Many thanks are due to all the folks responded with thoughtful and very useful commentary about the challenge of building bridges between these two worlds. I am posting a selection of their comments here, having obtained permission to do so from each of the authors quoted here. In some cases, the author is responding to a comment by someone who did not grant permission to use his/her words; the omissions are marked with a (snip).
Additional comments are very welcome!
From: Reuben Silvers
To: Nonprofit Open Source Inititive (nosi-discussion@nosi.net)
(snip)
Since NOSI is all about bridging this gap between the NPO and OSS communities, Deborah raises the biggie question - how can we do that better? A lot of our formal efforts to date (the Primer, the Cafe) have been about educating the NPO world about *using* OSS. But I really like Mark's point that for this whole NPO/OSS thing to work, the NPO side has to contribute back. Because if that happens enough then the NPO tech community and the OSS community start to meld, and the gap disappears. So I wonder what NOSI can do to educate NPOs about *contributing* (rather than just using) OSS.
One project along these lines got proposed a while back (see the Wiki at http://www.nosi.net/node/35?PHPSESSID=bd9d25554eb7c155c7c
Here's the description.
"NOSI Documentation Assistance Project: This would go a step further than helping non-profits get support, by choosing two or so applications that are useful to nonprofits, but whose documentation is lacking. Develop additional printed materials including step-by-step guides, how-tos, and case studies."
But someone made the good point that us picking 1-2 projects is risky. So maybe there's a more project-neutral way to facilitate NPOs contributing to projects. A how-to-contribute guide? Soliciting "help wanted" notices from projects, e.g. like David's recent post asking for input to CiviCRM? Other ideas?
From: Tina Bartleson, M.Ed.
Program Specialist
The National Exchange Club
Child Abuse Prevention Services
To: HUman Service Information Technology Applications (HUSITA@listserv.uta.edu)
We as social workers and parent aides in the non-profit sector are "behind the eight ball" with technology. I believe that part of the problem is our lack of knowledge about the resources that are available.
Let's face it, technology vendors aren't often at our conferences or advertising in our publications. A second part of the gap is that companies are not familiar with our needs...primarily because we are not sure how technology could assist us.
The solution is multi-pronged....we need to have someone (perhaps such as yourself) educating us about technology and encouraging us to think about ways technology could ease our burdens (most of us social workers/parent aides believe that technology should be able to assist us, we just don't understand exactly how that might happen or what it might look in its final form). The second prong to this solution is developing ideas about our needs then educating the software providers as to them.
From: Edward Geraty
To: HUman Service Information Technology Applications (HUSITA@listserv.uta.edu)
(snip)
I couldn't; agree more. Social workers really need to "get up to speed" about cyber practice (the integration of Internet-mediated communication and social work practice). There are many good technology resources and training for social workers, but many still have their heads still stuck in the sand. If I can be of assistance in directing you toward those resources please let me know.
From: Scott Kashkin
To: To: HUman Service Information Technology Applications (HUSITA@listserv.uta.edu)
(snip)
I don't know that you'll have to 'get completely away' (as you put it) from your old field as the needs and uses of IT in social welfare are extensive. That's what this whole group is all about.
HUSITA now has recently started a college club which helps students with the convergence of IT and social work. You might be finding that your program pays scant attention to IT. The HUSITA college club is intended to help you bridge the gap. For more info, please check out our web page. Go to husita.org and click on college clubs on the menu up top. Or just send me an email: skashkin@gmail.com.
From: Goutham Menon
To: To: HUman Service Information Technology Applications (HUSITA@listserv.uta.edu)
(snip)
While I would tend to agree with Thomas's and Scott's comments on technology not being as prominent in the social services sector...things are definitely changing. As long as the resources lag behind innovation in our sector, this will tend to be an issue. Especially with budget cuts etc etc and the inability of board members to see value in investing in technology, this will be a problem.
I would look at exposing board members (the decision makers) to technology tools rather than enticing social service workers (the worker bee) to the toys of productivity. That should be our target. Once it gets in there, it would perculate.
