Sampson, RR, et al. SPARC: a multi-institutional integrated web based research management system. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings 2013; 2013: 230. eCollection 2013.
Glenn, JL, Sampson, RR. Developing an institution-wide web-based research request and preliminary budget development system. Research Management Review 2011; 18(2): 39–57.
Obeid, JS, et al. Sustainability considerations for clinical and translational research informatics infrastructure. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science 2018; 2(5): 267–275. doi:10.1017/cts.2018.332
Raymond, ES. The cathedral and the bazaar. First Monday 1998; 3(2). doi:10.5210/fm.v3i2.578
Dingsøyr, T, et al. A decade of agile methodologies: towards explaining agile software development. Journal of Systems and Software 2012; 85(6): 1213–1221.
Nerur, S, et al. Towards an understanding of the conceptual underpinnings of agile development methodologies. In: Dingsøyr, T, Dyba, T, Moe, NB, eds. Agile Software Development: Current Research and Future Directions. Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 2010. 15–29.
Slack Technologies. Slack; 2019. Retrieved from https://slack.com/. Accessed April 21, 2019.
Paré, G, et al. Clinicians’ perceptions of organizational readiness for change in the context of clinical information system projects: insights from two cross-sectional surveys. Implementation Science 2011; 6(15).
Schulte, M, DBA, FACHE, CPHIMS, eds. Go-Live: Smart Strategies from Davies Award-Winning EHR Implementations. Chicago, IL: HIMSS; 20
Ehls, D. Open source project collapse - sources and patterns of failure. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hilton Waikoloa Village, Hawaii: IEEE; 2017. 5327–5336.
O’Reilly, T. Lessons from open-source software development. Communications of the ACM 1999; 42(4): 32–37.
Sullivan, KJ, et al. The structure and value of modularity in software design. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 2001; 26(5): 99.
Haff, G. How Open Source Ate Software: Understand the Open Source Movement and So Much More. New York, NY: Apress, 2018.
Sorkun, MF, Furlan, A. Product and organizational modularity: a contingent view of the mirroring hypothesis. European Management Review 2016; 14(2): 205–224.
Conway, ME. How do committees invent? Datamation 1968; 14(4): 28–31.
MacCormack, A, Baldwin, C, Rusnak, J. Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: a test of the “mirroring” hypothesis. Research Policy 2012; 41(8): 1309–1324.
Henderson, RM, Clark, KB. Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly 1990; 35(1): 9.
Peng, G, Mu, J. Do modular products lead to modular organisations? Evidence from open source software development. International Journal of Production Research 2018; 56(20): 6719–6733.
Weick, KE. Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly 1976; 21(1): 1.
Bonaccorsi, A, Rossi, C. Why open source software can succeed. Research Policy 2003; 32(7): 1243–1258.
Baldwin, CY, Clark, KB. The architecture of participation: does code architecture mitigate free riding in the open source development model? Management Science 2006; 52(7): 1116–1127.
Lakhani, K, Wolf, RG. Why hackers do what they do: understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. SSRN Electronic Journal 2003. doi:10.2139/ssrn.443040
Hars, A, Ou, S. Working for free? Motivations for participating in open-source projects. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 2002; 6(3): 25–39.