Conflicts and the governance model of Free Software
Author: | Stefan Merten |
---|---|
Date: | 2010-03-20, Virt3C, Hull |
Organization: | Projekt Oekonux |
Organization: | www.oekonux.org |
Peer production and Free Software
Peer production
- Production process
- Featuring external and internal openness
- Based on Selbstentfaltung
- In short: Having fun individually...
- ...while maintaining a relationship to society
- Selbstentfaltung merges individual well-being with societal needs
- Selbstentfaltung is an important precondition for peer production
- Expressions of Selbstentfaltung
- Contributions from volunteers
- No alienated structural force
Peer production is a new mode of production
Free Software and governance
- Producing software is complexity everywhere
- Every project has lots and lots of details, aspects, dependencies, tasks, priorities
- Big projects have lots and lots of contributions in various forms, contributors, specialists, stakeholders, timing considerations
- There are lots and lots of Free Software projects
Free Software needs governance or chaos would result
The governance model of Free Software
Governance related aspects in key features
- Production process
- Production as a goal
- Leveraging diversity of specialists
- External openness
- Practical and juridical availability of product
- Transparency of projects
- Internal openness
- General openness for contributions from all sides
- Selection of contributions
A governance model must meet lots of requirements
Cornerstones of the interior governance model
- Selbstentfaltung of producers
- Need for governance to prevent chaos
- Lots of requirements to meet
Under these conditions maintainership emerges
Maintainership
Key features of maintainership
- Maintainership == non-alienated leadership
- I.e.: Leadership in duty of the project
- Maintainership process == modified consensus
- Consensus-oriented decision making is the rule
- But: maintainer may cut the Gordian knot
- Self-appointment of maintainers
- Acceptance by community
- Maintainers are also volunteers
- Often: The founders of the project
- Often: No formal declaration of maintainership
- Non-political approach
- Not: "It should be this way"
- Instead: "It works best this way"
- The governance model emerges from the mode of production
Selbstentfaltung and commitment
- No alienated force bonds volunteers
- Result: Volunteers can not be commanded
- Usually they self-select tasks they execute
- Key question: Why does a project stay together?
- Volunteers are committed to the goal of the project
- All volunteers are interested in the goal of the project
- The individual reasons for this may be different
- Their own interest makes volunteers commit to the project
- Following own interests is part of Selbstentfaltung
- Maintainer is committed to the project goals, too
- This guarantees non-alienated leadership
All contributors are committed to the project goal
Why maintainership works
- Power of maintainer is balanced by volunteering
- Bad maintainers chase away important volunteers
- A maintainer without volunteers is pointless
- Volunteers need maintainer
- To help prevent chaos
- Maintainer fulfills a special role in the project
- Like anyone else...
A system of built-in checks and balances
Consensus as governance method
A way to make decisions
- Short definition: Nobody needs(!) to object
- Not: Unanimity
A cultural technique
- Rather unknown in democratic societies
- Each participant is very powerful
- Not everyone is good in handling this power carefully
Shapes the process of working together
- Participation by definition
- When nobody needs to object at least nobody is against a decision
- Longer discussions analyze a problem fully
Consensus handles conflicts implicitly
Wrap up
Summary
- Volunteers bonded by commitment to project goals
- Project goals "align" volunteers
- Consensus shapes the process
- Maintainership is a special role helping the process
Humans are not the wolves of humans
Thank you!
- More: http://www.oekonux.org/
- Contact: smerten@oekonux.de
- Questions? Comments?