Subscribe by Email

Your email:

Follow Us

See it in Action

The ActiveBuilding Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Open Vs. Closed Systems

  
  
  

Open vs. Closed

Every solution provider has to have a strategy with regards to how they want to conduct business in their respective niche. Open solutions are ones that are open to adding value-add tools/services/content for the benefit of their customer. Close systems are ones that perceive it a threat to "open-up" to externalities and therefore either try to develop on their own or acquire, and thus enhance and improve their value offering. And there's a lot in the middle; closed most of the time but open opportunisticly. Some companies chose their strategy based on constraints: priorities, resources and investment ($). Others choose based on principles: the true belief that open systems benefit first and foremost their customer. Facebook is a good example of an open system: you can develop (almost) any application on the Facebook platform. Android is similar in that sense: a platform enticing, inviting, and rewarding others to enhance it for the benefit of their mutual customer.

There are cons and pros to every approach; however there is no doubt, argument or explanation that can justify a closed system to be a better option for the customer. Customers are always better-off with open systems.

So if you are a customer, reach out to your suppliers and insist they be(come) an "open-system". Insist that they either provide ways for other/external applications to integrate with them, or alternatively insist that they integrate with other/external apps. The bottom line is that customers want best of breed. In everything. Best finance system; best management system; best communication platform etc. Unfortunately, the higher probability is that there will never be a single supplier that will provide the best of breed applications in all categories. Therefore, the only way suppliers can accomodate that is by "opening" their systems up; this way customers can work with multiple suppliers, assuring they get best of breed in every category, but having a standartized, integrated flow of information passing between the open systems (and suppliers involved); for the customers benefit. So if you are working with any closed system, it's about time they open-up. And remember: the customer is always right. Which in is this case, is you.

Comments

I share your belief in the power and benefits of open systems. 
 
Tim O'Reilly is a long-time champion of open systems, but recently shared an interesting longer term perspective about open and closed are in a great dance in a Wired.com debate with Chris Anderson (see the section labeled "Round Two"). 
 
FWIW, I wrote a bit about open systems and their prospects for transforming government, healthcare, education and science in a post (initially inspired by Tim) on platform thinking
 
I think the benefits of applying platform thinking in the design of systems that bridge the gaps between the online and offline worlds - as you do with ActiveBuilding - are immense ... and still largely unexplored.
Posted @ Tuesday, December 07, 2010 11:11 PM by Joe McCarthy
Your reference to the pace of adoption in your industry, and the differences between online and offline problems (and solutions), remind me of Stewart Brand's book, How Buildings Learn, and the six layers of longevity with which he characterizes buildings: Site, Structure, Skin, Services, Space Plan, Stuff. The technology applications that are increasingly integrated into buildings - such as what you provide at ActiveBuilding - may well constitute another layer (though the wiring itself is clearly at the Services layer). 
 
I suspect that there is different levels of openness and closedness at different layers, due, in part, to the different rates of change inherent in each.
Posted @ Monday, December 13, 2010 9:40 AM by Joe McCarthy
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics