Abstract
In a network of organizations, members are often faced with the problem of choosing partners for closer cooperation within this network. Consequently, network members collect information about potential partners to reach informed decisions about for instance starting new joint development projects or harvesting best practices. The large amounts of information involved in these decision processes obscure possibilities, and choices are made ad hoc. In this paper, we present an approach that uses techniques from network analysis to support organizations in processing and understanding this information. Central in our approach are network visualizations that help in comparing gaps between the aspired and current development levels of the processes of the member organizations. The advantage of our approach, which we validated via expert interviews, is that such visualizations are generated semi-automatically and offer an overall view of the current and aspired situation in the network without losing the ability to pinpoint particular, individual processes of interest.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aaen, I., Arent, J., Mathiassen, L., Ngwenyama, O.: A conceptual MAP of software process improvement. Scandinavian J. of Inf. Sys. 13, 81–101 (2001)
Barabasi, A.L.: Linked. Perseus Publishing (2002)
Baskerville, R.: Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 2, 4 (1999)
Borgatti, S.: Identifying sets of key players in a social network. Comp. & Math. Org. Theory 12, 21–34 (2006)
Chi, L., Holsapple, C.: Understanding computer-mediated interorganizational collaboration: a model and framework. J. of Knowl. Management 9, 53–75 (2005)
Freeman, L.: Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1(3), 215–239 (1978)
Fuggetta, A.: Software process: a roadmap. In: ICSE 2000: Proc. Conf. on the Future of Software Engineering, pp. 25–34. ACM, New York (2000)
Goldenson, D.R., Herbsleb, J.D.: After the appraisal: a systematic survey of process improvement, its benefits, and factors that influence success. Technical CMU/SEI-95-TR-009, Softw. Eng. Institute, Carnegie Mellon Univ. (1995)
Hansen, B., Rose, J., Tjørnehøj, G.: Prescription, description, reflection: the shape of the software process improvement field. Int. J. Inf. Mngt. 24(6), 457–472 (2004)
He, Z.L., Wong, P.K.: Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science 15(4), 481–494 (2004)
Herbsleb, J., Zubrow, D., Siegel, J., Rozum, J.: Software process improvement: State of the payoff. American Programmer 7, 2–12 (1994)
Hoffmann, W.H.: Strategies for managing a portfolio of alliances. Strategic Management Journal 28(8), 827–856 (2007)
Iversen, J., Ngwenyama, O.: Problems in measuring effectiveness in software process improvement: A longitudinal study of organizational change at danske data. Int. J. Inf. Mngt. 26(1), 30–43 (2006)
Kautz, K.: Making sense of measurement for small organizations. IEEE Softw. 16(2), 14–20 (1999)
Kumar, K., van Dissel, H.G.: Sustainable collaboration: Managing conflict and cooperation in interorganizational systems. MIS Quarterly 20(3), 279–300 (1996)
Lin, Z.J., Yang, H., Demirkan, I.: The performance consequences of ambidexterity in strategic alliance formations: Empirical investigation and computational theorizing. Management Science 53(10), 1645–1658 (2007)
Matsuda, N., Takeuchi, H.: Networks emerging from shifts of interest in eye-tracking records. eMinds: Int. J. Human-Computer Interaction 2(7), 3–16 (2011)
Ponisio, L., van Eck, P., Riemens, L.: Planning cooperation in inter-organizational systems. In: E-Strategies for Resource Management Systems, pp. 61–85. IGI Global (2010)
Ponisio, M.L., Sikkel, K., Riemens, L., van Eck, P.: Combining visualisation techniques to understand co-operation in inter-organisational systems. Journal of Systems and Information Technology 10(2), 159–179 (2008)
Popadiuk, S.: Scale for classifying organizations as explorers, exploiters or ambidextrous. International Journal of Information Management 32(1), 75–87 (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ponisio, L., van Eck, P., Riemens, L., Matsuda, N. (2013). Using Network Analysis to Discover Cooperation Opportunities in Inter-organizational Networks. In: McCaffery, F., O’Connor, R.V., Messnarz, R. (eds) Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement. EuroSPI 2013. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 364. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39179-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39179-8_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39178-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39179-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)