Professor Brian Fitzgerald la_oss_forum

976 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Professor Brian Fitzgerald la_oss_forum

  1. 1. LA Open Source Forum Cork 12 April 2011 Adopting Open Source Software: Lessons Learned Prof Brian Fitzgerald University of LimerickLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 1
  2. 2. Background • Early OSS implementations in back-office ‘invisible’ infrastructure  Deployed by ‘tech savvy’ under the radarLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 2
  3. 3. Background • Early OSS implementations in back-office ‘invisible’ infrastructure  Deployed by ‘tech savvy’ under the radar • Now ubiquitous  Visible front-office applications  To military and beyond! (mil-oss.org to crowd-sourcing)Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 3
  4. 4. Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 4
  5. 5. Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 5
  6. 6. Background • Primary v. secondary adoption of OSS • Lessons based on five cases of (secondary) OSS Adoption  Ireland, Italy, Spain, US  Local government/public sectorLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 6
  7. 7. Shameless Plug Time!Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 7
  8. 8. Reasons to Adopt OSS • Reduce costs (but TCO estimates vary greatly) • Reduce vendor lock-in • More control/ability to adapt to local needs • More transparency/security through openness • Future proofing backward compatibility • Stimulate small/local software industry • Be seen as pioneering/innovativeLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 8
  9. 9. A Framework to Investigate OSS Adoption • Adapted from Rogers (1962,2003); Gallivan 2001Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 9
  10. 10. A Framework to Investigate OSS Adoption • Adapted from Rogers (1962,2003); Gallivan 2001 Managerial Intervention• Mandatory v. voluntary• Training & support• Championing OSS Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 10
  11. 11. A Framework to Investigate OSS Adoption • Adapted from Rogers (1962,2003); Gallivan 2001 Managerial Subjective Norms Intervention • Expectations of peers,• Mandatory v. managers, voluntary subordinates• Training & support (Ideology)• Championing OSS Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 11
  12. 12. A Framework to Investigate OSS Adoption • Adapted from Rogers (1962,2003); Gallivan 2001 Managerial Subjective Norms Facilitating Conditions Intervention •Attributes of Innovation • Expectations of peers, •Relative advantage• Mandatory v. managers, voluntary •Compatibility subordinates• Training & support (Ideology) •Complexity• Championing OSS •Trialability •Observability/Image •Attributes of Organization •Absorptive capacity •Attitude to Risk Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 12
  13. 13. A Framework to Investigate OSS Adoption • Adapted from Rogers (1962,2003); Gallivan 2001 Managerial Subjective Norms Facilitating Conditions Intervention •Attributes of Innovation • Expectations of peers, •Relative advantage• Mandatory v. managers, voluntary •Compatibility subordinates• Training & support (Ideology) •Complexity• Championing OSS •Trialability •Observability/Image •Attributes of Organization •Absorptive capacity •Attitude to Risk Secondary Adoption of OSS Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 13
  14. 14. A Framework to Investigate OSS Adoption • Adapted from Rogers (1962,2003); Gallivan 2001 Managerial Subjective Norms Facilitating Conditions Intervention •Attributes of Innovation R • Expectations of peers, •Relative advantage o• Mandatory v. managers, voluntary •Compatibility g subordinates• Training & support •Complexity e (Ideology)• Championing OSS •Trialability r •Observability/Image s •Attributes of Organization •Absorptive capacity •Attitude to Risk Secondary Adoption of OSS Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 14
  15. 15. A Framework to Investigate OSS Adoption • Adapted from Rogers (1962,2003); Gallivan 2001 Managerial Subjective Norms Facilitating Conditions Intervention •Attributes of Innovation • Expectations of peers, •Relative advantage• Mandatory v. managers, voluntary •Compatibility subordinates• Training & support (Ideology) •Complexity• Championing OSS •Trialability •Observability/Image •Attributes of Organization •Absorptive capacity Gallivan •Attitude to Risk Secondary Adoption of OSS Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 15
  16. 16. Managerial Intervention • Mandatory usage  Natural resistance  Beware of exceptions being perceived as elite  “We didn’t think OpenOffice was given to us as a bonus. We thought MS Office had been taken away”Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 16
  17. 17. Managerial Intervention • Training & Support  Tend to underestimate as OSS products similar to proprietary ones being replaced  Free software = => free training  Important to communicate advantages of OSS – chance to up-skill usersLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 17
  18. 18. Managerial Intervention • Training & Support  Tend to underestimate as OSS products similar to proprietary ones being replaced  Free software = => free training  Important to communicate advantages of OSS – chance to up-skill users • Championing OSS  No vendor to play this role  Evident in all successful casesLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 18
  19. 19. Subjective Norms • Sense of work being under-valued if asked to use free software • “You meet people and hear they are using MS Office and immediately you ask how did they manage that” • Feeling of being de-skilled • Problem if no other exemplars in same industry/sector • Older employees less likely to embraceLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 19
  20. 20. Relative Advantage • Important to illustrate this in training • OpenOffice teething problems - especially with Impress • LinEx, Guadalinex in Spanish  Espronceda for word processing • Less problematic when not replacing a previous system • Also good if able to use at home alsoLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 20
  21. 21. Observability/Image • Many OSS products designed to be as similar as possible to proprietary counterparts • Differences downplayed to make it easier for users • Image can be negative • “Poor man’s Microsoft…from Jurassic Park”Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 21
  22. 22. Trialability • Key property of OSS • Good if able to use same products at home also • Bur do not underestimate training needsLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 22
  23. 23. Compatibility • Disabled users not catered for in MassachusettsLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 23
  24. 24. Absorptive Capacity • Students now have OSS experience • Need technical competence to solve problemsLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 24
  25. 25. Absorptive Capacity • Students now have OSS experience • Need technical competence to solve problems • “…the exhilarating succession of problem-solving challenges when installing open source”Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 25
  26. 26. Absorptive Capacity • Students now have OSS experience • Need technical competence to solve problems • “…the exhilarating succession of problem-solving challenges when installing open source” • Local small software companies key partners oftenLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 26
  27. 27. Attitude to Risk • Massachusetts first government in world to mandate open standards  First to create public library, public school, public subwayLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 27
  28. 28. Summary of Key Lessons • Identify management champion • Use local software company • Avoid opt-out groups forming • Provide good training  Upskill users  Illustrate advantages • Create positive image of OSSLero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 28
  29. 29. Thank you This work was supported, in part, by Science Foundation Ireland grant 03/CE2/I303_1 to Lero– the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre (www.lero.ie)Lero–the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre Lero © 2011. Slide 29

×