@proceedings {2010,
	title = {Analyzing Leadership Dynamics in Distributed Group Communication},
	year = {2010},
	address = {Kauai, HI, 5{\textendash}8 January},
	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 = {FLOSS, Leadership},
	issn = {0361-1434 },
	doi = {10.1109/HICSS.2010.62},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/07-06-02.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Wiggins, Andrea and James Howison}
}
@article {2010,
	title = {The under-appreciated role of stigmergic coordination in software development},
	year = {2010},
	abstract = {<p>Coordination in software development teams has been a topic of perennial interest in empirical software engineering research. The vast majority of this literature has drawn on a conceptual separation between work and coordination mechanisms, separate from the work itself, which enable groups to achieve coordination. Traditional recommendations and software methods focused on planning: using analysis to predict and manage dependencies. Empirical research has demonstrated the limits of this approach, showing that many important dependencies are emergent and pointing to the persistent importance of explicit discussion to managing these dependencies as they arise. Drawing on work in Computer-Supported Collaborative Work and building from an analogy to collaboration amongst insects (stigmergy), we argue that the work product itself plays an under-appreciated role in helping software developers manage dependencies as they arise. This short paper presents the conceptual argument with empirical illustrations and explains why this mechanism would have significant implications for Software Engineering coordination research. We discuss issues in marshaling clear positive evidence, arguing that these issues are responsible, in part, for the under-consideration of this mechanism in software engineering and outlining research strategies which may overcome these issues.</p>},
	keywords = {Coordination, FLOSS, Stigmergy},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/stigmergy-short.pdf},
	author = {Bolici, Francesco and James Howison and Kevin Crowston}
}
@conference {Bolici:2009,
	title = {Coordination without discussion? Socio-technical congruence and Stigmergy in Free and Open Source Software projects},
	booktitle = {2nd International Workshop on Socio-Technical Congruence, ICSE},
	year = {2009},
	month = {19 May},
	address = {Vancouver, Canada},
	keywords = {Coordination, FLOSS},
	url = {http://docs.google.com/View?id=dhncd3jd_405fzt842gv},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/Coordination\%20without\%20discussion\%3F\%20Socio-technical\%20congruence.pdf},
	author = {Bolici, Francesco and James Howison and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {Li:2008a,
	title = {Asynchronous Decision-Making in Distributed Teams (Poster)},
	year = {2008},
	month = {8{\textendash}12 November},
	address = {San Diego, CA},
	keywords = {Decision-Making, FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/CSCW2008Poster11x17Draft.pdf},
	author = {Li, Qing and Heckman, Robert and Allen, Eileen E. and Kevin Crowston and Eseryel, U. Yeliz and James Howison and Wiggins, Andrea}
}
@proceedings {Howison:2008,
	title = {e{R}esearch workflows for studying free and open source software development},
	year = {2008},
	note = {Slides from the presentation at the Oxford eResearch Conference of lessons learned in replicating research in eResearch workflows.},
	address = {Milan, Italy, 7-10 September},
	abstract = {This paper proposes a demonstration of eResearch workflow tools as a model for the research community studying free and open source software and its development. For purposes of background and justification, the paper first introduces eResearch as increasingly practiced in fields such as astrophysics and biology, then contrasts the practice of research on free and open source software. After outlining the suitable public data sources the paper introduces a class of tools known as scientific workflow frameworks, specifically focusing on one---Taverna---and introducing its features. To further explain the tool a complete workflow used for original research on FLOSS is described and the agenda for the live demonstration is outlined.
