10.10 Prosumers—Co-Producing Consumers
209
increasingly working hand in hand with collaborative projects brought about by the
newly emerging digital economy.
25
Note that “projects” as I have described them above are already in existence.
Open-source software projects, for example, are largely run by people who want
to use open-source components to develop own software more quickly, which they
then make available to everyone in exchange. Such “open innovation” is typically
built on a framework of “viral” open-source licenses, which encourage users to
contribute something in return for what they get for free. These software licenses
(such as the GNU General Public License) reward a culture of collaborative creation
(“co-creation”), reciprocity, and fair sharing.
26
This is fueled by the principle of “co-epetition”—a special form of competition
that goes along with cooperation. In the context of open-source development, the
GitHub platform has become particularly popular among software developers. The
platform shows who has contributed what, whereby it creates incentives to contribute.
Thus, everyone can benefit from the growing “ecosystem” of open-source software.
We must further pay attention to another fundamental change: as the Internet
connects citizens, customers and users, we see a trend towards more bottom-up participation in our socio-economic system. Apparently, it can be counterproductive to
engage in too much centralization and standardization without providing sufficiently
diverse opportunities for an array of countries, regions, and local communities with
widely differing interests, needs, weaknesses and strengths.
27 As systems become
more complex, it takes more local knowledge to satisfy the increasing diversity
of needs, which calls for more participation. Otherwise, complex socio-economic
systems will perform poorly or may even become unstable over time. Therefore,
let us now discuss the advantages and disadvantages of top-down and bottom-up
organization in more detail.
10.11 Top-Down Versus Bottom-Up Organization
Top-down organization is common in military organizations, administrations, and
many companies. The aim of this approach is to “command and control” so that
leaders are able to exert their power and get their wishes and decisions implemented.
The hierarchy inherent in such systems also makes it easier to establish a system of
accountability. Top-down organization, furthermore, enables rapid decision-making
25 Leadbeater [9], Ormerod [10].
26 This reflects the spirit of the other-regarding behavior discussed in a previous chapter and benefits
the entire system.
27 The current problems with the EURO currency in a large economic area with very different growth
rates, GDP per capita, and public debts in different European countries demonstrate this well.
209
increasingly working hand in hand with collaborative projects brought about by the
newly emerging digital economy.
25
Note that “projects” as I have described them above are already in existence.
Open-source software projects, for example, are largely run by people who want
to use open-source components to develop own software more quickly, which they
then make available to everyone in exchange. Such “open innovation” is typically
built on a framework of “viral” open-source licenses, which encourage users to
contribute something in return for what they get for free. These software licenses
(such as the GNU General Public License) reward a culture of collaborative creation
(“co-creation”), reciprocity, and fair sharing.
26
This is fueled by the principle of “co-epetition”—a special form of competition
that goes along with cooperation. In the context of open-source development, the
GitHub platform has become particularly popular among software developers. The
platform shows who has contributed what, whereby it creates incentives to contribute.
Thus, everyone can benefit from the growing “ecosystem” of open-source software.
We must further pay attention to another fundamental change: as the Internet
connects citizens, customers and users, we see a trend towards more bottom-up participation in our socio-economic system. Apparently, it can be counterproductive to
engage in too much centralization and standardization without providing sufficiently
diverse opportunities for an array of countries, regions, and local communities with
widely differing interests, needs, weaknesses and strengths.
27 As systems become
more complex, it takes more local knowledge to satisfy the increasing diversity
of needs, which calls for more participation. Otherwise, complex socio-economic
systems will perform poorly or may even become unstable over time. Therefore,
let us now discuss the advantages and disadvantages of top-down and bottom-up
organization in more detail.
10.11 Top-Down Versus Bottom-Up Organization
Top-down organization is common in military organizations, administrations, and
many companies. The aim of this approach is to “command and control” so that
leaders are able to exert their power and get their wishes and decisions implemented.
The hierarchy inherent in such systems also makes it easier to establish a system of
accountability. Top-down organization, furthermore, enables rapid decision-making
25 Leadbeater [9], Ormerod [10].
26 This reflects the spirit of the other-regarding behavior discussed in a previous chapter and benefits
the entire system.
27 The current problems with the EURO currency in a large economic area with very different growth
rates, GDP per capita, and public debts in different European countries demonstrate this well.