[Board] USGIF Conference and diatribe on where we are heading

[Arnulf Christl]

Mark,
thanks for this detailed report and your thoughts. Let me answer to a
few points you raise and share my ideas about OSGeo's future that I have
nursed since our last f2f meeting in Denver. It will take some time so
please bear with me.

On 10/25/2011 11:54 PM, Mark Lucas wrote:
> Just got back from the 2011 Geoint Conference in San Antonio Texas.
> http://geoint2011.com/
> 
> The USGIF is the conference for geospatial intelligence in the US.  This
> year there were over 5000 attendees (138 from overseas- mostly foreign
> military).
> 
> There over 250  booths and paying sponsors (> 100,000 sq ft of exhibit
> space) .  They have built this organization up to support a full time
> staff, multiple events throughout the year, media publications etc.
> http://www.gotgeoint.com/
> 
> For the first time, we were able to get on the agenda with an OSS panel.  
> http://geointv.com/archive/geoint-2011-breakout-demonstration-of-military-relevant-open-source-geospatial-software/

This is great to see. Was OSGeo represented with a booth? Right now I am
at the OSGeo booth in Seoul at the SmartKorea event, a trade fair with
some 100 exhibitors from a dozen countries. The trade fair, convention
and conference is co-organized by the Korean Ministry of Transport and
others (please check for yourself - it really is a big event). The OSGeo
booth has been organized by Mr. Sanghee Shin and is sponsored by the
Korean Local Chapter [1], mainly through his company GRIDA who provide
know-how and consulting using Open Source software tools. Tomorrow they
will also hold FOSS4G Korea [2], the local chapter's annual conference
taking place at the same venue. It is fascinating to see so much
activity around OSGeo and FOSS4G here. Interest by the government,
academia and private sector here is building up a lot of momentum.

I also met with the organizers of the global FIG conference [3] here
which will take place in Malaysia in 2014. We have talked about
co-organizing and Open Source track with OSGeo and will also try to have
a booth and so on.

This is just to document that there are things going on outside of what
we typically see.

> Open source software is suddenly interesting because of dramatic budget
> cuts that are planned for most of the agencies.

...which in my opinion is always a difficult path to star from. I know -
this is a great chance and I do not want to downplay it, but I also
think that we have done a pretty good job of making a pitch for Open
Source explicitly *without* the focus on cost alone, but all the other
arguments.

> Most of the presentations are online at: http://geointv.com/

Some of the presentations were already on Twitter, great to see so much
positive things going on. We will have to make sure that they are
collected as testimonials and are readily accessible for interested
OSGeo members to make a pitch at other events.

> NSA and NGA both made announcements related to their focus on open
> source software.
> 
> As the US government shows increasing interest in open source software
> solutions the existing contractors will try to align themselves with
> those capabilities.  
> 
> Unfortunately, this comes at a time when the OSGeo has stepped back from
> a core staff and is uncertain about holding annual NA conferences.

My understanding is different. Instead, to me it seems like this will be
the *first* year where NA will actually "dare" to have it's own
conference. This is great and I am all for supporting it. If you
recollect I explicitly asked at the AGM whether someone would volunteer
to organize it and someone stood up.

>  Indeed, there almost seems to be a reluctance to focus on raising
> revenue for the organization - instead focusing on how to allocate what
> we have to code sprints, travel, etc.  

I think you got this wrong - nobody is saying that we should refrain
from collecting more funds to be able to do more. Instead (at least I
am) desperate to get going again and suggested to restart the Funding
Committee. But our set up so far did not work out to actually achieve
this goal which is why we changed it.

> We want to support the building of open source geospatial software.  I
> would contend that we can do more if we (the board) focus on running the
> organization more like a business.

As Tim I disagree here. Yes, some aspects of running a business can and
should be applied to OSGeo but I do not think that it should become a
business-like operation. I see OSGeo global or international (let's
finally find a name for this) more like a UN like structure, ideally
without a big budget. In my opinion we should focus on the Local
Chapters to do this in whatever way is appropriate for it's cultural
surrounding. Again - this is something where North America has not been
at the front of things due to (absolutely understandable) reasons that
were mentioned here before. One of the most important aspects is
language (anything you do in English seems to compete with OSGeo Int'l)
but also the fact that OSGeo is incorporated in the US.

> We already do a great job on supporting development.  If we add more
> attention to business models I believe that we have a window of
> opportunity to attract sponsorship from some of the many players that
> already support USGIF.  If the US government continues to move towards
> OSS, many contractors will want to brand themselves with an OSS
> approach, resources, development and operational support.

