Objective

The term open has become popularly used to describe a variety of objects (software and technology, educational resources, education, etc.). Ambiguity exists in the meaning of open, for example open education where anyone can enroll with the only requirement a fee, or open education that is available to anyone, and without a cost. In addition to the ambiguity of open (what it enables), there is also ambiguity with how organizations might operate to allow openness.

The Openness Maturity Model (OMM) Index attempts to define open attributes and a means to assess the type of openness within the community of practice responsible for the design, development, and distribution of the open artifact.

Importantly, the Openness Maturity Model Index is not designed to assess the "openness" of an artifact (object, software, OER, etc.) claimed to be open–there are plenty of licenses which can be used to assess the openness of an object–rather, the model assess the openness of the organization/community that creates and manages artifact.

Traditional Maturity Model Definition:

There are five levels defined along the continuum of the a maturity model

1. Initial (chaotic, ad hoc, individual heroics) - the starting point for use of a new or undocumented repeat process.
2. Repeatable - the process is at least documented sufficiently such that repeating the same steps may be attempted.
3. Defined - the process is defined/confirmed as a standard business process, and decomposed to levels 0, 1 and 2 (the latter being Work Instructions).
4. Managed - the process is quantitatively managed in accordance with agreed-upon metrics.
5. Optimizing - process management includes deliberate process optimization/improvement.

"Opening" the Maturity Model Definition:

Using the above as a framework, the following can be applied to access the maturity of an open project:

...

Meetings

Educause 2012

Implementations (Reference Implementations)

The following have expressed interest in applying the Open Index to their organizations. As a working project, the Openness Index can be informed through actual use, iterating through development as information is learned in its application. These initial tests will provide the Openness Index with reference models for refinement and enhancement. The results of these initial assessments are not intended to provide an actual index of the organizations reviewed, rather provide direction for further development efforts. The 2-3-98 project is extremely grateful for this early participation from interested organizations, without whom the project could not advance.

• Apereo Foundation (website)
  The Apereo Foundation assists and facilitates educational organizations which collaborate to foster, develop, and sustain open technologies and innovation to support learning, teaching, and research.
• Open Education Resource Foundation (website)
  The Open Education Resource Foundation is an independent, not-for-profit organisation that provides leadership, international networking and support for educators and educational institutions to achieve their objectives through Open Education. 
• Project Kaleidoscope (website)
  Project Kaleidoscope is implementing a set of fully open general education courses across eight colleges serving predominantly at-risk students. The project will dramatically reduce textbook costs and allow collaborative improvement of course design to improve student success.

Traditional Maturity Model Definition:

There are five levels defined along the continuum of a maturity model

1. Initial (chaotic, ad hoc, individual heroics) - the starting point for use of a new or undocumented open projectrepeat process.
2. Repeatable - openness the process is at least documented sufficiently such that repeating the same steps toward openness may be attempted.
3. Defined - openness the process is defined/confirmed as a standard business process, and decomposed to levels 0, 1 and 2 (the latter being Work Instructions).
4. Managed - openness the process is quantitatively managed in accordance with agreed-upon metrics (those of the OMM).
5. Optimizing - openness process management includes deliberate principle/process/practice process optimization/improvement.

Openness Values

Courage: Courage is sufficient to participate in openness, however participants may be motivated by other causes, such as: a condition of employment; direction from a supervisor; peer pressure; or, a hidden agenda—perhaps to influence (or sabotage) direction.

...

...

"Opening" the Maturity Model Definition:

Using the above as a framework, the following can be applied to access the maturity of an open project:

1. Initial/Aware: (chaotic, ad hoc, individual heroics) - the starting point for use of a new or undocumented open project.
2. Repeatable - openness is at least documented sufficiently such that repeating the same steps toward openness may be attempted.
3. Defined - openness is defined/confirmed as a standard business process, and decomposed to levels 0, 1 and 2 (the latter being Work Instructions).
4. Managed - openness is quantitatively managed in accordance with agreed-upon metrics (those of the OMM)
5. Optimizing - openness management includes deliberate principle/process/practice optimization/improvement.

Openness Values

Courage: Courage is sufficient to participate in openness, however participants may be motivated by other causes, such as: a condition of employment; direction from a supervisor; peer pressure; or, a hidden agenda—perhaps to influence (or sabotage) direction.

...

Honesty: Honesty requires sincerity, directness and specificity, where actions and statements are free from bias or dogma and motivated to achieve the goals and objectives of the initiative. Reflection (assessment) of one's ideas and self can only be genuine if one is honest.

...

Evidence-based decision-making

Meritocracy

Objectives

Simplicity

Emergence

Incremental Development

Rapid Feedback

Continuous Feedback: Evidence-based decision making provides a rationale for organisational investment in, and the prioritisation of actions and behaviours (initiatives). The effect(iveness) of evidence-based decision making is in part a function of communication and transparency, without which organisational participants may not undertand why or how a variety of decisions are made reducing their ability to effectively participate. The notion of evidence-based decision making is tied closely to outcomes monitoring and analysis, and underpins the organisation's ability to function as a meritocracy.

...

