Skip to content

Maturity model to assess the authenticity and engagement of open projects.

License

Notifications You must be signed in to change notification settings

massonpj/OpenMaturityModel

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

7 Commits
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

Open Maturity Model

Maturity model to assess the authenticity and engagement of open projects.

Objective

The Open Maturity Model (OMM) attempts to define open attributes, and a means for assessing the behaviors within a community of practice responsible for the design, development, and distribution of open works.

Importantly, the OMM is not designed to assess the openness of any specific artifact (object, software, resource, content, etc.) claimed to be open—there are plenty of licenses which can be used to assess the openness of an object—rather, the model assesses the presence and authenticity of behavior within an organization/community that creates and manages artifact.

Scope of Work

The OMM is applicable for individuals and organizations who are assessing the openness of a project or organization.

The OMM may also be used as a reference guide by projects/organizations for creating and promoting openness within their own community.

Background

The term open is popularly used to describe a variety of works (software and technology, educational resources, culture and government, etc.). Unfortunately, as organizations who actively and authentically participate in the development of works distributed with open licenses (Creative Commons, Open Source Initiative) reap the business, economic, operational, and technical benefits, as well as garner public accolades and increased profile from that success, “openwashing" and “fauxpen source" become more prevalent. Michelle Thorn, Mozilla’s Director of the Webmaker Program, was the first to define openwashing in 2009, “to spin a product or company as open, although it is not,” while fauxpen source was introduced by Phil Marsosudiro, as "a description of software that claims to be open source, but lacks the full freedoms required by the Open Source Definition.”

Ambiguity exists in not only the meaning of open but the scope as well. Consider the term open education, which currently encompass many attributes, some of which may not actually be recognized across all initiatives devoted to open education. For example, must open education include, open enrollment (no fee, no prerequisites, no registration, etc.) or the exclusive use of open resources (i.e. Creative Commons licensed content)?

References

The following have influenced and informed the development of the OMM

  1. Etiel. "OpenSource Maturity Model." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 16 June 2010. Web. 8 May 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSource_Maturity_Model.
  2. Marsosudiro, Phil. "Fauxpen Source." Fauxpen Source. Phil Marsosudiro, 2 May 2009. Web. <http://www.fauxpensource.org>.
  3. Masson, Patrick. "Openness Index." Apereo WIki. Apereo Foundation, 14 Feb. 2011. Web. 8 May 2016. <https://wiki.jasig.org/display/2398/Openness+Index>.
  4. Thorn, Michelle. "Openwashing." Michelle Thorn. Michelle Thorn, 14 Mar. 2009. Web. 8 May 2016. <http://michellethorne.cc/2009/03/openwashing/>.
  5. Waugh, Pai. "Openness Rating: How Open Is Your Software Project?" OSS Watch. OSS Watch, 11 Dec. 2014. Web. 8 May 2016. <http://oss-watch.ac.uk/apps/openness/>.

Copyright (c) 2016 Patrick Masson, Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

About

Maturity model to assess the authenticity and engagement of open projects.

Resources

License

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

No packages published