This type of thing is happening all over the world right now - but with
very different approaches which is a tribute to the different cultural
backgrounds and the big difference we can see in local markets.

> If we do not focus on this we will simply lose the opportunity to USGIF,
> MIL-OSS, OSFA, OSSI or other organizations that will aggressively step
> forward.

Not sure about "aggressively". I do not think this appropriate for our
organization. Pushing the agenda it with a clearly laid out plan and
potentially staff, yes. But from all that I can tell this is something
that the local chapter of North America (or even the US only) can an
should pursue best.

> In either case OSGeo projects will become a valuable resource.  As I
> mentioned before, I was able to convince RadiantBlue to make a $30k
> investment as a platinum foss4g sponsor based on the trends we see
> developing.  I'd like to continue and expand that support, but can only
> do that if there is a business case to be made.

Then we will have to build a business case. But as already mentioned, I
don't think that it is a good idea to use OSGeo Int'l as the vehicle to
start this. At this level we are talking international politics - and
this should avoid an agenda that is too strictly national. What you
propose to me feels like a very national thing.

A different take could be that US based organizations make up for the
largest share of income for OSGeo and OSGeo then distributes this money
out to the world. But I can already see a lot of discussion on how this
is supposed to work and it will be a really slippery slope. Also taking
into account that the US has some inconvenient international
involvements like export restrictions, visa limitations and in general
is a high cost environment. For the money that we spent on one employee
in NA it would be possible to employ 5 or even 10 people from other
economic backgrounds. To me this makes it almost impossible to make a
transparent and fair business case.

> I feel that we have fallen backwards.  We failed to raise sponsorship
> and revenue in order to sustain and grow the organization.  That led to
> decision to cut expenses with the removal of the ED.  I get the feeling

No, I believe you got something wrong here. We have not fallen
backwards. Instead the largest chunk of sponsorship jut ran out this
year - as we knew all along since Autodesk started as sustaining
sponsor. What happened is that we did not manage to attract enough new
sponsors to compensate for this loss - even although we did have a full
time ED. Explicitly looking at funding, removing the ED position does
not put us in a worse position than we were in before. Continuing with
this position without appropriate funds would have been suicidal for the
foundation and irresponsible towards our employee.

> that some on the board are comfortable with the status quo.  It is
> probably clear that I'm in a different camp - we need to raise revenue,
> get back to where we can support core staff, and grow the organization
> on a couple of fronts.  A litmus test for me will be a decision on the
> annual NA conference.

As already stated above, I am absolutely in favor of having an annual
North American event and will support it with a +0. I intentionally say
"+0" because I feel that the responsibility for this to happen - and
also the format of the event - lies with the northern Americas.

> I feel that this is a discussion we should quickly settle one way or the
> other and I'd appreciate any feedback in advance of the next board
> meeting.  Either way I'll continue to be a strong supporter and user of
> OSGeo projects - its just that we all need to decide where we are going
> to focus and put our energies.
> 
> Mark

Not sure that we can settle this quickly, but it is great to see the
energy to get things done.



Let me add some more random thoughts. What I have to say might not make
all of us comfortable - so please approach this with an open mind.

As you all know I am not happy with the current compilation of board
members. I highly respect and personally like you all - plus I am
thankful that you invest all the time needed to pursue furthering OSGeo.
But 7/9 directors are from northern America and native English speakers
and the two remaining board members are from Europe. In many aspects
Europe is very comparable to the US and Canada. Forgive me for lumping
us all in one bucket but you know where I am getting at: This is not an
international representation.

So I have been wondering whether we should break down the current board
of directors and start again from a different angle. I can see excellent
leadership and great ideas in the current board and believe that you
could perfectly well populate a North American Local Chapter - kind of a
meta chapter. This North American Chapter could then incorporate as a
not-for-profit (if they see the need), start to build it's own budget,
have elections, organize FOSS4G conferences, employ staff, conduct
training events and so on.

What do you think?

The OSGeo Int'l board of directors would then be different in that
members are nominated and elected by the local chapters - however this
can be organized... This would probably make up for a much more diverse
board and make OSGeo Int'l a truly global organization.


Best regards,
Arnulf.

PS:
This has been hacked into a flimsy netbook sitting on my knees attending
the United Nations GGIM. If you think I have gone nuts please feel free
to point this out, it may well be that I have been over politicized by
the last three days here... :-)

[1] http://www.osgeo.kr/
[2] http://www.osgeo.kr/3

-- 
President, OSGeo
http://www.osgeo.org