Open Source Management Text

Sitting here with hundreds of my new friends and colleagues in the Managing Through Collaboration (MTC)* project meeting. Here is a revolutionary approach to writing a text. It leverages the notion of wikinomics, including multiple (1,000+) voluntary contributors, and web 2.0 tools (Facebook, Twitter, wikispaces). The idea is that we develop a truly global book about management, with an emphasis on collaboration, and that we practice what we preach...

Yes, that's right, we (academic researchers, teachers and authors) will work together as a largely virtual and global team, to produce an entire textbook (to be published by Routledge in 2010). How will this work? Can it work? In large part, this may be seen as an experiment. However, there are some precedents to this kind of organization in the 'scholarly arts'.

For example, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) program, has successfully brought together dozens, if not hundreds of scholars to measure, analyze and evaluate the progress of entrepreneurship in 42 developed and developing countries around the worlds. This collaborative project has been a tremendous contribution to our understanding of entrepreneurship and economic development in recent years. However, GEM is not producing a textbook, it is 'only' producing research and reports (no mean feat).

Is it possible to write a book using collaborative principles? We have bounced around words like 'open source', 'wikinomics', 'web 2.0', but how far can this project really take these ideas and survive (or at least be completed by deadline!). First, what are the principles?

1. Open source means just that - anyone may contribute, although their contributions must stand-up in the community, that is, they must be deemed to be of high quality by the community

2. The community will police itself - once a structure is in place to allow the contributions to be submitted, shared, edited, revised etc. then the community will actively separate the wheat from the chaff, reward the valued contributors, and sanction those who stray too far from the community goals.

3. The strength of the model lies in its egalitarian approach. You are what you contribute, regardless of geographic location, pedigree, formal education, politics or any other personal differences. Whether you are a community college professor, PhD student, Academic Dean, Emeritus Professor, Consultant, Business Leader, each has the opportunity to join the project and contribute.

4. We are our own market. If we do a good job, then we will also consume the product ourselves.

Can these principles really be upheld in the context of a textbook for undergraduate students in the field of management?

First, management texts must generally conform to some fairly standard contents or 'core knowledge'. The commonly adopted framework these days is Plan, Organize, Lead and Control. Within these four categories you will find a variety of topics/chapters on motivation, leadership, organizational structure, information systems, communications etc etc. And, within these subtopics, you will find it important to cite the most significant and well established research findings. This substantially reduces your degrees of freedom in terms of content.

Second, because the book will be produced in a text format first (followed by digital/web versions later) you have significant space and time constraints. Space constraint, because you must cram all of this information into 6-700 pages of a standard management text book sold to undergraduates (at least in the US). Time constraint, because between project conception and birth of the book will take approximately 2 years, with just 8 months for brainstorming, benchmarking and writing of content. These constraints can further restrict freedom and creativity in the name of getting the job done.

Third, while we have a wealth of technology options, sometimes this diversity in communications tools becomes overwhelming. After working with the Chapter team on the HRM topic for 4 months via email and the wikispace we are using, our first face to face meeting was spent resolving a host of fairly important but basic issues such as deadlines, content questions and so on. Even when we focus on a few of the multitude of tools (email, wiki) and ignore others (linked-in, facebook, secondlife). This problem is compounded when there are wide differences in personal capabilities, comfort level, or even access to the technologies required (e.g. secondlife).

Fourth, the overhead of developing the content, coauthoring, and policing the contributions is something that becomes less appealing, especially when there are not many tangible rewards for participation. After all, this is time that could be spent on 'real research' or other activities that may be recognized by the administration and relevant to promotions or rewards.

So what is to be gained? First, by bringing together such diverse 'voices' in the process of creation, the content, examples and presentation of otherwise 'standard knowledge' should take on a unique color and flavor. It may be a cacophony, a babel-like mess, or it may be something greater that is attractive to a new generation of students in ways which us 'old fogies' cannot imagine.

Second, we have global perspective built into the team. Each chapter is written by up to 50 individuals, frequently representing as many as 20 countries (over 90 countries are represented in the project at this point).

Third, we are creating this book about collaboration by collaborating - and this brings a shared experience to the process like no other. Will we remain friends? Will we remain academics?! Will we even keep out jobs?! Or will we find new opportunities and new friendships, not to mention new understanding of our little world?

In my opinion, in order to succeed, this project will never be a true 'wiki' or 'open-sourced' text book. It cannot be. That model does not fit the needs of any of the current stakeholders - publishers, authors, teachers or students. That is not to say that we could not produce such a work. I think a true wiki for management knowledge would be a wonderful thing. But you (and I) would have to do it for love, not money.

I would love to discuss that last idea with anyone who may have an interest...

*This project was initiated by Prof. Charles Wankel, St Johns University, New York. His creative spark has set a lot of us into motion.