Volunteering: Why Open-Source Governance Is Reaching Its Limits

Behind every successful open-source project stands an organization that ensures the legal, financial, and strategic framework. Volunteer leadership is under pressure.

Every major open-source project needs a structure—whether a foundation or an NPO like OSM at Joomla! These bodies have many responsibilities: they protect trademarks, manage budgets, and serve as the interface to sponsors. The problem: while technical development often happens in a decentralized and agile way, governance work (board, secretariat, treasury) is highly concentrated and often time-consuming.

A Personal Experience

After my own term as secretary at Open Source Matters, which is now coming to an end, I can draw a conclusion: anyone who takes these strategic roles within an organization like OSM seriously and wants to make a difference invests a great deal of personal time. My heartfelt thanks go to all those who do this every day.

Since almost all of us are employed, we try to handle complex management tasks “in between.” We set high goals, want to meet the community’s expectations, and advance the organization strategically—but the reality of limited time takes its toll: we make mistakes.

I make no secret of it: I too have made mistakes, because important decisions or documentation had to be completed under time pressure between professional commitments. In a community that is supportive but understandably has high expectations for transparency, there is therefore also criticism—mostly justified.

The Requirements Have Changed.

Open-source projects are no longer small community initiatives. Many have developed into powerful systems over the past few years. One example of this is Joomla.

However, as these projects grow, their requirements also change. Open-source software is increasingly being developed, operated, and strategically planned in a professional way. Topics such as sustainable financing, transparent governance, clear decision-making structures, and long-term stability are becoming ever more central.

The IT world has also evolved: users and stakeholders now expect reliability, security standards, predictability, and professional release processes. Open-source projects must therefore create structures that meet these expectations without losing their open and community-driven values.

For open-source to remain successful in the long term, development is needed not only in code but also in organization, communication, and strategic direction. Joomla exemplifies how strongly projects can evolve—and how important it is to continuously adapt the framework conditions to stay future-proof.

To sustain Joomla! or other systems in the long term, it is necessary to:

1. Distribute Responsibility Across More Shoulders

More roles are needed in the administrative units (the board): there is a tremendous amount to do. Tasks must be broken down into clearly defined packages that can also be handled part-time without compromising quality or strategic oversight. This is the only way to prevent volunteers from becoming overburdened and the project from stagnating administratively.

2. Organizational Visibility

Transparency is a central factor for trust—but it requires time, commitment, and continuous communication. Decisions, processes, and responsibilities must be presented in a comprehensible and understandable way. Only then can the community see how and why certain decisions are made and who is responsible for what. But transparency takes time.

3. Paid Roles?

This topic has been widely discussed. Perhaps it is time to break the taboo: large open-source projects need professional, paid people to take on leadership. In many open-source projects, this has long been the case.

Whether for core administrative tasks, strategic coordination, or financial management—paid roles prevent overwork, ensure continuity, and create sustainable leadership. Leadership should not be a burnout risk.

Joomla! has grown, and the world around us has changed. Volunteering alone may no longer be enough to ensure stability, transparency, and long-term development. To preserve the project, we need to distribute responsibility, make the organization visible, and perhaps break the taboo of paid roles.

I know this is a sensitive topic for the community. But maybe it’s time to discuss it again?