From the Editor, Gabriele Piccoli

Some debate can be had about the exact birth date of the open source software movement. Was it when computer enthusiasts and scientists began to exchange code? Was it at the time of the birth of the Internet when the infrastructure was made available to enable further collaboration? Was it more recently when the open source label was agreed upon and became a popular umbrella for many of these collaborative efforts?

Who knows ... What is certainly more important, and much less debatable, is that open source is now a reality, and it is a software development and distribution model that is clearly here to stay, holding great promise and at least as much uncertainty for IT professionals in a wide range of business firms, nonprofit organizations, and governments.

To confirm that open source software has become a force to be reckoned with, we only have to look at the many successful products out there. For example, the Apache Web Server, arguably the poster child of successful open source software, accounted for almost 70% of the Web server market in September 2005, according to a survey by ServerWatch.¹ Beyond just tallying up the numbers (i.e., open source software programs, business firms that have sprung up to carve business models around the movement, and established firms that have embraced open source), perhaps most telling is a recent news story. In early 2005, the MIT Media Lab felt comfortable advising the Brazilian government to shun Microsoft products for open source software, contending that "Free software is far better on the dimensions of cost, power, and quality." ² So open source is good not only because it is free, but it can even be better than production software.

But as often happens with innovations -- and certainly with IT innovations -- the excitement and promises of the new quickly give way to the frustration and disappointment of unsuccessful adoption. Transitioning to open source is certainly no different and presents many of the same challenges and potential pitfalls. For this reason, in this issue of Cutter Benchmark Review we tackle the matter of open source software head-on. Rick Watson, J. Rex Fuqua Distinguished Chair for Internet Strategy and Director of the Center for Information Systems Leadership in the Terry College of Business, University of Georgia (USA), and Marie-Claude Boudreau, Assistant Professor of MIS at the Terry College of Business, offer insight from their ongoing research on open source business models; and Jason Matthews, a Senior Consultant with Cutter Consortium, offers guidance based on his significant firsthand experience with open source software. We set out with the charge of benchmarking the extent to which, and how, organizations currently use open source software. Having taken the pulse of open source current practices amongst our readers, I also asked Rick, Marie-Claude, and Jason to think about the drivers and challenges respectively pushing and hindering its widespread adoption. As is the tradition of CBR, given our ability to tap contributors with significant experience on the matter at hand, the survey results were used as a jumping-off point to offer insight, tangible ideas, and guidance to our readers.

One of the great features of this issue, and one that I specifically draw your attention to, is the positive tension created by the two complementary contributions, with Rick and Marie-Claude on one side and Jason on the other, espousing sometimes differing views about the value and risks of open source adoption.

With the term "open source" being an umbrella for a number of widely differing software development and distribution models, Rick and Marie-Claude start off by providing an overview of the open source landscape. They identify six business models around software development and distribution: proprietary software development, open community, bundlers, sponsored open source, open source service, and professional open source (POS). They then focus on the one model they consider to be most promising: professional open source. They describe it in depth and make the case for its future viability by addressing its benefits and drawbacks, as well as how this model allows firms to address demand, innovation, inefficiency, and scaling risks. They conclude by suggesting a blueprint for organizations interested in developing a strategy for dealing with POS providers.

As a counterpoint to Rick and Marie-Claude's positive stance, Jason plays the role of a pragmatic devil's advocate. The undertone to his contribution is a compelling "buyer beware!" With his "informed skeptic" hat on, but with an underlying belief in the potential promise of the open source model for modern organizations (when properly adopted), Jason introduces both technical and nontechnical issues that you need to consider when transitioning to open source. He also stresses the importance of adopting a transitioning methodology, including readiness assessments, transition planning and management, transition reviews, and replication strategies. The bulk of his contribution is devoted to a detailed treatment of the technical challenges associated with open source adoption and use.

I am very pleased with this issue of Cutter Benchmark Review, an issue I believe offers significant value and captures the essence of our multiple complementary perspectives approach. It is this approach, the defining feature of CBR, that will help jump-start your own critical thinking and continue to establish CBR as a publication that offers significant return on reading (ROR) -- yes, in case you are wondering, I did make that one up just now!

-- Gabriele Piccoli, Editor, Cutter Benchmark Review

NOTES

¹"September 2005 Netcraft Survey Highlights." ServerWatch, 8 September 2005 (www.serverwatch.com/stats/article.php/3547286).

"MIT urges Brazil to adopt open-source." Reuters, 17 March 2005 (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7220913).