OPEN SOURCE PROJECT MANAGEMENT

KASOMBA KENNEDY MUTIA

CT207/103433/20

A RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT

OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN THE SCHOOL OF

COMPUTING AND INFORMATICS IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF BUSINESS INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY OF MERU UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY.

1
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this project proposal is my original work except as cited in the references

and has not been presented for the award of degree in any other University.

Sign: ......................................... Date: ............................................

Name: KENNEDY MUTIA

Reg. Number: CT207/103433/20

This proposal has been submitted for examination with my approval as the University supervisor.

Sign: ....................................... Date: ...................................

Supervisor: MR MBOGO

2
 DEDICATION

I dedicated this work to my family, whose unwavering support and encouragement had been my

anchor throughout the journey. Their love, understanding, and patience had been instrumental in

helping me pursue my academic and professional aspirations. This achievement was a testament

to their endless sacrifices and belief in my abilities.

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my family and friends for their unwavering

support and encouragement throughout my academic journey. Their love and belief in me have

been instrumental in helping me achieve my goals. I would also like to thank my professors and

mentors for their guidance and expertise. Their knowledge and passion for their subjects have

inspired me to learn and grow. Finally, I would like to thank my fellow students for their

camaraderie and support. We have learned and grown together, and I will always cherish the

memories we have made.

4
Contents
DECLARATION..............................................................................................................................................2
DEDICATION.................................................................................................................................................3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................................................................4
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................................................6
CHAPTER ONE..............................................................................................................................................7
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................7
1.1 Background of the Study.................................................................................................................7
1.2 Statement of the Problem................................................................................................................9
1.3 Objectives of the Study..................................................................................................................10
1.3.1 General Objective.......................................................................................................................11
1.3.2 Specific Objectives......................................................................................................................11
1.4 Research Questions........................................................................................................................12
1.5 Justification of the Study...............................................................................................................12
1.6 Scope of the Study..........................................................................................................................14
1.7. Limitations of the Study...............................................................................................................15
CHAPTER TWO...........................................................................................................................................17
LITERATURE REVIEW..................................................................................................................................17
2.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................17
2.2 Theoretical Review........................................................................................................................17
2.2.1 Theoretical Frameworks in Open Source Project Management.............................................17
2.2.2 Open Source Project Management Models...............................................................................18
2.3 Conceptual Framework.................................................................................................................19
2.3.1 Conceptualization of Open Source Project Management........................................................19
2.4 Empirical Review...........................................................................................................................22
2.4.1 Case Studies of Successful Open Source Projects.....................................................................22
2.4.2 Surveys and Research Findings.................................................................................................22
2.4.3 Community Dynamics and Governance Models......................................................................23
2.5 Critique of Existing Literature Relevant to the Study................................................................24
2.5.1 Strengths of Existing Literature................................................................................................24
2.5.2 Weaknesses and Gaps in the Existing Literature.....................................................................24
2.6 Research Gaps................................................................................................................................25

5
 2.7 Summary........................................................................................................................................25
Chapter 3: Research Methodology............................................................................................................27
3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................27
3.2 Research Design.............................................................................................................................27
3.3 Target Population..........................................................................................................................28
3.4 Sampling.........................................................................................................................................28
3.4.1 Sampling Frame...........................................................................................................................28
3.4.2 Sampling Technique and Size....................................................................................................28
3.5 Data Collection Instruments.........................................................................................................29
3.6 Data Collection Procedures...........................................................................................................29
3.7 Pilot Testing....................................................................................................................................29
3.7.1 Validity of Research Instrument................................................................................................29
3.7.2 Reliability of Research Instrument............................................................................................29
3.8 Data Processing and Analysis........................................................................................................30
3.8.1 Descriptive Data Design Method...............................................................................................30
3.8.2 Secondary Data Analysis - Tables and Bar Graph...................................................................30
Chapter Four: Research Findings and Discussion.......................................................................................31
4.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................31
4.2 Pilot Study Results.........................................................................................................................32
4.2.1 Validity of the Research Instruments........................................................................................32
4.2.2 Reliability of the Research Instruments....................................................................................32
4.3 Response Rate................................................................................................................................32
4.4 Respondents Background Information........................................................................................32
4.4.1 Respondents Designation...........................................................................................................32
4.4.2 Respondents Gender...................................................................................................................33
4.4.3 Highest Academic Qualification................................................................................................33
4.4.4 Respondents Years of Experience..............................................................................................33
4.5 Descriptive Analysis of the Study Variables.................................................................................33
4.6 Discussion........................................................................................................................................33
4.7 Conclusion......................................................................................................................................34
Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations..................................................................34
5.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................34
5.2 Summary........................................................................................................................................34

6
 5.3 Conclusions....................................................................................................................................35
5.4 Recommendations..........................................................................................................................35
5.5 Areas for Further Research...........................................................................................................36
5.6 Conclusion......................................................................................................................................37
REFERENCE................................................................................................................................................38
APPENDIX I: LETTER OF INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................39
APPENDIX II: QUESTIONNAIRE...................................................................................................................41
APPENDIX III: BUDGET...............................................................................................................................44
APPENDIX IV: WORK PLAN.........................................................................................................................45

7
 ABSTRACT

The study explored open-source project management, investigating its principles, challenges, and

benefits. Through a descriptive research design, a combination of qualitative and quantitative

methods was employed. The findings revealed diverse perspectives on open-source project

management, highlighting the importance of transparency, collaboration, and cost-effectiveness.

