@article {863,
	title = {The Role of Participation Architecture in Growing Sponsored Open Source Communities},
	journal = {Industry \& Innovation},
	volume = {15},
	year = {2008},
	month = {4/2008},
	pages = {145 - 168},
	author = {Joel West and Siobhan O{\textquoteright}Mahony}
}
@article {flosswp191,
	title = {Hacking Alone? The Effects of Online and Offline Participation on Open Source Community Leadership},
	year = {2004},
	month = {September},
	abstract = {Research on computer mediated communication has examined how a lack of social presence affects participation, communication and leadership in online groups, but until recently, has not examined offline relations or emergent social structures. The few studies examining these issues have not been integrated with research on open source communities. Online communities producing open source software face even greater problems of governance than affinity or interest based online communities, as leadership responsibilities extend beyond mailing list management to managing release dates, public relations, and collaborations with firms. With data from one open source community{\textquoteright}s online and offline networks over three consecutive years, we assess factors affecting voting participation and leadership. We find that the more developers one has met face to face, the more likely one was to vote in a leadership election. Controlling for contributions of code, developers are more likely to hold a top leadership position when they participate more in online discussions. However, online participation in technical discussions did not affect leadership as much as occupying a structurally advantaged position in the community{\textquoteright}s social network. We conclude with theoretical implications that consider the dynamics of online and offline networks for governing distributed online communities.},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/omahonyferraro2.pdf},
	author = {Siobhan O{\textquoteright}Mahony}
}
@article {flosswp77,
	title = {Guarding the Commons: How Community Managed Software Projects Protect Their Work},
	journal = {Research Policy},
	volume = {32},
	year = {2003},
	note = {"Data was collected from three primary sources: 1) observation at project and user group meetings, technical presentations and conferences; 2) informant interviews; and 3) project data archived on the Internet that detailed project interactions and structural developments."

"Project data was collected from online archives and included documents such as: mission statements, charters, bylaws, meeting minutes, and mailing list archives."},
	month = {February},
	pages = {1179-1198},
	edition = {7},
	abstract = {Theorists often speculate why open source and free software project contributors give their work away. Although contributors make their work publicly available, they do not forfeit their rights to it. Community managed software projects protect their work by using several legal and normative tactics, which should not be conflated with a disregard for or neglect of intellectual property rights. These tactics allow a project?s intellectual property to be publicly and freely available and yet, governable. Exploration of this seemingly contradictory state may provide new insight into governance models for the management of digital intellectual property.},
	keywords = {Common Pool Resources, email, email archives, intellectual property, mailing list, open source, Public Goods, Software, Survey},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/rp-omahony.pdf},
	author = {Siobhan O{\textquoteright}Mahony}
}
@article {flosswp122,
	title = {Managing the Boundary of an {\textquoteright}Open{\textquoteright} Project},
	year = {2003},
	month = {October},
	abstract = {In the past ten years, the boundaries between public and open science and commercial research efforts have become more porous. Scholars have thus more critically examined ways in which these two institutional regimes intersect. Large open source software projects have also attracted commercial collaborators and now struggle to develop code in an open public environment that still protects their communal boundaries. This research applies a dynamic social network approach to understand how one community managed software project, Debian, develops a membership process. We examine the project{\textquoteright}s face-to-face social network during a five-year period (1997-2001) to see how changes in the social structure affect the evolution of membership mechanisms and the determination of gatekeepers. While the amount and importance of a contributor{\textquoteright}s work increases the probability that a contributor will become a gatekeeper, those more central in the social network are more likely to become gatekeepers and influence the membership process. A greater understanding of the mechanisms open projects use to manage their boundaries has critical implications for research and knowledge producing communities operating in pluralistic, open and distributed environments.},
	keywords = {debian, membership, social network analysis},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/omahonyferraro.pdf},
	author = {Siobhan O{\textquoteright}Mahony}
}
@unpublished {flosswp49,
	title = {The Emergence of a new commercial actor: community managed software projects (Please contact the author for the dissertation)},
	year = {2002},
	month = {June},
	abstract = {Institutional theory has matured to the point where we know a great deal about how institutions, once formed, are reproduced. We know less about how they are constructed. This study examines how social movements might inspire the creation of new organizing mechanisms. If new organizational forms result from recombination of existing elements, how might challenging and defending groups affect their construction? An inductive, ethnographic approach was used to examine interactions between community managed software projects from the free software and open source social movements (challengers) and established firms in the software industry (defenders). With interviews of seventy contributors and close examination of the practices used by four projects to manage their interactions with firms., I find that both community projects and firms made changes in their practices and form to better collaborate.},
	author = {Siobhan O{\textquoteright}Mahony}
}