Ed, with regards to some in the profession having their head stuck in the sand.. hmm... i like it that way.. for a reason. We some how seem to have missed one step in the concept formulation -> Testing -> Delivery phase of technology. Yes, the tools are there for communication and may be even computer mediated support groups... but cyber therapy? I would like us to take steps in producing empirical evidence that cyber therapy is what it is named to be. Therapy. We are a bit behind on this.
We enjoy the tools and do come up with practices to "mirror" real life, face to face practices. Maybe it is time to go outside the box and reposition technology mediated support services. I dont believe we are at the "therapy' stage yet...
From: Edward Geraty
To: HUman Service Information Technology Applications (HUSITA@listserv.uta.edu)
Social workers may be a bit behind on this, but not the other professions. Let me suggest you read the white papers on the International Society for Mental Health Online website http://www.ismho.org and the Web counseling standards of practice for Internet counseling on the National Board for Certified Counselors website at http://www.nbcc.org/ethics
From: Don Cameron
To: Community Informatics (communityinformatics@vancouvercommunity.net)
As something of an agnostic in this world of Open Source evangelism I am sometimes accused of being a Microsoft spy; the devil incarnate or worse when raising questions of the type you have asked on certain OS forums...yet as someone who also supports and contributes to Open Source development I usually enjoy a welcoming virtual 'cup of coffee' from more pragmatic OS developers (fortunately the majority!).
The OS community is very diverse but the old axiom about "squeaky wheels" still holds true - The views of a noisy evangelistic minority tend not to reflect the view of the majority and paints a sometimes false face on Open Source, which is commonly a for-profit development methodology albeit underpinned by collaboration and altruism. The OS methodology is the most part an extension of a "community cooperative" (a coop) - nothing at all new about the concept. Virtuous? possibly. Spiritual? well, to me it's a stretch at best...
So to provide one perspective to your questions... Engaging the Open Source community is the same as engaging the interest of any other coop - provide incentives to developers based on projected needs (a potential for marketing or profit; input into developments etc. etc.). Interest will rise if project needs are seen to be addressed by NPO's.
I think it's very important for NPO's not to be seen (or to see themselves) as simple beneficiaries of Open Source developments, nor to try and take the "high moral ground" of altruism - Open Source developers are often just as altruistic as NPO administrators and will not like a "holier than thou" approach. NPO's must be contributors and also acknowledge the potential of the NPO market to support development efforts (financially if necessary) if we/they really want to foster the interest of the OS community. (Some NPO's might seek discounts however they should still be willing to pay a nominal amount for extensive development efforts, or at least be willing to contribute in other ways).
For my part I have recently been accepted as a "Domain Expert" for the Open Source project "Sahana" - a system for managing disaster preparation, relief, recovery and reconstruction in collaboration with the Sri Lankan ICT Industry and University of Moratuwa. I chose to contribute to this project because I think it offers enormous potential to help NPO's working in the field of emergency aid - but we cannot expect the developers to do all this work on their own - we (NPO's and those representing NPO's) must also contribute and collaborate if we: a) truly want to be a part of this new-world coop, and b) want the outputs to "work" for our NPO environments.
Maybe what we firstly need to do is to assess our own skill-base before approaching OS developers so we know what it is we can offer...
From: Andy Williamson
To: Community Informatics (communityinformatics@vancouvercommunity.net)
I think the answer to this conundrum is really quite straightforward: A lot of people writing open source (and software in general) really don't care what it's used for - they care about writing software.
In the commercial software zoo, cages are aligned, bananas unveiled and the monkeys given specifications ... Then away they go... Eventually, after much shreiking and whooping, a system vaguely resembling the users specification issues forth (if you’re lucky). And the monkeys are happy. They (mostly) have absolutely no interest in what that system is for, what the users do or why they do it. That's the role of the analysts...
Guess what’s missing in the community ICT sector... The analyst! Often low budget users head straight for a low-budget (hence open source) developer, explain what they want, it gets developed. Worse still, the developer is connected or interested in the field, rolls up his sleeves and hacks some code together. That's not good software development practice! Where community-based applications are successful, there was probably a pivotal role in there with someone who could translate what was needed in the organisation into a specification the developers could understand and (in return) explain the development in a way the users could understand.