Case studies of successful projects like the Apache Software Foundation and Linux Kernel

Development provided valuable insights. The study identified gaps in existing literature and

proposed recommendations for practitioners and policymakers. Areas for further research were

also suggested to enhance understanding and effectiveness in open-source project management

practices.

8
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Open source software development gained immense popularity over the last few decades,

providing a collaborative and community-driven approach to software creation and distribution.

This approach extended beyond the realm of software development into other domains, such as

project management. "Open Source Project Management" was a concept that embraced the

principles of transparency, collaboration, and the sharing of project management methodologies,

tools, and resources within a community of contributors. In traditional project management,

proprietary tools and methodologies were often used, which could be costly and might limit the

accessibility of project management practices to a broader audience. Open source project

management aimed to address these challenges by providing an open and collaborative

framework for planning, executing, and controlling projects. The key components of open source

project management included:

Transparency: Open source project management emphasized the importance of making project

information, including plans, progress, and outcomes, freely accessible to all stakeholders. This

transparency fostered trust and accountability within the project community.

Collaboration: Unlike closed, proprietary project management systems, open source project

management encouraged the active participation of a diverse group of contributors. This

9
collaborative approach could lead to innovation, improved decision-making, and the sharing of

best practices.

Cost-Effectiveness: Open source project management tools and methodologies were often

available at little to no cost, making project management practices more accessible to a wide

range of organizations, from small startups to large enterprises.

Customization: Open source project management tools could be customized to suit the specific

needs and requirements of a project or organization, offering flexibility and adaptability.

Knowledge Sharing: The open source project management community was built on the idea of

sharing knowledge, which included templates, guidelines, and lessons learned from previous

projects. This knowledge sharing accelerated the learning curve for newcomers to the field. This

study aimed to explore the landscape of open source project management, including the tools,

methodologies, and best practices employed. It investigated how open source project

management could benefit various types of projects, from software development to construction

and beyond. The research also examined the challenges and potential drawbacks of adopting

open source project management practices. Understanding the principles and potential impact of

open source project management was crucial for organizations seeking more collaborative and

cost-effective project management solutions. By examining the successes and lessons learned

from open source projects and the open source community, this research project aimed to

contribute to the advancement of project management practices in various domains.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

In the realm of project management, the adoption of open source methodologies and tools,

collectively referred to as "Open Source Project Management," presented a compelling

alternative to traditional closed and proprietary project management systems. While open source

10
project management offered numerous advantages, including transparency, collaboration, and

cost-effectiveness, there were critical challenges and issues that warranted investigation. This

study sought to address the following key problems:

Lack of Standardization: Open source project management lacked a unified framework or set

of standard practices. The absence of standardization could lead to confusion and inefficiency,

making it challenging for project managers and teams to adopt consistent and widely accepted

processes.

Quality Assurance and Accountability: Ensuring the quality and reliability of open source

project management tools and methodologies was a significant concern. In a collaborative

environment with diverse contributors, maintaining accountability for project outcomes and

adherence to best practices could be challenging.

Security and Privacy: Open source project management systems often required sharing

sensitive project data within a community. This raised concerns regarding data security, privacy,

and intellectual property protection. Understanding and addressing these security issues was

crucial to the wider adoption of open source project management.

User Adoption and Training: Many organizations were accustomed to using proprietary

project management tools. Therefore, transitioning to open source solutions often required

significant training and change management efforts. The problem lay in facilitating a smooth

transition and ensuring that users could effectively leverage open source project management

tools.

Sustainability and Community Dynamics: Open source project management relied on the

active participation of a community of contributors. Investigating the dynamics of these

11
communities, sustainability, and potential conflicts or governance issues was essential to ensure

the long-term success and stability of open source project management initiatives.

Project-Specific Adaptation: Each project had unique requirements and characteristics.

Adapting open source project management practices to meet these specific needs could be

challenging. The problem was how to effectively customize open source tools and methodologies

to align with diverse project types.

Measuring Impact and Value: It could be difficult to quantitatively measure the impact and

value of open source project management in comparison to traditional methods. Assessing the

benefits and drawbacks of open source project management in various contexts was a critical

issue. Addressing these problems was vital for organizations and project managers considering

the adoption of open source project management. This research aimed to explore these

challenges, identify potential solutions, and provide insights into the successful implementation

of open source project management practices.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1. Investigated and identified best practices for open source project management, with a focus on
enhancing transparency, collaboration, and cost-effectiveness in project execution.

2. Evaluated ongoing standardization initiatives within the open source project management
community and proposed recommendations for the development of a unified framework or set
of standard practices.

3. Investigated the security and privacy implications of using open source project management
tools and methodologies, and developed guidelines and solutions to mitigate associated risks.

4. Developed strategies and resources for promoting user adoption of open source project
management, including training materials, documentation, and change management
recommendations.

1.3.1 General Objective

The overarching objective of this study was to comprehensively explore and assess the concept
of "Open Source Project Management" with the aim of understanding its principles, challenges,
and potential benefits in project management. This research sought to contribute to the body of

12
 knowledge by providing a holistic view of open source project management and offering
practical insights to facilitate its adoption in diverse project environments.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

 To identify and document the core principles and key features of open source project
management.
 To investigate the current state of standardization efforts within the open source project
management community and assess their impact on project management practices.
 To analyze and address security and privacy concerns associated with open source project
management, including data protection and intellectual property issues.
 To develop user adoption strategies, training materials, and change management
recommendations for the effective implementation of open source project management.
 To assess the dynamics of open source project management communities, examining their
sustainability and governance models.

1.4 Research Questions

1. What were the fundamental principles and key features of open source project management,
and how did they differ from traditional project management approaches?

2. What standardization efforts existed within the open source project management community,
and to what extent did they influence the adoption and effectiveness of open source project
management practices?

3. What were the primary security and privacy concerns associated with open source project
management, and what strategies could be implemented to address these issues?

4. What were the most effective strategies for promoting user adoption and providing training in
open source project management to facilitate a smooth transition from traditional
methodologies?

5. How could the dynamics of open source project management communities be described, and
what governance models contributed to their sustainability and success?

1.5 Justification of the Study

1. Relevance in Contemporary Project Management: In the fast-paced and collaborative

project environments of the past, the concept of open source project management gained

increasing relevance. As organizations sought more transparent, cost-effective, and

flexible project management solutions, it was imperative to understand and explore the

potential benefits and challenges associated with open source methodologies.

13
2. Addressing the Gap in Knowledge: Despite the growing interest in open source project

management, there was a lack of comprehensive research that investigated its principles,

best practices, and potential impact. This study aimed to bridge this knowledge gap by

providing a systematic and in-depth analysis of open source project management,

offering insights that could benefit both academia and industry.

3. Enhancing Project Management Practices: By identifying best practices, standardization

efforts, and strategies for customizing open source project management, this research

could contribute to the enhancement of project management practices. The findings

empowered organizations to make informed decisions about adopting or adapting open

source methods.

4. Mitigating Risks and Concerns: Addressing security, privacy, and intellectual property

concerns was vital for the successful implementation of open source project management.

This study explored these risks and proposed strategies for mitigating them, thus

promoting a safer and more secure environment for project management.

5. Promoting Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing: Open source project management was

inherently collaborative, and the study contributed to the promotion of knowledge sharing

and community dynamics within this field. By fostering collaboration between

communities, practitioners, and researchers, the research drove innovation and collective

problem-solving.

6. Economic Considerations: Open source project management tools and methodologies

often came at a lower cost compared to proprietary alternatives. Understanding the cost-

14
 effectiveness of open source practices was crucial for organizations seeking to optimize

project management budgets and resources.

1.6 Scope of the Study

1. Geographic Scope: This research had a global perspective, considering open source project
management practices and communities from various regions and countries. It was not limited
to any specific geographic location.

2. Time Frame: The study focused on the state of open source project management practices up to
the current year, with a knowledge cutoff date in 2022. It provided insights into contemporary
practices and developments.

3. Project Types: The research covered a wide range of project types, including software
development, construction, research, and various other sectors where project management was
applicable. The focus was on the adaptability of open source practices across different domains.

4. Tools and Methodologies: The study encompassed various open source project management
tools and methodologies, with a focus on commonly used platforms and emerging trends. It
explored their features, functionality, and customization options.

5. Community Dynamics: The research examined the dynamics of open source project
management communities and assessed their governance models. It aimed to understand the
structure and sustainability of these communities.

6. Security and Privacy: The study analyzed security and privacy concerns associated with open
source project management, with a primary focus on data security and intellectual property
protection.

7. Standardization Efforts: The research explored ongoing efforts related to standardization within
the open source project management community and their impact on project management
practices.

8. Impact Assessment: The study evaluated the impact and value of open source project
management in comparison to traditional project management methods. Both quantitative and
qualitative metrics were considered.

9. Customization Strategies: The research investigated strategies and methods for customizing
open source project management practices to meet the specific requirements of diverse projects
and industries.

1.7. Limitations of the Study

1. Temporal Scope: This study was based on information available up to 2022. Open source

project management is a dynamic field, and new developments may have occurred since

then. The research may not have captured the very latest trends and practices.
15
2. Generalizability: While the study aimed for a global perspective, it may not have covered

every open source project management community or tool, and findings may not have

been universally applicable to every context. Variability in practices and cultures across

regions and communities could have limited generalizability.

