1. University of Toronto: KMDI, POS|OA SEP Awards Turning a Mature Nonprofit Organization into an Open Source Community: First Steps Andrew Clarke Professor Andrew Clement Faculty of Information Studies

2. Introduction  What is an “open source community”? Is it one that:  collaborates for the primary purpose of developing computer programs under various open source licenses?  facilitates legitimate peripheral participation by using newer communication genres to represent openly its social norms, and document publicly its decisions and processes?  How does it mean for an organization to “adopt open source”?  start using FLOSS as tools to achieve the adopting organization’s (static) goals?  start a conversation with, or begin co-evolution with, an open source community?

3. Background & Rationale  Mature nonprofit organizations (MNPOs) are marginalized in our consumer-driven, capitalist global society (Gandy 2002).  Another type of gift economy, the open source community, increasingly thrives.  Adopting open source methods might help MNPOs thrive too, but what would that mean?  Why might some efforts by mature nonprofit organizations to adopt open source “technology” have failed?

4. Project Methodology  Action Research Case Study (transformational paradigm)  In the context of a struggling, MNPO (United Church congregation) facilitate an initial encounter with an open source content management system (Drupal)  Typical (low) budget, agile (iterative) methods  Use development blogs, emails as qualitative sources  Triangulate tentative findings with another organization (U of T)

5. Main Findings/Deliverables  Main deliverables:  the organization’s existing website content migrated to Drupal  a document describing the organization’s objectives for its website  a document describing a social justice argument for the organization to have a first encounter with open source technology and methods  Findings:  organization had difficulty articulating goals for its website  tight project timeframe meant migration had to proceed anyway  exposure to new technology affected the organization’s goals  organization remains very excited and positive about the transition so far

6. Implications  There may be a risk in over-stabilizing the organizational goals of MNPOs prior to attempting adoption of open source technology  Agile (iterative) methods may have a role in preventing this overstabilization  Much of the discourse among helpers of nonprofit organizations advocates a completely different process: stabilize goals THEN choose technology

7. Communities Affected  Mature nonprofit communities (organizations)  Open Source Communities  Facilitators of “technology” adoption: information professionals GoalsGenresArtifacts MNPO Community GoalsGenresArtifacts OS Community Traditional methods: stabilize goals, then choose artifacts as tools Agile methods: artifacts affect goals as much as the reverse What about a new method, focused entirely on communication genres?

8. Benefits of SEP  Tightly framed the timeline  removed any temptation to spend time investigating (and thereby stabilizing) organizational goals, which probably contributed to the eventual success  Mandated some reflection: theoretical perspective on the extent of success and the potential causal factors  Framing the project in a research context allows the organization to see itself as a leader – enhancing self- efficacy, making “the trials” worthwhile

9. Conclusions and Next Steps  What are the most efficient ways to deliver this experience to non-profit organizations in general?  Need to facilitate the transition from face-to-face to online interaction for participating organizations  How can this shift more to an educational intervention, and less of an action research project?  Website transformation “course”?  Collaboration with potential website hosting providers:  Web Networks  United Church of Canada  University of Toronto AMS?