IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v52y2006i7p1015-1030.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary Code

Author

Listed:
  • Alan MacCormack

    (Harvard Business School, Soldiers Field, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

  • John Rusnak

    (Harvard Business School, Soldiers Field, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

  • Carliss Y. Baldwin

    (Harvard Business School, Soldiers Field, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

Abstract

This paper reports data from a study that seeks to characterize the differences in design structure between complex software products. We use design structure matrices (DSMs) to map dependencies between the elements of a design and define metrics that allow us to compare the structures of different designs. We use these metrics to compare the architectures of two software products--the Linux operating system and the Mozilla Web browser--that were developed via contrasting modes of organization: specifically, open source versus proprietary development. We then track the evolution of Mozilla, paying attention to a purposeful "redesign" effort undertaken with the intention of making the product more "modular." We find significant differences in structure between Linux and the first version of Mozilla, suggesting that Linux had a more modular architecture. Yet we also find that the redesign of Mozilla resulted in an architecture that was significantly more modular than that of its predecessor and, indeed, than that of Linux. Our results, while exploratory, are consistent with a view that different modes of organization are associated with designs that possess different structures. However, they also suggest that purposeful managerial actions can have a significant impact in adapting a design's structure. This latter result is important given recent moves to release proprietary software into the public domain. These moves are likely to fail unless the product possesses an "architecture for participation."

Suggested Citation

  • Alan MacCormack & John Rusnak & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2006. "Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary Code," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1015-1030, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:52:y:2006:i:7:p:1015-1030
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0552
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0552
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0552?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rajiv D. Banker & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2000. "The Moderating Effects of Structure on Volatility and Complexity in Software Enhancement," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 219-240, September.
    2. Pimmler, Thomas U. (Thomas Udo) & Eppinger, Steven D., 1994. "Integration analysis of product decompositions," Working papers 3690-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    3. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    4. Black, Thomas A. (Thomas Andrew), 1965- & Fine, Charles H. & Sachs, Emanuel M., 1990. "A method for systems design using precedence relationships : an application to automotive brake systems," Working papers 3208-90., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    5. Sanderson, Susan & Uzumeri, Mustafa, 1995. "Managing product families: The case of the Sony Walkman," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 761-782, September.
    6. von Hippel, Eric, 1990. "Task partitioning: An innovation process variable," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 407-418, October.
    7. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    8. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. MacCormack, Alan & Baldwin, Carliss & Rusnak, John, 2012. "Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: A test of the “mirroring” hypothesis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1309-1324.
    2. Kartik Kalaignanam & Tarun Kushwaha & Anand Nair, 2017. "The Product Quality Impact of Aligning Buyer-Supplier Network Structure and Product Architecture: an Empirical Investigation in the Automobile Industry," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    4. Baldwin, Carliss & MacCormack, Alan & Rusnak, John, 2014. "Hidden structure: Using network methods to map system architecture," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1381-1397.
    5. Burton, Nicholas & Galvin, Peter, 2022. "Modularity, value and exceptions to the mirroring hypothesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 635-650.
    6. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Gang Zhang & Ruoyang Gao, 2010. "Modularity and incremental innovation: the roles of design rules and organizational communication," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 171-200, June.
    8. Anna Cabigiosu & Arnaldo Camuffo, 2012. "Beyond the “Mirroring” Hypothesis: Product Modularity and Interorganizational Relations in the Air Conditioning Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 686-703, June.
    9. Bilal Gokpinar & Wallace J. Hopp & Seyed M. R. Iravani, 2010. "The Impact of Misalignment of Organizational Structure and Product Architecture on Quality in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(3), pages 468-484, March.
    10. Wallace J. Hopp & Xiaowei Xu, 2005. "Product Line Selection and Pricing with Modularity in Design," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 172-187, August.
    11. Alessandro Rossi & Alessandro Narduzzo, 2003. "Modular design and the development of complex artifact lesson fron free open source software," Quaderni DISA 080, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 29 Sep 2003.
    12. Sungyong Um & Bin Zhang & Sunil Wattal & Youngjin Yoo, 2023. "Software Components and Product Variety in a Platform Ecosystem: A Dynamic Network Analysis of WordPress," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1339-1374, December.
    13. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    14. Henning Skirde & Wolfgang Kersten & Meike Schröder, 2016. "Measuring the Cost Effects of Modular Product Architectures — A Conceptual Approach," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 1-23, August.
    15. Marlo Raveendran & Phanish Puranam & Massimo Warglien, 2016. "Object Salience in the Division of Labor: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 2110-2128, July.
    16. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Madjid Tavana & Takao Terano, 2020. "Product development team formation: effects of organizational- and product-related factors," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 88-122, March.
    17. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2020. "Component complementarity and transaction costs: the evolution of product design," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 845-867, August.
    18. Yan, Tingting & Wagner, Stephan M., 2017. "Do what and with whom? Value creation and appropriation in inter-organizational new product development projects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 1-14.
    19. Leonardo Bargigli, 2005. "The limits of modularity in innovation and production," KITeS Working Papers 176, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Sep 2005.
    20. Köhler, Lutz, 2002. "Organisation der Produktinnovation in Medienunternehmen: Eine Analyse des Forschungsstandes zur Ablauforganisation der Innovation von Online-Produkten," Working Papers 2/2002, University of Munich, Munich School of Management, Institute for Information Systems and New Media.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:52:y:2006:i:7:p:1015-1030. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.