Both the public and private sectors stand to benefit from free sharing and reuse as a key approach to doing digital better. In a 3-part blog we cover: 1/ (this post) this beneficial way of working is still challenging, 2/ making decisions to share and reuse, and 3/ the means of sharing that will realise the benefits of reuse.

This beneficial way of working is still challenging 

The internet has been made possible by sharing and reusing standards, products, and services for no cost. Not just to support interoperability, but also to get the benefits of increased speed of delivery, reduced operational cost, greater security, and greater quality. 

A single digital service typically uses multiple software applications built and operated using foundational elements that are freely shared, including dozens of standards and 100’s of open source products in the form of industry software libraries, tools, frameworks, and platforms. Without this supercharging effect, the cost of digital services would be multiples of what we’re spending today.

Yet facilitating technology sharing and reuse predominantly remains an external industry practice delivered by maverick programmers and not-for-profits rather than a corporate or government one. 

The digital blueprint for government published in January 2025 (link) reported that following a comprehensive review of the state of digital across the UK public sector, engaging more than 100 organisations: “achievements are typically in isolation: sharing success and reusing code is rare.” 

In terms of government strategy it has long been encoded in point 8 of the Tech Code of Practice, but resulting action was largely lip service. Now the Blueprint for Digital Government makes a call to address this inefficiency and immaturity citing the clear success stories of GOV.UK Notify and Pay, and we’d add GOV.UK Forms to that list.

But in reality, the practice of sharing and reuse is not well understood, being a mystery for many stakeholders, service owners, and teams. It’s under-promoted by those who know its value forcing many service owners to waste time, money, and energy on technology problems that have already been solved. 

The examples of free sharing and reuse that do exist are highly valuable and beg the question, “Why aren’t we doing more of this, what magic is needed for government and corporates to invest in these foundational elements?”. 

Barriers to sharing

At CYB we've made a practice of sharing and reviewed situations when we've found this challenging, and situations in which we'd hoped others would share. We have learnt that there are barriers to sharing that must be addressed if the negative culture towards sharing for free is to change, including: 

• Service owners wish to avoid any extra costs associated with sharing 

• Constraints on delivery, such as time, mean that considering sharing is not possible

• The responsibilities of owning and operating a shared asset are not well understood, and hence are too risky for service owners to commit to

• Service delivery teams and individuals commonly have a competitive mindset, so they do not easily move towards sharing work that might get others ahead more quickly

• Delivery teams formed of suppliers can sometimes have a commercial imperative that undermines their desire to support sharing, for example, being rewarded by creating work to realise more revenue

• Service teams will often assume their needs and problems are unique and that other services will need different products or tools, hence they do not undertake an analysis of common needs

Barriers to reuse

Similarly we've found barriers to reusing free foundational elements being provided by someone else, including:

• The functional or non-functional scope of a shared element does not meet the service needs

• The technology used for a shared element does not align with the service’s organisational tech strategy

• The technology used for a shared element requires a different skill base than is available within the organisation and they are not willing to adopt new skills

• The owner/roadmap of a shared element is not open to change that is needed by the service delivery team

• Services delivery teams and individuals largely have a competitive mindset, so do not easily move towards reusing other’s work, wanting to get kudos for creating solutions and solving problems themselves and not award it to others

• Delivery teams and individuals can be motivated to avoid reaping the benefit of greater delivery speed so to create more work and/or generate a greater reliance on them

• Delivery teams formed of suppliers can sometimes have a commercial imperative that undermines reuse, for example, charging higher fees for reusing a foundation element compared to building custom

Benefits beyond the barriers

The barriers may seem insurmountable but given that every digital service in the world uses free foundational elements then we know it is eminently achievable. What’s more is that the benefits are extraordinary. Some of the proven benefits, but by no means all, are the ones mentioned above:  increased speed of delivery, reduced operational cost, greater security, and greater quality. 

When freely shared our software libraries, tools, frameworks, and platforms enable societal economies of scale that more than reward the complexity and communal effort involved in bringing them to market.

Given the context of these challenges, in part 2 we’ll break down how to approach making decisions to share and reuse foundational elements of a digital service.