ubuntu-ngo team mailing list archive

[Pierre van Male <vmalep@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,

I am not sure of much this list is still alive, but hopefully, it is...

I am finishing a thesis on the adoption of FLOSS by International NGOs for
a master in social economy and management with the university of Barcelona.

I made a small website about this project here:
https://sites.google.com/site/floss4ingo/

>From my professional experience (10 years in the field with the ICRC and
Oxfam Intermón), I believe that one major obstacle to the adoption is the
lack of awareness by the INGO managers and in particular the operational
and strategic ones: they do not know what is FLOSS or misunderstand it and
they do not consider themselves as in charge when it comes to decide about
IT solutions. All the managers with whom I have talked about FLOSS without
exception find the subject interesting at the best, but do not feel
concerned at all.

To substantiate that assertion, I designed a small online survey and I
would appreciate if you could share the link with INGO manager you may know:
https://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Flnkd%2Ein%2Fdd58ufN&urlhash=jLY2&_t=commentary-share-link&trk=commentary-share-link

Another important aspect is the benefits of FLOSS for INGO. In good part,
it match with the general benefit of FLOSS for any corporation (vendor
lock-in, etc.). But there are some characteristics of the INGO that imply
particular benefits and inconvenients:

Particular benefits:

   - INGO respond in countries usually with low IT development and by using
   specific IT solutions, they contribute to their diffusion among their local
   partners (local NGO and local authorities in particular). I.e. the fact to
   work with MS Office for example makes those INGO de facto acting as
   marketing department for Microsoft + contribute to the vendor lock-in of
   those countries.
   - Collaborative approach: unlike most of the organizations from the
   private sectors, INGO are naturally working in a collaborative mode between
   themselves (even though competition for obtaining project calls, etc. is a
   reality too). In this context, using collaborative technology is obviously
   a plus to facilitate the interoperability between them. currently for
   example, there are a lot of investment (in time and/or money) to develop
   the digital monitoring of the activities. Open source solutions exist, but
   not always as polished as a private one. some INGO opt for the private and
   ready to use solution despite the long term consequences of this choice.

Particular inconvenients:

   - The first one that comes to my mind is the TCO when private software
   are given for free. This is particularly the case right now with MS Office
   365. Microsoft is promoting this new way to commercialize MS Office by
   making it available for free or very cheap (see for example the agreement
   between the IFRC and Microsoft
   <http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9237098/Red_Cross_offers_Office_365_to_its_units_worldwide_to_improve_communications>,
   that does not reveal however the details of the agreement...). Knowing that
   migration to a FLOSS alternative (i.e. LibreOffice) does has costs and
   risk, INGO that reach this agreement are very unlikely to consider the
   alternative.
   - Geographical coverage of the INGO making the migration more
   complicated: it is something to migrate x employees in one office or two,
   but to conduct the process in 20 offices in as many countries with
   employees having low IT skills is a different story...

This list can be completed for sure and your contribution will be highly
appreciated!

Best regards,
Pierre