The recent brouhaha over IBM’s patent on outsourcing was interesting. In this case both the stimulus and response were characteristically American- companies piling up patent filings for every new idea and the scare about jobs going offshore.

The anti-outsourcing camp feared that with the new tool, managers at IBM can keep hitting the  button and drain away American jobs. Figurative logic and overreaction- I would say.

From what one could gather from Bob Sutor’s post, it was just a decision-making tool that brought together the pieces of information needed to decide what parts of the workflow needs to be done where. The methodology might have been in use for ages by many companies. But many IBMers would have put the thought and effort in making it easy to use, more effective, more productive. Hence it could have qualified as intellectual property.

It was the intended application of the tool that drew the disproportionate amount of attention. Even those who upheld the necessity to protect intellectual property through patents dismissed it as a farfetched idea. Whereas IBM’s intention might have been to use the tool to shorten the engagement cycle which would save time and money and charge the customer for its proprietary methodology. And at the scale at which IBM operates the tool would have had a significant impact. In good faith IBM withdrew the filing but nothing would stop them from using the tool nonetheless.

For the broader American psyche, one thing is sure- Outsourcing is still a dirty word. That one of the iconic companies set out to automate the heartless practice of outsourcing was tantamount to blatant insensitivity to human issues.