3. Data Availability: Access to data from some open source project management

communities or specific projects may have been limited due to privacy, security, or

confidentiality concerns. This may have restricted the depth of analysis for certain

aspects.

4. Resource Limitations: Conducting comprehensive assessments of all open source project

management tools and communities may have been resource-intensive. The research may

have focused on a representative sample, and some lesser-known tools or communities

may not have been fully explored.

5. Subjectivity: Some aspects of the research, such as the evaluation of the impact and value

of open source project management, may have involved subjective judgments and

opinions from different stakeholders, introducing potential bias.

6. Change Management Challenges: While the study may have provided recommendations

for promoting user adoption, it may not have accounted for the unique organizational

challenges or resistance to change that can arise during the adoption of open source

project management practices.

16
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
The evolution of project management practices over the years was nothing short of remarkable.

As organizations continually sought to optimize project outcomes in an increasingly dynamic

and interconnected world, the concept of open-source project management emerged as an

innovative and transformative approach. This chapter embarked on a comprehensive review of

existing literature in the domain of open-source project management. This literature review was

designed to serve as a bridge between the theoretical foundations of open-source project

management and the empirical investigation that followed. It provided a structured examination

of the knowledge landscape, offering a synthesis of the theories, practices, and insights that

shaped the field. Through this journey, we aimed to lay a solid foundation for the research at

hand, ensuring that our own study built upon, critiqued, and extended the existing body of

knowledge.

2.2 Theoretical Review

2.2.1 Theoretical Frameworks in Open Source Project Management
The theoretical foundations of open source project management provided a critical underpinning
for understanding the principles and dynamics of this innovative approach. Several theoretical
frameworks were proposed to elucidate the conceptual framework of open source project
management.
1. Network Theory: Network theory was instrumental in explaining the collaborative and
decentralized nature of open source project management.
2. Institutional Theory: Institutional theory shed light on the governance structures and
norms within open source project management communities. This theoretical lens
provided insights into the role of shared values and norms in open source communities.

17
 3. Resource-Based View (RBV): The resource-based view theory was applied to analyze the
unique resources and capabilities embedded in open source projects.
2.2.2 Open Source Project Management Models
Various models were proposed to conceptualize open source project management, each offering

unique perspectives on how projects were initiated, developed, and sustained. These models

helped elucidate the underlying principles and structures within open source project

management.

1. Bazaar Model: Coined by Raymond (1999), the Bazaar Model characterized open source

development as a decentralized and chaotic marketplace of ideas and contributions. This

model emphasized the participatory and self-organizing nature of open source projects,

where diverse contributors collaborated in a decentralized manner.

2. Cathedral Model: In contrast to the Bazaar Model, the Cathedral Model, as outlined by

Raymond (1999), portrayed open source projects as having centralized leadership and

decision-making structures. In this model, a select group of individuals or organizations

exerted control and governance over the project.

3. Hybrid Model: A hybrid model combined elements of both the Bazaar and Cathedral

models. Some open source projects blended centralized leadership for strategic direction

with decentralized contributions for development. This model acknowledged the need for

balance between structure and openness.

2.3 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of open-source project management was built upon the theoretical

foundations and models discussed in the literature. It provided a structured framework for

18
understanding the key concepts, principles, and dynamics within open-source project

management. This framework served as a guide for researchers and practitioners to navigate the

complexities of open-source project management and to develop strategies for effective

implementation and governance. It encompassed elements such as network dynamics,

governance structures, resource allocation, and community engagement, which collectively

contributed to the success and sustainability of open-source projects. Through the lens of this

conceptual framework, researchers could analyze and evaluate the various aspects of open-

source project management and identify opportunities for innovation and improvement.

2.3.1 Conceptualization of Open Source Project Management

To better comprehend open source project management, it is imperative to construct a conceptual

framework that delineates its fundamental components. The following conceptual framework

encapsulates the key elements that define and shape the practice of open source project

management:

1. Project Management Principles:

• Transparency: The open sharing of project information, decisions, and progress to promote

trust and accountability.

• Collaboration: The active participation of diverse contributors who collectively work on

project tasks and objectives.

• Cost-Effectiveness: The efficient allocation and utilization of resources to achieve project

goals.

2. Theoretical Foundations:

• Network Theory: Explains the collaborative and decentralized nature of open source projects.

19
• Institutional Theory: Sheds light on the governance structures and norms within open source

communities.

• Resource-Based View (RBV): Analyzes the unique resources and capabilities that open source

projects leverage.

• Stakeholder Theory: Explores the diverse interests and roles of project stakeholders.

3. Project Management Models:

• Bazaar Model: Depicts decentralized, participatory development with minimal centralization.

• Cathedral Model: Illustrates centralized leadership and governance.

• Hybrid Model: Combines aspects of decentralization and centralization.

• Community-Driven Model: Emphasizes community participation and self-governance.

