Team 29 Caine Pan, Kevin Qiao, Lorah Chong, Manman Lai, Yushi Xian October – April 2010 Sponsored...

The Business Case for Open Standards and Methodologies

Implications for MIKE2.0 and how to establish a successful open source methodology

Team 29Caine Pan, Kevin Qiao, Lorah Chong, Manman Lai, Yushi Xian October – April 2010

Sponsored and supported by BearingPoint

Market research◦ Case study: TOGAF, Mozilla, JBoss

Literature review

Findings from primary research◦ Survey 1 – Motivation of online contribution◦ Survey 2 – MIKE2.0 web satisfaction Online & face to face

interview on potential adoption◦ Survey 3 – Online & face to face interview on potential

adoption

Recommendations

Our Presentation: An Overview

• IDC study : worldwide revenue from open source software will expand at an estimated compound annual growth rate of 22.4%, with revenues approaching $8.1 billion by 2013.

• an increase in OSS acceptance by enterprise customers IBM, Sun, Dell and HewlettPackard, are introducing more enterprise customers to open source

• Hybrid business models are becoming more prevalent among vendors. E.g: Closedsource vendors are offering more OSS solutions OSS vendors are offering both open source and proprietary solutions

Open Source Market Trend

a new emerging trend for many open source developers

1) provide for potential adopters a wide range of complementary services (e.g. technical supports)

2) provide monetary rewards for the development by shifting the value from licensing agreements to additional services such as packaging, consultancy, maintenance and training.

New Hybrid Models

In 2003, the for-profit Moodle Services (moodle.com) was formed to provide commercial service to support the non-profit Moodle.org.

The Moodle software remained freely available.

Commercial entities would be - listed as official providers -share a percentage of their Moodle-related income with Moodle has preserved the open source development of Moodle while allowing for further innovation as money can be poured back into the product

Case of Moodle

Currently there are in excess of 140,000 open source projects on the net

based on the Optaros’ open source catalogue 2007 which contains a list of 262 projects that matches its enterprise ready benchmark

Open Source Catalogue

ProductFirst Public Release Year

Current Version Description / URL License Type Governance

Structure Support Success Factors Achievements

Plone 2001 3.3.4

Comprehensive content and document management solution based on the Python language and running on the Zope Applications Server http://plone.org

GPL Community Hybrid Prof / Community

• Security• Extensibility• High usability and

flexibility• Active community• legal backing from

the council of the Software Freedom Law Center

Plone's development team has also been ranked in the top 2% of the largest open source communities. (http://www.i-kno.net/technology/plone-cms)

Typo3 1997 4.4

Widely used Content Management System (CMS) offering full flexibility and extendibility. Implemented in PHP http://typo3.org

GPL Community Flat Community• Flexibility• Safety• User-friendliness

TYPO3 has been used in over 300,000 websites around the world. Its users include Philips, EDS, Volkswagen, General Electric, Stanford University, and more.

Alfresco 2005 3.2

Standards compliant document management application (sort of a lightweight Documentum) evolving into a comprehensive ECM solution over the coming releases. The software is developed by former Documentum and Interwoven employees and based on a modern Java stack (Spring/Hibernate/Java Faces, etc.) http://www.alfresco.com

LGPL Community Hybrid Prof / Community

• Ease to use• Functionality• Community support• Easy for

Collaboration• Open standard based

(JAVA)

The 2009 Open Source CMS Market Share Report described Alfresco as a leading Java-based open source web content management system

32% market share

Main adopters: • Dairy farm group • Ministry of Defence (UK MOD) • Department of Social Security (UK DSS)

Case study: TOGAF

What it does well…

Strong leadership power The Open Group was created to put an end to the Unix wars in the

early 1990s technique based on U.S. Department of Defense Technical Architecture For Information Management (TAFIM).

was founded with a sound base

Open and diversified community includes several sub-forums such as Architecture Forum; Enterprise Management Forum; and, Platform Forum, etc.

Any members can contribute

Case study: TOGAF (con’t)

High transparency of standard development process to all members and third parties

The Open Group Standard Process Flow

Idea for Standard

Develop Draft Standard

Formal Company ReviewAnd

Ballot

Approve Standard

Publish Approved Standard

Principles Resources

Forum/WG operations

Forum/WG operations

Technical Procedures

Technical Procedures Technical

Procedures

Technical Procedures

The methodologies have to be well founded and raised to professionalism “…it’s not just TOGAF. It’s not just a case of having a framework, a method, or a way of helping organizations do enterprise architecture. We’re also concerned with raising the level of professionalism,” said Allen Brown, president and CEO of The Open Group

Always look at new areas and improve usability As limited by the format of TOGAF 9 in hard copy, PDF, and HTMLreleased an open source plug-in tool “TOGAF Customizer” based on the Eclipse Process Framework in 2009

Case study: TOGAF (con’t)

Difficulties in early development period

(not enough contributor, project leader quit….)

