Offshoring, globalization and Open Source... continuing thread
Continuing my post on Open Source and Offshoring from a few weeks ago, I came across an interesting article in Dr. Dobb’s “Open-Source Globalization” In the article, Christof talks about how open-source globalization is more of an agent for increased specialization, which is usually a path to higher incomes. Christof adds "most software engineers embrace open source—not surprising, given that it was they who started the movement in the first place." and articulates some major benefits for engineers:
- Open source is a career builder. You don't need to be an MIT graduate to join key IT projects.
- Globalization also brings global opportunities to you. Why not work on a movie animation project in New Zealand?
- There is a looser affiliation to a project. Being less locked-in with your current employer creates a better "market" for your services.
- Empowerment, values, and fun. Open-source projects recruit their contributors and then get out of their way.
Tech companies have embarked on their internal open-source movements which are also getting externalized. IBM'S open source is a case in point. Microsoft too has been pushing into the open-source world albeit positioning its toolkits [Gotdotnet]
For managers at software service firms, an open-source culture is also a ‘tool’ to motivate technically inclined employees. Well, I uttered the B word, didn’t I? Fact of the matte is that most service firms consciously decide to keep a certain percentage of staff on bench to enable organization to service the pipeline of clients. The challenges is not just maintaining a ‘bench’ but ensuring that those on bench sharpen their skills and are motivated. For instance, at Infosys we have several collaborative models including an internal knowledge-sharing portal (kshop) internal, discussion forums, mailing lists, blogs and other forums mimicking a Web 2.0 in the internal environment. Interestingly, an internal ‘sourceforge,’ similar to its open-world cousin, has been in existence for a while where employees can sign-up for virtual projects and collaborate. This ecosystem is especially useful to motivate those on ‘bench’
Motivating those on bench to participate in internal (and external?) open source communities is certainly a win-win proposition for service delivery firms.
Comments
I highly recommend Charles Leadeater's work, The ProAm Revolution for some amazing insights on open source and where it is heading.
http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/proameconomy
In addition, as to the efforts by Infosys or IBM to encourage this type of collaboration, is this as much reactionary attempts to keep up with the phenomenon as opposed to some visionary driving of it? In other words, I agree with Siva Vaidhayanathan who argued in "Anarchist in the Kitchen" that the technologies that converged into the internet are structurally anarchist (structurally averse to central control, and a catalyst for diffusion). In fact, on an even broader level, hasn't most management theory since Peter Drucker aimed at ditching command and control and recognizing that knowledge workers know more than their managers what their functions are? Open source is the ultimate expression of the fact that perhaps future organizations will simply need well articulated problems and the rest will manage itself.
Overly simplistic, but it seems clear that even rapidly changing organizations will find it hard to keep pace with these sorts of "unmanagement" management concepts which reduce the warm confines of bureaucracy and scare the hell out of white collar middle managers.
Posted by: michael | March 20, 2007 3:03 AM
Thanks Michael,
You touch on a few interesting topics:
* Organic Innovation driven by open source movement (as opposed to organizations).
* Recognizing that knowledge workers know more than their managers: I had written a paper for IEEE’s Computing journal on this very topic a few years ago [Re: From Organization Man to Free Agent; IEEE Computing: Jan 2004]
I haven’t changed my views on ‘Free Agent’ in the past few years; and the trends you point out certainly continue to be on the horizon. This said, large software services firms, - many into offshoring - are where a good percentage of hi-tech workers continue to work. Some may innovate for their firms and others may innovate to externalize their ideas … and the open source community – internal and external -- provides yet another outlet to channel their ideas. Right?
Posted by: Mohan | March 20, 2007 10:31 AM
Hi Mohan,
I meant to ask for your article weeks ago. I have no interest in the IEEE's computing journal at this time, but enjoy your blog and would be interested in reading the paper.
Congrats on being featured by Cutter. I find their research highly relevant to real world situations.
Finally, I forwarded your post mentioning Wipro's quality awards sweep to a few Wipro colleagues. It elicited several compliments for Infosys and yourself.
That reminds me, Forrester and others are indicating a huge bias in the marketplace for larger firms. I have not done my homework on this latest research (just saw the sound byte). Perhaps an interesting thread there and one that ties back into how to best incubate or at least remove obstacles from, the 'anti-structure', disruptive forces like open source.
I'll give a quick example that I would think favors a small company based on experience: telecommuting. In 2005, I strongly urged management use of telecommuting as a quality of life tool to avoid 4 hour rounds trips on Hosur Road. A growing offshore team I was leading for a client was going through a difficult period and this was one of few immediate ways to alleviate some pressure and demonstrate that the client and management were committed to the team both as human beings and as managers strategizing to avoid attrition. Long story short, management in Bangalore was not ready to embrace what for a small firm might seem an obvious win/win tool to innovate and change.
Maybe not the best example, but think it through. What happens when companies trusting bigger players reverses itself as competitive demands reward small businesses? There are many factors at work here, but one is an arguably non-data driven comfort level derived from the "bigger is better" pathology (Tom Peters loves to blast that one in other contexts, including results). In other words, as offshoring aproaches mainstream, inexperienced managers might avoid due diligence and put their faith in enormity. Also, I see this as more likely on the development side (open source being a major factor) and the higher end consulting/project management end of the market.
Ok..getting carried away and I'm procrastinating on other things.
Posted by: michael | April 15, 2007 7:09 PM