Not Invented Here

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article or section may contain original research or unattributed claims. Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

Not Invented Here (NIH) is a term used to describe a persistent sociological, corporate or institutional culture that avoids using already existing products, research or knowledge because of its different origins. Normally used in a pejorative sense, it can however, also be used as a positive implication.

While the etymology is perhaps apocryphal, the American National Institutes of Health (NIH) is said to be either the direct inspiration for the term, as a play on its acronym, or as an organization subject to this attitude.^{[citation needed]}

Not Invented Here, in corporate settings often occurs out of simple ignorance where research to determine whether a solution to a problem already exists is not done. More specifically, an hegemonic company may practice 'NIH' policies intentionally in order to maintain a more complete understanding and control of its own 'invention', so as to stifle the development of rivals.

Subcontracting, outsourcing, and other similar practices, can produce an 'NIH' culture within a company which creates conflict that prevents the adoption of solutions developed by the same company or its partners. For example, if a company of one country outsourced its software development to a company of another, embedded technologies to another, and obtained hardware from yet another, should the employees of that company resist dealing with workers in the other countries? This 'NIH' culture could disrupt the efforts of all companies involved.

As a sociological phenomenon the "Not Invented Here" syndrome sometimes usually occurs as a unwillingness to adapt an idea or product because it originates from another culture. In that sense it can be described as an effect of Nationalism.

Contents 1 Usage in computing 1.1 In the free software community 1.2 In Corporate IT 2 NIH syndrome in academia 3 Usage in the Military 3.1 The French Military and NIH 3.2 The Chinese Military and NIH 3.3 German Military and NIH 3.4 The U.S. Military and NIH 3.4.1 Harrier II and debated NIH 4 In popular culture 5 See also 6 Further reading

[edit] Usage in computing

The computer industry has seen many examples of Not Invented Here syndrome.

For example, some people say^{[citation needed]} that Apple, during the evolution of the Mac OS through OS 9, did not copy many user interface innovations found in other operating systems simply because they went against or were not discussed in Apple's original human interface guidelines. These critics say that this was an example of Apple irrationally rejecting any change not invented by themselves. Apple's long held single button mouse philosophy is arguably one example (up until they introduced Apple Mighty Mouse, at least).

Another example was the difficulty that early British, and Japanese home computer manufacturers had to get the same acceptance for their products they had in their own country. For example the Timex Sinclair 2068, (an improved version of the British Sinclair Spectrum) almost got no attention, while in Britain the Sinclair Spectrum became hugely successful. Similarly the Japanese/Dutch MSX home computer standard became successful in many countries, except in countries that produced competing systems, Britain and the USA. The opposite was also true. British and American homecomputers got no foothold in Japan. In these cases perhaps both the "Not invented here", and the "invented here" syndromes were at work.

[edit] In the free software community

Many in the free software / open source community have been accused^{[citation needed]} of demonstrating the NIH syndrome because at any one time, there can be several programmers and/or groups working on different projects that, in effect, accomplish the same things as an existing solution. When a new program is written for task A because all existing programs that accomplish task A are not free, this is not NIH; but when it is done out of reasons that are not purely technical or legal, then it is referred to as "reinventing the wheel".

Reasons to reinvent a program can include pride, ignorance, discontent with some aspect of the existing solution, or simply the desire to create for creation's sake. These traits are in no way particularly specific to open source programmers; many programmers of proprietary software exhibit them as well.

The open source community may initially seek to provide the needed alternative to some fully or partially closed source implementation. However, later this closed implementation may also be released under an open source license, resulting two competing open source projects. Examples of such situations could be Apache Velocity and WebMacro or, on a larger scale, KDE and GNOME. In other cases, two projects that can be classified as both free and open source just pick incompatible licenses (like GNU Classpath and Apache Harmony).

[edit] In Corporate IT

NIH can be common in the corporate world of Information Technology, and must be compared with technology available at the time.

[edit] NIH syndrome in academia

In academic environments, the motivation for the NIH effect is twofold: first, resources from student workers are often paid in a lump sum (as a stipend, scholarship, or fixed salary) resulting in no variable increase in pay for more requested work; and second, the drive for publication at some institutions may drive repetition of work done at other institutions or in industry so that the researcher (and institution) may publish about their (repeated) work.

The quality of academic products developed out the NIH effect is widely varied, mostly for the aforementioned reasons.

[edit] Usage in the Military

Among the main examples of the NIH syndrome are the world's armed forces. Some observers have suggested^{[citation needed]} that the need to keep designers and bureaucrats in work plays an important part in such decisions. National security is also affected by the ability to produce, and to a lesser extent design, more advanced arms. Many countries often try to produce their own designs especially if they feel they do not have reliable suppliers.