1. Process Categories

2. Processes

• The Artifacts Created During Participation in an Open Course
• Pedagogical Intent
• Learning Activities
• Assessments
• Assessment
• Externally Used Resources
• Credentialing (course and program level)
• Course Content
  • Access Dimensions: non-discriminatory: open to everyone–non restrictive.
  • Licensing Dimensions:
    • Use
    • Reuse
    • Derivative Works
    • Economic Access (open to everybody irrespective of their financial means)
• Learning Design
• Instruction and Support
• Delivery Technology

Resources Processes

• Open Access - publishing of research data
• Externally Used Resources
• Licensing Dimensions:
  • Use
  • Reuse
  • Derivative Works
  • Economic Access (open to everybody irrespective of their financial means)
• Software used
• Public Contribution
• Public comment
• Interoperability - resources are distributed with cross-platform interoperability in mind (for example RTF vs. PDF)

Processes

(perhaps the indicators below would be represented by individual items under each process category?)

Assessment Table

The "assessment table" becomes a matrix with each category of behavior assessed on a dimension:

• Delivery
• Planning
• Definition
• Management
• Optimization

So an evaluator/participant seeks evidence that the maturity element is being delivered, the evaluator seeks evidence of a planning process, evidence that the organization defines the element, manages it (including measurement), and has a process in which the element is assessed against standards and improved (reflective practice).

Each of these dimensions are then assessed in terms of openness.  The dimensions and openness rating taken together forms a matrix.  In the eMM model, adequacy is represented by color, making it pretty easy to identify in which areas on which dimensions the organizations exhibits various levels of maturity.

Process Dimensions

each process is examined based on dimensions of the process capability:

Openness Key:

...

...

...

...

...

Practices

...

L1 Practices

References:

Masson, P. (2011) Open Governance in Higher Education: Extending the Past to the Future. Educause Review. Available from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM1112.pdf.

Marshall, S. (2007) eMM Version 2.3 Process Descriptions. Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Available from http://www.utdc.vuw.ac.nz/research/emm/Publications.shtml

Waugh P. & R. Metcalfe (2007) The Foundations of Openness. What are we doing today, brain? Available from http://pipka.org/blog/2008/07/23/the-foundations-of-openness/

Agile causality http://openmasters.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/causality.png?w=768&h=1024Meritocracy: Meritocracy allows the separation of title, role and other personal and professional trappings from ideas. The individual, under particular circumstances is measured by the merit of their idea, and the idea is judged by the circumstances under which is is being considered. It is virtually impossible to achieve this form of meritocracy without an organisational culture that values humility.

Objectives

Simplicity:  Simplicity refers to the state of an organisation and the practice of selecting processes, language, and outcomes that have the lowest concept, administration, and work burdon that meet requirements. Simplicity reduces barriers to understanding and overhead costs, allowing more resources to be invested in the goals of the community. 

Emergence: From simplicity emerges complexity. Emergence is the creation of outcomes that are irreducible to its constituant parts - that is, it is the creation of something new and more complex that the constituents without a formal externally imposed plan. Through emergence, organisations can expect:

• • radical novelty through the appearance of  characteristics and qualities that were not previously observed in the organisation;
  • coherence or correlation, providing stable and integrated wholes that maintain themselves over some period of time;
  • the benefits of evolutionary dynamic processes and outcomes that by definition are suited to and a reflection of their environment;
  • the benefits of supervenience, is which the nature of emergent outcomes are influenced by the organisational culture, but are not reducible. _{(reference to Emergence as a Construct: History and Issues, by Jeffrey Goldstein: http://www.anecdote.com.au/papers/EmergenceAsAConsutructIssue1_1_3.pdf)}

Through emergence, the organisation can enjoy the complexity of sophisticated outcomes, while managing simplicity.

Incremental Development: Engaging in discovery, design, and creation of any artefact, pattern, or idea in simple discreet iterative cycles, such that mesurable outcomes may be assessed at a reasonably small level of granularity.  As such, incremental development allows for adjustments to desired outcomes, expectations, prioritisation, processes, and workload at a level that promotes organisational effectiveness and efficiency.

Rapid Feedback: Rapid feedback is essential to incremental development and allows for relevant, timely, and working products, which enhances productivity, a sense of clear direction, and improves alignment with changing requirements.

Continuous Feedback: Continuous feedback supports continuous improvement and enhances the likelihood that requirements are met as they evolve with low relative investments in rework.

Potential Openness Key:

1:

2:

References:

Laffan, Liz. (2011) A New Way of Measuring Openness, from Android to WebKit: The Open Governance Index [Updated]. VisionMobile, 29 July 2011. Web. 30 July 2012. Available from http://www.visionmobile.com/blog/2011/07/the-open-governance-index-measuring-openness-from-android-to-webkit/

Marshall, S. (2007) eMM Version 2.3 Process Descriptions. Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Available from http://www.utdc.vuw.ac.nz/research/emm/Publications.shtml

Masson, P. (2009) Agile Causality. Available from http://openmasters.wordpress.com/agile-causality/

Masson, P. (2011) Open Governance in Higher Education: Extending the Past to the Future. Educause Review. Available from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERM1112.pdf

Waugh P. & R. Metcalfe (2007) The Foundations of Openness. What are we doing today, brain? Available from http://pipka.org/blog/2008/07/23/the-foundations-of-openness/

...