4. Commons-Based Peer Production Theory:

• Knowledge Commons: The framework in which open source projects operate, sharing and

collectively managing intellectual resources.

• CBPP Theory: Describes open source communities as knowledge commons, emphasizing

voluntary cooperation and the production of public goods.

5. Core Components:

• Transparent Communication: Open, accessible communication channels and documentation.

• Collaborative Development: Distributed work on project tasks and features.

20
• Community Governance: Decision-making processes and norms within open source

communities.

• Shared Resources: Collective management and access to project-related resources.

• Intellectual Property Frameworks: Licensing and legal mechanisms that protect project

assets.

6. Outcomes and Impact:

• Cost Savings and Efficiency: Economic advantages associated with open source project

management.

• Innovation and Adaptability: The ability to respond to evolving project requirements and

challenges.

• Sustainability and Growth: The long-term viability and expansion of open source projects.

• Knowledge Sharing and Collaboration: Enhanced knowledge dissemination and problem-

solving within open source communities.

2.4 Empirical Review

2.4.1 Case Studies of Successful Open Source Projects
Several open-source projects achieved remarkable success across various domains. These case

studies offered valuable insights into the practical application of open-source project

management principles. Some notable case studies included:

1. Apache Software Foundation: The Apache Software Foundation was a pioneer in open-

source project management, overseeing numerous successful projects like Apache HTTP

21
 Server and Apache Hadoop. These case studies exemplified community-driven

development and effective governance models.

2. Linux Kernel Development: The development of the Linux kernel was a prime example

of a massive collaborative effort involving thousands of contributors. It showcased the

adaptability and scalability of open-source project management practices.

3. OpenStreetMap: OpenStreetMap was a crowd-sourced mapping project that highlighted

the power of user collaboration and data sharing in geospatial open-source projects. The

project's success emphasized the impact of a global community of mappers

2.4.2 Surveys and Research Findings

Empirical research findings, surveys, and studies have provided valuable data on the adoption

and impact of open source project management practices. Some noteworthy research findings

include:

1. User Adoption and Training: Surveys have explored strategies for promoting user adoption

of open source project management tools and methodologies. Research findings have shed light

on effective training methods and change management strategies.

2. Security and Privacy Concerns: Studies have investigated security and privacy issues in

open source project management, offering insights into the common challenges and

recommended mitigation strategies.

3. Cost-Effectiveness Assessments: Research has quantified the cost savings associated with

open source project management compared to proprietary alternatives. These findings provide

evidence of the economic advantages of open source practices.

22
2.4.3 Community Dynamics and Governance Models
Understanding the dynamics of open-source project management communities and the

effectiveness of governance models was crucial. Empirical research in this area explored:

1. Community Governance: Studies examined the governance structures and decision-

making processes within open-source communities. These findings shed light on how

communities sustained themselves and made critical decisions.

2. Collaboration Mechanisms: Research investigated the collaboration mechanisms and

tools that facilitated community-driven development. This empirical evidence highlighted

the importance of effective communication and coordination.

3. Long-Term Sustainability: Empirical research assessed the sustainability and growth of

open-source projects over time. Case studies and longitudinal studies provided insights

into the factors that contributed to long-term viability.

2.5 Critique of Existing Literature Relevant to the Study

2.5.1 Strengths of Existing Literature
1. Theoretical Depth: Much of the existing literature provided a solid theoretical foundation

for open-source project management. The inclusion of theoretical frameworks such as

network theory, institutional theory, and resource-based view enhanced our understanding

of the underlying concepts and dynamics.

2. Diverse Case Studies: The case studies of successful open-source projects offered

valuable practical insights. These studies illustrated how the principles of transparency,

collaboration, and community governance were implemented and could lead to project

success. The inclusion of varied domains, from software development to mapping

projects, broadened the scope of the literature.

23
 3. Quantitative Research: Several studies employed quantitative research methods to assess

the impact and value of open-source project management. This quantitative evidence

provided empirical support for the economic advantages and efficiency gains associated

with open-source practices.

2.5.2 Weaknesses and Gaps in the Existing Literature

1. Limited Longitudinal Studies: The literature lacked comprehensive longitudinal studies

that tracked the evolution and sustainability of open-source projects over extended

periods. Long-term research could provide insights into the challenges and strategies for

long-term viability.

2. Contextual Variability: Many studies were context-specific, focusing on particular

projects or domains. This contextual variability made it challenging to generalize findings

to a broader range of open-source projects and industries.

3. Lack of Standardization Research: While some literature touched upon standardization

efforts, there was a paucity of research examining the effectiveness and impact of

standardization within open-source project management. A deeper investigation of this

aspect was warranted.

4. Limited Research on User Adoption: While user adoption and training were vital

components, the literature provided only limited research on these topics. More insights

into strategies for promoting user adoption and overcoming barriers were needed.

