Ask any four people what they think about outsourcing and there will be four different answers. Though outsourcing and offshoring are slightly different concepts - outsourcing can be domestic while offshoring is understood as outsourcing moved overseas - the two are increasingly blended in discussions these days and were usually approached as one entity in the panel conversation. At the Cyberposium 2004 panel ""The Outsourcing Revolution,"" however, the views of three seasoned managers and one MIT professor fell into general alignment: They like it. They believe it is a powerful force for good in the future of business.
One type of online community that has experienced unprecedented growth since the word open source was coined in the spring of 1998, are open source software communities. An open source software project faces even greater problems of governance than typical online communities, as leaders have responsibilities that extend beyond mailing list and account management to managing release dates, representing the project to the public and collaborating with firms. This research paper from Harvard Business School examines the face-to-face network of an open source community that began online and, ten years later, still operates primarily in cyberspace: the Debian Linux distribution project.
For many companies, traditional outsourcing has led to significant cost savings and has improved the bottom line. Some companies have discovered even greater returns are possible and are using their global partners to drive top-line revenue with innovative new products, faster time-to-market, and entrance into new markets. This shift, from traditional outsourcing to global collaboration, has become a competitive advantage for these leaders and is likely over time to become a competitive necessity for all.
Mixed duopoly refers, in this paper, to the interactions between a not-for-profit competitor and a for-profit competitor. While this formalization is motivated by the case of Linux vs. Windows that is described below, asymmetry with respect to profit maximization also seems focal in the sense of representing the most obvious modification to the standard assumption of symmetric profit maximization. Specifically, it is assumed that the not-for-profit player prices its product at zero (or at marginal cost) and that the for-profit player must take that commitment as given in making its own pricing decisions.