The maturation of the open source model has indeed been a powerfully disruptive force within the software industry. Both the pace and degree of growth has been enabled, in large part, by what amounts to the capability to achieve rapid scaling throughout the software development process. In general terms, scaling is creating solutions at a small scale and then applying it across increasingly more extensive ones. Rapid scaling involves doing so at an accelerated pace without sacrificing quality. Technology, strategy, ideas, etc. are all scaled at some point in time during their lifespan with a varying amount of success. However, the open source model is demonstrating how open approaches to building communities, distribution and collaboration create a solid foundation for rapidly scaling.
It's interesting how in the face of an unprecedented paradigm shift brought about in part by the efficiency of the open source model, the relatively short time frame during which this has occurred has been overlooked. So much so, that focus has turned to the subject of what open source can't achieve in the next 10 years, which is a question only the passing of time will reveal in full. In the mean time, it is possible to attain a more concrete view of the possibilities by understanding how the rapid scaling of open source software has contributed to its current state.
As a direct driver of establishing economies of scale, it should be of no surprise that rapid scaling is often targeted as apart of what might be referred to as an "ideal" production process. Yet to simply imply that open source software development represents an ideal production process doesn't quite speak for the argument in favor of open processes well enough. The value of such is best spoken for when cast as an enabler of the type of rapid scaling key to the growth within the open source software industry. For example, the lowering of barriers to participation compulsory to open processes actually creates a shorter path to scaling from a purely open source project to a product to an enterprise quality product with according characteristics.
It's my perspective that the intake from adopting an open source development and distribution model is rarely understood by those external to the various open source companies and/or projects. The focus seems to remain on what the end user of an open source software asset receives from the equation, without understanding the dynamics of this symbiotic relationship. As a result, the misconception that software is being given away still persists to this day. When in fact software is being made accessible to the commons where its ownership is shared amongst collaborating entities.
In reality, there is a phenomenal difference between giving software away for free and distributing it so as to evenly appropriate the costs and efforts required throughout its lifecycle. As history has shown and will continue to, the purely free software model just doesn't scale as well as its open source brethren. In a way open is the new free...even as its been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that most folks will pay for quality, at reasonable price points. Software that meets a need, isn't overly difficult to use and doesn't suffer from bloatware has a fighting chance regardless. So it's intriguing to watch as an entirely new generation of companies, business models and high quality software are spawned in light of the core principles of open source, even if it seems like its lower price is all the rage.
However, simply sporting lowered financial costs of acquisition isn't enough to achieve the type of rapid scaling which eventually attracts ecosystems, strengthens business models and establishes revenue streams. The concept of opening up to providing value in order to receive it in return is one has been and continues to be at the core of what open source is to this day. What surprises me is that this concept isn't being duplicated, copy-catted and applied to create other models which leverage aspects of the open source model.
It's obvious that some VC's do indeed understand open source, but how many do to the point of integrating those characteristics which enable rapid scaling into the fundamental structure of company's within an investment portfolio. Where is the exploding number of significantly open product communities? What about the truly open feedback channels (not just HTML forms for submitting suggestions, but real interactive exchange mechanisms)? It's obvious that the art of actively putting open source to use in slashing the costs related to guiding a start-up down the road to acquisition/profit?
Open source has been a proving grounds for a great deal of similar concepts while unequivocally proving the merits of less walls/more cooperation over the castle-and-the-moat outsiders are bad view point. Are the majority of enterprises considering open source software really looking closely at adopting the concept of shared ownership as a risk litigator? Or are they simply scouring for as much value as can be had for the lowest price which happens to lead them to the realm of open source solutions? Do they understand how to sublimate open source as a disruptive force within the ever expanding boundaries of the 21st century organization? I'm hoping the answer proves to be a resounding "yes" because if it's not, there's a potentially large group missing the point about why open source really is the future and why it matters...
About the blogger: Alex Fletcher is lead industry analyst at Entiva Group Incorporated, a research and analyst firm which concentrates exclusively on the open source software industry. His main focus is working to help clients of all sizes formulate strategy and policy surrounding their use of open source software within the enterprise. Alex has prior experience as a consultant, software engineer and start-up founder. He can be reached at alex dot fletcher -at- entivagroup dot com.
Leave a comment