Harvard Adds Open Source to its MBA Curriculum

mjasay writes to tell us that Harvard has started teaching open source to its aspiring MBA candidates. In the latest issue of Harvard Business Review, Harvard presents business managers with a tough decision: To open source a successful (but increasingly vulnerable) product or guard its intellectual property zealously? As the case study's open source proponent suggests, "Open source is like a rising tide. You either float with it or drown."

Grey area

[ijustam]

From the case study description:

Eric Levin, the executive vice president of Techno Source, suggests that KMS take a middle path: license its software to third-party companies and add features to promote community building.

I, personally, hate it when this occurs. In my experience these companies never seem to get it right and usually end up tarnishing the entire brand. I hate to be so black-and-white, but the mix of company policies could just... be awful. If they licensed an add-on to a company who hired crap programmers that could tarnish the entire line.

Maybe I'm just bitter because then it seems like a game of "monkey in the middle" and they're tossing the code around and won't let me have it. Jerks.

Re:Grey area

[martin-boundary]

Maybe I'm just bitter because then it seems like a game of "monkey in the middle" and they're tossing the code around and won't let me have it. Jerks.

Fuck'em. Build your own. Package it for Debian. Laugh.

Re:Grey area

[that_itch_kid]

From the case study description:

Eric Levin, the executive vice president of Techno Source, suggests that KMS take a middle path: license its software to third-party companies and add features to promote community building.

I, personally, hate it when this occurs. In my experience these companies never seem to get it right and usually end up tarnishing the entire brand. I hate to be so black-and-white, but the mix of company policies could just... be awful. If they licensed an add-on to a company who hired crap programmers that could tarnish the entire line. Maybe I'm just bitter because then it seems like a game of "monkey in the middle" and they're tossing the code around and won't let me have it. Jerks.

It's a prime example of a business trying to get the advantages of the open source development model without giving back to the community. I think you'd be quite right in saying this is Doing It Wrong.

What about Zimbra?

[amasiancrasian]

It's a prime example of a business trying to get the advantages of the open source development model without giving back to the community. I think you'd be quite right in saying this is Doing It Wrong.

I have to say I disagree. If you look at how Zimbra (open-source Microsoft® Exchange slaughterer) works, it really is a miracle that you get a first-grade email server with CalDav, Jabber, Wiki, self-updating and indexing search, with a MySQL-based message store connected by an OpenLDAP implementation (with capabilities of integrating with other directories) in an interface of commercial quality and usability, you will find that this is open-source wedded with commercial enterprise done right.

And I don't disagree with their business model. I think it is perfectly acceptable for them to ensure that commercial releases are tested thoroughly for QA, and that connectors integrating with commercial technologies such as Outlook or iSync stay commercial. I have no qualms about paying for an Outlook connector or an iSync connector. If you don't pay for the commercial edition, you're on your own like any open-source software. But at the very least, you get to run a mail server that is not crippled and probably a very formidable competitor to Exchange (which sadly can't run in Opera, Safari, or Firefox).

I don't see why you guys don't think this can work. These companies deserve to be rewarded for their hard work, and they are making money by adding value to a product, not crippling it. If you're an all open-source user any way, why would you need an iSync or an Outlook connector? Perhaps the only thing they could do better is change their license to GPL instead of MPL.

Oh, and I hope Microsoft doesn't buy Yahoo. Because your next upgrade path is Exchange, if Zimbra isn't released from a Microsoft merger or forked to a new project.

Re:

[wrook]

Personally, I'm not against companies that try to sell a proprietary add-on to their own open source software. However, I don't think it's the smartest business practice. Especially if it's an MPL license. In this kind of circumstance you are banking on selling to proprietary folk and getting support from open source folk. Such a practice won't last long because the open source folk will jump ship as soon as there is a friendlier alternative. They may soon find themselves competing against the same peo

Re:What about Zimbra?

[deanlandolt]

I completely understand your sentiment, but I'm having a little trouble reconciling...

I don't disagree with their business model. I think it is perfectly acceptable for...connectors integrating with commercial technologies such as Outlook or iSync stay commercial

...and...

