--An Open Letter to the Community
To My Friends in FlightGear:
The current controversy in FlightGear between FGMEMBERS and FGAddon has grown into a life that far exceeds a simple disagreement over particulars regarding a given project.
The posts have gone through numerous cycles: first provocative, followed with replies, refutations, and arguments that escalate, followed by periods of smoldering, until another post reignites the dispute.
To the casual FG reader, the ever-multiplying posts appear to be locked in a cycle, a mobius strip of infinitely repeating tit-for-tat verbal confrontations that appear to go nowhere.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
--My Initial Observation:
My observation is that FlightGear, as it moves through being a decade and a half old, is going through a massive generational change. Part of it is evolutionary, part revolutionary. However, it is a natural and, therefore, unstoppable, process.
All organizations experience change at about this time in their existence. I know, because in my doctoral dissertation I studied how organizations change. And specifically, I looked at how organizations survive when they enter periods of environmental turbulence that threaten their existence.
--Organizational Turbulence:
What I am about to say will not make everyone happy, but it is based on solid scholarship and cannot be dismissed out of hand simply because you don't like the conclusion of the authors.
I rely on the work of Cameron, Kim and Whetten (1987) titled "Organizational Effects of Decline and Turbulence" published in the Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 32, pp. 222-240. There are many others I could cite, but this article fits our situation most closely.
I will say at the outset, in that my reading of the article, I do not think that FlightGear fits what Cameron, Kim and Whetten describe as an organization in decline, i.e., "in which a substantial, absolute, decrease in an organization's resource base occurs over a specified period of time" (p. 224). I think we have plenty of resources, even a growing number of resources, so we can move to the issue of turbulence
.
--Defining FlightGear's Organizational Turbulence
The authors state: "Turbulence exists when changes faced by an organization are nontrivial, rapid, and discontinuous" (p. 225). That is what I see is happening in FlightGear. After a number of years of generally little in terms of real or perceived challenges to the roles of the core developers, now in the preceding months from 2014 into 2015, from several directions, there have been a number of individuals asking questions about how the core developers are doing their work, wanting more information, and some wanting a piece of the action
.
--How (Some) of the Core Developers Reacted:
Because of the other technical environmental changes facing FlightGear, the amount of time it was taking to address these issues, the frequent posts, from certain developers'/moderator's point of view, was looked upon with varying degrees of welcome. Upsetting the status quo at this time was met with everything from wrist-slapping to threats of being banned from the Forum and denial from more exclusive lists. The requests for change and involvement appear to have been regarded as has having come at the worst time possible. As the situation escalated, FG formally began experiencing "nontrivial, rapid, and discontinuous change: The verbal pushback on both sides became quite strident at times. Not only were sides taken; new sides literally were being created almost on a weekly basis. What, then, were the indicators driving this "discontinuous change?"
--Indicators for Organizational Turbulence:
Here, more context from Cameron, Kim and Whetten, needs to be provided. In their article, they put together a list of twelve items, compiled from their research, that are indicators of organizations that are in a state of dangerous turbulence.
No organization will exhibit all twelve. Many will only manifest perhaps four or five. They provide an essential wake-up call for the core developers. At the same time they also provide an alert to the members how their action may be contributing to the turbulence. But I will come back to that later. Here are the definitions without comment.
Turbulence:
1. Centralization. Decisions are passed upward. Rank and file participation declines.
2. No Long Term Planning. Crises drive out strategic planning.
3. No Innovation. Risk aversion. No experimentation permitted by management.
4. Scapegoating. Leaders and/or selected individuals blamed for all problems.
5. Resistance to Change: Conservatism and turfism lead to rejection of new alternatives
6. Turnover: Most competent leaders leave first.
7. Low Morale: Few needs are met. In-fighting is predominant.
8. No Slack: Uncommitted resources are used to cover operating expenses.
9. Fragmented Pluralism: Special interest groups organize and become more vocal.
10. Loss of Credibility: Leaders lose credibility of subordinates.
11. Non-prioritized Cuts: Attempts to minimize conflict leads to attempts to equalize cutbacks.
12. Conflict: Competition and infighting for control when resources are scarce.
--My Analysis of the CKW List: FlightGear is in Serious Trouble
My assessment of what I will refer in shorthand as the CKW list is that FlightGear is currently in a state of severe turbulence and experiencing no less than seven and maybe eight of the items on the list. Here are my seven. First I will list them, then I will explain my rationale.
