Skip to main content

IP Modularity in Software Ecosystems: How SugarCRM’s IP and Business Model Shape Its Product Architecture

  • Conference paper
  • 2338 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 114))

Abstract

We provide a case study of the concept of “IP modularity,” analyzing the case of SugarCRM. The modular architecture of this platform software is aligned with its intellectual property structure in such a way that the firm can derive, from the same code tree, an open source community version and a proprietary version. The software’s IP modular structure also facilitates the development of complements by distributed and anonymous complementors and simplifies downstream customizations, thus enhancing the platform’s attractiveness. We find that SugarCRM implements IP modularity on three different levels of the architectural hierarchy, in some cases down to the source code level. Our study thus extends the concept of IP modularity to comprise the notion of hierarchy levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Henkel, J., Baldwin, C.Y.: Modularity for Value Appropriation - How to Draw the Boundaries of Intellectual Property. Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper, No. 11-054 (2010), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1340445

  2. Baldwin, C.Y., Henkel, J.: The Impact of Modularity on Intellectual Property and Value Appropriation. Harvard Business School Finance Working Paper No. 12-040 (2011), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1971203

  3. Boudreau, K.: Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control. Management Science 56(10), 1849–1872 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gawer, A., Cusumano, M.A.: Platform leadership. How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco drive industry innovation. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  5. West, J.: How Open Is Open Enough? Melding Proprietary and Open Source Platform Strategies. Research Policy 32(7), 1259–1285 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gawer, A., Henderson, R.: Platform Owner Entry and Innovation in Complementary Markets: Evidence from Intel. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 16(1), 1–34 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Baldwin, C.Y., Woodard, C.J.: The Architecture of Platforms: A Unified View. In: Gawer, A. (ed.) Platforms, Markets and Innovation, pp. 19–44. Elgar, Cheltenham, UK (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cusumano, M.A.: Staying power. Six enduring principles for managing strategy and innovation in an uncertain world (lessons from Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Google, Toyota and more). Oxford University Press, Oxford (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Eisenmann, T.R., Parker, G., van Alstyne, M.: Opening Platforms: How, When and Why? In: Gawer, A. (ed.) Platforms, Markets and Innovation, Cheltenham, U.K. and Northampton, pp. 131–162. Elgar, Mass (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hecker, F.: Setting up shop: The business of open-source software. IEEE Software 16(1), 45–51 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Raymond, E.S.: The cathedral and the bazaar. Musings on Linux and Open Source by an accidental revolutionary, Rev. edn. O’Reilly, Beijing (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bonaccorsi, A., Giannangeli, S., Rossi, C.: Entry Strategies Under Competing Standards: Hybrid Business Models in the Open Source Software Industry. Management Science 52(7), 1085–1098 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lindman, J., Rossi, M., Puustell, A.: Matching Open Source Software Licenses with Corresponding Business Models. IEEE Software 28(4), 31–35 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Riehle, D.: The single-vendor commercial open course business model. Information Systems and e-Business Management 10(1), 5–17 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Edmondson, A.C., McManus, S.E.: Methodological fit in management field research. Academy of Management Review 32(4), 1155–1179 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Eisenhardt, K.M.: Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review 14(4), 532–550 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Band, W.: The Forrester WaveTM: CRM Suites For Midsized Organizations. In: Q2 2010, Cambridge, Mass (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dow Jones Company Report - SugarCRM Inc. (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Waltl, J., Henkel, J., Baldwin, C.Y. (2012). IP Modularity in Software Ecosystems: How SugarCRM’s IP and Business Model Shape Its Product Architecture. In: Cusumano, M.A., Iyer, B., Venkatraman, N. (eds) Software Business. ICSOB 2012. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 114. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30746-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30746-1_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-30745-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-30746-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics