Ecosystem-inspired enterprise modelling framework for collaborative and networked manufacturing systems
Rapid changes in the open manufacturing environment are imminent due to the increase of customer demand, global competition, and digital fusion. This has exponentially increased both complexity and uncertainty in the manufacturing landscape, creating serious challenges for competitive enterprises. For enterprises to remain competitive, analysing manufacturing activities and designing systems to address emergent needs, in a timely and efficient manner, is understood to be crucial. However, existing analysis and design approaches adopt a narrow diagnostic focus on either managerial or engineering aspects and neglect to consider the holistic complex behaviour of enterprises in a collaborative manufacturing network (CMN). It has been suggested that reflecting upon ecosystem theory may bring a better understanding of how to analyse the CMN. The research presented in this paper draws on a theoretical discussion with aim to demonstrate a facilitating approach to those analysis and design tasks. This approach was later operationalised using enterprise modelling (EM) techniques in a novel, developed framework that enhanced systematic analysis, design, and business-IT alignment. It is expected that this research view is opening a new field of investigation.
Understanding organizations and their needs for new technology has never been more challenging than in today’s high-tech business world. Enterprise managers are required to coordinate with other departmental managers, direct their personnel and solve problems along the way. Communicating new designs to IT for needed applications may not be in the manager’s skillset. When the enterprise grows rapidly or tries to compete in new areas, a set of basic diagrams illustrating common workflows may no longer accurately reflect the complex environment. What is needed is a simple method for illustrating the enterprise as a whole, interoperable structure so managers and workers alike can describe their requirements in the unique vocabulary of their industry. REBAR offers a novel approach for using key strategic and operational business documents, written in natural language, as the basis for the formal enterprise ontology. Popular semantic web standards, including RDF, FOAF and DC, provide generic terms already designed to convey the subject–predicate–object structure of natural language in a social structure. The REBAR enterprise ontology extends these existing standards, thus evolving a socio-technical model of the functional organization distilled directly from existing enterprise documents. REBAR captures the essence of the unique enterprise in a graphical application that can be queried and dynamically recombined to illustrate details of complex workplace collaborations. An enterprise ontology should unite all defined departmental functions authorized by executive enterprise managers. Additionally, findings indicate the REBAR ontology has the potential to provide a reusable structure for linking core social business functions of the enterprise to other explicit enterprise knowledge, including policies, procedures, tech manuals, training documents and project metrics. The REBAR methodology offers evidence that the enterprise is more than the sum of its parts, it is the bridge unifying explicit and tacit knowledge during work projects across the entire enterprise.
A Systematic Literature Review to Understand Cross-organizational Relationship Management and Collaboration
An increasingly dynamic, unpredictable and challenging environment leads organizations to cross their own borders and establish partnerships to other organizations for remaining competitive. This cross-organizational relationship allows participating organizations to share resources with each other and collaborate to better handle an identified opportunity for joint work. However, besides having a mutual or compatible goal, it is common that these organizations face several challenges during the partnership. The present research aims to explore the cross-organizational relationship management. To this end, this paper outlines the systematic literature review performed to understand the collaboration and relationship establishment between different organizations and organize an ICT related body of knowledge about the topic. A discussion about the findings, challenges and open issues identified from the retrieved literature is also provided to guide further work.
A sophisticated framework for strategic operating model is presented here which helps develop the IT foundation in order to execute IT-Strategy. The driving force behind the projected operating model is the need of IT alignment with business. There are key approaches used in this paper to shape our operating model: a) SOA: Service orientation approach for each phase of Enterprise Architecture, b) Governance: Automated process to govern the strategy into each enterprise application, c) Evolution: Although strategy drives enterprise architecture, it also evolves in bottom-up fashion. This operating model integrates several frameworks to lead a basis of standard and effective IT.
In an increasingly digitized environment, enterprises face new challenges. Enabled by ubiquitous Internet accessibility, people, places, and products have become more interconnected and are gradually merging into the Internet of Everything. Simultaneously, a new generation of connected customers is emerging that is establishing new requirements for the capabilities of enterprises to communicate, interact, and respond to unforeseen events. As customer satisfaction is the central source of future competitiveness, companies must initiate a transformation towards a connected enterprise. By analyzing the characteristics of the connected customer, this paper presents guidelines for enterprises to address customer needs adequately and manage their operations in the Internet of Everything. Building upon established enterprise architecture frameworks, we apply a Design Science Research procedure to derive four practical recommendations. Thus, enterprises must manage their business processes holistically, implement information systems and standards for data exchange, provide mechanisms for real-time business intelligence, and determine their optimal degree of connectivity.