I hope Microsoft doesn't buy Yahoo. Because your next upgrade path is Exchange, if Zimbra isn't released from a Microsoft merger or forked to a new project.

Because of the very strategy you advocate, it's impossible to fork the project with the connectors -- which is really the competitive pressure MS would want to squelch. Thus, irony ensues.

Re:What about Zimbra?

[replicant108]

It's worse than that.

The Zimbra Public License requires that the code displays the Zimbra logo. Yahoo's acquisition would mean that the trademark was owned by MS - allowing MS to exercise complete proprietary control over Zimbra code - and effectively nullify any user freedoms granted by the license.

Re:

[Schraegstrichpunkt]

MS or Murdock or any other from that anti-business, centralized, command economy crowd

THANK YOU. You just made my day.

Grey area-Hypocrisy.

[Anonymous Coward]

"It's a prime example of a business trying to get the advantages of the open source development model without giving back to the community."

So everyone who downloads gives back to OSS? Glad to see no one's talking out both sides of their mouth.

Re:

[debatem1]

At least they don't breathe out of it exclusively. If you're only distributing the code to your crippleware and selling the blobs for your more advanced features, you're implicitly saying that you don't trust the people you expect to be writing code for your product. Would you choose to volunteer for something like that?

Re:

[that_itch_kid]

You didn't actually read the example. Do so. This isn't an example of open source, it's an example of a company using the advantages of open source (Many developers, all bugs are shallow, you know what I mean) and still subjugating their customers. It's like MS Shared Source.

Makes me wish everybody had just stuck with "Free Software".

Re:

[Jurily]

Glad to see no one's talking out both sides of their mouth.

Is that an english expression?

P.S. I'm Hungarian, and I'm after my 10th beer, so be gentle.

Re:

[AdamInParadise]

I've found the case study to be pretty interesting. I also think that the answer from Eric Levin from Techno Source (an electronic toy maker) was perfectly in line with their current way of thinking and therefore disappointing. From my point of view, this middle path is just business as usual for electronic manufacturers: this is the standard business models for third-party accessories, from the iPod to the Wii. However, it should be noted that the middle path he was suggesting included a "certification" s

Re:

[GaryOlson]

...it seems like a game of "monkey in the middle" ...

The most succinct and accurate description I have ever seen of any MBA program.

Harvard has determined the OSS ecosystem is now large enough to sustain a population of MBA monkeys. I suggest the OSS community remove the monkey sustenance from their ecosystem immediately if not sooner.

Re:

[Technician]

I, personally, hate it when this occurs. In my experience these companies never seem to get it right and usually end up tarnishing the entire brand

This happens as someone needs to pay for R & D for much of the stuff. But this is starting to fall as open alternatives encroach on the product. A custom Point Of Sale system may be produced this way. The number of clients for the software fall off as Open Source alternatives fill the market. The end result is nicely summarized in the last sentence.

"Open

this is just a case study

[hazem]

The title here is pretty misleading. It reads as if an entire course was dedicated to the issues of Open Source, which would be a good thing. As it is, this is just one case study. If used in a course, it would be read and used in one class session.

These case studies are used in lots of MBA courses, and they are just little stories used to describe a business situation. They often have interesting business problems but they're also often filled with fluff ("Jane showed up at the factory with her DK shoes and her Gucci handbag... can't figure out why the client doesn't take her seriously") and tons of information that is irrelevant to the "problem". I'm sure part of the "training" from these case studies is learning to weed out useless information.

For example, we had one about Eli Lilly and whether they should build a line dedicated to a particular product or use a general purpose/configurable line. The dedicated line had a higher throughput and lower cost but the configurable line could be used for something else if the market didn't develop for the drug. But it would be quite a stretch to say that because we read and discussed a 10 page case study that "Pharmaceuticals" had been added to our curriculum.

The type of course that would have this case study on the syllabus would also have cases on motorcycle parts manufacturing, consultancy woes, and HR problems where people don't work well together. But this is hardly a serious curriculum about Open Source.

Re:

[torstenvl]

Yeah, the quality of this post wasn't all that great. Publishing something in the HBR doesn't guarantee that the case study will be used in any classes at HBS, and even if it did, a case study does not a course curriculum make.

