IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 50, NO. 2, JUNE 2007
85
Making an Open Source Case for Offshoring Commentary —Feature by CASEY O’DONNELL Index Terms—Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS), inshoring, offshoring.
This paper is an account of the possibilities that expanded international offshoring could have for the Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS) movement. Based on existing survey data, this paper argues that at a numeric level, the continued spread of software development jobs into new areas of the world could create the foundation from which expanded international involvement in FLOSS could evolve. By drawing a parallel between the amount of available employment and education in an area to the overall participation of developers in FLOSS activities, I argue here that expanding the number of participants in the high-tech sector could increase the number of developers in other countries who choose to participate in open source projects. This analysis posits a kind of symbiotic relationship between commercial and private sector software development, which has not previously been taken. While these modes of software production continue to expand internationally, we gain a unique opportunity for expanding our understanding of the consequences of offshoring. Furthermore, the liberatory promise of FLOSS projects can only be realized if educated and motivated individuals are present in other countries. Without this expansion, it will remain an activity dominated by America and Western Europe. Although a handful of studies have provided quantitative data on the makeup of the FLOSS movement, given the ever-shifting economies surrounding software development, continued research must be done to assess the numbers and demographics of this rapidly moving “community.” This paper draws heavily on these existing quantitative studies, drawing qualitative conclusions, and hopefully encouraging more research into areas beyond a strictly quantitative analysis [1]. This paper argues that those who champion the ideas of FLOSS must logically take the position of promoting the continued growth and Manuscript received April 17, 2006. The author is with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY 12180 USA (email:
[email protected]). IEEE 10.1109/TPC.2007.897580 0361-1434/$25.00 © 2007 IEEE
global expansion of information technology (IT), and, more specifically, software development jobs.
FLOSS MAKES ECONOMIC SENSE INSHORERS
FOR
FLOSS makes sense for third-world countries and countries with emerging IT economies [2]. The reduced license fees alone constitute a motivating factor for companies interested in maintaining an acceptable legal standing to the American companies interested in retaining their services. When software must be developed for proprietary (closed) systems, it becomes possible to either make use of cross-platform development toolkits and maintain a minimum number of proprietary licenses, or build the cost of licensing into development contracts. Either way, the reduced cost in these environments provides a significant benefit for companies inshoring software development work. Many software products, which are necessary for the operation of daily business and software development needs, have some sort of a FLOSS-based option or alternative. Businesses may significantly reduce the economic barriers to entry into the global IT economy by making FLOSS technologies central to their daily operations. FLOSS is left to serve only as a product for (free) consumption. Stopping the argument at this point neglects the incredible potential which these countries offer the FLOSS movement.
ACKNOWLEDGING FLOSS
THE
ECONOMIC DEMANDS OF
At the core of this argument is the assumption that there are economic, social, and political demands that precede the ability to create and actively develop FLOSS projects. With nearly three-quarters of FLOSS projects being produced in the US and Western Europe, one must question what supports these activities [1]. Without paying attention to the language barriers that typically stand between potential FLOSS participants and
86
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATION, VOL. 50, NO. 2, JUNE 2007
the largest projects, one quickly notices those countries that are most active in the development of FLOSS software are also the countries producing commercial software. FLOSS developers tend to be educated, well paid, and perhaps even more importantly, professional developers [1]. Developers who do not work on FLOSS projects as part of their normal work function do so on their own time. This time investment may not be seen as strictly “leisurely,” but it is still done outside of work hours [1]. Developers working 40 hours a week at their normal job also spend a significant amount of their free time developing FLOSS software. If employees spend more than 40 hours per week at work, they would likely have less available time to work on FLOSS projects. Also, professionals with other activities that place demands on their time (hobbies, children, significant others) will spend less time developing FLOSS software. It is important to keep these costs in mind as we think about the possibilities of FLOSS in the emerging global IT workplace.
