Advice to Microsoft Open Source Evangelist Candidates

It would seem Microsoft is looking for an open source evangelist.  A friend forwarded this Linux.com post to me.  I took a stroll through the Microsoft careers site and couldn't find an actual posting to match.  (If anyone has the job code, I'll happily post it here.)  I did find a couple of marketing manager positions however to work on the teams continuing the "Get the Facts" campaign and the "Commercial Software Initiative."   

The first is the much maligned traditional "don't touch it — we paid for studies to show we're better" sort of marketing program we've all come to know and disregard.  The latter is a program that may or may not be public, but certainly was active two years ago and continued to demonstrate that large amounts of money can be thrown at Things We Don't Understand. 

This was enough to provoke me to post advice for candidates.  You need to interview Microsoft.  You need to request the recruiter get a number of people on your interview loop:

• At the very least request the recruiter get someone from Legal and Corporate Affairs (LCA) involved, such as the primary person responsible for "free and open source software" opinions within LCA.  Microsoft still seems to have a fetish and a HUGE misunderstanding about the nature of IP (patents in particular) and open source software.  You can see this in the recent positioning around the Novell Microsoft agreement.  It would be best to understand how this might effect the role you will play.
  
• You want to talk with someone in the Government Engagement team that is responsible for their F/OSS opinions.  Microsoft unfortunately appears to not understand developing country economics.  They think countries are excited to ship hard currency out of their economies to use American technology to develop their own IT industry potential.  Open source wins in these economies against developed nation tech time and again. 
  
• These two organizations don't align necessarily with Bill Hilf's team in a reporting structure. You need to understand the relationship this evangelism position has to any of the other key groups that could drop a public opinion in your path that makes your position untenable. 
• If this evangelism position does NOT report directly into Hilf's organization, request an interview with Bill to understand the relationship if any.  These are the first three groups that occur to me that can effect the evangelist's role.
• When you interview the person that will be your manager, ask for the objectives that would appear on your review for this period so you get a sense of what will be expected of you, and whether or not they're measurable and achievable.  Then  ask to see his/her objectives for the coming year, at least all the non-personal growth or private ones.  All of them.  You need to understand how relevant your position is in the context of your manager's job.  If you don't see a reasonable overlap -- walk away.
• Ask to see any executive Think Week papers from the past three to five years that concern free and open source software.  Sign a non-disclosure agreement if they require it, but get a hold of them and look for Gates's comments on the papers.  Use this as a basis for some of your questions, as well as insight into the exec mind set on the issues.  I submitted two on two different occasions a number of years ago.  I have no idea if they got past the filter system.  I know Hilf has submitted at least one that was reviewed with comments. 
• Determine whether the evangelist position has executive sponsorship.  Bill Hilf explained in the O'Reilly OSCON interview last summer that Bill Gates and Ray Ozzie "support his work", but there's a huge difference between knowledge and support versus active sponsorship.  If there's no direct executive sponsorship for the role, you may discover "evangelist" means "apologist". 

Microsoft remains a company that can gain huge upside with customers by participating and contributing in existing communities, and developing its own.  Open source software is an enormous opportunity for Microsoft to re-invent itself and improve the bottom line.  As long as its executives and managers believe they compete with open source, or that open source is some how the antithesis of intellectual property, or that they need to explain "commercial software" to the global community, an evangelist's position will be uncomfortable to say the least.

When they tell you all the great things they believe, ask for examples of actions that back up those words.  Bill Hilf works very very hard, but there's little to show for his efforts when it comes to open source related action — actual community contribution. (Licenses, blogs, and web sites do not open source software contributions make.)  There's still far too much Fear and Loathing as is apparent in the public statements and lack of credible action. 

Posts, etc. that may give additional insight as you prep:

• Open Standards, IPR and Innovation Conference, Beijing 2006 covers part of the Microsoft perception problem around open source in developing economies.
• Sun and Open Source Java versus the Microsoft .NET Efforts covers some of the misunderstandings and miscommunications across groups within Microsoft and how it effects their "open source" efforts.
• OSCON 2006: IBM, Microsoft, and Open Source Strategy contrasts two large vendors efforts around open source, and the tough position in which Bill Hilf finds himself. 
• Microsoft continues to learn about Open Source: WiX is two years old covers Microsoft's one shining public example of someone that gets it inside.
• Is Microsoft playing well with others? gives more examples of the cross group opinion problems confronting the evangelist.
• Open Source and the New Microsoft Strategy is a perspective on exec sponsorship against the "leaked" Ozzie memos.
• On Why I Left Microsoft
• Or Maybe Microsoft Could Join the Community demonstrates the sort of public statements (from LCA in this case) an evangelist may need to deal with.
• Perspectives on Microsoft's Shared Source Initiative is the O'Reilly article I wrote covering the opportunity and challenges Microsoft has with open source software.  My opinions haven't changed.

Enjoy!   If you have questions after reading your way through, by all means drop me a line.  Or chase down Daniel Robbins.  I have confidence he'll have interesting opinions as well. 

Comments

[Heather Flanagan]

This comment isn't directly related, but I have become fascinated by what ex-Microsoft people create in the after-life. Here is a link to a video about it from the Microsoft Alumni Network's After The Holiday Party:

http://pugettown.wordpress.com/2007/01/23/is-there-life-after-microsoft/