This paper provides a state-of-the-art report on the usage of business capability maps in enterprise architecture management. We conducted expert interviews with 25 organizations to reveal the benefits and challenges of capability-based enterprise architecture management and evaluated 14 use cases on the feasibility and benefit of using business capability maps in practice. The results reveal increasing interest and acceptance of the approach in practice and among support organizations.
Enterprise agility, i .e., the ability of enterprises to respond to changes, is a core imperative for effective change management. It can improve operational efficiency as well as support resource optimization. Yet, it is challenging and a major concern for corporate executives. To facilitate agility, it can be useful to design modeling constructs for representing changes. Such modeling constructs can help stakeholders to represent and better understand change concepts. This research contributes by extending existing enterprise modeling approaches with new modeling constructs for representing concepts of change. These modeling constructs are integrated into a conceptual model. To demonstrate utility, we apply this meta-model to represent a real-world case study and discuss some lessons learned in this process. One major challenge faced by
Many large organizations have on-going Enterprise Architecture initiatives. Key aims include achieving more organizational agility, and to tidy up a messy portfolio of IT silo systems. A holistic approach to IT architecture has been an accepted strategy, but the results of these initiatives have been variable. An under-researched aspect is how different organizational units respond to the call for a holistic approach. In this study, we investigate how different stakeholders connected to three ongoing projects responded to the call for EA. With a qualitative approach, we identify three options of response to EA initiatives: (i) compliance with the EA strategy, (ii) loyal but isolated response, and (iii) rebel solutions. We argue for the need of a more nuanced repertoire of actions for dealing with EA, and show how these responses are useful for understanding and managing successful EA.
Information technology (IT) is at the core of digitisation of existing business models and dominates in the innovation efforts of many industries. IT has until now in many ways been regarded as exempted from the structuration and automation represented by IT. The IT4IT framework released by The Open Group in October 2015 suggests to a major change. IT has to be governed and structured along defined processes of value chains, life-cycles, service propositions, customer interaction and cost control as any other area of the organization. The purpose of this paper is to review IT4IT as a practical implementation of a Management of Technology framework and to review its perspectives and implications to the MoT society as well as the contributions it has to IT professionals, innovators and MoT practitioners. Methodologically this paper is based on an extensive case study of a large IT service provider. The IT service provider used the framework, along with other frameworks, to introduce larger degree of homogeneity of its own service “catalogues”, improved processes for navigating in the heterogeneity of its customers, and to ensure uniform processes of performance management and reporting. Methodologically this paper has been challenged by the novelty of the topic of IT4IT as only very little peer reviewed materials is available
An interoperability assessment approach based on criteria dependencies to support decision making in networked enterprises
In the networked enterprise, the interoperability is seen as a requirement for ensuring the collaboration among partners. Therefore, an assessment for identifying the enterprise's strengths and weakness regarding interoperability is paramount. It involves determining the gaps between where enterprises envision themselves in the future and the enterprises' current states. Indeed, a variety of approaches were proposed in the literature. However, based on surveys, existing methods are assessing specific aspects of interoperability and focusing only on one kind of measurement. The objective of this work is, therefore, to propose a holistic assessment approach to support the interoperability development. To do so, the criteria regarding the interoperability aspects and measurements were identified and are being formalised. The enterprise systems associated with the criteria are being modelled based on Enterprise Architecture techniques. This modelling supports the identification of existing interdependencies between criteria. Finally, case studies will be used to validate the proposed approach.
As a result of growing complexities in business processes, information systems, and the technical infrastructure, a key challenge for enterprise architecture management (EAM) is to guide stakeholders from different hierarchical levels with heterogeneous concerns. EA deliverables, such as models or frameworks, are often highly comprehensive and standardized. However, these can hardly be applied without greater adaption. Although the literature selectively covers approaches for tailoring EA deliverables closer to the concerns of affected stakeholders, these approaches are often vague or not very differentiated. In the paper at hand, we aim at introducing a stakeholder perspective to EAM research that considers stakeholder concerns on EAM across hierarchical levels. To this end, we conduct a case study: Our results show homogenous concerns among stakeholders on EA deliverables. In turn, we found different concerns on the role of EAM in applying these deliverables, dependent on the hierarchical level of stakeholders. These findings stress the necessity for a more differentiated understanding of stakeholder concerns on EAM. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings for an exemplary EAM approach.
Enterprise Reference Architectures have been increasingly emerging as new standardized architectural description artefacts suitable to provide a frame of reference for a particular business domains. Used in an appropriate way, they can be a useful tool for improving enterprise architecture management practices. Whilst from a practitioners perspective several instances of such architectures have been created over the past years, little research on such artefacts has been done to date. Hence, academia still lacks a comprehensible overview of prior literature on Enterprise Reference Architectures, despite the relevance of literature reviews to knowledge advancement in any scientific field. To close this gap, in this paper we present a primer literature review on Enterprise Reference Architectures conducted following general guidelines proposed for undertaking information systems reviews. Similarly to precedent contributions addressing enterprise architecture oriented topics, we introduce a novel classification framework based on Gregor‘s theory types of information systems to structure and summarize former research. Major findings from significant studies on the topic are then identified, analysed and mapped into the referred framework. Based on the analysis and results of the review, brief suggestions to stimulate further research on the design, improvement and application of Enterprise Reference Architectures are also derived.
Enterprise architecture (EA) is an approach to improve the alignment between the organization’s business and their information technologies. It attempts to capture the status of the organizations’ business architecture, information resources, information systems, and technologies so that the gaps and weaknesses in their processes and infrastructures can be identified, and development directions planned. For this reason, EA has become a popular approach also in the public sector to increase their efficiency and ICT utilization. Yet researchers have largely ignored this context, and it seems that quite little is known about how EA is developed, implemented, or adapted in different countries and in the public sector. We thus conducted a systematic literature review to identify the major research topics and methods in studies focusing on public sector EA. We analyzed 71 identified articles from the past 15 years. Our analysis shows that the development viewpoint, case studies in developed countries, and local settings seem to form mainstream EA research in the public sector. Taken together, it seems that public sector EA is scattered, and there is no strong, single research stream. Instead the researchers conduct local case studies. This means the knowledge on EA development, implementation or adaptation, their challenges and best practices does not accumulate. There is consequently a need for more research in general, and targeted research in some specific segments.
The Failure of Success Factors: Lessons from Success and Failure Cases of Enterprise Architecture Implementation
Many Enterprise Architecture programmes fail to meet expectations. While much has been written about the factors influencing the success of EA programmes, there are few empirical investigations of the role of critical success factors (CSFs) in the success of EA programmes. This study condensed the very broad literature on CSFs for EA identifying six key CSFs that share a broad consensus in the literature. A qualitative case study was conducted to test the hypothesis that the six key CSFs would distinguish between the successful and the unsuccessful programmes. Analysis of the case study data reveals that three key CSFs associated with the use of EA tools did not distinguish between successful and unsuccessful cases while three key CSFs related to the process of EA programme implementation did so. The study concludes that success in EA programmes comes more from how architecture is practiced than what is practiced. The findings have important implications for EA suggesting that the methodological skills of architects need to be supplemented with an understanding of practice.
In order to aid organisations in the adoption of enterprise architecture (EA) best practices, maturity models have been proposed in the literature. These models offer organisational roadmaps and assessment frameworks for increasing EA maturity. However, key questions concerning the implied meaning of the term maturity in the context of these models have been left unexplored by previous research. This research, aided by the field of organisational learning, offers new insights into the implied assumptions of current EA maturity models and offers initial concepts and constructs to guide the conceptualisation, construction and refinement of enterprise maturity models.
We investigated contextual organizational ambidexterity, defined as the capacity to simultaneously achieve alignment and adaptability at a business-unit level. Building on the leadership and organization context literatures, we argue that a context characterized by a combination of stretch, discipline, support, and trust facilitates contextual ambidexterity. Further, ambidexterity mediates the relationship between these contextual features and performance. Data collected from 4,195 individuals in 41 business units supported our hypotheses.
Corporate executives must constantly look backward, attending to the products and processes of the past, while also gazing forward, preparing for the innovations that will define the future. This mental balancing act is one of the toughest of all managerial challenges - it requires executives to explore new opportunities even as they work diligently to exploit existing capabilities - and it’s no surprise that few companies do it well. But as every businessperson knows, there are companies that do. What’s their secret? These organizations separate their new, exploratory units from their traditional, exploitative ones, allowing them to have different processes, structures, and cultures, at the same time, they maintain tight links across units at the senior executive level. Such ambidextrous organizations, as the authors call them, allow executives to pioneer radical or disruptive innovations while also pursuing incremental gains. Of utmost importance to the ambidextrous organization are ambidextrous managers - executives who have the ability to understand and be sensitive to the needs of very different kinds of businesses. They possess the attributes of rigorous cost cutters and free-thinking entrepreneurs while also maintaining the objectivity required to make difficult trade-offs. Almost every company needs to renew itself through the creation of breakthrough products and processes, but it shouldn’t do so at the expense of its traditional business. Building an ambidextrous organization is by no means easy, but the structure itself, combining organizational separation with senior team integration, is not difficult to understand. Given the executive will to make it happen, any company can become ambidextrous.
Dynamic capabilities have been proposed as a useful way to understand how organizations are able to adapt to changes in technology and markets. Organizational ambidexterity, the ability of senior managers to seize opportunities through the orchestration and integration of existing assets to overcome inertia and path dependence, is a core dynamic capability. While promising, research on dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity has not yet been able to specify the specific mechanisms through which senior managers are actually able to reallocate resources and reconfigure assets to simultaneously explore and exploit. Using interviews and qualitative case studies from thirteen organizations, this article explores the actions senior managers took to implement ambidextrous designs and identify which ones helped or hindered them in their attempts. A set of interrelated choices of organization design and senior team process determine which attempts to build ambidextrous organizations are successful.
How do organizations survive in the face of change? Underlying this question is a rich debate about whether organizations can adapt—and if so how. One perspective, organizational ecology, presents evidence suggesting that most organizations are largely inert and ultimately fail. A second perspective argues that some firms do learn and adapt to shifting environmental contexts. Recently, this latter view has coalesced around two themes. The first, based on research in strategy suggests that dynamic capabilities, the ability of a firm to reconfigure assets and existing capabilities, explains long-term competitive advantage. The second, based on organizational design, argues that ambidexterity, the ability of a firm to simultaneously explore and exploit, enables a firm to adapt over time. In this paper, we review and integrate these comparatively new research streams and identify a set of propositions that suggest how ambidexterity acts as a dynamic capability. We suggest that efficiency and innovation need not be strategic tradeoffs and highlight the substantive role of senior teams in building dynamic capabilities.
There is a fundamental disconnect between the wealth of digital data available to us and the physical world in which we apply it. While reality is three-dimensional, the rich data we now have to inform our decisions and actions remains trapped on two-dimensional pages and screens. This gulf between the real and digital worlds limits our ability to take advantage of the torrent of information and insights produced by billions of smart, connected products (SCPs) worldwide. Augmented reality, a set of technologies that superimposes digital data and images on the physical world, promises to close this gap and release untapped and uniquely human capabilities. Though still in its infancy, AR is poised to enter the mainstream - according to one estimate, spending on AR technology will hit $60 billion in 2020. AR will affect companies in every industry and many other types of organizations, from universities to social enterprises. In the coming months and years, it will transform how we learn, make decisions, and interact with the physical world. It will also change how enterprises serve customers, train employees, design and create products, and manage their value chains, and, ultimately, how they compete. In this article we describe what AR is, its evolving technology and applications, and why it is so important. Its significance will grow exponentially as SCPs proliferate, because it amplifies their power to create value and reshape competition. AR will become the new interface between humans and machines, bridging the digital and physical worlds. While challenges in deploying it remain, pioneering organizations, such as Amazon, Facebook, General Electric, Mayo Clinic, and the U.S. Navy, are already implementing AR and seeing a major impact on quality and productivity. Here we provide a road map for how companies should deploy AR and explain the critical choices they will face in integrating it into strategy and operations.
The evolution of products into intelligent, connected devices is revolutionizing business. In a November 2014 article, How Smart, Connected Products Are Transforming Competition, Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter and PTC president and CEO James Heppelmann looked at how this shift is changing the structure of industries and forcing firms to rethink their strategies. In this companion article, the authors look at the effects inside firms, examining the impact that smart, connected products have on operations and organizational structure. The new capabilities and vast quantities of data that smart, connected products offer are redefining the activities of the core functions of companies—sometimes radically. As software and cloud-based operating systems become integral to products, new product-development principles emerge, manufacturing components and processes change, and IT security becomes the job of every function. Companies need different skills and expertise, which creates new imperatives for HR. In the marketing function, the ability to track a product's condition and use shifts the focus to maximizing the product’s value to the customer over time. Customer relationships become continuous and open-ended, service becomes more efficient and proactive, and new business models are enabled. The rich data on location and environment that products provide take logistics to a whole new level. Smart, connected products also alter interactions between functions, in ways that hold major implications for organizational structure. Intense, ongoing coordination becomes necessary across multiple functions, including design, operations, sales, service, and IT. Functional roles overlap and blur. Entirely new functions - unified data organizations, dev-ops, and customer success management- begin to emerge. What is under way is the most substantial change in the manufacturing firm since the Second Industrial Revolution, and the effects are spreading to other industries, like services, as well.
Information technology is revolutionizing products. Once composed solely of mechanical and electrical parts, products have become complex systems that combine hardware, sensors, data storage, microprocessors, software, and connectivity in myriad ways. These smart, connected products - made possible by vast improvements in processing power and device miniaturization and by the network benefits of ubiquitous wireless connectivity - have unleashed a new era of competition. Smart, connected products offer exponentially expanding opportunities for new functionality, far greater reliability, much higher product utilization, and capabilities that cut across and transcend traditional product boundaries. The changing nature of products is also disrupting value chains, forcing companies to rethink and retool nearly everything they do internally. Smart, connected products raise a broad set of new strategic choices for companies about how value is created and captured, how to work with traditional partners and what new partnerships will be required, and how to secure competitive advantage as the new capabilities reshape industry boundaries. For many firms, smart, connected products will force the fundamental question: What business am I in? This article provides a framework for developing strategy and achieving competitive advantage in a smart, connected world.
Digital computers have transformed work in almost every sector of the economy over the past several decades. We are now at the beginning of an even larger and more rapid transformation due to recent advances in machine learning (ML), which is capable of accelerating the pace of automation itself. However, although it is clear that ML is a general purpose technology, like the steam engine and electricity, which spawns a plethora of additional innovations and capabilities, there is no widely shared agreement on the tasks where ML systems excel, and thus little agreement on the specific expected impacts on the workforce and on the economy more broadly. We discuss what we see to be key implications for the workforce, drawing on our rubric of what the current generation of ML systems can and cannot do [see the supplementary materials (SM)]. Although parts of many jobs may be suitable for ML (SML), other tasks within these same jobs do not fit the criteria for ML well; hence, effects on employment are more complex than the simple replacement and substitution story emphasized by some. Although economic effects of ML are relatively limited today, and we are not facing the imminent end of work as is sometimes proclaimed, the implications for the economy and the workforce going forward are profound.
The value created by learning in communities of practice or networks is not always easy to articulate in ways that make sense to participants, sponsors, and stakeholders. Yet it is something that needs to be done, not only for monitoring and evaluation, but also for optimizing the learning of the community. We have developed a “value-creation framework” that focuses on how social learning makes a difference in the world via its effect on practice. The framework helps structure convincing accounts of the value of social learning by framing learning in terms of different cycles of value creation and loops between them. It integrates quantitative and qualitative data and can be used by professional evaluators as well as participants. In this paper we demonstrate the use of the framework in a project supported by the World Bank in Southern and Eastern Africa where it was used both for evaluation and for strategic renewal of a regional network of members of parliament and their clerks.
While mixed methods research is increasingly established as a methodological approach, researchers still struggle with boundaries arising from commitments to different methods and paradigms, and from attention to social justice. Combining two lines of work—social learning theory and the Imagine Program at the University of Brighton—we present an evaluation framework that was used to integrate the perspectives of multiple stakeholders in the program’s social interventions. We explore how this value-creation framework acts as a boundary object across boundaries of practice, specifically across quantitative and qualitative methods, philosophical paradigms, and participant perspectives. We argue that the framework’s focus on cycles of value creation provided the Imagine Program with a shared language for negotiating interpretation and action across those boundaries.