MAKING A FLOSS CASE FOR OFFSHORING If one accepts the assumption that FLOSS requires, at its base, some kind of economic under-girding, then it becomes apparent that offshoring provides an introductory economics for the education, payment, and professionalization of a workforce that is then able to participate in existing and new FLOSS projects. While some would argue that countries like India and China should focus more on generating new software, rather than on “taking over” the jobs of North American and Western European developers, this argument neglects the kind of budgets that are often necessary for the generation of most commercial software applications. Offshoring becomes an entry point from which foreign companies can become involved in software development practices, a point from which they can pursue other endeavors when it becomes economically feasible. Once software developers are educated, paid, and employed, many may make the choice to become active participants in FLOSS projects. This is the first FLOSS argument for offshoring. At its simplest level, offshoring makes human resource sense.
BEYOND MANPOWER, GOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT One significant benefit FLOSS may enjoy in new contexts is direct and active government support. This is the second FLOSS argument for offshoring.
While FLOSS projects have enjoyed moderate sponsorship at the hands of North American and Western European corporations and governmental research funding agencies, there has not been a concerted effort. Direct governmental mandates for FLOSS funding have almost strictly been the domain of countries at the periphery of the software development world. China, in particular, has made the importance of reducing dependency upon software produced abroad a matter of national security concern [3]. Socialist or communist governments, like India and China, would more likely spend government dollars on FLOSS software development than neoliberal governments content to spend massive numbers on commercial software which must be continually upgraded [4]. Similar to businesses, governments may begin making FLOSS mandates to reduce software-licensing fees. Once this leap is made, countries may see the need for enhancement or funding of new FLOSS projects. This could open up new spaces for development, where governmentally employed individuals would find themselves working on producing free software.
CONCLUSION The two FLOSS arguments for the offshoring of software development work come down to increasing the number of people actively involved in the creation of software. FLOSS benefits from an increasing number of individuals being able to work with FLOSS on their own time out of interest in professional development, or as a required employment duty work on new or existing projects [5]. The emphasis is placed on code and the production/revision of code. While the possibilities for FLOSS software are numerous given the global expansion of software development labor, there is an implicit assumption that has been made, which will now be addressed. The flaw resides in the assumption that offshored software development positions will provide the same kind of educational, economic, and professional benefits that North American and Western European IT workers have enjoyed until recently. While presumably the educational demands of software production will provide some kind of bottom line for how far costs can be cut, this line may be lower than is necessary to support FLOSS involvement. A second risk resides in the relationship between FLOSS software and commercial software
O’DONNELL: MAKING AN OPEN SOURCE CASE FOR OFFSHORING
development. There is a symbiotic relationship between commercial software firms and the FLOSS movement. Many developers are dependent upon commercial software companies for economic sustenance. If paid positions are cut in favor of FLOSS solutions, the original developer is no longer able to provide input to FLOSS projects, and FLOSS loses. Commercial software has come to depend on the activities of the FLOSS community. The two have become intertwined in a way that is worthy of more study. Thus far, the emphasis for the FLOSS movement, and those who speak on its behalf, has been on source code. People, in particular those working on these projects, have not been of primary concern. We must refocus ourselves on the individuals who often disappear from the process of developing software [6]. In many ways, this article references a larger social and economic issue that is at the core of any discussion surrounding globalization, “How far do you want to let the market run things?”
87
REFERENCES [1] R. A. Ghosh et al., Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Survey and Study. Maastricht, The Netherlands: International Institute of Infonomics, 2002. [2] R. A. Ghosh, “License fees and GDP per capita: The case for open source in developing countries,” First Monday 2003 [Online]. Available: http://www.infonomics.nl/FLOSS/report/ [3] “Microsoft at the power point: Governments like open-source software, but Microsoft does not,” The Economist, vol. 368, no. 8341, p. 77, 2003. [4] INPUT Projects Federal IT Spending to Reach $92 Billion by FY10. Reston, VA: INPUT, 2005. [5] E. S. Raymond, The Cathedral & the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary. Cambridge, MA: O’Reilly and Assoc., 2001. [6] L. Suchman, “Making work visible,” Commun. ACM, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 56–64, 1995. Casey O’Donnell is a Ph.D. candidate in the Science and Technology Studies Department at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, and has performed fieldwork at game studios for more than two years. His work examines the diverse forces and activities that shape software development, and make it tenable in today’s globalized economy.
