Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design

BMSD 2011: Business Modeling and Software Design pp 70–90Cite as

On the Impact of Modular Dependencies on Innovation in Organizations

  • Conference paper

  • 532 Accesses

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 109))

Abstract

In volatile and customer-driven markets, the ability to innovate is a key success factor. It has been claimed that innovations need to be implemented at a steady pace to ensure business sustainability. However, the successful implementation of innovations is only poorly understood. As a result, many organizations and governments have difficulties stimulating and managing innovation. Several authors have proposed organizational modularity as a theoretical basis to better understand and manage innovation. Their main argument is that a modular structure enables parallel evolution of different organizational modules. Consequently, innovations can be implemented without being limited by implementation aspects of other organizational modules. Similarly, an imperfect modular structure will exhibit obstacles when implementing innovations. Such a modularity analysis has been applied by various authors on different levels of the organization, such as products, processes, departments, and supporting IT systems. Often, an enterprise architecture framework is used to model these different levels. However, these frameworks do not adequately support the modeling of modularity characteristics. In this paper, we present three case studies to demonstrate (1) how modular dependencies impact enterprise architecture projects, and (2) how modeling modular dependencies can be used to complement existing modeling approaches.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barjis, J., Wamba, S.F.: Organizational and business impacts of rfid technology. Business Process Management Journal 16(6), 897–903 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Schekkerman, J.: Trends in enterprise architecture: How are organizations progressing? Technical report, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Campagnolo, D., Camuffo, A.: The concept of modularity in management studies: A literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews 12(3), 259–283 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baldwin, C.Y., Clark, K.B.: Design Rules. MIT Press Books, vol. 1. The MIT Press (January 2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Baldwin, C.Y., Clark, K.B.: The value, costs and organizational consequences of modularity. Working Paper (May 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Galunic, D.C., Eisenhardt, K.M.: Architectural innovation and modular corporate forms. The Academy of Management Journal 44(6), 1229–1249 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Parnas, D.L.: On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Communications of the ACM 15(12), 1053–1058 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mannaert, H., Verelst, J., Ven, K.: The transformation of requirements into software primitives: Studying evolvability based on systems theoretic stability. Science of Computer Programming 76(12), 1210–1222 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mannaert, H., Verelst, J., Ven, K.: Towards evolvable software architectures based on systems theoretic stability. Software: Practice and Experience 42(1), 89–116 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Simon, H.A.: The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 106(6), 467–482 (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  11. The Open Group: The open group architecture framework (togaf) version 9 (2009), http://www.opengroup.org/togaf/

  12. Schöenherr, M.: Towards a Common Terminology in the Discipline of Enterprise Architecture. In: Feuerlicht, G., Lamersdorf, W. (eds.) ICSOC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5472, pp. 400–413. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Arsanjani, A., Ghosh, S., Allam, A., Abdollah, T., Gariapathy, S., Holley, K.: Soma: a method for developing service-oriented solutions. IBM Syst. J. 47, 377–396 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lucke, C., Krell, S., Lechner, U.: Critical issues in enterprise architecting - a literature review. In: Proceedings of AMCIS 2010 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Delic, K., Riley, J., Faihe, Y.: Architecting principles for self-managing enterprise it systems. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Autonomic and Autonomous Systems (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lam, W.: Technical risk management on enterprise integration projects. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 13, 290–315 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Meilich, A.: System of systems (sos) engineering and architecture challenges in a net centric environment. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on System of Systems Engineering (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rhodes, D., Ross, A., Nightingale, D.: Architecting the system of systems enterprise: Enabling constructs and methods from the field of engineering systems. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Annual IEEE Systems Conference (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dreyfus, D.: Information system architecture: Toward a distributed cognition perspective. In: Proceedings of ICIS 2007 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kaisler, S.H., Armour, F., Valivullah, M.: Enterprise architecting: Critical problems. In: Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 8. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Shah, H., Kourdi, M.: Frameworks for enterprise architecture. IT Professional 9(5), 36–41 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Armour, F., Kaisler, S., Getter, J., Pippin, D.: A uml-driven enterprise architecture case study. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, vol. 3, p. 72b (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zachman, J.A.: A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst. J. 26(3), 276–292 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sowa, J.F., Zachman, J.A.: Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst. J. 31(3), 590–616 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Huysmans, P.: On the Feasibility of Normalized Enterprises: Applying Normalized Systems Theory to the High-Level Design of Enterprises. PhD thesis, University of Antwerp (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ross, J., Beath, C.M.: Sustainable it outsourcing success: Let enterprise architecture be your guide. MIS Quarterly Executive 5(4), 181–192 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Camuffo, A.: Rolling out a “world car”: globalization, outsourcing and modularity in the auto industry. Korean Journal of Political Economy 2, 183–224 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Djelic, M.L., Ainamo, A.: The coevolution of new organizational forms in the fashion industry: A historical and comparative study of france, italy, and the united states. Organization Science 10(5), 622–637 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Miozzo, M., Grimshaw, D.: Modularity and innovation in knowledge-intensive business services: It outsourcing in germany and the uk. Research Policy 34(9), 1419–1439 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Salvador, F., Forza, C., Rungtusanatham, M.: Modularity, product variety, production volume, and component sourcing: theorizing beyond generic prescriptions. Journal of Operations Management 20(5), 549–575 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Thyssen, J., Israelsen, P., Jørgensen, B.: Activity-based costing as a method for assessing the economics of modularization–a case study and beyond. International Journal of Production Economics 103(1), 252–270 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Argyres, N.S.: The impact of information technology on coordination: Evidence from the b-2 “stealth” bomber. Organization Science 10(2), 162–180 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Newbury Park (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ould, M.: Business Process Management, a Rigorous Approach. The British Computer Society, Swindon (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Huysmans, P., Ven, K., Verelst, J.: Designing for innovation: using enterprise ontology theory to improve business-it alignment. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on IT-enabled Innovation in Enterprise (ICITIE 2010), pp. 177–186 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Johnson, P., Johansson, E., Sommestad, T., Ullberg, J.: A tool for enterprise architecture analysis. In: IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, pp. 142–154. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Van Nuffel, D.: Towards Designing Modular and Evolvable Business Processes. PhD thesis, University of Antwerp (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  38. De Bruyn, P., Mannaert, H.: Towards applying normalized systems concepts to modularity and the systems engineering process. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Systems, ICONS (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management Information Systems, University of Antwerp, Prinsstraat 13, Antwerp, Belgium

    Philip Huysmans

Authors
  1. Philip Huysmans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Interdisciplinary Institute for Collaboration and Research on Enterprise Systems and Technology – IICREST, Sofia, Bulgaria

    Boris Shishkov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Huysmans, P. (2012). On the Impact of Modular Dependencies on Innovation in Organizations. In: Shishkov, B. (eds) Business Modeling and Software Design. BMSD 2011. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 109. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29788-5_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29788-5_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29787-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29788-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation