Advertisement

Towards the Development of a Cloud Service Capability Assessment Framework

  • Noel CarrollEmail author
  • Markus Helfert
  • Theo Lynn
Part of the Computer Communications and Networks book series (CCN)

Abstract

Considering the complexity of today’s service environment, Small-to-Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs) cannot afford to accept the status quo of service operations, and therefore, they must have some clear business analytics objectives to reach. Without clear metric objectives, organisations are almost destined for disaster since the allocation of resources may not have responded to the demand exerted from outside of the organisation. This is particularly true within a complex and rapidly changing cloud computing environment. The cloud dynamic ecosystem is moving toward a collection of services which interoperate across the Internet. This chapter offers a discussion on an approach to assessing cloud capabilities through cloud service capability assessment framework (CSCAF). Service metrics play a critical role in CSCAF that presents managers with a practical framework to carry out cloud capability assessments. The process may be simply described as publishing, retrieving, and managing cloud service descriptions, service publications which are matched with descriptions of consumer’s requirements and service matching.

Keywords

Capability assessment Cloud assessment Cloud computing Cloud service capability assessment framework Service capability 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This research was undertaken at the Irish Centre of Cloud Computing and Commerce (IC4) and funded by Enterprise Ireland and the IDA.

References

  1. 1.
    Cisco CloudWatch Report (2012) Summer 2012. cisco.com/cisco/web/UK/assets/cisco_cloudwatch_2012_2606.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2013Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Normann R (2001) Reframing business: when the map changes the landscape. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fitzsimmons JA, Fitzsimmons MJ (2004) Service management-operations, strategy, and information technology, 4th edn, international edn. McGraw-Hill, IrwinGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Spohrer J, Maglio PP, Bailey J, Gruhl D (2007) Steps toward a science of service systems. IEEE Comput 40(1):71–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chesbrough H (2011) Bringing open innovation to services. MIT Sloan Manage Rev 52(2):85–90Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Orand B (2010) The unofficial ITIL® v3 foundations course in a book. ITILYaBrady Publisher, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sharif AM (2010) It’s written in the cloud: the hype and promise of cloud computing. J Enterp Inf Manage 23(2):131–134CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Armbrust M, Fox A, Griffith R, Joseph A, Katz R, Konwinski A, Lee G, Patterson D, Rabkin A, Stoica I, Zaharia M (2009) Above the clouds: a Berkeley view of cloud computing. Technical report no. UCB/EECS-2009-28, University of California at Berkley, USA. Feb 10, 2009Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SNS/cloud-computing/cloud-def-v15.doc. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  10. 10.
    Gartner (2011) Predicts 2012: four forces combine to transform the IT landscape. http://www.gartner.com/resources/228700/228739/predicts_2012_four_forces_co_228739.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  11. 11.
    Cohen H (2012) Cloud computing still faces obstacles to adoption. Eweek, January 17th, http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Data-Storage/Cloud-Computing-Still-Faces-Obstacles-to-Adoption-761567/. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  12. 12.
    Buyya R, Yeo CS, Venugopal S (2008) Market-oriented cloud computing: vision, hype, and reality for delivering IT services as computing utilities. Proceedings of the 10th IEEE international conference on high performance computing and communicationsGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gillett FE (2008) Future view: the new tech ecosystems of cloud, cloud services, and cloud computing for vendor strategy professionals. Forrester Research, Inc. August 28thGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cearley DW (2010) Cloud computing-key initiative overview. Gartner Inc. http://www.gartner.com/it/initiatives/pdf/KeyInitiativeOverview_CloudComputing.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  15. 15.
    Wang L, von Laszewski G, Kunze M, Tao J (2008) Cloud computing: a perspective study. Proceedings of the grid computing environments (GCE) workshop, NovemberGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    EC Expert Report (2010) The future of cloud computing-opportunities for European cloud computing beyond 2010. http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/ssai/docs/cloud-report-final.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  17. 17.
    Zeithaml VA, Parasuraman A, Berry LL (1990) Delivering quality service: balancing customer perceptions and expectations. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kleinrock L (2005). A vision for the internet. ST J Res 2(1):4–5Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carr N (2008) Big switch: rewiring the world, from Edison to Google. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Friedman TL (2006) The world is flat. Penguin Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hofmann P, Woods D (2010) Cloud computing: the limits of public clouds for business applications. IEEE Internet Comput 14(6):90–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reynolds E, Bess C (2009) Clearing up the cloud: adoption strategies for cloud computing. Cut IT J June/July:14–20Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Milne (2010) IT value transformation road map vision, value, and virtualization, VMWare report, IT Process InstituteGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clarke R (2010) Computing clouds on the horizon? Benefits and risks from the users perspective, 23rd Bled eConference, SloveniaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weinman J (2008) 10 laws of cloudonomics. http://gigaom.com/2008/09/07/the-10-laws-of-cloudonomics/. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  26. 26.
