IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03395460.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Seven observations and research questions about Open Design and Open Source Hardware

Author

Listed:
  • Jérémy Bonvoisin

    (University of Bath [Bath])

  • Robert Mies

    (TUB - Technical University of Berlin / Technische Universität Berlin)

  • Jean-François Boujut

    (G-SCOP_CC - Conception collaborative - G-SCOP - Laboratoire des sciences pour la conception, l'optimisation et la production - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes - Grenoble INP - Institut polytechnique de Grenoble - Grenoble Institute of Technology - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes)

Abstract

'Openness' is one of the key concepts brought forward by postindustrial narratives questioning the modern repartition of roles between industries and customers. In these narratives, citizen participation in design and intellectual property management based on open source principles are the promise of more sustainable production models. In this context, openness in product design and development has been the object of growing interest and experimentation from academia, businesses and grassroots communities. As a result, numerous concepts emerged that attempt to grasp the essence of this phenomenon, unfortunately leading to overlapping, conflicting or speculative depictions. In this article, we share the understanding we gained throughout 6 years of research on Open Design and Open Source Hardware and attempt to make the difference between myths and facts. We depict an enthusiastic but realistic picture of Open Design and Open Source Hardware practices as we could observe them and deliver a structured framework to situate concepts and their differences. From this, we share seven observations leading to seven corresponding research questions and establish a research agenda to stimulate further investigations into this socially relevant and potentially groundbreaking phenomenon.

Suggested Citation

  • Jérémy Bonvoisin & Robert Mies & Jean-François Boujut, 2021. "Seven observations and research questions about Open Design and Open Source Hardware," Post-Print hal-03395460, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03395460
    DOI: 10.1017/dsj.2021.14
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03395460v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03395460v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1017/dsj.2021.14?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. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    2. Christina Raasch, 2011. "Product Development In Open Design Communities: A Process Perspective," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(04), pages 557-575.
    3. Tobias Redlich & Manuel Moritz & Jens P. Wulfsberg, 2019. "Introduction: Co-creation in the Era of Bottom-Up Economics," Management for Professionals, in: Tobias Redlich & Manuel Moritz & Jens P. Wulfsberg (ed.), Co-Creation, pages 1-6, Springer.
    4. 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.
    5. Joshua Pearce, 2012. "The case for open source appropriate technology," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 425-431, June.
    6. Øystein D. Fjeldstad & Charles C. Snow & Raymond E. Miles & Christopher Lettl, 2012. "The architecture of collaboration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 734-750, June.
    7. Hamalainen, Markko & Karjalainen, Jesse, 2017. "Social manufacturing: When the maker movement meets interfirm production networks," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 795-805.
    8. Jérémy Bonvoisin & Laetitia Thomas & Robert Mies & Rainer Stark & Karine Samuel & Roland Jochem & Jean-François Boujut & Céline Gros, 2017. "Current state of practices in open source product development," Post-Print hal-01578044, HAL.
    9. Troxler, Peter & Wolf, Patricia, 2017. "Digital maker-entrepreneurs in open design: What activities make up their business model?," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 807-817.
    10. Jérémy Bonvoisin & Laetitia Thomas & Robert Mies & Céline Gros & Rainer Stark & Karine Evrard Samuel & Roland Jochem & Jean-François Boujut, 2017. "Current state of practices in open source product development," Post-Print hal-01666085, HAL.
    11. Cameron Colby Thomson & Marcin Jakubowski, 2012. "Toward an Open Source Civilization: (Innovations Case Narrative: Open Source Ecology)," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 7(3), pages 53-70, July.
    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. Torres de Oliveira, Rui & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Steen, John & Indulska, Marta, 2021. "Creating value by giving away: A typology of different innovation revealing strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 137-150.
    2. Philipp Nitzsche & Bernd W. Wirtz & Vincent Göttel, 2016. "Innovation Success In The Context Of Inbound Open Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-38, February.
    3. Ivan A. Butakov, 2021. "Rigid form of cooperation between industrial enterprises in the natural resources sector: Institutional trap or survival strategy," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 12(3), pages 31-43, July.
    4. Järvi, Kati & Almpanopoulou, Argyro & Ritala, Paavo, 2018. "Organization of knowledge ecosystems: Prefigurative and partial forms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1523-1537.
    5. Rayna, Thierry & Striukova, Ludmila, 2021. "Assessing the effect of 3D printing technologies on entrepreneurship: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    6. Tabarés, Raúl & Kuittinen, Hanna, 2020. "A tale of two innovation cultures: Bridging the gap between makers and manufacturers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    7. Oliver Alexy & Joel West & Helge Klapper & Markus Reitzig, 2018. "Surrendering control to gain advantage: Reconciling openness and the resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1704-1727, June.
    8. Thierry Rayna & Ludmila Striukova, 2021. "Assessing the effect of 3D printing technologies on entrepreneurship [Évaluer l'effet des technologies d'impression 3D sur l'entrepreneuriat]," Post-Print hal-04096075, HAL.
    9. Vladimiras Dolgopolovas & Valentina Dagiene, 2021. "On the Future of Computational Thinking Education: Moving beyond the Digital Agenda, a Discourse Analysis Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Baldwin, Carliss Y. & Bogers, Marcel L.A.M. & Kapoor, Rahul & West, Joel, 2024. "Focusing the ecosystem lens on innovation studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    11. Isaksson, Olov H.D. & Simeth, Markus & Seifert, Ralf W., 2016. "Knowledge spillovers in the supply chain: Evidence from the high tech sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 699-706.
    12. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    13. Simona Alfiero & Laura Broccardo & Massimo Cane & Alfredo Esposito, 2018. "High Performance Through Innovation Process Management in SMEs. Evidence from the Italian wine sector," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(3), pages 87-110.
    14. Caroline Danièle Mothe & Thuc Uyen Nguyen-Thi, 2017. "Persistent openness and environmental innovation: An empirical analysis of French manufacturing firms," Post-Print hal-01609129, HAL.
    15. Fu, Xiaolan, 2012. "How does openness affect the importance of incentives for innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 512-523.
    16. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    17. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.
    18. Bertschek, Irene & Kesler, Reinhold, 2022. "Let the user speak: Is feedback on Facebook a source of firms’ innovation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    19. Changbyung Yoon & Keeeun Lee & Byungun Yoon & Omar Toulan, 2017. "Typology and Success Factors of Collaboration for Sustainable Growth in the IT Service Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-20, November.
    20. Dolata, Ulrich, 2014. "Märkte und Macht der Internetkonzerne: Konzentration - Konkurrenz - Innovationsstrategien," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2014-04, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    open source product development; open source innovation; crowdsourcing; social product development;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-03395460. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.