Enhancing Teamwork Behavior of Services

  • Paraskevi TsoutsaEmail author
  • Panos Fitsilis
  • Omiros Ragos
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 339)


Nowadays, many large software systems that are developed for business are mainly built from services leveraging the benefits of interoperability. However, the development of new technologies such as Cloud Computing, Internet of Things and Cyber Physical Systems create additional concerns that claim to be integrated into the existing approaches of modeling services, their interaction and cooperation. In this research, we propose web services to automatically cooperate using the role modeling approach by enhancing service’s interoperability through novel service teamwork roles. Teamwork contribution to the organizational performance has tracked attention of various research groups from several disciplines. In this direction, we contribute by determining the dominant teamwork roles that prevail during service group cooperation, link them with fifteen major teamwork factors that are recognized in agent-based teamwork, and indicate their primary teamwork behavior. A simulation using Monte Carlo presents results about how teamwork roles could affect and benefit the service cooperation.


Services Information systems Composition Role modeling Teamwork 


  1. 1.
    Sheng, Q.Z., Qiao, X., Vasilakos, A.V., Szabo, C., Bourne, S., Xu, X.: Web services composition: a decade’s overview. Inf. Sci. 280, 218–238 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jula, A., Sundararajan, E., Othman, Z.: Cloud computing service composition: a systematic literature review. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(8), 3809–3824 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tosi, D., Morasca, S.: Supporting the semi-automatic semantic annotation of web services: a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 61, 16–32 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van Wissen, A., Gal, Y., Kamphorst, B.A., Dignum, M.V.: Human-agent teamwork in dynamic environments. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28(1), 23–33 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liemhetcharat, S., Veloso, M.: Synergy graphs for configuring robot team members. In: International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-agent Systems, pp. 111–118 (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tsoutsa, P., Fitsilis, P., Ragos, O.: Role modeling of IoT services in industry domains. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Management Engineering, Software Engineering and Service Sciences, pp. 290–295 (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Driskell, T., Driskell, J.E., Burke, C.S., Salas, E.: Team roles: a review and integration. Small Group Res. 48, 482–511 (2017). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rao, J., Kungas, P., Matskin, M.: Logic-based web services composition: from service description to process model. In: ICWS, pp. 446–453. IEEE Computer Society (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giacomo, G.D., Patrizi, F., Sardina, S.: Automatic behavior composition synthesis. Artif. Intell. 196, 106–142 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berardi, D., Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.D., Lenzerini, M., Mecella, M.: Automatic service composition based on behavioral descriptions. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 14(4), 333–376 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rodríguez, G., Soria, Á., Campo, M.: AI-based web service composition: a review. IETE Tech. Rev. 33(4), 378–385 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zeshan, F., Mohamad, R.: Semantic web service composition approaches: overview and limitations. Int. J. New Comput. Archit. Appl. (IJNCAA) 1(3), 640–651 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schwartz, T., et al.: Hybrid teams of humans, robots, and virtual agents in a production setting. In: Proceedings - 12th International Conference on Intelligent Environments, IE 2016, pp. 234–237 (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rojko, A.: Industry 4.0 concept: background and overview. Int. J. Interact. Mobile Technol. (iJIM) 11(5), 77–90 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Delarue, A., Van Hootegem, G., Procter, S., Burridge, M.: Teamworking and organizational performance: a review of survey-based research. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 10(2), 127–148 (2008). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mathieu, J.E., Tannenbaum, S.I., Kukenberger, M.R., Donsbach, J.S., Alliger, G.M.: Team role experience and orientation: a measure and tests of construct validity. Group Organ. Manag. 40, 6–34 (2015). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rousseau, V., Aube, C., Savoie, A.: Teamwork behaviors: a review and an integration of frameworks. Small Group Res. 37(5), 540–570 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Salas, E., Cooke, J., Rosen, M.A.: On teams, teamwork, and team performance: discoveries and developments. Hum. Factors 50(3), 540–547 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kozlowski, S.W.J., Grand, J.A., Baard, S.K., Pearce, M., Durso, F.: Teams, teamwork, and team effectiveness: implications for human systems integration. In: Handbook of Human Systems Integration (CDM), pp. 1–30 (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Berlin, J.M., Carlstrom, E.D., Sandberg, H.S.: Models of teamwork: ideal or not? A critical study of theoretical team models. Team Perform. Manag. Int. J. 18(5–6), 328–340 (2012). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tsoutsa, P., Fitsilis, P., Ragos, O.: Teamwork behavior: a review to interconnect Industry 4.0 entities. In: Ferreira, L., Lopes, N., Silva, J., Putnik, G., Cruz-Cunha, M., Ávila, P. (eds.) Technological Developments in Industry 4.0 for Business Applications, pp. 1–25. IGI Global, Hershey (2019). in press.
  22. 22.
    Margerison, C.J., McCann, D.: Team Management: Practical New Approaches. Mercury Books, San Francisco (1990)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Belbin, R.M.: Team roles at work: a strategy for human resource management. zitiert in: Teamarbeit und Teamentwicklung 321 (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zeshan, F., Mohamad, R.: Semantic web service composition approaches: overview and limitations. Int. J. New Comput. Archit. Appl. (IJNCAA) 1(3), 640–651 (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nacer, H., Aissani, D.: Semantic web services: standards, applications, challenges and solutions. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 44, 134–151 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rubinstein, R.Y., Kroese, D.P.: Simulation and the Monte Carlo method, vol. 10. Wiley, Hoboken (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paraskevi Tsoutsa
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Panos Fitsilis
    • 3
  • Omiros Ragos
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of PatrasPatrasGreece
  2. 2.Department of Accounting and FinanceUniversity of Applied Sciences of ThessalyLarisaGreece
  3. 3.Department of Business AdministrationUniversity of Applied Sciences of ThessalyLarisaGreece

Personalised recommendations