Attracted institutional users(HP, Oracle, Sun Microsystems)

Increase in participating(documentation improved, Development tools and tools refined)

Mozilla FireFox - Development

Goal: community in a structured and transparent way Structure:

Project team Non-Member

Lead

Developer

Issue Tracking: keep track of all requests for new features, bug reports and tasks that need to be completed,

JBoss- Organizational Structure

By submitting a patch

1. Do not give up. More contributors would join the project alone with community development.

2. It would be helpful to attract some big industry players to adopt the open source methodology.

3. Developers need extensive support from community administration.

What we can learn?

THE BENEFITS OF OPEN SOURCE

MOTIVATIONS FOR ONLINE CONTRIBUTION

ORGANISATIONAL ADOPTION

ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE OF OPEN SOURCE

OPEN STANDARD

INTRODUCTION OF OPEN SOUCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES

Key findings literature

National Computing Centre in the UK:

The benefit of open source

Low Cost – especially in recent economic downturn (need sufficient in-house resource)

User-driven and transparent approach (freedom to share the work with others)

The benefit of using open source for IM is similar to the general benefit of open source.

THE BENEFIT OF OPEN SOURCE

The benefit of open source

“Why should thousands of top-notch programmers contribute freely to the provision of a public good?”

Intrinsic motivation - inherent satisfactions (fun, altruism, obligation to contribute) instead of their separable consequence

Extrinsic motivation - immediate or delayed benefits (salary, bonus or signaling) generated from participating into projects

MOTIVATIONS FOR ONLINE CONTRIBUTION

Obligation/community-based

Enjoyment-based

Altruism

Gift-giving

Self-effectiveness

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION

Signaling

User needs

Human capital

Motivation differences – content Vs. software

Extrinsic motivation

Open Standard ≠ Open Source Definition by the Wheeler (2006):

Open Standard

Four major assessment approaches:

1) Open source maturity model (Capgemini)

2) Open source maturity model (Navica)

3) Methodology of qualification and selection of open source software (Atos Origin) - QSOS

4) Open business readiness rating (Carnegie Mellon West & Intel) - OpenBRR

Open Source Assessment Methodologies

Open source assessment methodology (MIKE2.0)

Intrinsic Motivation: Feel competency and accomplishment

Survey 1:Motivation for online contribution

Contr

ibuti

ng t

o a

n o

pen s

ourc

e

pro

ject

is f

un:

Collabora

tion g

ives m

e a

chance t

o d

o t

he jobs I f

eel I

do t

he b

est:

Part

icip

ati

ng in a

n o

pen s

ourc

e

com

munit

y g

ives m

e a

feeling

of

accom

plishm

ent:

Part

icip

ati

ng in a

n o

pen s

ourc

e

com

munit

y g

ives m

e a

feeling

of

com

pete

nce:

I ra

te m

y p

art

icip

ati

on a

s a

n

import

ant

acti

vit

y f

or

myself

Seekin

g/P

rovid

ing a

dvic

e

Contributing to an open source project is fun:

Collaboration gives me a

chance to do the jobs I feel I

do the best:

Participating in an open source

community gives me a feel-ing of accom-

plishment:

Participating in an open source

community gives me a feel-ing of compet-

ence:

I rate my parti-cipation as an

important activ-ity for myself

Seeking/Provid-ing advice

4.10

4.20

4.30

4.40

4.50

4.60

4.70

4.80

4.90

Extrinsic Motivation: Learning and self-promotion instead of monetary

rewards

Experience from an open source project raises my skill level ...

I will make money from my participation in an open source pro...

Participating in an open source project makes me more marke...

Participating in an open source project displays the value of m...

Participating in an open source projects signals my abilities t...

I will sell products related to the project I participate in.

I will sell customization services related to the project I partici...

Part

icip

ati

ng in a

n o

pen s

ourc

e p

roje

ct

dis

pla

ys t

he v

alu

e o

f m

y info

rmati

on.

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00

Motivation for online contribution

Personal Needs: Hope communities could actually solve their

problems

Motivation for online contribution

I alw

ays u

se o

pen

source c

om

munit

ies

apart f

rom

work.

The c

om

munit

y is c

rit

-

ical fo

r m

y w

ork.

I am

not s

atis

fied w

ith

exis

tin

g s

oft

ware o

r

the r

equir

ed s

oft

ware

does n

ot e

xis

t.

It is h

ard f

or c

om

-

mercia

l soft

ware t

o

meet m

y e

ver c

han

-

gin

g n

eeds.

