Donatella Corti
email: donatella.corti@supsi.ch

Luca Canetta
email: luca.canetta@supsi.ch

Alessandro Fontana
email: alessandro.fontana@supsi.ch

Assessing the role of plants in international manufacturing networks: a tool to monitor the strategic alignment

Keywords: manufacturing networks, strategic role of plants, Ferdows' model, assessment model

The internationalization of operations has been quite a common trend for Western companies over the last 20 years. The development of manufacturing networks is a more and more common solution also for SMEs. In order to make sure that the whole network evolves according to the business requirements, each single plant needs to be assigned a precise role. Starting from the well-known framework proposed by Ferdows ([5]; [6]) on the strategic role of plants, a tool is developed to monitor the role of production plants by aligning the vision of the headquarters and the one of the plant itself. Four case studies are carried out to validate the model and some guidelines are then derived to interpret the output. This paper contributes to the field dealing with the strategic role of plants with a proposal that can be easily applied by practitioners.

Introduction

Over the last decades, it has been a common trend for a large number of companies in industrialized countries to increase their international presence as a way to strengthen competitive position and increase their sustainability in the long term. Even though in the past this choice was mainly confined to multinational enterprises, nowadays production relocation is a more and more widespread option also for SMEs (see for example [START_REF] Corti | Challenges for off-shored operations: findings from a comparative multi-case study analysis of Italian and Spanish companies[END_REF]). The recent evolution of the competitive context and, in particular, the huge economic crisis that hit the Western countries led to new trends for this phenomenon: as argued by Kinkel ([9]), production relocation has declined, whilst the number of backshoring activities has remained stable in the period 2007 to mid-2009. At the same time, a further relocation from East Europe to Far East has been noted ( [START_REF] Kinkel | Trends in production relocation and backshoring activities. Changing patterns in the course of the global economic crisis[END_REF]). As shown by these recent findings, the research on international production networks is still an evolving topic that needs to keep pace with the dynamics of the macroeconomic environment. The academic interest for management of operations in offshored plants has increased and shifted from dyadic relationships to the networks framing and management ( [START_REF] O'donnel | Managing Foreign Subsidiaries: Agents of Headquarters, or an Interdependent Network?[END_REF]; [START_REF] Ghoshal | The multinational corporation as an interorganizational network[END_REF]; [START_REF] Forsgren | Managing the embedded multinational: A business network view[END_REF]; [START_REF] Ferdows | Making the most of Foreign Factories[END_REF]). In this paper the focus is on a specific form of direct foreign investment that entails the set up of a fully owned plant by a SME running a dispersed production network. In this context, attention is paid to the coordination of the network from a strategic point of view: companies need tools that could support them in continuously monitoring the configuration of the network and, in particular, if and how the single plant is contributing to the success of the network as a whole. The proposed model is a decisional supporting tool that aims at supporting SMEs in continuously monitoring the dynamics of the production network by making sure that each plant is acting according to the assigned role. The tool provides managers of both the parent company and the offshored plant with a common set of data to start sharing a strategic vision the running of the plant should be based on. This paper contributes to the literature debate by further testing the Ferdorws' model, whilst, at the same time, attempts to translate theoretical concepts currently mainly used only in the academic arena into a tool for practitioners.