},
	keywords = {eResearch, FLOSS, Workflow},
	doi = {10.1007/978-0-387-09684-1_39},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/eResearchWorkflows.pdf},
	author = {James Howison and Wiggins, Andrea and Kevin Crowston}
}
@proceedings {,
	title = {eSocialScience for Free/Libre Open Source Software researchers},
	year = {2008},
	address = {Manchester, UK, 18-20 June},
	abstract = {This abstract presents a case study of the potential application of eScience tools and practices for the social science research community studying Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) development practices. We first describe the practice of research on FLOSS to motivate the need for eScience. After outlining suitable public data sources, we describe our initial efforts to introduce eScience tools for FLOSS research, potential obstacles and how the use of such tools might affect the practice of research in this field.},
	keywords = {eScience, FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/NCeSS2008CrowstonHowisonWiggins.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and James Howison and Wiggins, Andrea}
}
@proceedings {Scialdone:2008,
	title = {Group Maintenance in Technology-Supported Distributed Teams},
	year = {2008},
	address = {Anaheim, CA, 9-13 August},
	abstract = {Are geographically-distributed teams which exhibit high levels of group maintenance between members successful? We answer this through content analysis of emails from two Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) teams. Our results illustrate that the groups utilize low levels of organizational citizenship behaviors and high levels of positive politeness actions.},
	keywords = {FLOSS, Group Maintenance},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/GroupMaintenance.pdf},
	author = {Scialdone, Michael J. and Li, Na and James Howison and Heckman, Robert and Kevin Crowston}
}
@proceedings {Wiggins:2008a,
	title = {Social dynamics of FLOSS team communication across channels},
	year = {2008},
	pages = {131-142},
	publisher = {Springer Boston},
	address = {Milan, Italy, 7-10 September},
	abstract = {This paper extends prior investigation into the social dynamics of free and open source (FLOSS) teams by examining the methodological questions arising from research using social network analysis on open source projects. We evaluate the validity of data sampling by examining dynamics of communication centralization, which vary across multiple communication channels. We also introduce a method for intensity-based smoothing in dynamic social network analysis.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	isbn = {978-0-387-09683-4},
	issn = {1571-5736 (Print) 1861-2288 (Online)},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/DSNAWigginsIFIP.pdf},
	author = {Wiggins, Andrea and James Howison and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {Howison:2008a,
	title = {Towards a data and workflow collaboratory for research on Free and Open Source Software and its development (Poster)},
	year = {2008},
	address = {Los Angeles, CA},
	keywords = {eScience, FLOSS, Workflow},
	author = {James Howison and Squire, Megan and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {Howison:2007,
	title = {Building a collaboratory for research on open source software development (Poster)},
	year = {2007},
	address = {Ann Arbor, MI},
	keywords = {eScience, FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/Howison_eSocSciPoster-small.pdf},
	author = {James Howison and Squire, Megan and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {2007,
	title = {A proposed data and analysis archive for research on Free and Open Source Software and its development (Poster)},
	year = {2007},
	address = {Ann Arbor, MI},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	author = {James Howison and Squire, Megan and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {2007,
	title = {A proposed data and analysis archive for research on Free and Open Source Software and its development (Poster)},
	year = {2007},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	author = {James Howison and Squire, Megan and Kevin Crowston}
}
@article {Crowston:2007,
	title = {The role of face-to-face meetings in technology-supported self-organizing distributed teams},
	journal = {IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications},
	volume = {50},
	number = {3},
	year = {2007},
	pages = {185{\textendash}203},
	abstract = {We examine the role of face-to-face meetings in the context of technology-supported self-organizing distributed or virtual teams, specifically Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) development teams. Based on a qualitative inductive analysis of data from interviews and observations at FLOSS conferences, we identify a variety of settings in which developers meet face-to-face, activities performed in these settings and benefits obtained. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, FLOSS developers generally do not meet face-to-face until the project is well under way. An additional benefit of face-to-face meetings is time away from a regular job and speed of interaction for certain kinds of tasks.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	doi = {10.1109/TPC.2007.902654},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/070122.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and James Howison and Masango, Chengetai and Eseryel, U. Yeliz}
}
@proceedings {Crowston:2006b,
	title = {Core and periphery in Free/Libre and Open Source software team communications},
	year = {2006},
	address = {Kaua{\textquoteright}i, Hawai{\textquoteright}i, January},
	abstract = {The concept of the core group of developers is important and often discussed in empirical studies of FLOSS projects. This paper examines the question, {\textquotedblleft}how does one empirically distinguish the core?{\textquotedblright} Being able to identify the core members of a FLOSS development project is important because many of the processes necessary for successful projects likely involve core members differently than peripheral members, so analyses that mix the two groups will likely yield invalid results. 