Another nitpick - there are exactly zero "aspiring MBA candidates" in business school. If you've been admitted to business school, you already *are* an MBA candidate. It's like trying to charge someone with attempted conspiracy.

Re:

[maxwell demon]

But attempted conspiracy is entirely possible: Imagine you want to start a conspiracy, but don't find anyone who's willing to conspire with you ...

Re:

[torstenvl]

Then it would depend on if they did whatever it was they wanted to conspire to. If they decided NOT to do it, then nothing criminal was done. If they decided to do it and were successful, charge them with the underlying offense. If they decided to do it and were unsuccessful, charge them with attempt of the underlying offense.

You can't charge someone with attempted conspiracy because conspiracy itself is an attempt (at complicity). You can't charge attempted attempts. You have to take actual, concrete steps

Re:

[maxwell demon]

Otherwise, the government could imprison you for just talking about a possible conspiracy

From what I hear, the Chinese government can.

it forgets about *using* software

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, it forgets about *using* the software and instead focuses on that fantasy vision about 'selling' software. The vast majority is developed only for in-house use.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just an HBR article, but there are a number of courses including Managing in the Information Age, Strategic Agility, Competing Through Business Models, Managing Networked Businesses, and Strategy and Technology that deal extensively with questions of open source vs. proprietary technology. In the past two years (I'm graduating this June) we've dealt with how Red Hat can make a viable business out of selling services, whether Linden Labs should open the API library for its servers, and a number of o

Re:

[rtb61]

What is does is teaches future business leaders that there are choice beyond closed source proprietary software. As a tech site sometimes it is worth remembering that for 99.99% of businesses software is just an overhead, and even worse it is an overhead with an enormous service and support cost.

So understanding open source software, being able to deploy it effectively and establishing service and support systems for it, is very important to ensure major savings are achieved in this overhead cost.

The ch

Floating

[bazonic]

"Open source is like a rising tide. You either float with it or drown."

That's a great sound bite, but in reality, the big money-making technology is closed. Google, while being a great OSS advocate, will never open source what truly makes them money - their search algorithm. Apple, Adobe, SAP, Symantech, MS, etc, are not going to open their cash cows any time soon and are floating just fine.
 
OSS is not going away, but to say you have to open or drown is hyperbole. There is room, and reason, for both.

Re:

[SerpentMage]

It's funny that people don't realize this. Look at the market value of the companies you named. Look at their revenues. And then look at the market cap of Red Hat and Novell. Pitiful... Shows you that closed source is actually more profitable...

Harvard misses the point

[HiggsBison]

The real point is not to open source ones product. The point is to open source all the commodity overhead programming. If everyone is doing bookkeeping and payroll and inventory, then sharing the maintenance of the software keeps everyone's costs down.

Back to school?

[JonnyBe]

Well, maybe Bill Gates will now finish his degree at Harvard. The question is, will he pass the course?

Better Trained Weasels

[tom's a-cold]

This is just another indication that, if they can't kill us or piss on us, they're going to try to own us.

I've had occasional dealings with Harvard MBAs. Their arrogance and sense of entitlement, coupled with the hypercompetitive shallowness that characterizes a certain kind of A student, is typical of an especially odious segment of the American ruling elite. I would rather they knew nothing about open source, so that they would be on the losing side and find themselves marginalized and irrelevant, rather than letting them force themselves into leadership positions through their highly refined self-promotion and ass-kissing skills.

Re:

[Funakoshi]

I am curious. You say you've had "occasional dealings", but seem to paint all Harvard MBAs with a single stroke. I understand your dislike for the individuals you have met, but do you feel that the generalization is fair? Moreover, is the use of a single case in a single class actually an "indication" that they are attempting to do you wrong in some way (or as you say, "own us")?

It seems that most of what I read online on sites like Slashdot, people are complaining that business school students and ma

Amusing line from TFA

[Daniel Dvorkin]

The first line, in fact:

It's about time that United States elite academic institutions finally got around to not only using open-source software, but also teaching it.

United States elite academic institutions have been teaching open source for quite some time: computer science departments at good schools teach their students to compile their programs using GCC, statistics departments at good schools teach their students to program in R, etc. If business schools are finally starting to hear about this mira