Developer experience · Empirical study of firm–community relationships

Understanding Organization and Open Source Community Relations

ACM conference proceedings · 2017

Georg J.P. Link, Debora Jeske

Original paper ↗

Summary

Studies how organizational involvement shapes relationships with OSS communities.

For your marketing

Possible founder application

Create an explicit boundary/liaison function between company goals and community norms.

Reported result

What the study found

Studies how organizational involvement shapes relationships with OSS communities.

Research question

What the authors investigated

How does the study’s stated design explain its reported outcome in this setting?

Design

Empirical study of firm–community relationships

Sample and setting

Organizations and OSS communities; exact sample unavailable on abstract page.

Scope and transfer

Limitations to keep in view

Abstract/page evidence limits detailed sample and external-validity assessment.

Research sources

abstract_only

Study strength

3.5/5 Abstract-level evidence is useful for framing questions; verify full methods before transfer.

How this was assessed

The 1–5 evidence-check score is a practical reading aid, not a formal peer review or a probability that a conclusion is true. It combines design strength (2 points), sample reporting (1), comparison/control clarity (1), and how much of the paper could be checked (1). Access affects how confidently this directory can assess a study, not the study's underlying quality. Blinding is reported separately because it is not relevant to every design.

Design transparency · 2/2

Based on the reported study design in the retrieved source.

Sample and setting · 1/1

The sample context is stated; a numerical count is preserved only when reported.

Outcome clarity · 1/1

The finding is summarized from publisher or article metadata.

Access for checking · 0.5/1

Only abstract or bibliographic access was confirmed.

Double-blind? The retrieved publisher record does not establish whether participants or outcome assessors were blinded.