# Winning Through Open-Source Software in Manufacturing Digitalization

> Explore how open-source software helps manufacturers overcome vendor lock-in and accelerate their digital transformation efforts.

The manufacturing sector is in an interesting situation. It's caught between a
future with immense promise and a present with high complexity. The promised ROI
of digital transformation (DX) is into the
[trillions of dollars](https://www.marketresearchfuture.com/reports/digital-transformation-in-manufacturing-market-32040)
globally over the next decade. For manufacturers, this is more than just an
opportunity for incremental improvement; it is a fundamental shift to
competitiveness.

Yet, on the other hand, a starkly different narrative is heard from the factory
floor. Despite the commitment of many IT and OT teams, paired with colossal
investment, the path to digitalization is proving to be unexpectedly slow. About
70% of digital transformation projects are (self-reported!)
[considered failures](https://www.myhubintranet.com/digital-transformation-statistics/).
Falling short of their objectives and failing to deliver the promised return on
investment (ROI).

To break this impasse a strategic shift and pivot will be needed, industrial IT
and OT need a decisive pivot to open-source software (OSS). With its core
principles of collaboration, transparency, and interoperability, manufacturers
can systematically remove barriers that have slowed their DX. Open source
provides the tools and the philosophy necessary to acquire and transport data
more effectively, build powerful analytics and interaction applications that
deliver real ROI, and, most of all, escape vendor lock-in.

## The Digitalization Paradox in Manufacturing

The economic case for digital transformation in manufacturing is unequivocal and
immense. The global digital transformation market, valued at nearly <span className="katex">
<span className="katex-mathml">
<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML">
<semantics>
<mrow>
<mn>

1

</mn>

<mi>

t

</mi>

<mi>

r

</mi>

<mi>

i

</mi>

<mi>

l

</mi>

<mi>

l

</mi>

<mi>

i

</mi>

<mi>

o

</mi>

<mi>

n

</mi>

<mi>

i

</mi>

<mi>

n

</mi>

<mn>

2020

</mn>

<mo separator="true">

,

</mo>

<mi>

i

</mi>

<mi>

s

</mi>

<mi>

f

</mi>

<mi>

o

</mi>

<mi>

r

</mi>

<mi>

e

</mi>

<mi>

c

</mi>

<mi>

a

</mi>

<mi>

s

</mi>

<mi>

t

</mi>

<mi>

e

</mi>

<mi>

d

</mi>

<mi>

t

</mi>

<mi>

o

</mi>

<mi>

b

</mi>

<mi>

e

</mi>

<mo stretchy="false">

[

</mo>

<mi>

o

</mi>

<mi>

v

</mi>

<mi>

e

</mi>

<mi>

r

</mi>
</mrow>

<annotation encoding="application/x-tex">

1 trillion
in 2020, is forecasted to be
[over

</annotation>
</semantics>
</math>
</span>

<span className="katex-html" ariaHidden="true">
<span className="base">
<span className="strut" style="height:1em;vertical-align:-0.25em;">



</span>

<span className="mord">

1

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

t

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.0278em;">

r

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

i

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.0197em;">

l

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.0197em;">

l

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

i

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

o

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

nin

</span>

<span className="mord">

2020

</span>

<span className="mpunct">

,

</span>

<span className="mspace" style="margin-right:0.1667em;">



</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

i

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

s

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.1076em;">

f

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.0278em;">

or

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

ec

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

a

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

s

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

t

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

e

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

d

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

t

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

o

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

b

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

e

</span>

<span className="mopen">

[

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal">

o

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.0359em;">

v

</span>

<span className="mord,mathnormal" style="margin-right:0.0278em;">

er

</span>
</span>
</span>
</span>

2.7 trillion by 2026]([https://www.themanufacturer.com/articles/digital-transformation-in-manufacturing-the-challenges/](https://www.themanufacturer.com/articles/digital-transformation-in-manufacturing-the-challenges/)).
This growth is driven by the operational benefits; the primary motivators for
these investments are to achieve greater operational efficiency (cited by 40% of
executives), a faster time-to-market for new products (36%), and an improved
customer experience (35%).

To understand the paradox, one must dissect why manufacturing initiatives fail.
These challenges are connected with one-another, and are symptom from more
systemic issues. Financial constraints and ROI, particularly high initial costs
for hardware, software, and integration, coupled with pressure for rapid ROI,
create a catch-22. DX is now viewed as a cost center rather than a source of
operational improvement and thus ROI. A lack of qualified workers and in-house
skills, especially in IT, is another roadblock. With manufacturing competing for
talent with tech and finance. Then there’s legacy systems, where factory floors
have old, incompatible machinery and systems, making upgrading or retrofitting
this "rigid infrastructure" costly and complex, often stalling or killing
projects. Finally, cybersecurity fears arise from increased connectivity in
factories, expanding the attack surface and making the implementation of robust
and costly cybersecurity solutions complex, especially for SMEs.

## The Iron Grip of Proprietary Systems and Vendor Lock-In

The challenges detailed in the earlier, stem from the same key issue – the
manufacturing industry's historical and continued reliance on a technological
paradigm built around closed, proprietary systems. This licensing model, which
was key in enabling the first wave of digital automation, has now become a
barrier. Its defining characteristic is vendor lock-in, a condition that
systematically stifles innovation, inflates licensing costs, and holds the
industrial sector as a whole back from progress.