We compare 3 analysis approaches to identify the core: the named list of developers, a Bradford{\textquoteright}s law analysis that takes as the core the most frequent contributors and a social network analysis of the interaction pattern that identifies the core in a core-and-periphery structure. We apply these measures to the interactions around bug fixing for 116 SourceForge projects. The 3 techniques identify different individuals as core members; examination of which individuals are identified leads to suggestions for refining the measures. All 3 measures though suggest that the core of FLOSS projects is a small fraction of the total number of contributors.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/CoreAndPeripheryInFreeLibre.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Kangning Wei and Li, Qing and James Howison}
}
@proceedings {Heckman:2006b,
	title = {Emergent decision-making practices in technology-supported self-organizing distributed teams},
	year = {2006},
	address = {Milwaukee, WI, 10{\textendash}13 Dec},
	abstract = {We seek to identify work practices that make technology-supported self-organizing distributed (or virtual) teams (TSSODT for short) effective in producing outputs satisfactory to their sponsors, meeting the needs of their members and continuing to function. A particularly important practice for team effectiveness is decision making: are the right decisions made at the right time to get the work done in a way that satisfies team sponsors, keeps contributors happy and engaged, and enables continued team success? In this research-in-progress paper, we report on an inductive qualitative analysis of 120 decision episodes taken by 2 Free/libre Open Source Software development teams. Our analysis revealed differences in decision-making practices that seem to be related to differences in overall team effectiveness.},
	keywords = {Decision-Making, FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/Emergent\%20Decision\%20Making\%20Practices\%20In\%20Technology\%20Supported\%20Self\%20O.pdf},
	author = {Heckman, Robert and Kevin Crowston and Li, Qing and Allen, Eileen E. and Eseryel, U. Yeliz and James Howison and Kangning Wei}
}
@article {Howison:2006,
	title = {FLOSSmole: A collaborative repository for FLOSS research data and analyses},
	journal = {International Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering},
	volume = {1},
	number = {3},
	year = {2006},
	pages = {17{\textendash}26},
	abstract = {This paper introduces and expands on previous work on a collaborative project, called FLOSSmole (formerly OSSmole), designed to gather, share and store comparable data and analyses of free and open source software development for academic research. The project draws on the ongoing collection and analysis efforts of many research groups, reducing duplication, and promoting compatibility both across sources of FLOSS data and across research groups and analyses. The paper outlines current difficulties with the current typical quantitative FLOSS research process and uses these to develop requirements and presents the design of the system.},
	keywords = {FLOSSmole},
	issn = {1554-1045 },
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/FLOSSmole.pdf},
	author = {James Howison and Conklin, Megan S. and Kevin Crowston}
}
@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 = {FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/HierarchyAndCentralization.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and James Howison}
}
@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},
	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 = {FLOSS, Success},
	doi = {10.1002/spip.259},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/InformationSystemsSuccessInFree.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and James Howison and Annabi, Hala}
}
@conference {Li:2006,
	title = {Language and power in self-organizing distributed teams},
	booktitle = {OCIS Division, Academy of Management Conference},
	year = {2006},
	address = {Atlanta, GA},
	abstract = {In this paper, a comparative case study is conducted to explore the way power is expressed and exercised through language use in distributed or virtual teams. Our research questions are {\textquotedblleft}how is power expressed in online interactions in self-organizing distributed teams, in a context without formal authority or hierarchy?{\textquotedblright} and {\textquotedblleft}What effects do expressions of power have on team outcomes?{\textquotedblright} To fully understand the role of power in self-organizing teams, we apply an input-process-output model on two open source projects-one successful and the other less successful. Two set of codes (source of power and power mechanism) are drawn from the data, and different power patterns interestingly show up between them. The findings lead us to speculate that strong, centralized leadership, the assertive exercise of power, and direct language may contribute to effectiveness in FLOSS teams. And the relevant conclusions and suggestions are provided for further research.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/LanguageAndPowerInSelf-organizing.pdf},
	author = {Li, Qing and Kevin Crowston and Heckman, Robert and James Howison}
}
@proceedings {Howison:2006sd,
	title = {Social dynamics of free and open source team communications},
	year = {2006},
	pages = {319-330},
