Thanks all for the session yesterday.
Following up on the previous session, we decided to spend some times on different pillars that might help us to scorecard organizations on their transparency.
Here are the few of those pillars
How transparent are corporation about what they are taking?
From the scale 1 to 5, on the far left we have organizations with no public reporting about how much value is derived from FOSS. On the far right we have organizations who have public reporting about value derived from FOSS, including public data and methodology.
How transparent are they about the contribution back to open source?
From 1 to 5. Far left organization with no giving of any kind to far right organizations with public accounting of giving that covers money, code, and in-kind.
How transparent are their policies?
- Clear and openly shared contribution policies
- Named Accountability Officer
- Employee contributions are associated the employer
Provides a true explanation of the reasoning behind proposed contributions
On a scale from 1 to 5, far left are the ones governed internally, and on the far right, the organizations open source projects that are fully governed externally.
The danger of scorecarding all organizations on the same grading system
Given many organisations have an immature FOSS posture, and there is a journey of learning and development that most organisations must undertake, it is important that the score card system isn’t irrelevant through setting an unachievable bar for the masses. Therefore, a graded system - similar to belts in karate - may be beneficial to allow staged improvements and a graduating understanding and development in relation to FOSS. In other words, moving a company from ‘white belt’ to ‘yellow belt’ is solid progress - if such a company is expected to graduate from white to black belt immediately, nobody wins.