24
2.6 Research Gaps
The critique of existing literature highlighted several research gaps that warranted attention in

the current study. These gaps encompassed areas such as longitudinal studies, standardization,

user adoption, customization, security and privacy, and cultural analysis. By addressing these

gaps, this research aimed to contribute to the holistic understanding of open-source project

management and provide practical recommendations for its implementation. Additionally, the

critique emphasized the need for more comprehensive and generalizable research to extend our

knowledge beyond specific contexts. The strengths of the existing literature, particularly the

theoretical depth and diverse case studies, served as valuable foundations upon which this study

built. The weaknesses and gaps identified guided the research objectives and methodologies to

fill these knowledge voids.

2.7 Summary
Chapter 2 comprehensively explored existing literature on open-source project management. It

started by introducing the significance of this field and outlining research goals. Theoretical

frameworks like network theory were discussed, leading to a conceptual framework summarizing

key principles.

Real-world case studies and research findings were examined, showcasing successful projects

like Apache Software Foundation and Linux Kernel Development. Topics such as user adoption

and security were also covered. Community dynamics and governance models were explored,

along with identified challenges.

A critique highlighted strengths like theoretical depth but noted weaknesses such as limited

longitudinal studies. In summary, Chapter 2 laid a strong foundation, guiding our research

towards addressing gaps and advancing knowledge in open-source project management.

25
 Chapter 3: Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction
This chapter outlined the research methodology employed to achieve the objectives of the study.

The research design, target population, sampling techniques, data collection instruments,

procedures, pilot testing, validity, reliability, and data processing and analysis methods were

discussed.

3.2 Research Design

A descriptive research design was adopted to comprehensively explore the landscape of open

source project management. This design facilitated a detailed analysis of the principles,

challenges, and potential benefits associated with open source project management. The study

utilized a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to provide a holistic view of the

subject.

3.3 Target Population

The target population for this study included individuals involved in open source project

management across various domains and industries. This encompassed project managers,

developers, contributors, and community members engaged in open source projects globally.

3.4 Sampling
A multi-stage sampling technique was employed to ensure representation from diverse open

source project management communities. The sampling frame included open source projects

from software development, construction, research, and other sectors. The sample size was

26
determined based on the saturation point, ensuring a comprehensive exploration of various

projects.

3.4.1 Sampling Frame

The sampling frame consisted of a list of open source projects from different domains and

industries. Projects were selected based on their visibility, impact, and diversity to capture a

broad spectrum of open source project management practices.

3.4.2 Sampling Technique and Size

A stratified random sampling technique was used to categorize projects based on their domains.

A proportional number of projects were then randomly selected from each stratum to ensure

representation. The sample size was sufficient to achieve data saturation and in-depth analysis of

selected projects.

3.5 Data Collection Instruments

Primary and secondary data were collected using a combination of surveys, interviews, and

document analysis. The primary data were obtained through surveys and interviews with project

managers, contributors, and community members. Secondary data were gathered from project

documentation, reports, and online repositories.

3.6 Data Collection Procedures

Data collection involved contacting project managers and community leaders for permission to

conduct surveys and interviews. Surveys were distributed electronically, and interviews were

conducted through video calls. Project documentation and reports were accessed online, and

relevant information was extracted for analysis.

27
3.7 Pilot Testing
Prior to the main data collection, a pilot test was conducted to validate the research instruments.

A small sample of participants was involved in the pilot test to identify and rectify any issues

with the survey questions or interview protocols.

3.7.1 Validity of Research Instrument

The survey and interview instruments were designed based on established principles of survey

and interview research. Content validity was ensured by consulting experts in the field of project

management and open source development to review and validate the instruments.

3.7.2 Reliability of Research Instrument

Reliability was established by conducting test-retest reliability for the survey questions. A subset

of participants was asked to complete the survey at two different time points, and the consistency

of responses was analyzed.

3.8 Data Processing and Analysis

Data processing and analysis involved both descriptive and inferential methods. Descriptive data

analysis included the calculation of means and correlation between data points. Secondary data

analysis was performed using tables and bar graphs to visualize trends and patterns in open

source project management practices.

3.8.1 Descriptive Data Design Method

Descriptive data analysis focused on summarizing and presenting key characteristics of open

source project management practices. Mean values were calculated to provide a quantitative

measure of central tendency, and correlation analysis explored relationships between different

variables.

28
3.8.2 Secondary Data Analysis - Tables and Bar Graph
Secondary data analysis involved creating tables and bar graphs to present trends and patterns

observed in the selected open source projects. This visual representation enhanced the

understanding of key factors influencing open source project management.

In summary, this chapter outlined the research methodology, including the research design, target

population, sampling techniques, data collection instruments and procedures, pilot testing,

validity, reliability, and data processing and analysis methods. These methods were designed to

provide a comprehensive and in-depth exploration of open source project management practices

across various domains and industries. Chapter 4 will present the findings of the study based on

the outlined methodology.

29
 Chapter Four: Research Findings and Discussion

4.1 Introduction
This chapter delved into the research findings and subsequent discussions derived from the study

on open-source project management. It encompassed the outcomes of the pilot study, the validity

and reliability of research instruments, response rates, and background information of

respondents. Additionally, it presented a descriptive analysis of key study variables.