	address = {Lake Como, Italy, 8-9 June},
	abstract = {This paper furthers inquiry into the social structure of free and open source software (FLOSS) teams by undertaking social network analysis across time. Contrary to expectations, we confirmed earlier findings of a wide distribution of centralizations even when examining the networks over time. The paper also provides empirical evidence that while change at the center of FLOSS projects is relatively uncommon, participation across the project communities is highly skewed, with many participants appearing for only one period. Surprisingly, large project teams are not more likely to undergo change at their centers.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/SocialDynamics.pdf},
	author = {James Howison and Inoue, Keisuke and Kevin Crowston}
}
@proceedings {Crowston:2005,
	title = {Coordination of Free/Libre Open Source Software development},
	year = {2005},
	address = {Las Vegas, NV, USA, December},
	abstract = {The apparent success of free/libre open source software (FLOSS) development projects such as Linux, Apache, and many others has raised the question, what lessons from FLOSS development can be transferred to mainstream software development? In this paper, we use coordination theory to analyze coordination mechanisms in FLOSS development and compare our analysis with existing literature on coordination in proprietary software development. We examined developer interaction data from three active and successful FLOSS projects and used content analysis to identify the coordination mechanisms used by the participants. We found that there were similarities between the FLOSS groups and the reported practices of the proprietary project in the coordination mechanisms used to manage task-task dependencies. However, we found clear differences in the coordination mechanisms used to manage task-actor dependencies. While published descriptions of proprietary software development involved an elaborate system to locate the developer who owned the relevant piece of code, we found that {\textquotedblleft}self-assignment{\textquotedblright} was the most common mechanism across three FLOSS projects. This coordination mechanism is consistent with expectations for distributed and largely volunteer teams. We conclude by discussing whether these emergent practices can be usefully transferred to mainstream practice and indicating directions for future research.},
	keywords = {Coordination, FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/Coordination\%20of\%20Free\%20Libre\%20Open\%20Source\%20Software\%20Development.pdf , https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/CoordinationFreeLibreOSSDevSlides.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Kangning Wei and Li, Qing and Eseryel, U. Yeliz and James Howison}
}
@conference {Crowston:2005b,
	title = {Face-to-face interactions in self-organizing distributed teams},
	booktitle = {Academy of Management Conference},
	year = {2005},
	address = {Honolulu, HI},
	abstract = {We explore the role of face-to-face meetings in the life of distributed teams using data from Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) development teams. Such distributed teams are part of many organizations{\textquoteright} new vision of management in the 21st century. Practitioner research has suggested the need for face-to-face meetings when a team is formed, but few studies have considered the role of face-to-face meetings during a team{\textquoteright}s life. Based on a qualitative inductive analysis of data from interviews and observations at FLOSS conferences, we identify a variety of settings in which FLOSS developers meet face-to-face, activities performed in these settings and benefits obtained. Contrary to prior research, we find that FLOSS developers generally do not meet until the project is well under way. We also find that an additional benefit of face-to-face meetings is time away from a regular job. We conclude by noting limitations in our data collection due to a focus on core developers in large projects and with directions for further research.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/FaceToFace\%20Interactions.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and James Howison and Masango, Chengetai and Eseryel, U. Yeliz}
}
@article {Crowston:2005c,
	title = {The social structure of Free and Open Source Software development},
	journal = {First Monday},
	volume = {10},
	number = {2},
	year = {2005},
	note = {First Monday, Special Issue $\#$2: Open Source {\textemdash} 3 October 2005
The social structure of free and open source software development (originally published in Volume 10, Number 2, February 2005)},
	abstract = {Metaphors, such as the Cathedral and Bazaar, used to describe the organization of FLOSS projects typically place them in sharp contrast to proprietary development by emphasizing FLOSS{\textquoteright}s distinctive social and communications structures. But what do we really know about the communication patterns of FLOSS projects? How generalizable are the projects that have been studied? Is there consistency across FLOSS projects? Questioning the assumption of distinctiveness is important because practitioner{\textendash}advocates from within the FLOSS community rely on features of social structure to describe and account for some of the advantages of FLOSS production.

To address this question, we examined 120 project teams from SourceForge, representing a wide range of FLOSS project types, for their communications centralization as revealed in the interactions in the bug tracking system. We found that FLOSS development teams vary widely in their communications centralization, from projects completely centered on one developer to projects that are highly decentralized and exhibit a distributed pattern of conversation between developers and active users.

We suggest, therefore, that it is wrong to assume that FLOSS projects are distinguished by a particular social structure merely because they are FLOSS. Our findings suggest that FLOSS projects might have to work hard to achieve the expected development advantages which have been assumed to flow from "going open." In addition, the variation in communications structure across projects means that communications centralization is useful for comparisons between FLOSS teams. We found that larger FLOSS teams tend to have more decentralized communication patterns, a finding that suggests interesting avenues for further research examining, for example, the relationship between communications structure and code modularity.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	url = {http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1207/1127},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/Social\%20structure\%20of\%20Free\%20and\%20Open\%20Source\%20Software\%20development.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and James Howison}
}
@conference {2004,
	title = {Effective work practices for software engineering},
	booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2004 ACM workshop on Interdisciplinary software engineering research (WISER {\textquoteright}04)},
	year = {2004},
	pages = {18},
	publisher = {ACM Press},
	organization = {ACM Press},
	address = {Newport Beach, CA, USA},
	abstract = {We review the literature on Free/Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) development and on software development, distributed work and teams more generally to develop a theoretical model to explain the performance of FLOSS teams. The proposed model is based on Hackman{\textquoteright}s [34] model of
effectiveness of work teams, with coordination theory [52] and collective mind [79] to extend Hackman{\textquoteright}s model by elaborating team practices relevant to effectiveness in software development. We propose a set of propositions to guide further research.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	isbn = {1581139888},
	doi = {10.1145/1029997.1030003},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/p18-crowston.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Annabi, Hala and James Howison and Masango, Chengetai}
}
@proceedings {Crowston:2003c,
	title = {Defining Open Source Software project success},
	year = {2003},
	address = {Seattle, WA, December},
	abstract = {Information systems success is one of the most widely used dependent variables in information systems research. In this paper, we identify a range of measures that can be used to assess the success of Open Source Software (OSS) projects. We identify measures based on a review of the literature, a consideration of the OSS development process and an analysis of the opinions of OSS developers. For each measure, we provide examples of how they might be used in a study of OSS development.},
	keywords = {FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/icis2003success.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and Annabi, Hala and James Howison}
}
@conference {Crowston:2003e,
	title = {The social structure of Open Source Software development teams},
	booktitle = {The IFIP 8.2 Working Group on Information Systems in Organizations Organizations and Society in Information Systems (OASIS) Workshop},
	year = {2003},
	address = {Seattle, WA},
	abstract = {Open Source Software 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. 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 = {FLOSS},
	attachments = {https://crowston.syr.edu./sites/crowston.syr.edu/files/icis2003sna.pdf},
	author = {Kevin Crowston and James Howison}
}
