A New Spin on Open Source Business Models

IT Managers Journal is reporting that a Canadian communications student is trying to put a new spin on open source business models. Greg Dean, a student at Simon Fraser University, is attempting to merge the principles of open source with that of a co-op and a regular corporation. From the article: "On the first slide of his presentation, Dean described the ICT/OS as a 'participatory, self-managed workers' business' designed for 'getting the benefits of a corporation through the convivial democracy of a co-op.' Punctuated by dozens of questions, the rest of the presentation explained exactly how he thought this goal could be achieved. In his vision, the co-op would involve three types of members: full members, who are freelancers in high-tech professions and have full voting rights; associated members such as lawyers who provide services to the co-op; and non-members with an investment in the company."

Comments

Re:I'm no expert, but...

[cperciva]

Could anyone translate into inoffensive plain english? How is this different from any other business plan?

If you're wondering how this is different from any other business plan, you're doing better than me. After reading the article, I'm still trying to figure out what the business plan is.

So far I understand that it starts with "get a bunch of people together", but I can't see how to get from there to "profit!".

It does look different to me

[Infonaut]

This looks like more of that randomised babble I get from my junkmail folder... Could anyone translate into inoffensive plain english? How is this different from any other business plan? Honestly?

Every business plan I've ever seen (for something beyond a sole proprietorship or partnership) takes for granted that the business will be established as either an S-Corp, LLC, or C-Corp. I'm not sure how business formation works in Canada. However, based on the article, it appears that the idea is to create a business structure that borrows features from a co-operative association (ex: a co-op grocery store or a co-op lending organization), while retaining features of a corporation.

Just because the concept seems a bit convoluted doesn't make it particularly "offensive" to my mind. Many extremely successful businesses have structures that can't be explained in less than 10,000 words, anyway. I'm of the opinion that part of the reason we have companies that do stupid and destructive things is because the legal structures for those companies encourage buck-passing, groupthink, and sublimation of individual responsibility. The article indicates that this new structure attempts to avoid both of those. It will be interesting to see if anyone gives it a try.

Business Model?

[bobintetley]

I read TFA and I don't understand why the Slashdot title is "Open Source Business Models". This sounds more like an organisation structure (and a fairly lame one at that) than a business model. Shouldn't a business model outline what they're going to sell, how much they're going to charge, potential revenues, etc. etc.

This just looked like a load of fluff to me. Did I miss the point?

Monetization...aargh

[Flying pig]

Yet another person determined to destroy the useful word "monetization" by depriving it of meaning. This one is really getting to me.

Monetization means to establish something as being a currency, e.g. gold, silver, perhaps grain in agricultural communities. You mean "of making a profit or getting an income from Open Source." Why can't you just say that instead of using a word that you think makes you sound like some kind of economist? When there is an exchange rate on the currency markets of lines of source code to the dollar, your comment will make sense.

Morning rant over. Back to doing documentation.