By p

artic

ipatin

g,

the

com

munit

y p

rovid

es

functio

nality t

hat

matches m

y u

niq

ue

and s

pecifi

c n

eeds

Bein

g a

ble

to fi

x p

rob

-

lem

s t

hrough c

ollabor

-

atio

n w

ithin

the c

om

-

munit

y is o

ne o

f the

great a

dvantages o

f

open s

ource

soft

ware/m

ethodolo

gy.

I always use open source communit-ies apart

from work.

The com-

munity is critical for my work.

I am not sat-isfied with existing

software or the required

software does not ex-

ist.

It is hard for commercial software to meet my

ever chan-ging needs.

By particip-ating, the

community provides

functionality that

matches my unique and

specific needs

Being able to fix prob-

lems through col-laboration within the

community is one of the

great ad-vantages of open source

software/methodo-

logy.

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Altruism Helping others and be helped

Motivation for online contributionI don't

care

about

money.

You c

an a

lways t

rust

an o

pen s

ourc

e p

ar

-

ticip

ant.

Recognit

ion f

rom

oth

ers

is m

y g

reate

st

rew

ard

.

By investi

ng e

ffort

s, I

can m

ake t

he r

esult

-

ing s

olu

tion p

ublicly

avaia

ble

wit

h t

he

help

fro

m o

ther

pro

-

gra

mm

ers

.

Open s

ourc

e p

art

i-

cip

ants

should

help

each o

ther

out.

I do n

ot

min

d m

akin

g

any s

acri

fices.

I deeply

enjo

y h

elp

-

ing o

thers

.

Open s

ourc

e p

art

i-

cip

ants

are

a b

ig f

am

-

ily.

I am

pro

ud t

o b

e p

art

of

the O

pen S

ourc

e

Com

munit

y.

I don't care about

money.

You can always trust an

open source par-

ticipant.

Recognition from others

is my greatest reward.

By investing efforts, I can

make the resulting solution publicly avaiable with the

help from other pro-grammers.

Open source participants should help each other

out.

I do not mind mak-ing any sac-

rifices.

I deeply en-joy helping

others.

Open source participants

are a big family.

I am proud to be part of

the Open Source

Community.

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Sample demographic 16 valid responses, 80% working on information consultation

industry, 20% working on government, and crossed industry; Positions: Business consultant (45%), managers ( 35%), Directors/CEO (15%), Others (5%)

MIKE2.0 Website Satisfaction questionnaire findings

Source of members ‘Where did you learn about MIKE2.0?’

52.6% : become members through word of mouth marketing

26.3% mentioned the impact of AIIM ECM COURSE and their work on their decisions to apply for membership.


Perceived Web Presentation and Functionality

Criteria- ease of navigation, visual appeal, quality of information, usefulness of information

Result-Average rating for the separate items are high

Presentation 70.6% of respondents: more pictures and illustrations are needed, and

some respondents particularly pointed out that the web home page was ‘too busy’ and lacked a ‘modern feel’.

Potential improvement areas Dynamic navigation (Flex/Flash), site map and data set

upload/management are required; Incorporate best practice for IM subsets: Data Management, Data

Modeling, ETL, BI Maybe make the blogs and forums look a little better.


Motivation and expectations of members visiting the MIKE2.0 website

Reasons to visit MIKE2.0: Used the site for information management

solutions (50%) A large proportion of respondents expressed their

interest in looking for publications (33.3%) Sharing knowledge on the site (38.9%)


Respondents’ expectations towards the site based on the current level

Some of the material is too conceptual;

More solution offerings are required, incorporate with the fundamental best practices

perhaps follow a framework like ITIL

Add depth and project experience specifics

Add more tools like templates


Attitudes towards open source standard Respondents expressed relatively high confidence (5.25 out of 7)

However, some were cautious about it becoming standard and main

concerns related to following areas: Vendor pressure for specific market spaces within IM is still too

fragmented. BI, Data Management and 'other front-end software' all play in a different

space. Data management is still far too much oriented towards batch data

integration methodologies to be embraced in an individual standards-based approach.

MIKE2.0 Website Satisfaction Questionnaire Findings

Online Interview Findings – Survey 2

Sample Demographic:Occupations of Respondents

• 6 completed • 3 from 219 of the 400 valid

email addresses from the email list provided

• 3 from 15 emails sent variety of Mike2.0 and online motivation

respondents

• Banking/financial services• Government, government –

public safety • RIM and entertainment, and

engineering

• Job titles: - Director- Senior Enterprise (IT) Architect- IT Director- President- Consultant and IT Project Manager

One respondent from Norwich Union states that they are using Quality Management System (QMS).

No38%

Not Sure50%

Yes ( Quality Management System- QMS)

13%No

Not Sure

Yes ( Quality Management Sys-tem- QMS)

Does your organisation use any (existing) Enterprise Information Management Methodology/Framework?

He said “QMS is an in-house (and, therefore, proprietary) framework and method, based largely on IBM's Global Services and End-to-End Methods, controlling everything from business and IT Strategy development through to implementation of change (IT systems or elsewhere). It is more of a recipe book to be picked from with some mandatory elements for governance.