Innovation has always driven industrial automation forward. The transition from
mechanical systems to electrical relay logic in the early 20th century, and then
to the maturing of Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) in the 1960s, transformed
the factory floor. PLCs, followed by Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
(SCADA) and Distributed Control Systems (DCS), brought control, reliability, and
programmability to industrial processes. These technologies were the engines of
the Third Industrial Revolution. Industrial automation was leading the way in
what was possible with digital systems, and combining these systems with one
another in new ways. The manufacturers were driving innovation in the software
industry and gaining real momentous ROI.

Since the late seventies, software became a copywrightable good, and with a shift
happened mostly in traditional applications of the software – Vendor Lock-In.

Vendor lock-in is an economic and technical condition where a customer becomes
so dependent on a specific vendor's products and services that switching to an
alternative provider becomes prohibitively difficult or costly.

**With that, manufacturers used to lead the way three quarters into the 20th
century, now are stuck with their 21st-century digital ambitions.**

The traditional, vertically integrated model of industrial digitalization,
‘featuring’ vendor lock-in, is a critical hindrance currently. This paradigm now
showcases inflated costs, lack of innovation, interoperability issues, and a
skills gap. These issues have effectively made manufacturers followers rather
than leaders in the realm of software-aided business. To regain an edge a
fundamental shift is a requirement. This shift requires abandoning vertical
point-solutions and instead embracing a new technological foundation that is
inherently open, fostering interoperability, and freeing manufacturers from the
constraints of single-vendor control.

## DX with Open-Source Software

In contrast to the closed, proprietary software, the open-source variant offers
a fresh approach to creating and distributing software. Born from the need of
collaboration and transparency, open-source software (OSS) provides fundamentals
to break vendor lock-in once and for all.

In 1983, MIT programmer Richard Stallman, annoyed by the practice of withholding
source code, founded the Free Software Foundation. His goal was to create a
completely free (“Free” as in speech, and also “Free” as in beer) operating
system, establishing a philosophy built on the user's right to run, study,
modify, and redistribute software. In the late 1990s, this movement gained a
more pragmatic and business-friendly identity with the coining of the term "open
source".

The value proposition of OSS is great and shows up in four key points:

1. Cost-Effectiveness
2. High flexibility and extensibility
3. Cross-Industry collaboration
4. Stability and Strategic Control

To go over each, one by one.

The most immediate appeal of OSS is the absence of high upfront licensing fees.
OSS is not "free" when considering the total cost of ownership (TCO), which
includes implementation, integration, training, and support. The crucial
difference lies in where the money goes. With proprietary software, a large
portion of the budget is spent on license and maintenance fees that primarily
benefit the vendor. With OSS, that same capital can be reinvested into
activities that build direct value for the manufacturer.

Secondly, flexibility of software and freedom to extend it – the single most
powerful advantage of OSS. Because the source code is accessible, manufacturers
are no longer constrained by a vendor's limited feature set or development
roadmap. Anyone can propose changes that modify, adapt, and extend the software
to meet their operational needs. If a particular open-source tool doesn't
support a niche industrial protocol, the company has the option to build that
integration itself or hire a third party to do so. As these investments do not
provide an edge over competition, it’s almost always shared within the OSS
community – building libraries of open toolchains.

Extending on that; Cross-industry collaboration enables wildly different
use-cases with the same fundamental problems to resolve to apply their knowledge
and craft serving all other businesses. For example, database technology has
been perfected for decades by banking and trading companies to allow for atomic
transactions and durability of data of those transactions. These scalability
improvements have profound impact for manufacturing use-cases around the world,
helping out with compliance, track-and-trace, and more.

Finally, Long-Term Stability and Strategic Control is implicitly featured with
OSS. With proprietary software, a manufacturer is exposed to the business risks
of the vendor. If the vendor is acquired, goes out of business, or simply
decides to discontinue a product line, the manufacturer can be left with an
unsupported and obsolete system. With OSS, the code is publicly distributed and
cannot be withdrawn. Even if the original maintainers abandon a project, the
community, or the company itself, can "fork" the code and continue its
development. This provides a level of long-term stability and strategic control
over critical technology assets that is impossible to achieve in a
vendor-dependent relationship.

## Finale

The manufacturing industry faces a challenge with its digital transformation
efforts. A reliance on proprietary systems has contributed to an impasse where
investment does not always produce the expected results. This model,
characterized by vendor lock-in, can lead to higher costs and constraints on
innovation, causing manufacturers to lag in technology adoption.

To move forward, a different approach can be considered. Open-source software
(OSS) offers a model that addresses many of the barriers causing digital
transformation projects to fail. With OSS, companies can gain more strategic
control over their technology, redirect funds from licensing fees toward
in-house capabilities, and connect previously isolated systems. This allows a
manufacturer to shift from being a consumer of a vendor's technology to a
director of its own.

The conversation is therefore shifting from if manufacturing should adopt open
source, to how it can be implemented to improve operations and deliver a return
on investment. This transition presents new questions, but it is one that
companies do not have to approach on their own. At FlowFuse, we work with
manufacturers to navigate this change, and we would love to explain how an
open-source strategy can transform your factory of the future. Download our comprehensive whitepaper "[Open Source Software for Manufacturing](/whitepaper/open-source-software-for-manufacturing/)," to learn how to transform your factory operations and secure a competitive edge.