Comments on: Putting Your Golden Eggs in One Basket http://blog.ecorrado.us/2008/11/26/putting-your-golden-eggs-in-one-basket/ Ramblings about library technology, open source software, and other adventures! Fri, 28 Oct 2011 05:59:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Jonathan Rochkind http://blog.ecorrado.us/2008/11/26/putting-your-golden-eggs-in-one-basket/comment-page-1/#comment-8609 Jonathan Rochkind Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:38:33 +0000 http://blog.ecorrado.us/?p=578#comment-8609 Thanks Ed. The biggest problem I see with 'one basket' actually isn't captured by my 'egg' metaphor. When you count on only one organization to provide you your innovation, you are limited to the timelines, resources, and priorities of that organization. We are certainly used to that with our ILS and other software vendors. There's a feature you really want, and you just have to wait for the vendor to implement it, maybe, someday. And the vendor, like all of us, has limited resources. And the vendor, like all of us, has to chose priorities based on a variety of factors, including their business model. I'm not talking about an incompetent vendor here, _any_ vendor has limited resources, and has to make priorities, and when you've got only 'one basket', you are limited to hoping they do what you need, eventually. In an open world, open data, open source, you don't have to wait for your one vendor. Other people can work collaboratively with that vendor, to add their resources to the mix, based on their priorities. Other people, even other vendors, can go ahead and work on it themselves even without collaborating with the first vendor, again based on their own priorities and their own resources. If you need something and _you've_ got the resources, you can make it happen. If you don't have the resources, there's a chance there's someone else who needs the same thing who DOES. You don't have to wait on the timeline and constrained resources of the one closed vendor. When you've got open-ness, there is a synergistic effect where everyone's efforts build on each other, and you can collectively accomplish more than you ever could with a collection of 'closed' data or products, that only one organization can work on. (Incidentally, its recognition of that that leads to such things as the Ex Libris 'open platform strategy'. They're trying to get the benefits of that synergy in open-ness, _without_ actually giving up the closed monopoly on their central assets. It's an interesting combination, there may be some way to get it right, especially when it comes to software, but it'll take some experimenting. When it comes to data, I'm less optimistic that anything short of actual openness can give you the benefits.) Thanks Ed. The biggest problem I see with ‘one basket’ actually isn’t captured by my ‘egg’ metaphor.

When you count on only one organization to provide you your innovation, you are limited to the timelines, resources, and priorities of that organization. We are certainly used to that with our ILS and other software vendors. There’s a feature you really want, and you just have to wait for the vendor to implement it, maybe, someday.

And the vendor, like all of us, has limited resources. And the vendor, like all of us, has to chose priorities based on a variety of factors, including their business model. I’m not talking about an incompetent vendor here, _any_ vendor has limited resources, and has to make priorities, and when you’ve got only ‘one basket’, you are limited to hoping they do what you need, eventually.

In an open world, open data, open source, you don’t have to wait for your one vendor. Other people can work collaboratively with that vendor, to add their resources to the mix, based on their priorities. Other people, even other vendors, can go ahead and work on it themselves even without collaborating with the first vendor, again based on their own priorities and their own resources. If you need something and _you’ve_ got the resources, you can make it happen. If you don’t have the resources, there’s a chance there’s someone else who needs the same thing who DOES.

You don’t have to wait on the timeline and constrained resources of the one closed vendor. When you’ve got open-ness, there is a synergistic effect where everyone’s efforts build on each other, and you can collectively accomplish more than you ever could with a collection of ‘closed’ data or products, that only one organization can work on.

(Incidentally, its recognition of that that leads to such things as the Ex Libris ‘open platform strategy’. They’re trying to get the benefits of that synergy in open-ness, _without_ actually giving up the closed monopoly on their central assets. It’s an interesting combination, there may be some way to get it right, especially when it comes to software, but it’ll take some experimenting. When it comes to data, I’m less optimistic that anything short of actual openness can give you the benefits.)

]]>