@conference {1256,
	title = {Analyzing Leadership Dynamics in Distributed Group Communication},
	booktitle = {2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2010)},
	year = {2010},
	note = {"Our analysis examines the communication patterns in two FLOSS development projects, Fire and Gaim"
"These data were imported into a database to allow automated analysis. The Fire data set includes about 1,800 events in the user email list, 7,800 messages in the developer venues, and 1,300 events in the combined trackers, spanning a period of 54 months. The significantly larger Gaim data set included over 41,000 events in the user forum, over 30,000 events in the developer venues, and about 20,000 events in the trackers, generated over 78 months."
"The dynamic network analysis was performed using a scientific workflow tool, Taverna Workbench"},
	pages = {1 - 10},
	publisher = {IEEE},
	organization = {IEEE},
	address = {Honolulu, Hawaii, USA},
	abstract = {We apply social network analysis (SNA) to examine the dynamics of leadership in distributed groups, specifically Free/Libre Open Source Software development projects, and its relation to group performance. Based on prior work on leadership in distributed groups, we identify leaders with those who make the highest level of contribution to the group and assess the degree of leadership by measuring centralization of communications. We compare the dynamics of leadership in two FLOSS projects, one more and one less effective. We find that in both projects, centralization was higher in developer-oriented communications venues than in user-oriented venues, suggesting higher degrees of leadership in developer venues. However, we do not find a consistent relation between centralization and effectiveness. We suggest that SNA can instead be useful for identifying interesting periods in the history of the project, e.g., periods where the leadership of the project is in transition.},
	keywords = {core, DYNAMICS, email, email archives, fire, flossmole, gaim, leadership, mailing list, project success, social network analysis, srda},
	isbn = {978-1-4244-5509-6},
	doi = {10.1109/HICSS.2010.62},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/07-06-02.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Andrea Wiggins and Howison, James}
}
@article {Crowston:2006a,
	title = {Hierarchy and centralization in Free and Open Source Software team communications},
	journal = {Knowledge, Technology \& Policy},
	volume = {18},
	number = {4},
	year = {2006},
	pages = {65{\textendash}85},
	abstract = {Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) development teams provide an interesting and convenient setting for studying distributed work. We begin by answering perhaps the most basic question: what is the social structure of these teams? Based on a social network analysis of interactions represented in 62,110 bug reports from 122 large and active projects, we find that some OSS teams are highly centralized, but contrary to expectation, others are not. Projects are mostly quite hierarchical on four measures of hierarchy, consistent with past research but contrary to the popular image of these projects. Furthermore, we find that the level of centralization is negatively correlated with project size, suggesting that larger projects become more modular. The paper makes a further methodological contribution by identifying appropriate analysis approaches for interaction data. We conclude by sketching directions for future research.},
	keywords = {apache, bug fixing, bug tracking, FLOSS, project success, savannah, social network analysis, sourceforge, team size, teams},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CrowstonHierarchyAndCentralization.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Howison, James}
}
@article {Crowston:2006,
	title = {Information systems success in Free and Open Source Software development: Theory and measures},
	journal = {Software Process{\textendash}Improvement and Practice},
	volume = {11},
	number = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {"we continue our examination of success measures using data from Sourceforge..."
"e chose the number of developers (assessed from the records of the project and from bug fixing logs), bug-fixing time, and popularity (assessed from the number of downloads and viewings of project Web pages, and inclusion in distributions). These measures were chosen because they span the reconsidered FLOSS development process discussed above, including inputs (number of developers), process (speed of bug fixing) and output (popularity)."},
	pages = {123{\textendash}148},
	abstract = {Information systems success is one of the most widely used dependent variables in information systems (IS) research, but research on Free/Libre and Open Source software (FLOSS) often fails to appropriately conceptualize this important concept. In this paper, we reconsider what success means within a FLOSS context. We first review existing models of IS success and success variables used in FLOSS research and assess them for their usefulness, practicality and fit to the FLOSS context. Then, drawing on a theoretical model of group effectiveness in the FLOSS development process, as well as an online discussion group with developers, we present additional concepts that are central to an appropriate understanding of success for FLOSS. In order to examine the practicality and validity of this conceptual scheme, the second half of our paper presents an empirical study that demonstrates its operationalization of the chosen measures and assesses their internal validity. We use data from SourceForge to measure the project{\textquoteright}s effectiveness in team building, the speed of the project at responding to bug reports and the project{\textquoteright}s popularity. We conclude by discussing the implications of this study for our proposed extension of IS success in the context of FLOSS development and highlight future directions for research.},
	keywords = {bug fixing, developers, downloads, FLOSS, flossmole, page views, popularity, project success, size, sourceforge, success, team size},
	doi = {10.1002/spip.259},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/CrowstonHowisonAnnabi2006.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Howison, James and Hala Annabi}
}
@conference {flosswp180,
	title = {Towards a Portfolio of FLOSS project Success Measures},
	booktitle = {Workshop on Open Source Software Engineering, International Conference on Software Engineering},
	year = {2004},
	month = {May},
	abstract = {Project success is one of the most widely used dependent variables in information systems research. However, conventional measures of project success are difficult to apply to Free/Libre Open Source Software projects. In this paper, we present an analysis of four measures of success applied to SourceForge projects: number of members of the extended development community, project activity, bug fixing time and number of downloads. We argue that these four measures provide different insights into the collaboration and control mechanisms of the projects.},
	keywords = {bug fixing, developers, downloads, project success, sourceforge, team, team size},
	attachments = {https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/crowston04towards.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Hala Annabi and Howison, James and Chengetai Masango}
}
