Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Management Digitaler Ökosysteme mit der DREEM-Methode am Beispiel einer Virtual-Coaching-Plattform

Management of Digital Ecosystems with the DREEM-Method – the Case of a Virtual Coaching Platform

  • Spektrum
  • Published:
HMD Praxis der Wirtschaftsinformatik Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Eine wesentliche Herausforderung bei der Umsetzung moderner Versorgungsansätze im Gesundheitswesen ist die Integration digitaler Lösungen. Digitale Plattformansätze werden zunehmend verfolgt, da sich so digitale Ökosysteme entwickeln lassen. Diese sollen die Integration digitaler Technologien vereinfachen und die Entwicklung innovativer Lösungen fördern. Jedoch geht mit der Konzeption und Entwicklung von Ökosystemen das Dilemma einher, dass zum einen emergente Entwicklungspfade ermöglicht werden müssen, zum anderen eine gewisse Planbarkeit der Entwicklung erwünscht ist. Aus diesem Grund müssen bei der Strategieplanung und Umsetzung konkreter Plattformressourcen verschiedene Entwicklungspfade des Ökosystems antizipiert werden, um so auch auf unerwünschte Entwicklungen reagieren zu können. Zur Begegnung dieses Spannungsfelds zwischen Emergenz und Planbarkeit wird im vorliegenden Beitrag die Dresdener Ecosystem-Management-Methode vorgestellt. Sie unterstützt und leitet die Konstruktion und das Management digitaler Ökosysteme, indem Vorgehensempfehlungen definiert und Vorschläge für die formale Beschreibung des Gesamtsystems gemacht werden. Anhand einer Fallstudie im Gesundheitswesen wird gezeigt, wie die Methode zur Entwicklung einer eHealth-Plattform für das Virtual-Coaching in der häuslichen Rehabilitation eingesetzt werden kann.

Abstract

A major challenge for the implementation of modern healthcare delivery approaches is the integration of digital technologies. In order to achieve an ease of this integration and to foster the development of innovations in healthcare, digital ecosystems are being implemented. However, the conception and development of digital ecosystems is accompanied by the dilemma that on the one hand a dynamic development of solutions should be promoted, on the other hand a certain predictability of the ecosystem should be achieved. Unintended effects that occur in the ecosystem need to be managed systematically. In this paper, the Dresden Ecosystem Management Method is presented which addresses the conflict between emergence and predictability. The method guides the design and management of digital ecosystems and defines aspects for the formal modelling of the overall system. The method presented has been applied to a case study in order to demonstrate its applicability by developing an eHealth platform for a virtual coaching solution in the field of domestic rehabilitation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4

Notes

  1. Bislang hat sich noch keine eindeutige deutsche Übersetzung dieses Begriffs herausgebildet. Daher wird im Zuge des Beitrags immer der englische Originalbegriff verwendet.

Literatur

  • Adner R (2017) Ecosystem as structure: an actionable construct for strategy. J Manage 43:39–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316678451

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin CY, Woodard CJ (2008) The architecture of platforms: a unified view. SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1265155

    Google Scholar 

  • Bender D, Sartipi K (2013) HL7 FHIR: An Agile and RESTful approach to healthcare information exchange. In: Proceedings of the 26th IEEE international symposium on computer-based medical systems, S 326–331

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Benedict M (2018) Modelling ecosystems in information systems—A typology approach. In: Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik (MKWI) 2018. Leuphana Universität Lüneburg, Lüneburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedict M, Schlieter H (2017) Revise your ehealth-platform!—design principles for a descriptive case study. In: AMCIS 2017 proceedings

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedict M, Kosmol L, Esswein W (2018) Designing industrial symbiosis platforms—from platform ecosystems to industrial ecosystems. In: PACIS 2018 Proceedings

    Google Scholar 

  • Benlian A, Hilkert D, Hess T (2015) How open is this platform? The meaning and measurement of platform openness from the complementors’ perspective. J Inf Technol 30:209–228. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2015.6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianco VD, Myllarniemi V, Komssi M, Raatikainen M (2014) The role of platform boundary resources in software ecosystems: a case study. In: Proceedings of 2014 IEEE/IFIP conference on software architecture. IEEE, Sydney, S 11–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Boucharas V, Jansen S, Brinkkemper S (2009) Formalizing software ecosystem modeling. In: Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on open component ecosystems. ACM, New York, S 41–50

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau K, Hagiu A (2008) Platform rules: multi-sided platforms as regulators. Social Science Research Network, Rochester

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkard C, Widjaja T, Buxmann P (2012) Software ecosystems. Bus Inf Syst Eng 4:41–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-011-0199-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buschmann F (1996) Pattern-oriented software architecture: a pattern language for distributed computing. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen HB, Hansen KM, Kyng M, Manikas K (2014) Analysis and design of software ecosystem architectures—Towards the 4S telemedicine ecosystem. Inf Softw Technol 56:1476–1492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2014.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eaton B, Elaluf-Calderwood S, Sorensen C (2015) Distributed tuning of boundary resources: the case of apple’s Ios service system. Mis Q 39:217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenmann TR, Parker G, Van Alstyne MW (2008) Opening platforms: how, when and why? SSRN Electron J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1264012

