Forum OpenACS Q&A: Re: Marketing and Advocacy

We are all here because we like using OpenACS instead of alternatives
OpenACS continues to realize only a small fraction of its realistic (not blue-sky, ideal world, but real, tangible, one-step-away) potential.
We have adequate organization and processes and code; what we're lacking is resources.
We would benefit as users of OpenACS if the project had more resources.
We would benefit as Free Software developers if more people used OpenACS, and if we knew about it.

Thus marketing, both to get more users and to get more resources, is currently the limiting factor in our success. From here, i see Stan's original post in this thread as a good starting point for more discussion. The first problem in marketing, as I see it, is that we don't have information to tell us where to focus our very limited resources (those being the donated time and energy of people in the forum, and maybe some cash from the .LRN consortium or other donors we can find). I see the problem as a funnel:

There are X people in the world whose problems could be practically solved by OpenACS. We could increase X by improving the quality, usability, or functionality of OpenACS.
Of those X people, only Y have heard of OpenACS. We could increase Y by advertising, going to conferences, etc.
Of those Y people, only Z are interested. We could increase Z by changing parts of OpenACS that are unattractive, by making better arguments or brochures, more screenshots, etc.
Of the Z people who are interested in OpenACS, only W actually succeed in trying it. We could increase W with binary installers, better installation, stable demo sites, installfests, boot camps, etc.
Of the W people who try OpenACS, only V actually adopt in for their use.

My question is thus, where is the leverage? Is it feasible to get some hard numbers for X->Y->Z->W->V? It would then be much easier to tell which of very many different things we could be doing would be most worth doing.

I therefore find Stan's post interesting because it is a start in this direction, albeit unencumbered by numbers. I can only respond in similarly anecdotal form:

"Marketing the platform to organizations not now using it for use by their developers/IT staff who aren't now part of the community. ... This doesn't seem like a compelling marketing strategy to me (nothing really is being sold, and no one really is buying), but perhaps I'm missing something fundamental here." Well, isn't this how almost the entire community to date grew? We were attracted by the book, by a boot camp, or by a Phil lecture. How many people have become active members of the community through other means? I don't know if this is the best leverage going forward, but it's what has worked the best in the past.

"Marketing custom consulting/hosting solutions to organizations that don't currently have a web infrastructure or else need one". I don't think the community grows when this happens. I've built OpenACS solutions for a few paying customers, but they aren't part of OpenACS now; they just rely on me. Maybe it works better for bigger companies/institutions that actually have staff that could contribute back.

"Marketing vertical solutions to specific industry segments that either currently don't have comparable solutions or else have inferior ones." How will this grow OpenACS? Will consulting firms add it to their quiver? Will we get new developers who decide "I'll learn OpenACS so I can sell it in my niche?" I think this approach (as .LRN, in the higher-ed market) is the only thing other than recruiting developers that has worked well for OpenACS. How would we move forward (extend a pseudopod?) as a community?

"Marketing to current OpenACS or ACS developers who are already working in organizations" I like this because it fits the adage, "your existing customers are your best market." How would we do it? Appoint a lost-sheep liason?