2. No Long Term Planning. Crises drive out strategic planning.
3. No Innovation. Risk aversion. No experimentation permitted by management.
4. Scapegoating. Leaders and/or selected individuals blamed for all problems.
5. Resistance to Change. Conservatism and turfism lead to rejection of new alternatives
7. Low Morale. Few needs are met. In-fighting is predominant.
9. Fragmented Pluralism. Special interest groups organize and become more vocal.
10. Loss of Credibility. Leaders lose credibility of subordinates.
12. Conflict. Competition and infighting for control when resources are scarce.
and, probably,
1. Centralization (a variation on it) Decisions are passed upward. Rank and file participation declines
--How to Use the CKW List:
The presentation of the CKW list is not to point fingers as much as it is to illustrate a principle that the authors believe is critical in helping managers AND organization members understand: that unless you are aware of the indicators that are contributing to the turbulence you cannot make adjustments to correct it. We know in flying that is exactly what we have to do. Adjust the aircraft's trim to fly more smoothly through the turbulent air or find another flight level in which the air is smooth. In our relationships, however, we have a hard time applying the same principle. The enormous amount of posts of the forum in this regard is evidence we have not got the relational turbulence figured out.
Let me put it more bluntly with this quote from CKW: "…most managers respond to turbulent environment in a manner opposite to that which is predicted to lead to greater effectiveness." (quoting Bourgeois, McAllister & Mitchell 1978, p. 508). In the Forum environment that has been going round and round for the past few months, this quote, in all fairness, applies not just to the core developers, but on more than one occasion to those who have been challenging them, when they stepped over the bounds of civil discourse.
--To FG Members, FGMEMBERS and Other Developers:
To FG members FGMEMBERS and other developers who are unhappy with the Core Developers, in all fairness, it is essential to remember that many of these individuals have dedicated a significant portion of their professional lives, purely as an act of love, to create, maintain and improve FlightGear. Nobody twisted their arms to take on this often many-headed monster. They can tell more than a few stories where they made mistakes, hit dead ends, and wondered if the whole thing was going to fall apart. I am sure they have as many stories that would leave us gasping for air we would be laughing so hard as they stumbled upon solutions that ended with a big DUH!
FlightGear exists because they took the time to create it. They created it so they could have a flight simulator that was Open Source, not only for all the development and licensing advantages that provides, but so they could offer a free flight simulator to the worldwide community. They designed FlightGear so they could have fun and then they gave it to the entire world. That's the rest of us. We're now having fun, too--even though we may (or may not) have frustrations with the current situation. With a free, Open-Source flight simulator. Making friends around the world. Just as they envisioned. We need to show our appreciation for that, first. And never forget it.
--FlightGear's Second Generation Is Here:
But now I speak directly to the core developers. FlightGear is evolving in and around, through, above and below you. As CKW stated we are in the midst of "nontrivial, rapid, and discontinuous" change. You cannot stop it. No amount of wishing can even slow it down. Change is what organizations must do to continue to grow. Across generations. If they do not, they will die. FlightGear does not get a pass on this.
As such, you are faced with a challenge that you must confront. You have a choice--embrace with it grace and enthusiasm, for it is the promise of the new generation of what FlightGear can become. Or you can continue to present to us in the rank and file the perception that you are afraid of the change, are resistant toward it--as well as--toward us who see things from a different perspective, who bring a new history to FG. Your seeming to have an attitude of trying to thwart the efforts of those who have grabbed onto the excitement of the changes that are already happening and cannot be undone will only make you angrier and create a wave of resistance that will grow until it overwhelms you.
--Train New Core Developers Beginning NOW!
I am not saying that FGMEMBERS is the only solution to this generational change. What I am saying is that you now must begin preparing, carefully, prudently to plan to replace yourselves within the next period of years. Perhaps that is five, perhaps ten, even more. But, if I understand what changes are already at your doorstep, through the efforts of FGMEMBERS and others, a new cohort of Core Developers must be in training in the FlightGear system NOW and be fully trained in less than two years. Not only does this generational change require fresh blood, it requires a planned increase in the number of developers to keep up with the changes to ensure FlightGear operates on a day to day basis.
--Stop Scapegoating IH-COL, JWocky and Others-You've Lost That Fight:
As such, it is time for to stop wrongly seeing individuals such as IH-COL and JWocky, among others, as scapegoats as your adversaries, when, in fact, they could be your greatest allies, if you would acknowledge their unabashed enthusiasm for the game and willingness to spend countless hours improving it in their areas of expertise. Kind of like you. You have long lost the battle of words. The ongoing threats of banning them has cost you credibility from which you may never recover because you have no way to fairly enforce it in the eyes of the Forum participants.
--The Final Choice Is Yours--So Is the Fate of FlightGear:
The choice, solely, is yours. Everything that can be said, has been said. Read carefully through the CKW list and use it as a mirror to see how many times you find your face looking back at you. Is it worth it? Is this what you want your legacy to be in FlightGear? Staring back at yourself at six or seven items on the Turbulence List, each of which endangers the future of the flight simulator?
Every mirror you choose to smash and replace with a window opening toward the present and future, reaching out to the entire FlightGear Community, will redefine your FG legacy in a positive way. Change flight levels; find clear air.
To borrow a line out of a famous movie, (sort of): "Please choose wisely."
With Respect,
DrDavid/SkyBoat