    Tapscott D, Caston A (1993) Paradigm shift: the new promise of information technology. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dwivedi YK, Mustafee N (2010) It’s unwritten in the cloud: the technology enablers for realising the promise of cloud computing. J Enter Inf Manage 23(6):673–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mooney J, Gurbaxani V, Kraemer K (1995) A process oriented framework for assessing the business value of information technology. In proceedings of the 16th international conference on information systems, Amsterdam, pp 17–27Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Aalst WMP van der (2010) Configurable services in the cloud: supporting variability while enabling cross-organizational process mining. In international conference on cooperative information systems (CoopIS 2010), vol 6426 of lecture notes in computer science, pp 8–25. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Open Group (2009) Risk taxonomy. http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919899/toc.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  31. 31.
    Fiegler A, Dumke RR (2011) Growth- and entropy-based SOA measurement-vision and approach in a large scale environment. 2011 joint conference of the 21st international workshop on software measurement and the 6th international conference on software process and product measurementGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Raines G (2009) Cloud computing and SOA. The MITRE corporation. www.mitre.org/work/tech_papers/tech_papers_09/09_0743/09_0743.pdf. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  33. 33.
    Mettler T (2009) A design science research perspective on maturity models in information systems, Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland, Technical Report BE IWI/HNE/03, 2009Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gefen D, Zviran M, Elman N (2006) What can be learned from CMMi failures? Commun Assoc Inf Syst 17(1): 36Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Humphrey WS (2005) Foreword. In M Bush and D Dunaway, CMMI® Assessments-motivating positive change(Sei Series in Software Engineering). Addison-Wesley ProfessionalGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Brooks P (2006) Metrics for IT service management. Van Haren Publishing, ZaltbommelGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Orand B (2010) The unofficial ITIL® v3 foundations course in a book. ITILYaBrady Publisher, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Luftman J (2003) Assessing IT/business alignment. Inf Strategy 20(1):33–38Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Carroll N, Helfert M, Lynn T (2013) A contingency model for assessing cloud composite capabilities, the 3rd international conference on cloud computing and services science (CLOSER 2013), Aachen, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Garg SK, Versteeg S, Buyya R (2011) SMICloud: a framework for comparing and ranking cloud services, fourth IEEE international conference on utility and cloud computingGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sycara K, Lu J, Klusch M, Widoff S (1999) Dynamic service matchmaking among agents in open information environments. ACM SIGMOD record (Special issue on semantic interoperability in global information systems), 28, 1, pp 47–53Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Paolucci M, Kawmura T, Payne T, Sycara K (2002) Semantic matching of web services capabilities. Proceedings of the international semantic web conference (ISWC), pp 333–347Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology (COBIT) framework. http://www.isaca.org/Knowledge-Center/cobit/Pages/Overview.aspx. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  44. 44.
    Lainhart JW (2001) An IT assurance framework for the future. Ohio CPA J 60(1): 19–23Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Cloud Commons Consortium (2010) ‘Cloud commons’, MiscellaneousGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Klems M, Nimis J, Tai S (2009) Do clouds compute? A framework for estimating the value of cloud computing. Designing e-business systems. Markets, services, and networks, lecture notes in business information processing, vol 22, p 110Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cloud Service Measurement Initiative Consortium (CSMIC). http://csmic.org/about-csmic/. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  48. 48.
    Capability Maturity Model Integration. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  49. 49.
    Persse JR (2006). Process improvement essentials. O’Reilly Media Inc, SebastopolGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Humphrey WS (1989) Managing the software process, reading, reading. Addison Wesley, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Universal Description, Discovery and Integration (UDDI). http://uddi.xml.org. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  52. 52.
    ITIL Service Lifecycle. http://www.itil-officialsite.com/. Accessed 20 Nov 2013
  53. 53.
    Iosup A, Yigitbasi N, Epema D (2011a) On the performance variability of production cloud services. Proceedings of IEEE/ACM international symposium on cluster, cloud, and grid computing, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Iosup A, Ostermann S, Yigitbasi N, Prodan R, Fahringer T, Epema D (2011b) Performance analysis of cloud computing services for many-tasks scientific computing. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 22(6):931–945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Carroll N (2012) Service science: an empirical study on the socio-technical dynamics of public sector service network innovation, PhD Thesis, University of LimerickGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Carroll N, Whelan E, Richardson I (2010) Applying social network analysis to discover service innovation within agile service networks. J Serv Sci 2(4):225–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Carroll N, Richardson I, Whelan E (2012) Service science: exploring complex agile service networks through organisational network analysis’. Chap. 8 In: X Wang, N Ali, I Ramos, R Vidgen (ed) Agile and lean service-oriented development: foundations theory and practice. pp 156–172. IGI PublishingGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Marketing and ManagementUniversity of LimerickLimerickIreland
  2. 2.School of ComputingDublin City UniversityGlasnevinIreland

Personalised recommendations