NIH can play an important role in the development of a country's arms abilities. For example, India has worked on the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft at great expense, despite better designs being around. However, it stimulated the Indian aircraft industry. The Chinese usually made foreign designs also, but have changed over to making more locally-sourced designs.

[edit] The French Military and NIH

Among the major modern powers, France has the longest and strongest tradition of refusing to make foreign arms purchases. Since Charles De Gaulle's withdrawal from NATO and insistence on French autonomy, the French have designed and produced nearly all their own military equipment. Recently there have been a few exceptions. These include the Minimi and some joint aircraft development. The French participated in the early stages of what would become the Eurofighter, but pulled out in the 1980s to build the Rafale. During the Cold War, and for a time after, they flew the U.S. Vought F-8 Crusader aircraft, even past its retirement by U.S. forces.

[edit] The Chinese Military and NIH

By way of contrast the People's Republic of China is noted for not suffering from the NIH syndrome. It purchases most weapons and weapon designs from overseas. The People's Liberation Army has a poor record in design work and so usually uses weapons that have been purchased abroad or produced locally under licence. The main firearms used by the PLA are of Soviet origin and include the Chinese Type 56 Carbine (a copy of the Soviet SKS carbine), the Chinese Type 56 Assault Rifle (a local of the AK-47 assault rifle), the RPD light-machine gun, the Tokarev TT-33 pistol, the DShK heavy machine gun, and the Makarov PM series pistols. Their main tank has been the Type 59 which is a copy of the Soviet T-55. They have upgraded this themselves to produce the Type 69 and Type 79 tanks, but it was not until the fall of the Soviet Union that they were able to buy advanced technology from Serbia and Ukraine to produce the Type 80, Type 85 and Type 98. For many decades the PLA Airforce relied on the Shenyang J-5 a copy of the Soviet Mig 17, the Shenyang J-6 a copy of the Mig 19 and the Chengdu J-7, a copy of the Mig 21. It was not until 1979 that China first produced its own fighter in the Shenyang J-8 following the cutting of aid from the Soviet Union. In bombers it has also relied on locally-made copies of the Il-28 and Tu-16.

[edit] German Military and NIH

Germany has historically been highly dedicated to NIH, though not as much as the French. Most of the exceptions are for U.S. equipment, or joint projects with which it is partially involved. What little it does use is often made under license in Germany, rather than directly imported.

[edit] The U.S. Military and NIH

The syndrome is incorrectly thought to be common in the United States, though it actually has a long history of the reverse of the syndrome. The United States armed forces have a long history accepting weapons from overseas stretching back to the 1800s. Foreign purchases are especially common with firearms, though many of these are very expensive projects, furthermore more many other items from aircraft to missiles won contracts. However, most of these contracts have gone to western European countries, with a criticism being that rather than a pure NIH, a sort Euroamerican NIH exists, with a 'here' including Europe being demonstrated. There have been many contracts with other American countries however, especially Canada, as well as some Asian ones.

During the U.S. Civil War in the 1860s many British and French firearms were bought by both sides such as the Enfield. The U.S. selected and purchased the Krag-Jørgensen rifle in the 1890s over great protest from U.S. manufacturers. Its replacement, the M1903 Springfield, used a Mauser-locking bolt which the U.S. paid to license. In retrospect a rifle locking system may seem trivial, but in a era before tanks and aircraft, the abilities a single soldier's rifle was especially critical to a Army's capabilties. The Luger competed in trials in the early 1900s for a automatic pistol (resulting in the famed American Eagle Lugers) and was a lead contender, though their New York office lost the paperwork for further tests. The competition ended up finishing later resulting the M1911. In WW1 the U.S. purchased many French and British made machine guns such as the Hotchkiss machine gun. They also made huge numbers of M1917 Enfield rifles, a British developed design.

A great many modern firearms programs were won by foreign, mainly other NATO countries. Examples include the M9 Pistol (Italy), M11 (Swiss), Heckler & Koch MP5 (Germany), M249 (Belgium), M240 (Belgium), and the M136 AT4) (Sweden). Latest examples include the Mark 23(Germany), FN SCAR (Belgium) and XM320 (AG36 derivative (German)) and development work on the XM8 (Germany), Accuracy International AS50 (Britain), and OICW (Germany/US). Its tempting to dismiss these as 'small' projects, however, many are in fact very expensive (over 500.000 M9 pistols were purchased for example). Many of these were not simply, but jointly developed with input and feedback or to carefully crafted requirements.

