Field-Level Dynamics and the Gradual Disruption of the 3D Printing Community

Part of the Contributions to Management Science book series (MANAGEMENT SC.)


This chapter discusses the insights of my empirical research in conceptual and theoretical terms. With regard to the institutional entanglements that shape the 3D printing field and the corresponding conditions for entrepreneurial action, I emphasize the interfaces between different layers of social order. Additionally, I reconsider the essential differences between the exemplary case of open source software and the empirically observed context of open source hardware. In this regard, the matter of materiality turns out to be a crucial variable in determining the means and ends for community-based innovation. Moreover, the physical transformation of commons-based knowledge into tangible open source hardware devices like 3D printers generates multiple opportunities for entrepreneurship and thus heats up the disruptive tendencies associated with the dilemma of entrepreneurship.


Community-based Innovation Open Source Principles RepRap Community MakerBot RepRap Project 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Barley SR, Tolbert PS (1997) Institutionalization and structuration: studying the links between action and institution. Organ Stud 18(1):93–117. doi: 10.1177/017084069701800106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benkler Y (2006) The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom. Yale University Press, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourdieu P, Wacquant L (1992) An invitation to reflexive sociology. Polity Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowyer A (2006b) The self-replicating rapid prototyper – manufacturing for the masses. Keynote given to the Seventh National Conference on Rapid Design, Prototyping & Manufacturing (Centre for Rapid Design and Manufacture in High Wycombe, June 2006). Accessed 5 May 2016
  5. Dahlander L (2007) Penguin in a new suit: a tale of how de novo entrants emerged to harness free and open source software communities. Ind Corp Chang 16(5):913–943. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtm026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fitzgerald B (2006a) The transformation of open source software. MIS Q 30(3):587–598Google Scholar
  7. Fligstein N, McAdam D (2012) A theory of fields. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gartner (2013) Gartner’s 2013 hype cycle for emerging technologies maps out evolving relationship between humans and machines. Accessed 5 May 2016
  9. Hess C, Ostrom E (2003) Ideas, artifacts, and facilities: information as a common-pool resource. Law Contemp Probl 66(1/2):111–145Google Scholar
  10. Sarason Y, Dean T, Dillard JF (2006) Entrepreneurship as the nexus of individual and opportunity: a structuration view. J Bus Ventur 21(3):286–305. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Scott WR (2001) Institutions and organizations. SAGE, Los Angeles, CAGoogle Scholar
  12. Vance A(2010) 3-D printing is spurring a manufacturing revolution. The New York Times, September 13. Accessed 5 May 2016

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technische UniversitätBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations