Does OSCOM really matter?

Hi,

what's the most critical part of making OSCOM successful?

1. That others care about it!

1. We need to be of benefit!

1. We need to attract contributors and an audience!

Hence, let's think thoroughly about the potential interest
groups.

The main goal of OSCOM I formulated in the plan:

"We want to establish OSCOM as the number one umbrella
organization for 
all issues related to Open Source content management. [...]
The main 
goal of OSCOM is to foster innovation in the Open Source
content 
management segment by creating the potential for information
transfer 
between all involved persons."

Who will benefit from these goals? Whom do we want to reach?

This is the list of interest groups from the plan:

- developers
- project managers
- consultants
- journalists
- vendors
- solution providers
- users/customers
- others? (feel free to add)

What is your feeling, which of these groups could we reach
in the 
beginning? What is their interest/the benefit they gain from

contributing to OSCOM?

Which groups are really harder to reach, why?

Answers to these questions will tell us whether OSCOM really
matters.

Sandro

_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generaloscom.org
htt
p://oscom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general

2006/3/11, Sandro Groganz <sgez.no>:
> Hence, let's think thoroughly about the potential
interest groups.
>
> The main goal of OSCOM I formulated in the plan:
>
> "We want to establish OSCOM as the number one
umbrella organization for
> all issues related to Open Source content management.
[...] The main
> goal of OSCOM is to foster innovation in the Open
Source content
> management segment by creating the potential for
information transfer
> between all involved persons."

The phrase "information transfer" sounds a bit
sterile. Maybe:

"...by creating a forum for collaboration and
information exchange
between all involved persons."

> Who will benefit from these goals? Whom do we want to
reach?
>
> This is the list of interest groups from the plan:
>
> - developers
> - project managers
> - consultants
> - journalists
> - vendors
> - solution providers
> - users/customers
> - others? (feel free to add)
>
> What is your feeling, which of these groups could we
reach in the
> beginning? What is their interest/the benefit they gain
from
> contributing to OSCOM?

At this point the main group we're reaching seems to be
developers.
Some of those people (e.g. me) are working in software
development
companies, playing a project manager role. My company is a
solution
provider (and/or vendor). So there are at least three groups
stacked
on top of one person.

But if we talk about OSCOM reaching these groups through me,
then
OSCOM is preaching to the converted.   I would
like to see OSCOM
become important to project managers, vendors, and solution
providers
that are not developers.

> Which groups are really harder to reach, why?

Reaching the other groups, like consultants, journalists,
and
users/customers is a matter of mindshare. If they hear the
word OSCOM
with enough frequency, it'll get noticed. One of the things
we can do
is list and link to it. For instance: http://www.infrae.com/
products

Of course if someone from one of these groups goes to the
OSCOM site,
there has to be something interesting. But I like the text
that's
there:

"OSCOM organizes events, promotes standards, and
undertakes projects
to further the state of the art of Open Source Content
Management. "

I hope we can realize more of these activities in the
future.
kit


--
kit BLAKE
Infrae · infrae.com · +31 10 243 7051
Hoevestraat 10 · 3033GC · Rotterdam · The Netherlands

_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generaloscom.org
htt
p://oscom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general

Chalu Kim wrote:

>
>>  
>>
>>>Which groups are really harder to reach, why?
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>Reaching the other groups, like consultants,
journalists, and
>>users/customers is a matter of mindshare. If they
hear the word OSCOM
>>with enough frequency, it'll get noticed. One of
the things we can do
>>is list and link to it. 
>>  
>>
> I think you are hitting jugular.
>
> OSCOM is a bit of introverted organization with
meritocracy run by 
> people with self interests. People are almost tenured
here.
> I don't think that is healthy. You need to bring
"different thinkers". 
> I did not mean me by the way.


I think YOU would be good. Because at least you are active
on this 
mailing list and seem to care somehow 
I don't see much activeness of the current board and this
why I think 
they should step back and make
space for new people.

>
>
> What we lack is not developers but "master
builders" who can content 
> and needs into working and productive environment. They
are not the 
> same beasts.


Can you explain a bit more?

Michi

-- 
Michael Wechner
Wyona      -   Open Source Content Management   -    Apache
Lenya
http://www.wyona.com     
                http://lenya.apache.org
michael.wechnerwyona.com                        michiapache.org


_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generaloscom.org
htt
p://oscom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general

Michael Wechner wrote:
> Chalu Kim wrote:
>
>>
>>>  
>>>
>>>> Which groups are really harder to reach,
why?
>>>>   
>>>
>>> Reaching the other groups, like consultants,
journalists, and
>>> users/customers is a matter of mindshare. If
they hear the word OSCOM
>>> with enough frequency, it'll get noticed. One
of the things we can do
>>> is list and link to it.  
>>>
>> I think you are hitting jugular.
>>
>> OSCOM is a bit of introverted organization with
meritocracy run by 
>> people with self interests. People are almost
tenured here.
>> I don't think that is healthy. You need to bring
"different 
>> thinkers". I did not mean me by the way.
>
>
> I think YOU would be good. Because at least you are
active on this 
> mailing list and seem to care somehow 
> I don't see much activeness of the current board and
this why I think 
> they should step back and make
> space for new people.

I don't know if I am but there are other people. The mix of
board would 
be important. Bring in people with ulterior motives; users! 
They want 
to use your systems.

Writers, journalists, podcast personality?  Or humanist?
>
>>
>>
>> What we lack is not developers but "master
builders" who can content 
>> and needs into working and productive environment.
They are not the 
>> same beasts.
>
>
> Can you explain a bit more?
>

Sure, I am not sure if I will do the proper job explaining.

When we do consulting, we wear two hats; developer and
builder. The most 
frustrating thing sometimes is to be a builder. 
It is easy to build CMS and let them cope with it. Plaster
end-users 
with a long list of features.

To be a builder, it takes practices and experiences. It is
like 
Gutenburg built printing press based on a system of pt and
em. There are 
master book binders and printers. If we were to see from
this point of 
view, we have many Gutenburg inventors showing off their
wares. It seems 
to me we are in a stage where we can start looking at these
other much 
needed areas.

So, to transform OSCOM's agenda, it might be good to move
from 
developer's point of view to end-users and users scenarios
in different 
fields; medical, publishing, archival, workflow,  art
archival, 
photography etc.

OSCOM could start publishing benefits and solutions for
something 
mundane like how to share large number of files.

Sharepoint is a good example.  This is from user's needs.
We may need to 
take "Back to the Basics" kind of attitude.

Around the turn of this century, every garage was a home for
automobile 
inventor. We have many exotic CMSes but nothing to compare
with 
Sharepoint?  Doesn't that bring you to a question?

Are we missing the point in Open-Source CMS?

I think OSCOM has done great job rallying developers but
they seem all 
eager to do the work. But Open-source CMSes have impressions
of 
misguided ideas; difficult to use and difficult to manage
and so on. 
Sure, clients are paying just enough to get things done. I
am doing 
documentation on my spare time. I remember all the yelling
you did and 
so on. We just don't have "fair practices and
guidelines".

We should publish "Ethical Guidelines for Open-Source
[Content 
management - optional] developers and End-users"....
like that "Ethical 
Guidelines for Graphics Design"  We could tell
end-users what to expect 
and to pay. We could tell CMS developers wearing builder hat
what 
troubles they get themselves into and what they should
charge.... That 
will broaden and level the playing fields.

What do you think?

Lone voice in the wild?

All the best

> Michi
>

_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generaloscom.org
htt
p://oscom.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general