11 research outputs found

    Maturity Model for Interoperability Potential Measurement

    Get PDF
    Interoperability potential concerns the preparation level of an enterprise to establish an efficient collaboration with possible part- ners. In order to improve their interoperability, enterprises need to know witch level of maturity they have achieved. This article pro- poses a complete maturity model composed by a methodology and a reference set of parameters to measure interoperability potential. In order to clarify the proposal, an example of application in a real case is described.Campos, C.; Chalmeta, R.; Grangel, R.; Poler Escoto, R. (2013). Maturity Model for Interoperability Potential Measurement. Information Systems Management. 30(3):218-234. doi:10.1080/10580530.2013.794630S218234303Alfaro, J. J., Rodriguez-Rodriguez, R., Verdecho, M. J., & Ortiz, A. (2009). Business process interoperability and collaborative performance measurement. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 22(9), 877-889. doi:10.1080/09511920902866112Sabucedo, L. Á., & Rifón, L. A. (2010). Managing Citizen Profiles in the Domain of e-Government: The cPortfolio Project. Information Systems Management, 27(4), 309-319. doi:10.1080/10580530.2010.514181Berre, A.-J., Elvesæter, B., Figay, N., Guglielmina, C., Johnsen, S. G., Karlsen, D., … Lippe, S. (s. f.). The ATHENA Interoperability Framework. Enterprise Interoperability II, 569-580. doi:10.1007/978-1-84628-858-6_62Blanc, S., Ducq, Y., & Vallespir, B. (2007). Evolution management towards interoperable supply chains using performance measurement. Computers in Industry, 58(7), 720-732. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2007.05.011Campos, C., Martí, I., Grangel, R., Mascherpa, A. and Chalmeta, R. A methodological proposal for the development of an interoperability framework.Model Driven Interoperability for Sustainable Information Systems (MDISIS′08) (CAiSE′08). Vol. 340, pp.47–57. CEUR-WS. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-340/paper04.pdfChalmeta, R., & Grangel, R. (2005). Performance measurement systems for virtual enterprise integration. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 18(1), 73-84. doi:10.1080/0951192042000213164Doumeingts, G. and Chen, D. Basic concepts and approaches to develop interoperability of enterprise applications.PRO-VE,IFIP Conference Proceedings. Edited by: Camarinha-Matos, L. M. and Afsarmanesh, H. Vol. 262, pp.323–330. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.Duque, A., Campos, C., Jimenez-Ruiz, E. and Chalmeta, R. An ontological solution to supprot interoperability in the textile industry.Second IFIP WG 5.8 International Workshop, IWEI 2009. Edited by: Poler, M. V. S. R. Vol. 38, pp.38–51. New York: Springer.Guédria, W., Naudet, Y., & Chen, D. (2008). Interoperability Maturity Models – Survey and Comparison –. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 273-282. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-88875-8_48Hoving, R. (2007). Information Technology Leadership Challenges — Past, Present, and Future. Information Systems Management, 24(2), 147-153. doi:10.1080/10580530701221049Palomares, N., Campos, C., & Palomero, S. (2010). How to Develop a Questionnaire in Order to Measure Interoperability Levels in Enterprises. Enterprise Interoperability IV, 387-396. doi:10.1007/978-1-84996-257-5_36Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method. European Journal of Information Systems, 4(2), 74-81. doi:10.1057/ejis.1995.

    Structural elements of coordination mechanisms in collaborative planning processes and their assessment through maturity models: Application to a ceramic tile company

    Full text link
    Maturity is defined as a measure to evaluate the capabilities of an organization in regards to a certain discipline. The Collaborative Planning Process is a very complex process and Coordination mechanisms are especially relevant in this field to align the plans of the supply chain members. The objective of this paper is to develop a maturity model and a methodology to perform assessment for the Structural Elements of Coordination Mechanisms in the Collaborative Planning Process. Structural elements are specified in order to characterize coordination mechanisms in a collaborative planning context and they have been defined as key areas to be assessed by the maturity model. The identified structural elements are: number of decision-makers, collaboration level, interdependence relationships nature, interdepen-dence relationships type, number of coordination mechanisms, information exchanged, information processing, decision sequence characteristics and stopping criteria. Structural elements are assessed using the scheme of five levels: Initial, Repeatable, Defined, Managed and Optimized. This proposal has been applied to a ceramic tile company and the results are also reported.Cuenca, L.; Boza Garcia, A.; Alemany Díaz, MDM.; Trienekens, JJ. (2013). Structural elements of coordination mechanisms in collaborative planning processes and their assessment through maturity models: Application to a ceramic tile company. Computers in Industry. 64(8):898-911. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2013.06.019S89891164

    2.1.3 The US Ballistic Missile Defense System: A Case Study in Architecting Systems-of-Systems

    No full text
    Systems-of-Systems (SoS) engineering for modern complex systems is one of the most difficult challenges facing today\u27s engineer. This paper provides a detailed case study of architecting for a major modern SoS: the US Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). The BMDS is a massive SoS that encompasses several existing and new missile defense programs on a variety of platforms covering most of the world. This paper includes a review of currently defined practices for architecting SoS, a discussion of how the BMDS was architected, and then suggestions for architecting future additions to the program

    Introduction

    No full text
    corecore