to share technology plans and experiences, a new technological revolution, built on a dispersed network of innovators working together to create a just sustainable world is possible.
Die Globalisierung und die zunehmende informationelle Vernetzung führen zu völlig neuen Mustern der Wertschöpfung, die sich unter dem Begriff „Bottom-up-Ökonomie“ zusammenfassen lassen. Sie unterscheidet sich durch eine Verschmelzung von Produktion und Konsum sowie durch verteilte Strukturen und Prozesse bei der Leistungserstellung. Dabei unterliegt sie einer Logik der Offenheit. Mit diesem Buch wird „Offenheit“ als ein Charakteristikum der Wertschöpfungssystematik untersucht und ein geeignetes Rahmenkonzept entwickelt, das produzierende Unternehmen bei der Wertschöpfungsgestaltung in einer zunehmend dynamischen Umwelt unterstützt. Es werden einerseits adäquate Modelle zur Beschreibung und Analyse von Wertschöpfungssystemen bereitgestellt, andererseits werden geeignete praktische Maßnahmen daraus abgeleitet, mit denen Wertschöpfungsaktivitäten und -strukturen in einer Bottom-up-Ökonomie erfolgreich gestalten werden können. Dabei wurden sowohl vorhandene eklektische Ansätze berücksichtigt, als auch neu gefundene Muster in ein gemeinsames Rahmenwerk integriert.
Updates: https://www.appropedia.org/Open-source_Lab
Open-Source Lab: How to Build Your Own Hardware and Reduce Scientific Research Costs details the development of the free and open-source hardware revolution. The combination of open-source 3D printing and open-source microcontrollers running on free software enables scientists, engineers, and lab personnel in every discipline to develop powerful research tools at unprecedented low costs.
After reading Open-Source Lab, you will be able to:
>Lower equipment costs by making your own hardware
>Build open-source hardware for scientific research
> Actively participate in a community in which scientific results are more easily replicated and cited
In this paper we report on the results of a study of the effort and motivations of individuals to contributing to the creation of Free/Open Source software. We used a Web-based survey, administered to 684 software developers in 287 F/OSS projects, to learn what lies behind the effort put into such projects. Academic theorizing on individual motivations for participating in F/OSS projects has posited that external motivational factors in the form of extrinsic benefits (e.g.: better jobs, career advancement) are the main drivers of effort. We find in contrast, that enjoyment-based intrinsic motivation, namely how creative a person feels when working on the project, is the strongest and most pervasive driver. We also find that user need, intellectual stimulation derived from writing code, and improving programming skills are top motivators for project participation. A majority of our respondents are skilled and experienced professionals working in IT-related jobs, with approximately 40 percent being paid to participate in the F/OSS project.
There has been a recent surge of interest in open source software development, which involves developers at many different locations and organizations sharing code to develop and refine programs. To an economist, the behavior of individual programmers and commercial companies engaged in open source projects is initially startling. This paper makes a preliminary exploration of the economics of open source software. We highlight the extent to which labor economics, especially the literature on career concerns,' can explain many of these projects' features. Aspects of the future of open source development process, however, remain somewhat difficult to predict with off-the-shelf' economic models.
Future of Open Source Survey
Jan 2015
P Santinelli
Santinelli, P. et al.: "2015 Future of Open Source Survey",
https://www.blackducksoftware.com/resources/webinar/2015-futureopen-source-survey-results, retrieved online 20/01/2016.
The DIY Electronics Revolution: The Present & Future of Open Source Hardware
Jan 2013
114
fried
Fried, L.: "The DIY Electronics Revolution: The Present & Future of
Open Source Hardware", Circuit Cellar: the magazine for computer
applications, 2013, pp.114-116.
Building open source hardware: DIY manufacturing for hackers and makers
Jan 2014
A Gibb
Gibb, A.: "Building open source hardware: DIY manufacturing for
hackers and makers", Pearson, 2014.
Alles aus Spaß? Zur Motivation von Open-Source-Entwicklern
Jan 2004
93
luthiger
Luthiger, B.: "Alles aus Spaß? Zur Motivation von Open-Source-Entwicklern", Lutterbeck und Gehring, 2004, pp 93-106.
Open-Source-Lizenzen: Untersuchung der GPL, LGPL, BSD und Artistic License
Jan 2013
A Schaaf
Schaaf, A.: "Open-Source-Lizenzen: Untersuchung der GPL, LGPL,
BSD und Artistic License", Hamburg, Diplomica Verlag, 2013.
Open Content -A practical guide to using Creative Commons licenses
Jan 2011
T Kreutzer
Kreutzer, T.: "Open Content -A practical guide to using Creative
Commons licenses", Bonn, Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission, 2011.
Projected revenue of open source software from
Jan 2008
Statista
Statista: "Projected revenue of open source software from 2008 to
2020", http://www.statista.com/statistics/270805/projected-revenue-ofopen-source-software-since-2008, retrieved online 20/01/2016.
Million dollar baby", conference presentation at Foo Camp East
Jan 2010
L Fried
P Torrone
Fried L., Torrone, P.: "Million dollar baby", conference presentation at
Foo
Camp
East
2010,
https://www.adafruit.com/pt/fooeastignite2010.pdf, retrieved online
20/01/2016.