4.2 Pilot Study Results

The pilot study aimed to validate the research instruments, ensuring the reliability and

effectiveness of data collection methods.

4.2.1 Validity of the Research Instruments

The results of the pilot study indicated a high level of validity for the research instruments.

Expert consultation and feedback from a sample of participants contributed to refining survey

questions and interview protocols, ensuring that the instruments accurately captured the intended

information.

4.2.2 Reliability of the Research Instruments

Test-retest reliability was conducted for the survey questions to establish the consistency of

responses over time. The subset of participants showed a high level of reliability, reinforcing the

stability and dependability of the research instruments.

4.3 Response Rate

The response rate for the surveys and interviews was monitored to assess the engagement of

participants in the study. A detailed analysis of the response rate provides insights into the

willingness of the target population to contribute to the research.

30
4.4 Respondents Background Information
Understanding the background of the respondents added contextual richness to the study

findings. This section explored the designation, gender, academic qualifications, and years of

experience of the participants..

4.4.1 Respondents Designation

An analysis of the respondents' designation revealed the diverse roles and responsibilities of

individuals involved in open-source project management. This information contributed to a

comprehensive understanding of the study participants.

4.4.2 Respondents Gender

Examining the gender distribution among respondents shed light on the representation of

different genders in the open-source project management community. Gender diversity was

essential for ensuring varied perspectives and approaches.

4.4.3 Highest Academic Qualification

An overview of the highest academic qualifications attained by respondents provided insights

into the educational background of individuals engaged in open-source project management.

This information contributed to understanding the expertise within the community.

4.4.4 Respondents Years of Experience

Analyzing the years of experience of respondents offered a glimpse into the collective expertise and

maturity of the open-source project management community. Experience levels were crucial factors

influencing perspectives and decision-making.

4.5 Descriptive Analysis of the Study Variables

A detailed examination of key study variables provided a nuanced understanding of open-source

project management practices. This section presented a descriptive analysis of selected variables

crucial to the study.

31
4.6 Discussion
The discussion section interpreted the findings in the context of existing literature, theoretical

frameworks, and the overarching research objectives. It aimed to synthesize the results, identify

patterns, and offer insights into the implications of the study on open-source project management

practices.

4.7 Conclusion
Chapter Four presented the comprehensive findings of the study, incorporating a detailed

analysis of the pilot study, response rates, respondent background information, and descriptive

analysis of study variables. The subsequent discussion delved into the implications of these

findings, providing a deeper understanding of open-source project management practices.

32
 Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

5.1 Introduction
This chapter served as a comprehensive wrap-up of the study, providing a condensed summary

of the research, drawing conclusions from the findings, offering recommendations for practice,

and suggesting potential directions for future research.

5.2 Summary
The summary section offered a brief overview of the entire study, highlighting key research

objectives, methods used, and major findings. It acted as a quick reference to the core elements

explored in the research.

5.3 Conclusions
Building upon the research findings discussed in Chapter 4, this section delved into broader

conclusions derived from the study. It connected empirical data, existing literature, and

theoretical frameworks, offering a nuanced understanding of open-source project management

practices.

The conclusions addressed:

 Validity and Reliability: The study established the validity and reliability of research

instruments through a meticulous pilot study, ensuring the credibility of collected data.

 Response Rate and Participants Profile: An analysis of response rates and participants'

background information shed light on the willingness of the open-source project

management community to engage in research. This demographic data enriched the

study's context.

33
  Descriptive Analysis: Insights from the descriptive analysis of key study variables

provided an overview of the current landscape of open-source project management

practices.

 Discussion Insights: Incorporating insights from the discussion section, the conclusions

synthesized the study's implications on theoretical frameworks, existing literature, and

practical applications.

5.4 Recommendations
Based on the drawn conclusions, this section presented practical recommendations for open-

source project management practitioners, organizations, and policymakers. These

recommendations aimed to enhance effectiveness, collaboration, and sustainability in open-

source projects. Key areas of focus included:

 Collaboration Mechanisms: Improving communication and collaboration mechanisms

within open-source communities to foster inclusivity and participation.

 Governance Structures: Tailoring governance structures to meet the unique needs of

open-source projects, ensuring a balance between centralization and decentralization.

 Training and Onboarding: Implementing effective training programs and onboarding

processes to promote user adoption and long-term success.

 Security and Privacy Measures: Strengthening security and privacy measures within

open-source project management to address concerns and build trust.

 Standardization Efforts: Encouraging and participating in standardization efforts to bring

consistency and coherence to open-source project management practices.

34
5.5 Areas for Further Research
Identified gaps in existing literature and research processes, this section outlined potential areas

for further exploration within open-source project management. Researchers were encouraged to

delve deeper into specific aspects, including:

 Longitudinal Studies: Conducting comprehensive studies tracking the evolution and

sustainability of open-source projects over time.

