So, what does that mean?

What does the phrase 'pragmatic information systems' mean? Why make a title of it? Why not Pragmatic Information Technology? Because in the tenure of my career in distributed technology I've come across what I think is an important distinction - Information Technology is still a single-sided phenomena, one only needs to follow the money. Said another way:

• The consumption and use of information technology is primarily a game for well funded organizations


• The focus of software companies drawn to well funded organizations.
  

The phenomena produced by the Open Source philosophy was supposed to close that gap. What happened is ironic. Once the licensing landscape was established, read that: clear boundaries of liability; Open Source became a competitor to established software vendors. This was especially so in the middleware space where application servers compete. An application servers is a platform that consolidates technologies used to produce sophisticated web applications. Well funded organizations were able to play the reduced ownership cost of tested, and in some cases certified, Open Source distributions against the usual and established suspects. The establishment's licensing costs are surprising; from what I've experienced and have had validated by my peers, the quality of support is sometimes not that good until you get to the right people.

Now comes software companies and consultancies focused on Open Source (OS). As a consultancy the organization offers experts in a strategic range of OS distributions. Open Source software companies tend to lie between two extremes:

• Consumers of OS projects who test and certify distributions, provide email and telephone support, maybe organized field level support and learning services
  


• Administrators and benefactors of OS projects, repackaging of public domain into a supported branded product, provide email and telephone support viz licensing, maybe field support and learning services
  

The reduction of cost of Open Source is associated with the reduction of complexity; i.e., the cost of development is absent or significantly reduced. But to be fair, the same is true of the quality of support in Open Source support organizations, and sometimes successful support from the community is complicated.

The effort of obtaining support from the Open Source Community is caused by a misunderstanding of the nature of the Community. Rule #1: Simply because you are using the distribution (whichever that might be), does not entitle you to a response, a solution, or even the attention of the developers. Rule #2: Read the manual, and read it again, and refer to #1. This is a different environment from the traditional. It may sound odd expressed this way but, the Open Source Community is best suited for independent sorts who can contribute to the knowledge base. The use of Open Source and participation in the community is a cultural change from the customary business model. Open Source is a community based model of software development versus a unitary source based model. The community model does not allow entitlement, it allows only participation. The unitary source model allows entitlement by definition.

Many of the Open Source software companies and the consultancies that support Open Source have associated costs that are not conducive to the economics nor the operandi of small business. Some benefits of using software associated with Open Source exist, for example Ubuntu, to be fair, but these benefits tend to be little more than what comes in the shrink-wrap; for example thirty-days free access to supported archives, or automatic updates until product end-of-life. How does that benefit small business beyond what a high-school geek benefits?

The preceding are the observations that compel this summary of what I mean by Pragmatic Information Systems. The promise of IT was better, faster, cheaper. Frankly, that promise is empty of meaning in the context of the current culture. Perhaps its become better-faster-cheaper for those with budgets to afford better-faster-cheaper; but I'm not familiar with any. The focus has been too shallow. Better-faster-cheaper is a war of words only.

Small businesses often have a need for better-faster-cheaper technology to compete better, faster, and cheaper. The lesson from the myth of better-faster-cheaper compels reiteration on the way information can be consumed and used by a community of interest. But an information system is a significant expense made more significant by the sophisticated methods and technologies owned by larger organizations. A collateral effect, in my opinion, is the impractical prioritization of presentation; the pragmatic implication is a deflection of focus from the first priority of conveying information. The information can be void as long as it looks good in lipstick. The gap between information producers and information consumers widens continuously in the current culture.

The present state of affairs makes it sometimes cost ineffective to invest in stricter governance of costs, both direct and indirect, because a technology could not be purchased. The resulting situation is brutal pragmatics: The existence of the problem is far less annoying than the solution. There are several, probably countably infinite, cases and examples. Its true that in many cases large concerns have opened information sinks accessed via a web site and special credentials. Some are sophisticated, some are restrictive. However, many times the terms and conditions of access to critical information is restrictive and risky to small businesses. This is an impractical model when nearly all businesses, large to small, are so tightly coupled to an international network. Its the same Internet for everyone and Open Source was intended for community use - meaning the World Community. Open Source does not imply free nor does it imply entitlement. The price tag involved can be paid either in capital equity or sweat equity. The olde-fashioned way is still the gauge. That means money or time in some moderation. Its been my impression those two things are, in a manner of speaking, commodities that are in short supply to a small business owner and operator.

This only adds impetus to the focus that small businesses can use the same technologies as the large concerns - its a matter of inventing pragmatic ways of adopting Open Source. What's good for the goose can be good for the gosling. This Blog is about how Open Source can be used beneficially by small businesses without a dependence on what large businesses can budget for Information Technology development. The solutions to be explored have two sources: my head, and community feed back. This in itself should be a friendly nudge that to find solutions entailing Open Source for small business the pragmatics shifts the emphasis to community.