This is the P2PU Archive. If you want the current site, go to www.p2pu.org!
Prototyping (the) Innovation Ecology
Commons-based Peer-Production of Physical Goods Is there Room for a Hybrid Innovation Ecology?
This is a paper I presented at the Free Culture Research Conference in Berlin, 8-9 October 2010.
"This paper examines how in commons-based peer-production of physical goods a hybrid, private-collective innovation ecology is developing. Using the Fab Lab community as the field of investigation, it collates three studies: a survey of Fab Lab business models, an interview study asking Fab Lab managers and assistants about the pain and pride of their Fab Lab, and a selection of cases describing innovation in Fab Lab projects. The paper finds that there is a desire and intention to establish a hybrid innovation ecology in the Fab Lab community, but that Fab Labs have not yet established business models that would e.g. replicate the known models from open source software. However, the studies indicated the possibility of such models. The paper finally puts the results in perspective to the free fabbing ecology, and the wider context of peer-production of physical goods."
Comments
I am managing an intranet
I am managing an intranet system for a student association (the Penn Biotech Group) and am facing the same challenge as Fab Labs managers about whether to design the system to create a community or to provide tools (e.g. file repository, project management system). From my experience (fed by surveys and discussions), the community building was unsatisfactory because the tools provided were not appealing enough. Members preferred to use Dropbox and Google Doc instead of the project management system we had set up (Open Atrium). Therefore, even if the goal is to create a community to support innovation, the first step is to provide useful/appealing tools. I think this may apply to Fab Labs as well. So, instead of referring to a dichotomy between the two goals, I would rather say that the main focus of Fab Lab managers may reflect how advanced is their Fab Lab. Testing this hypothesis may require to create an indicator of advancement for Fab Labs (e.g. based on metrics such as the age of the Fab Lab, the members registration rate and turn over, and the appreciation of managers), then to plot the goal as a function of this advancement indicator. What do you think?
This is an interesting
This is an interesting thought, and basically I would agree with your line of argument. However, there is a significant difference between online tools for file sharing etc. and digitally controlled machines (laser cutter, CNC routers). For the former, plenty of options are readily available to virtually anybody, for the latter, being able to access the infrastructure (tools) is already a big advantage. Fab Labs are providing the (hopefully: right) tools as a first step, so we're really concerned with the second one.
PS. Regarding project management systems -- I've yet to come across something that would qualify as a useful/appealing tool.
You are making a good point
You are making a good point here: tools offered by Fab Labs are not usually readily available, to the same extent, in other ways. There are a few alternatives, however, such as buying your own tools or using services such as Ponoko. Ultimately, Fab Labs with different models may also compete with each other. For instance, I started to look in Philadelphia and there seem to be different Fab Labs/Hacker Spaces with quite different models/philosophy; I don't know to what extent they are collaborating or competing with each other, though.
Concerning project management systems, after trying a few, Alfresco seems the best option to me, in a majority of cases. If you want to try it out, it is pretty easy to install using the Bitnami installer.