On Wednesday 18 May 2005 04:45 pm, Chad Smith wrote: > On 5/18/05, cono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Chad, > > > > I train people in groups of 4 to 6 persons. That takes them 4 hours. > > After that, they not only know where the differences between MsO and OOo > > are, they also have learnt: > > a - how to use an editor as it has to be done; (know how many time > > people lose day after day by ineffective use of their editor?) > > b - how to make use of serveral of OOo's great features. > > Okay, so it goes from 25 hours to 4, but then there is the added > expense of paying you to come in. And since you are only able to > train 4 to 6 people at a time you'd be there at least 136 hours - so > they'd have to pay you for your time. > > And, in the meantime, the people you haven't trained yet are still > fumbling with a new system - so their lost productivity doesn't start > going down until they get to be with you.
I forgot to mention that out of all the case studies I've written involving Linux on the desktop, NONE hired outside trainers. Instead, they appointed tech-savvy volunteers in each department to help with the transition, to good success. But also keep in mind that many companies will spend training money on an Office upgrade - so the budget may be already allocated. > > 136 hours is at least 3.4 weeks, so the average wait time to be > trained is 1.7 weeks or 68 hours - 68 * 200 employees. Since most of > the lost productivity would be made right off the bat, I'd say a good > 5-10 hours would be within the first two weeks, (that's about 30 > mintues to an hour a day trying to find stuff) so you still have to > factor that in. > > I don't know how much you charge, so going through all the numbers > would be kind of pointless, but you get the idea. Having you come in > doesn't eliminate the wasted time. > > > So you should make new coutings, to see the profits because of incresed > > productivity ;-) > > The increased productivity is due to your training, not the switch to > OpenOffice.org - they could just as easily invest in a 4 hour training > class for the new version of MSO and the productivity boost would be > equitiable. > > > Apart from these 'exact' considerations: what do employees loose by > > talking, surfing the internet, chatting, arguing with the bosses... > > In many comps, there's a world to win on many fields. Software only > > being one of those. > > Of course - but that's a non-sequitor. We're not dicussing ways to > save corporations money - we're discussing how much it costs/saved > companies to switch to OOo as opposed to upgrading to the latest > version of MSO (or whatever other propriatary office suite they have > been using). > > All things being equal (training for either option, or not training > for either option / gossip/surfing time staying the same either way, > etc.) - Switching to OpenOffice.org costs more than upgrading to MSO > Next. > > All of this is short term though - after the initial cost of > transfering to OOo, the costs per upgrade decreases geometrically. > Since the bulk of the employees would be remaining throughout many of > the upgrades, the retraining cost would decrease - as would lost > productivity. > > The only residual negative difference of having switched to OOo would > be the new employees who only knew Word/Excel/Powerpoint/Access. > Although some would agrue in the future, less people will be trained > program specifically like that, and more would be trained on how to > use *a* or *any* spreadsheet, and how to use *a* or *any* word > processor/ database/ presenter / etc..... and the difference would be > futher decreased when you take into consideration that people can only > be trained on the software that is currently available, so they would > have to be retrained (or relearn themselves = lost productivity) for > each residual upgrade. > > In the long run, switching to OOo's cost would grow closer and closer > to zero, while the cost of sticking with a pay-per-seat office system > would continuously grow. > > This is all making one *HUGE* assumption. > > That OpenOffice.org still exists the next time a major upgrade is > needed. Many open source projects don't last - one of the risks of > trusting a group of volunteers. If Sun ever drops its backing of OOo, > I doubt OOo would last a year. > > -Chad Smith > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Maria Winslow Open Source Analyst 919-968-7802, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Author, "The Practical Manager's Guide to Open Source", http://windows-linux.com/practicalOpenSource Contributing Editor, LinuxWorld Magazine Practical Open Source http://winslow.linuxworld.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