So, is it really a
problem of dis-intermediation being a bad thing? The solution perhaps
lies more with following good software design principles... Or perhaps
more to the point the community sector being resourced enough to be
able to do that.
From: Kayza Kleinman
To: Information Systems Forum (information_systems_forum@yahoogroups.com)
DEF: Could I have approached these folks in a more engaging way?
Possibly. However, I wonder who you were talking about? The "purists" or the folks who just want to see Linux deployed anywhere, anyhow.
DEF: Are there other folks in these organizations - other, that is, than the ones staffing the booths - who would be interested if approached?
If you were talking to the purists, I would bet that there ARE others who are interested. The purists tend to be just that and also seem to tend to believe that a. outreach shouldn't be necessary (they really do believe the "build a better mousetrap" thing) and that b. it's perfectly reasonable to expect people to be technologically savvy as part of the "price" for joining this club. However, there are lots of other linux folks who have a better sense of the realities on the ground, and DO understand that outreach may be necessary, and that not EVERYONE dealing with Linux needs to be a techie.
DEF: Should NOSI and N-TEN being doing a better job of making the case for service to the nonprofit community?
I think so. Microsoft has been very clever in making some much of their software so inexpensive for nonprofits. But, Linux and OS still make a great deal of sense in the sector, but they need help to make it happen. That's not to say that N-TEN and NOSI are just sitting on their hands. I just think that in terms of making the connections, it's just not where it needs to be, yet.
DEF: Should the techno-phobic social workers of this world be taking the lead in doing outreach to the open source software community about the importance of the work that the nonprofit sector does, and the need for the open source community to support it?
"Should" doesn't come into the issue discussion here, in my opinion. The reality is that these folks are stretched enough that this kind of outreach is simply not practical. And when a perception is fostered that Linux is for "geeks", well, you can't blame non-technologists for just concluding that there is no place for it where they are.
From: Anonymous
To: Information Systems Forum (information_systems_forum@yahoogroups.com)
DEF: What kind of relationship do you have with the Nonprofit Open Source Initiative <http://www.nosi.net>? How about the Nonprofit> Technology Enterprise Network <http://www.nten.org>? Unfortunately, when I asked these questions, I received a lot of blank looks.
I'd hardly say it's a surprise, however unfortunate it may be...
DEF: Could I have approached these folks in a more engaging way?
Maybe, maybe not? Everyone can't do everything. To people at a trade show that you are attempting to involve in a project near and dear to your heart that they may not really care about or may never even have heard of, you need to sell the idea of cooperating with what may sound like just yet another organization to them. [Apologies for the run-on.] Put a different way, you need to offer an answer to 'why should I care?' other than 'because you should.'
The 'you' here, of course, is anyone interested in convincing a techie to join the proverbial cause.
DEF: Are there other folks in these organizations - other, that is, than the ones staffing the booths - who would be interested if approached?
Possibly, but not necessarily, and chances are the person you're talking to doesn't know the answer either, especially as the size of the organization increases.
DEF: Should NOSI and N-TEN being doing a better job of making the case for service to the nonprofit community?
Absolutely. Although it raises the spectre of volunteer management trouble, techies that *aren't* in the nonprofit sector but are civic-minded are a great untapped resource. Net Day and similar projects are well and good, but organized tech volunteerism seems to stop right there.
DEF: Should the techno-phobic social workers of this world be taking the lead in doing outreach to the open source software community ?
It depends on what the social workers are doing and who they're talking to. The "importance of the work" is in the eye of the beholder, if you allow me to mutilate a metaphor or two. Calling its support a 'need' is risky. I think there needs to be an interim step somewhere; a volunteermatch.org / idealist.org sort of thing to get the right people on both sides of the fence talking.
If you gave me permission to quote your comments, and I accidentally omitted them, or if you'd like to enter this conversation now, please feel free to add comments to this blog.