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmer A (2016) eHealth in Deutschland—Probleme, Projekte, Perspektiven. Gesundh Ges Wiss 16:7–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Fedorowicz J, Gogan JL, Ray AW (2004) The ecology of interorganizational information sharing. J Int Inf Manage 13:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein A, Kramer J, Nuseibeh B et al (1992) Viewpoints: a framework for integrating multiple perspectives in system development. Int J Softw Eng Knowl Eng 02:31–57. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218194092000038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gawer A, Cusumano MA (2014) Industry platforms and ecosystem innovation: platforms and innovation. J Prod Innov Manage 31:417–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghazawneh A, Henfridsson O (2011) Micro-Strategizing in platform ecosystems: a multiple case study. In: ICIS 2011 proceedings Shanghai

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghazawneh A, Henfridsson O (2013) Balancing platform control and external contribution in third-party development: the boundary resources model. Inf Syst J 23:173–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2012.00406.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghazawneh A, Henfridsson O (2015) A paradigmatic analysis of digital application marketplaces. J Inf Technol 30:198–208. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2015.16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanseth O, Lyytinen K (2010) Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: the case of building internet. J Inf Technol 25:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2009.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hein A, Schreieck M, Wiesche M, Krcmar H (2016) Multiple-case analysis on governance mechanisms of multi-sided platforms. In: Multikonferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik (MKWI) 2016 Ilmenau, S 1613–1624

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobides MG, Cennamo C, Gawer A (2018) Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strateg Manage J 39:2255–2276. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapoor R (2018) Ecosystems: broadening the locus of value creation. J Organ Des 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41469-018-0035-4

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore JF (1993) Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harv Bus Rev 71:75–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Ofe H, Sandberg J (2019) Digital platform establishment: navigating competing concerns in emerging ecosystems. In: HICSS 2019 proceedings, S 1425–1434

    Google Scholar 

  • Peffers K, Tuunanen T, Rothenberger MA, Chatterjee S (2007) A design science research methodology for information systems research. J Manag Inf Syst 24:45–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche C, von Reinersdorff AB, Knoblach B, Fink D (2018) Digitales Unternehmen im Gesundheitswesen – Harmonisierung von Markt- und Technologieprioritäten. In: Pfannstiel MA, Da-Cruz P, Rasche C (Hrsg) Entrepreneurship im Gesundheitswesen III: Digitalisierung – Innovationen – Gesundheitsversorgung. Springer, Wiesbaden, S 1–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi M, Ramesh B, Lyytinen K, Tolvanen JP (2004) Managing evolutionary method engineering by method rationale. J Assoc Inf Syst 5:356–391

    Google Scholar 

  • Saarikko T (2016) Platform provider by accident: a case study of digital platform coring. Bus Inf Syst Eng 58:177–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-016-0426-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlieter H, Benedict M, Burwitz M (2017a) Geschäftsmodell Offene „E-Health-Plattform“ – Anforderungen und Potenziale. In: Müller-Mielitz S, Schachtrupp A (Hrsg) Theorie und Praxis von Businesskonzepten – 10 Jahre B. Braun-Stiftung Mentoringprogramm. Bibliomed, Melsungen

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlieter H, Benedict M, Gand K, Burwitz M (2017b) Towards adaptive pathways: reference architecture for personalized dynamic pathways. In: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE conference on business Informatics (CBI), S 359–368

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreieck M, Wiesche M, Krcmar H (2016) Design and governance of platform ecosystems—key concepts and issues for future research. In: Proceedings of the twenty-fourth European conference on information systems (ECIS)

    Google Scholar 

  • Selander L, Henfridsson O, Svahn F (2013) Capability search and redeem across digital ecosystems. J Inf Technol 28:183–197. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2013.14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Serbanati LD, Ricci FL, Mercurio G, Vasilateanu A (2011) Steps towards a digital health ecosystem. J Biomed Inform 44:621–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2011.02.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiwana A, Konsynski B, Bush AA (2010) Research commentary—platform evolution: Coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Inf Syst Res 21:675–687. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lamsweerde A (2001) Goal-oriented requirements engineering: A guided tour. In: Proceedings of the fifth IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering, S 249–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter R, Gericke A, Bucher T (2009) Method versus model—two sides of the same coin? In: Albani A, Barjis J, Dietz JLG (Hrsg) Advances in enterprise engineering III. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, S 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010) Research commentary—the new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Inf Syst Res 21:724–735. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu E, Deng S (2011) Understanding software ecosystems: a strategic modeling approach. In: Proceedings of the third international workshop on software ecosystems IWSECO-2011 Software Ecosystems, Brussels, Belgium, 2011, S 65–76

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Danksagung

Für dieses Projekt wurden im Rahmen der Finanzhilfevereinbarung Nr. 769807 Fördermittel aus dem Programm der Europäischen Union für Forschung und Innovation „Horizont“ 2020 bereitgestellt. Die Autoren danken den beiden anonymen Reviewern und der Herausgeberin für die profunden Hinweise zur Überarbeitung.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftsinformatik, insbes. Systementwicklung, Fakultät für Wirtschaftswissenschaften, TU Dresden, 01062, Dresden, Deutschland

    Martin Benedict, Hannes Schlieter & Carola Gißke

Authors
  1. Martin Benedict
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hannes Schlieter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carola Gißke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Benedict.

Caption Electronic Supplementary Material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Benedict, M., Schlieter, H. & Gißke, C. Management Digitaler Ökosysteme mit der DREEM-Methode am Beispiel einer Virtual-Coaching-Plattform. HMD 56, 857–875 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1365/s40702-019-00538-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1365/s40702-019-00538-1

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation