Developing a framework to establish collaborative enterprise networks

Hale, Andrew; White, Leroy

doi:10.1109/syscon.2014.6819293

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…What has not yet been mentioned, however, is the opportunity to import the methodologies and methods discussed above (as well as others) into the practice of systemic innovation in industry and government. The literature on systems thinking includes literally thousands of examples of the successful use of systems approaches for innovation (mostly in the form of case studies of practice, with some methodological learning coming out of them that others can utilise), including many where the purpose was explicitly to coordinate across the boundaries of multiple organizations (e.g., Brocklesby, 2015; Collins & Ison, 2010; Gregory & Midgley, 2000; Hale & White, 2014; Kärkkäinen & Hallikas, 2006; Midgley et al, 1997, 1998; Sydelko et al, 2021; Taket & White, 2000; White, 2001). Interestingly though, the word ‘innovation’ itself is not used very much in the systems literature, with words like ‘transformation’, ‘change’ and ‘improvement’ being more common instead.…”

Section: Systems Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systems perspective on systemic innovation

Midgley

Lindhult

2021

Syst Res Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term ‘systemic innovation’ is increasing in use, but there is no consensus on its meaning: five understandings of the term can be identified, each based on a different view of what the word ‘systemic’ should refer to. The first understanding focuses on technologies, where the innovation in focus is synergistically integrated with other complementary innovations, going beyond the boundaries of a single organization. Therefore, ‘systemic’ refers to technological innovations interacting in a larger product system. A second use of the term refers to the development of policies and governance at a local, regional or national scale to create an enabling environment for innovation systems. Here, ‘systemic’ means recognition that innovation systems can be enabled and/or constrained by a meta‐level policy system. The third use of the term says that an innovation is ‘systemic’ when its purpose is to change societal laws and norms to place new enablers and constraints on innovation in the interests of ecological sustainability. What makes this systemic is acknowledgement of the existence of nested systems: innovation systems are parts of economic systems, which are parts of societal systems, and all societies exist on a single planetary ecosystem. The fourth use focuses on collaboration in innovation networks with multiple actors. This has evolved from the first understanding of systemic innovation, but the critical difference is the primary focus on people and processes rather than technological products. The word ‘systemic’ refers to the interdependency of actors in a business or community context, leading to a need to cocreate value and innovate in concert or through coevolutionary dynamics. The fifth use of the term ‘systemic innovation’ concerns how people engage in a process to support systemic thinking and action, and it is primarily this process, and the thinking and action it gives rise to, that is seen as systemic, rather than the innovation system that they exist within or are trying to create. It is this fifth understanding that accords with most of the literature on systems thinking published over the last 50 years. The current paper offers a contemporary perspective on what systems thinkers mean by ‘systemic’, and this not only enables us to provide a redefinition of ‘systemic innovation’, but it also helps to show how all four previous forms of innovation that have been described as systemic can be enhanced by the practice of systems thinking.

show abstract

Section: Systems Thinkingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systems perspective on systemic innovation

Midgley

Lindhult

2021

Syst Res Behav Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Collaborative enterprise is derived from the word collaboration which is an activity that comprises of two or more stakeholders (Tolomett and Saunders, 1998), working collectively to achieving a shared goal towards the organizations vision (Halal, 2001;Kim, 2008). CE is any establishments that carries out activities where two or more people contribute distinct resources and know-how to facilitate the development of the establishment (Hale and White, 2014). According to Tencati and Zsolnai (2008) the goal of CEs is multidimensional hence different from other traditional enterprise and aims to provide end users and stakeholders with social, economic and environmental values which are mainly not considered by traditional enterprises.…”

Section: Overview Of Collaboration Enterprisementioning

confidence: 99%

A generic study on Green IT/IS practice development in collaborative enterprise: Insights from a developing country

Anthony

Majid

Romli

2020

Journal of Engineering and Technology Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Gaspar et al [78] organize a descriptive-qualitative study and determine the factors which influence, promote, or restrict the formation of a cooperative network. In another work, Hale and White [79] develop a framework for the establishment of a collaborative networks. They explore four case studies in aerospace and renewable industry and propose a framework consists of eight elements: (1) purpose definition, (2) funding mechanism, (3) identification and selection of partners, (4) defining collaborative objectives, (5) network structure, (6) governance processes, (7) defining risks, and (8) requirement for success.…”

Section: Network Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Partnership Alternatives in an IT Network Employing Analytical Methods

Salamat

Aliahmadi

Pishvaee

et al. 2016

Scientific Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main critical success factors for the companies is their ability to build and maintain an effective collaborative network. This is more critical in the IT industry where the development of sustainable competitive advantage requires an integration of various resources, platforms, and capabilities provided by various actors. Employing such a collaborative network will dramatically change the operations management and promote flexibility and agility. Despite its importance, there is a lack of an analytical tool on collaborative network building process. In this paper, we propose an optimization model employing AHP and multiobjective programming for collaborative network building process based on two interorganizational relationships' theories, namely, (i) transaction cost theory and (ii) resource-based view, which are representative of short-term and long-term considerations. The five different methods were employed to solve the formulation and their performances were compared. The model is implemented in an IT company who was in process of developing a large-scale enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. The results show that the collaborative network formed through this selection process was more efficient in terms of cost, time, and development speed. The framework offers novel theoretical underpinning and analytical solutions and can be used as an effective tool in selecting network alternatives.

show abstract

Developing a framework to establish collaborative enterprise networks

Cited by 4 publications

References 27 publications

A systems perspective on systemic innovation

A systems perspective on systemic innovation

A generic study on Green IT/IS practice development in collaborative enterprise: Insights from a developing country

Assessing Partnership Alternatives in an IT Network Employing Analytical Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About