The most important factors: Low cost Positive case studies

The respondents also suggested:

Adequacy of methodology Ease of use Comprehensive templates and

examples are also determinants of their

decisions.

If there is an open source enterprise IM framework/methodology available in the market, how likely would you be to adopt it?

Open Source Adoption

What is the main factor that may prevent you from using an open source IM methodology?

Reasons for not to use open source IM methodology:

1. Lack of perceived business benefit

2.NIH ( Not Invented Here)

3. All the above

4. Internal standards/ Vendor support/ Accountability

Face to Face Interviews

Important factors affect OS methodology adoption:

Freedom of Customisation

Quality of Community

Hidden cost of Open Source Adoption

Findings of Interviews

Lack of Knowledge on open source- 28.6% of respondents rate themselves as extremely unknowledgeable

NIH - NOT INVENTED HERE◦ IT manager in JPMorgan - JPMorgan only uses internal resources/help

when undertaking information management improvement projects. ◦ IT Director in McLaren - It is the reason why McLaren do not use open

methodology.

Internal standards / vendor support / accountability- No contract , no guarantee

- Large institutions may not be willing to adopt software/support without the protection of a contract and guaranteed delivery of service.

Obstacles of Open Source adoption – why not use?

Is there any correlation between type of industry and collaboration level?

IT and Education Industry Businesses

People in the education are more willing to help each other

Businesses see each other as competitors

In house intelligence information

Confirmed by JPMorgan

The key to Open Standards: Transparent; Objective; and, Being understood to mean the same thing to everybody

involved.

MIKE2.0 has the potential to become an open

standard: The Creative Commons Attribution License allows anyone

to read, use, adapt and extend the framework has helped MIKE2.0 to fulfil availability, with no royalty, extension and no nominal cost.

Open standards suggestion:

But MIKE2.0 still needs to work on the following:

The content provide must enable interoperability and avoid vendor-locking

Establish an open decision-making process to enhance its transparency to the public.

To apply the same standard world-wide will be the biggest challenge

‘Being a standard’ does not mean ‘it is an open standard’ MIKE2.0 could be developed into a de facto standard

…con’t

Provide training and consulting services

Increase the level of community support

Improve the usability of MIKE2.0

Suggestion (Maturity):

Possible Marketing strategy to engage participants

Identify and form a strong alliance with leading online

forums at IT/information management field Distribute blog-posts and initiate high-quality open

discussions on these sites with MIKE 2.0 links.

The MIKE 2.0 team should arrange the necessary induction courses with targeted corporations.

Reccomendation on the MIKE2.0 methodology and its community

Incentives to encourage participation/contribution

two main issues affecting members‟ contribution levels:

1.A large proportion of respondents demonstrated that they would contribute more if they knew that other contributors would appreciate their work;

2.it was clear to them that other people would benefit from their efforts.


Proposed suggestions to create incentive of contribution

Increase members‟ participation levels by implementing a

feedback and voting mechanism:

1. Readers are allowed to rate articles or edited pages 2. Readers gain community bonus points by leaving a comment 3. Readers are given limited voting rights on a daily basis 4. A system counts the number of votes, and credits

contributors with community bonus points. 5. In order to convert community bonus points to something

more meaningful and visible, a ranking system should be employed.


A ranking system - sample

Bonus points could be converted to raise their status in the

community. Under this system, members are actively interacting with

contributors, and an incentive is created which leads to members making more contributions as they feel their work is appreciated.

Members‟ status is connected with their involvement in, and

contribution to, the community, and thus this mechanism encourages members‟ overall participation levels.

Why the ranking system works?

MIKE 2.0 methodology- the way to be a standard Hindered from adopting MIKE 2.0 methodology as it lacked proof

for tactical feasibility and tangible benefits. The methodology would be more likely to be accepted if MIKE 2.0

could expand its influence to an international arena and collaborate/embrace other organisations in other parts of the world.

Identify perspective firms and utilise network to encourage them to

use the methodology. Will create initiative for other firms to adopt

Promote the community in different countries and translate the methodology into different languages.

MIKE 2.0 methodology- the way to be a standard

Quality control -- Need a well designed contribution agreement.

Issue tracking – Need a complete issue tracking system in place.

Dealing with issues swiftly can help members to create a sense of involvement which is crucial for the success of a virtual community.

Provide more solution offerings which give participants a sense of involvement.

Recommendation-other points

Thank You.Any questions?

Team 29 Caine Pan, Kevin Qiao, Lorah Chong, Manman Lai, Yushi Xian October – April 2010 Sponsored...

Documents

Transcript of Team 29 Caine Pan, Kevin Qiao, Lorah Chong, Manman Lai, Yushi Xian October – April 2010 Sponsored...