A corollary to the explosion of open source within the enterprise is it's evolution as an objective. In that light, open source has evolved from remote unknown/curiosity into somewhat of a key IT objective. Still, as I see it, open source continues as a tactical concern instead of a strategic one. By that I mean, it remains a means to achieving strategic IT initiatives such as building service-oriented-architectures (SOA), bringing enterprise collaboration into play or introducing web 2.0. A reality which isn't necessarily bad/good...only indicative of an actual state of affairs.
Listed below are just some of the strategic IT initiatives that open source, as a tactical measure, fuels:
- Enterprise collaboration. Tools such as Open-Xchange and Zimbra, instant messaging platforms like Openfire and Jabber, WordPress for blogging, and TWiki and MediaWiki can help drive the mandate for increased collaboration.
- Web 2.0. Dynamic languages (PHP, Python, and Ruby) along with various open source Ajax frameworks and tools from players such as Adobe and Laszlo Systems all contribute to
- Service-oriented architecture. Open source ESBs: Mule, OpenESB, and JBoss ESB help beat a path to SOA but are also supplemented by other enabling technologies including Axis, ServiceMix and Synapse.
Moving forward, I can visualize open source emerging as a strategic interest similar to, while also remaining a tactical driver for, the aforementioned. This as firms realize the inevitability of embracing open models of interaction and the enterprise software model matures to better accommodate open styles of software development. When this occurs we'll witness more participation by organizations in open source communities, more innovative forms of internal self-support as well as bridges to and from platforms like Microsoft's .NET or SAP's ABAP. The latter as both giants also come to a better understanding of where open source fits into their respective futures.
However, before this takes place there must be more awareness of the open source that is being used on both sides of the equation. For all of the Java based shops out there, I'd be willing to guess that the majority employ at least some open source. And I'd also venture to guess that very few know just how much. Since being aware of its presence will assist in effectively leveraging a larger scope of open source software, it's critical for this to change. The same goes for those companies dealing with suppliers...how many retain disclosure from suppliers regarding the amount of open source that is being used in commercial products? Very few, most likely. This variety of information might not seem relevant but is actually useful within the context of determining the value received in exchange for commercial licenses.
Yet the question of exactly how this transition from tactical to strategic will take place, remains. From my perspective, the increased presence of open source as a tactical mandate of sorts will drive the need for stronger open source governance. Which will further implicate closer alignment of overarching IT strategies with the open source domain. Currently, this link is missing and open source fails to remain relevant from a planning or strategic perspective. All despite the fact that there is definite value to be realized through open source on both fronts. The key will be for organizations to grasp that open source can, in fact, serve as a business accelerator.
Apache ServiceMix is most definitely an ESB, not just an enabling technology.
Posted by: Bruce Snyder | August 22, 2008 at 06:43 PM
Hi,
I am working at a big huge company (400.000 + employees).
The main reason to stay with Microsoft and SAP - from a business perspective - is:
a) these vendors are big enough to support us for 10-20 years; they wont disappear easily
b) if we have problems with their products, we can call 24/7 user help desks
c) there are ten thousands of developers worldwide, from which we can choose our external resources
Open Source is interesting from a initial financial view (it is free on the first spot).
But the main concern is not money, but business continuity.
OpenSource is often driven by little teams and unclear responsibility.
Sorry, but that is the truth. OpenSource is nice for little experiments, but not for big companies.
Greetings
Bernd
Posted by: Bernd | August 23, 2008 at 08:39 AM
I agree that many organizations don't know how much open source they're really using. That's one of the reasons why OpenLogic founded The Open Source Census (www.osscensus.org). Enterprises that participate in the Census scan a representative sampling of machines for open source software, then anonymously contribute the scan reports to the Census website. Once scans have been submitted, enterprises can login to the Census website to view reports on their open source usage and compare themselves to organizations with similar demographics. By participating in the Census, you can better understand your company's usage of open source as well as help promote the use of open source in enterprises around the world.
Posted by: Greg Bell | August 27, 2008 at 08:10 AM
Wholeheartely agree with Bernd, in that sometimes it pays to pay. As the old sayings goes, you often get what you pay for.
Posted by: 6mmbb.com | September 07, 2009 at 06:02 PM