FN (Belgium) beat out Colt (US) to produces M16 rifles as of 2005, and a Canadian firm won the contract to produce the latest batch of M9 bayonets, beating out earlier U.S. firms. Israel and now Taiwan currently manufacture 5.56 mm ammunition for the U.S. With respect to the 5.56 mm NATO round the U.S. currently uses, it is a design won by the Belgians (there were other contenders for the round, including a U.S. 5.56 mm). In 2005 one Swedish firm won a multi-million dollar contract for their armour-piercing 5.56 mm cartridge. Some of special rounds used in U.S. 50-cal. sniper are also made in Europe, including a special armour-piercing one.

U.S. tanks during the Cold War were armed with a license made 105 mm British gun, and then a German 120 mm gun, which is currently on the M1 Abrams. To compare one example, while the U.S. uses the German 120 mm gun, France, Britain, and Italy all use their own 120 mm gun at considerable extra expense to themselves. The U.S. even attempted a joint U.S-German tank project in the 1960s, the MBT-70. The current LAV-25 and Stryker are derivatives the Mowag Piranha (Swiss). The Marines use the Austrian/German 290 GDT (see G class), which beat a competing U.S. firm. During the 1930s the U.S. also had a small series of Coastal Patrol boats made in China.

Furthermore, many other types of equipment are purchased. The latest example include Embraer of Brazil beating Boeing's 717 for a aircraft contract for the Aerial Common Sensor. Other examples include the U.S. of Spitfires by the U.S. during World War II, and in more recent times, the Alenia C27 (the G222) light transport aircraft (Italy), and the T-45 Goshawk (the BAE Hawk) used as the main U.S. Navy training aircraft. The Coast Guard also uses the HH-65A Dolphin, a version of the Eurocopter Dauphin, and the MH-68A (the Italian 109M). Also, a heavily contested contract for VIP helicopters, including the presidential helicopter ('Marine One') went to the AgustaWestland EH101 (a UK/Italy design) 2005, beating entry from Sikorsky. The U.S. also use the Norwegian made Penguin missile as the AGM-119. Israeli made decoy glider bombs have also been used.

There are literally dozens of other examples in nearly every defense and military spending area. In the broader sense, as with every other large country, the bulk of contracts in the U.S. goes to the native country (many well justified, some less so). However, compared to other large countries the U.S. has had a long history of being among the most willing to accept foreign, especially European equipment of all sorts. Other countries that have had huge military budget, such as the Soviet Union, have used native designed and produced equipment near exclusively. In the U.S however, everything from the helicopter the President will fly in, to the actual bullets fired by a single soldier have come from elsewhere.

[edit] Harrier II and debated NIH

A example of the controversy that can develop over a joint military project is Harrier development. What is certain is that the U.S. funded early Harrier development through the Mutual Weapons Development Program (MWDP), a innovative way for NATO allies to cooperate on weapons development during the darker days of the Cold War. The resulting Hawker-Siddeley Harrier inspired a great deal of interest. The U.S. Marines bought some, but it found it lacking for the job they wanted it for (mainly close air-support), in particular it had too low a payload and short range. The U.S. wanted a design better suited to this role, but wasn't going to expect the already cash-strapped British to make it for them. So Mcdonald Douglas (under a partnership with British Aerospace) further developed the design into the Harrier II, which had much increased range and near double the payload capacity, as well as new features like FLIR and a special bombing system. The aircraft was in turn used as a starting point for further British developments of the aircraft line that were more adopted for the particular jobs the Brits used them for, who were not as interested in the ground attack role. The complicated nature of development has lead some to accuse both sides of NIH, though the reality was simply a well orchestrated joint development where each side got the aircraft they wanted. There may have actually been some NIH- they both passed up a french VTOL design capable of supersonic speeds, the only prototype VTOL design to do so up until the VTOL version of the JSF. In fairness, the French design was a essentially a fighter and far removed from the role the Marines needed, and had different performance goals.

The United States Coast Guard uses the HH-65A Dolphin (a version of the Eurocopter Dauphin), the MH-68A (the Italian 109M), the Dassault Falcon 20 as the HU-25, and the Spanish CASA CN-235. In 2006, the United States Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection ordered ten 10 Eurocopter EC120 helicopters, with options for up to fifty five[1]. The helicopter is based on the Eurocopter Colibri and was jointly developed in China and Europe. The CASA C-212 was also bought and serves as the C-41.

[edit] In popular culture

• MSV Not Invented Here is a Mind in Iain M Banks' Culture novels.

[edit] See also

• FUTON bias
• NIMBY

[edit] Further reading

• Katz & Allen, Investigating the Not Invented Here (NIH) Syndrome: a look at the performance, tenure and communication patterns of 50 R&D project groups. R&D Management vol. 12, pp. 7-19, 1982.

• Joel Spolsky, In Defense of Not-Invented-Here Syndrome^[2]