gokubi.com

Our customers are wise to focus on their immediate needs, and we work with them to build solutions to address those concerns. During a consulting project, our customer’s concerns are foremost in our minds. In the back of our minds, however, we are always thinking beyond the current project. We constantly think about how we can have the most impact in the broad environmental movement. It’s a mind set that underlies all the work we do, and directly affects our selection of application platforms.

We Select Platforms that are Viable in the Long-term

When we work with a customer on a application platform, we’d like that platform to meet the needs of the customer for at least a few years. Changing platforms is expensive, and our customers’ financial constraints cause us to be very interested in a platform that will stay around. While it’s impossible to see the future, we do our best to pick platforms that will be around for the long haul. We look for platforms that:

Don’t require us to push them to their limits

We like complex and robust platforms that are customizable and extensible, and don’t get limit what we can do.

Follow accepted standards

Standards are “future proof”–they are very likely to be supported further into the future than nonstandard software.

Support integration with other platforms

There is potential benefit for customers in connecting their internal data sources (i.e. having an email list manager share data with a donor management system). We look for platforms that support this kind of interoperability.

Are using current or forward-looking technology

Technology moves very quickly–best to get in on the upswing of the curve.

While a platform could be around for years, without a viable community to support it and move it forward, it will stagnate. In assessing a software platform, we look for communities that:

Show high levels of software development on the platform

Stagnant software platforms are not viable in the long term.

Show popular use of the platform

The more people that are wedded to a platform, the more likely it’s ongoing existence will be.

Have viable businesses built around the platform, especially hosting services

Businesses built around a platform show a critical mass of use, and can be resources for platform related services and support.

Publish books and hold conferences on the platform

If presses are willing to publish, and people are willing to travel, the platform has a critical mass of support.

Built with software languages and subplatforms that are popular and viable

Platforms are built on top of languages, operating systems, and databases. If those components are sound and popular, there is a greater likely hood of viability for the platform.

As described above, as integrators we work with software written by other people. That means that others hold the future of the platform in their hands. We try to assess the future viability of the holders of the software by looking for:

Open, two-way communication

We love software developers that take feedback and communicate about where they are taking the platform.

A willingness to not only hear our feedback but change the software based on our input

As you may have guessed, we have a lot of ideas, and like when people listen to us!

A commitment to sharing

Either the source code itself, best practices around the platform, API’s, and documentation

Reassurance that the software creators will continue to make the platform available

Whether it be a software license, or a strong business model, we look for indicators that our access to the platform won’t be reduced in the future.

All of these things are indicators to the viability of a platform over the long haul. Viability in the long term is a very hard thing to judge in our rapidly changing technological world, and is the most difficult part of platform selection.

We Select Platforms that will be Building Blocks for Strengthening the Movement

Many organizations have fragmented internal systems–silos of infomation with unrealized potential to work together, increasing the organization’s effectiveness. Analagously, we believe that the environmental movement suffers in a state of fragmentation–there is great opportunity if the movement can come together and present a more unified front to the public. Technology can play an important supporting role in these movement-strengthening collaborations. We select platforms on the criteia they will be good building blocks for this kind of work in our movement. Some key attributes are:

The ability to talk to other systems

Information is most powerful when it is connected to information from other systems.

Web Awareness

The communication link connecting all parts of the environmental movement–be it staff, the public, or government agencies–is the Internet. The opportunity inherent in that connectivity is enormous, and has become more and more clear over the past 10 years.

Adherence to Open, Common Standards

HTTP, XML, SOAP, SQL, CSS are the current lingua franca of the technology environment. They make it possible for systems to communicate.

Open Source Licensing of the Platform

There is nothing as secure as ownership, and with Open Source software, the movement can own the platform. The security of knowing that a platform will always be available allows us to rely on it as a core component of the movement. The movement can then build competencies based on that building block without fear of losing that investment.

Support for Replication

We never want to do one-off projects. We seek to leverage our efforts for future customers down the road and look for platforms that make future implementations more efficient than the first. That way, we can serve more customers in less time, thereby having greater impact.

We believe the greatest opportunity for strengthening the environmental movement lies in coalition building, sharing of information, and working together. We seek platforms that will not hinder the movement’s journey along this path. The ability to speak to other systems in common and open formats is critical to the linking of our fragmented movement. Building these communication links in efficient ways on Open Source platforms is the most responsible way for us to support the strengthening the environmental movement.

We Select Platforms that don’t Rely on us for Survival

Our two constraints of limited resources and our desire for good outcomes for our customers both play into this Guiding Principle. We build enduring and deep relationships with our customers, but we also want our customers to be independent of relying on us for ongoing support. We’d rather put our limited resources toward innovation and projects that will build on our investments, increasing the power of the movement. To make this possible, we look for platforms that:

Have options for hosting

Multiple providers who can provide ongoing hosting frees us up to focus only on implementation.

Have multiple entities providing consulting services

If our limited resources make it impossible for us to support new development on an existing project, our customer has other resources they can turn to for help.We would hate for our limited time to stand in the way of a customer’s needs.

Have a strong community of users

Outside of consulting services, it is very beneficial to have other users using the same platform.

Ensuring our customers don’t rely on us for ongoing support after our project work with them is complete allows us to be ready to help them with their next, more complicated project. This model lets us work within our constraints, have the greatest impact for the movement, and ensure our customers are well taken care of.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 16th, 2005 at 9:37 am and is filed under CRM, Technology. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.