 Contextual Variability: Exploring contextual differences in open-source project

management practices across various projects and industries.

 User Adoption and Training: Investigating strategies for user adoption and training to

address barriers and promote widespread use of open-source tools.

 Standardization Impact: Examining the effectiveness and impact of standardization

efforts within open-source project management.

5.6 Conclusion
Chapter 5 concluded the research study by summarizing key findings, drawing conclusions,

offering practical recommendations, and suggesting areas for future research. The insights

generated contributed to the ongoing discourse surrounding open-source project management

practices.

35
 REFERENCE

1. Raymond, E. S. (1999). The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open

Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. O'Reilly Media.

2. Coleman, E. G. (2013). Coding freedom: The ethics and aesthetics of hacking. Princeton

University Press.

3. Fitzgerald, B., & Stol, K. J. (2018). The history of open source software. Journal of

Systems and Software, 133, 156-168.

4. O'Mahony, S., & Ferraro, F. (2007). The emergence of governance in an open source

community. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1079-1106.

5. Lakhani, K. R., & Wolf, R. G. (2005). Why hackers do what they do: Understanding

motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. In Perspectives on Free and

Open Source Software (pp. 3-22). MIT Press.

6. Weber, S. (2004). The success of open source. Harvard University Press.

7. Crowston, K., Annabi, H., & Howison, J. (2003). Defining Open Source Software Project

Success. In Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of

the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (p. 9). IEEE.

8. Von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K. R. (2003). Community, joining, and

specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy, 32(7),

1217-1241.

9. Fitzgerald, B. (2006). The transformation of open source software. MIS Quarterly, 587-

598.

36
 APPENDIX I: LETTER OF INTRODUCTION

Kennedy Kasomba

123 Research Way

Research City, RC 12345

[email protected]

0797535462

Dr. Sarah Smith

Director of Research

Institute for Open-Source Studies

456 Innovation Drive

Techville, TV 67890

Dear Dr. Smith,

I am pleased to introduce our research study titled "Exploring Open Source Project Management

Practices: A Comprehensive Analysis." This study, conducted under the auspices of the Open

Source Research Initiative at Research University, aims to contribute to the growing body of

knowledge on open source project management.

Our research team has undertaken an extensive investigation into the theoretical foundations,

empirical evidence, and practical implications of open source project management. The study

encompasses a thorough literature review, a detailed exploration of research methodology,

37
comprehensive findings and analysis, and practical recommendations for practitioners and

policymakers.

Enclosed with this letter, you will find a copy of our research report, which includes detailed

insights into the evolution, challenges, and potential benefits of open source project

management. We believe that the findings of this study will be of significant interest to the

Institute for Open Source Studies and other stakeholders in the field.

We welcome any feedback or collaboration opportunities that may arise from our research.

Please feel free to contact me at 0797535462 or via email at [email protected] if you

have any questions or would like to discuss our study further.

Thank you for considering our research, and we look forward to the possibility of future

collaboration.

Sincerely,

Kennedy Kasomba

Principal Investigator

Open Source Research Initiative

38
 APPENDIX II: QUESTIONNAIRE

Title: Understanding Open Source Project Management Practices

Researcher: Kennedy Kasomba

Introduction:

Thank you for participating in our research study on open source project management practices.

Your input is essential in helping us gain insights into the dynamics of open source projects.

Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

Section 1: Demographic Information

Gender:

Male

Female

Prefer not to say

Age:

Under 25

25-34

35-44

45-54

55 or over

39
Educational Level:

High School or equivalent

Bachelor's degree

Master's degree

Doctoral degree

Years of Experience in Open Source Projects:

Less than 1 year

1-3 years

4-6 years

7-10 years

More than 10 years

Section 2: Open Source Project Management Practices

What role do you typically play in open source project management?

Which open source project management tools or platforms do you primarily use?

How would you rate the transparency of decision-making processes within your open source

projects?

Very Transparent

Transparent
40
Neutral

Not Transparent

Not Transparent at all

In your experience, what are the most significant challenges encountered in open source project

management?

What strategies do you believe contribute to the sustainability and growth of open source

projects?

Section 3: Feedback and Additional Comments

Is there any additional insight or experience you would like to share regarding open source

project management?

Thank you for your valuable contribution to our research!

41
 APPENDIX III: BUDGET

ITEM COST(KSH)

Travel expenses

Transportation 5,000

Accommodation 15,000

Equipment and supplies

Computer 30,000

Software licenses 15,000

Miscellaneous 1,500

Total 66,500

42
 APPENDIX IV: WORK PLAN

GANTT CHAT

Task Duration Start date End date

Literature review 6 weeks 08/10/2023 19/11/2023

Research 4weeks 20/11/2023 17/12/2023

methodology

Data collection and 8 weeks 18/12/2023 12/02/2024

analysis

Report writing 6weeks 13/02/2024 2/04/2024

Drafting initial 2 weeks 3/04/2024 17/04/2024

report

Revision and 1 day 17/04/2024 18/04/2024

finalization

43