2

The strategic role of plants within an international production network

The literature on manufacturing networks mainly takes a macro and static perspective ( [START_REF] Rudberg | Manufacturing networks and supply chains: an operations strategy perspective[END_REF]), neglecting the dynamics and lacking overall evidence on the interactions between the evolution of individual plants and the whole network ( [START_REF] Cheng | Manufacturing network evolution: a manufacturing plant perspective[END_REF]). Although there are several models in defining strategic roles of the international network plants, the Ferdows's model ( [START_REF] Ferdows | Mapping international factory networks[END_REF]; [START_REF] Ferdows | Making the most of Foreign Factories[END_REF]) be considered as a milestone or a starting point for the development of a tool which enables the consideration of dynamic changes of a plant's role [START_REF] Meijboom | Site competence dynamics in international manufacturing networks: instrument development and a test in Eastern European factories[END_REF]. [START_REF] Ferdows | Making the most of Foreign Factories[END_REF] addresses the roles of plants, introducing a model based on a matrix whose axis represent the strategic reason for choosing the location of a plant and the site's competence (measured on a low to high scale). Crossing the two dimensions, six strategic roles are identified. Unlike other classifications, the Ferdow's one introduces a clear analytical framework and allows the consideration of some dynamic aspects. He also pursued a more operations management-oriented approach focusing on the role and functioning of individual factories in international manufacturing networks rather than using the business unit as unit of analysis [START_REF] Meijboom | Site competence dynamics in international manufacturing networks: instrument development and a test in Eastern European factories[END_REF]. [START_REF] Vereecke | The Strategic Role of the Plant in International Networks: A Longitudinal Study[END_REF] state that the contribution of plants which have "low" level in the vertical axis of the Ferdows' model is to produce items, while "high" level in the vertical axis represents also important developments such as providing know-how for the other facilities of the network. However, the Ferdows' model lacks of a clear definition and operationalization of the site competence dimension [START_REF] Vereecke | The Strategic Role of the Plant: Testing Ferdow's Model[END_REF]. Building on this reasoning, [START_REF] Meijboom | Site competence dynamics in international manufacturing networks: instrument development and a test in Eastern European factories[END_REF] have focused on the dynamic changes that occur in the strategic roles of factories and enhanced the site competences axis of Ferdows' conceptual model by identifying additional factors that contribute to the level of site competence. Different plants are source of different capabilities [START_REF] Dossi | You Learn From What You Measure: Financial and Non-Financial Performance Measures in Multinational Companies[END_REF]: companies should work on the assessment of the plant's operations and performance management of single plants. Some possible indicators to be used are mentioned in [START_REF] Parthiban | An integrated model for performance management of manufacturing units[END_REF] or [START_REF] Dossi | You Learn From What You Measure: Financial and Non-Financial Performance Measures in Multinational Companies[END_REF]. Even though the importance of monitoring the network considering the different role of each plant within it, literature on the assessment of international production networks is still scarce and lacks of holistic frameworks.

An assessment model to support the strategic role of plants

This paper aims at contributing to the literature on strategic roles of plants by proposing a model that further extend Ferdows' proposal ( [START_REF] Ferdows | Making the most of Foreign Factories[END_REF]) by taking into account its recent extensions ( [START_REF] Meijboom | Site competence dynamics in international manufacturing networks: instrument development and a test in Eastern European factories[END_REF]; [START_REF] Vereecke | The Strategic Role of the Plant: Testing Ferdow's Model[END_REF]) and making it suitable for practitioners'use. Practical tools are needed to make sure, on the one hand, that strategic objectives are properly shared between the headquarters and each single manufacturing plant and, on the other hand, that performance of plants are aligned with the evolution of the network as a whole. The goal is to provide a dashboard (Figure 1) for both headquarters and foreign plants that can be used to determine the strategic role of the specific production unit of interest. This is done through mapping the current strategic role from the perspective of both headquarter and the plant itself and by analyzing possible gaps in order to build a shared set of believes. Furthermore, since the role of plants within the network is a dynamic one, the model is also able to timely highlight the need for a possible shift. The proposed model takes as a reference the two dimensions characterizing both Ferdows' and Meijboom and Vos's model, but the vertical axis (site competence) is redefined considering the current needs of the international production networks. The resulting framework becomes a tool that could be used to position different plants and monitor their role over time identifying possible misalignments. The tool includes kind of a dashboard that shows the results in a graphical way and a questionnaire that supports practitioners to define in a structured way the role of the plant. Since one of the aim of this tool is the measurement of how aligned are the perspectives of headquarter and foreign plants, the application procedure foresees the use of the same set of questions for both the parent company and the plant. By comparing the two resulting positioning it is possible to take into account possible misalignment characterizing the two visions. The present version of the model has been developed with Excel that provides the user with an immediate representation of the results that makes easier the comparison between the two visions. Like in the reference models, the key aspects to be investigated are: "Primary strategic reason for the location of the plant" and "Level of site competence & technical activities at the plant".

Primary strategic reason for the location of the plant

The main strategic reasons for opening a plant in a specific location are the three already proposed by [START_REF] Ferdows | Making the most of Foreign Factories[END_REF], as also further confirmed by more recent researches, namely access to low cost production input factors, use of local technological resources and proximity to market. A first set of questions has been included in the tool to understand which factors have a stronger effect on the choice of the location for the plant. With a straightforward calculation considering all the factors and their relative importance, the main strategic reason is determined. For each strategic reason a set of related factors are identified and who fills in the questionnaire has to rank their relative importance on a 5-point scale (1= unimportant; 5 = very important). The total score for the single factor is then translated into a percentage that reflects the level of pursuing of that objective. More objectives are achieved at the same time, but one is the main trigger for setting up the plant. The strategic reason with the highest proba-bility is defined as the primary reason for the relocation. The complete list of elements is shown on the left side of Figure 1.

Level of site competence & technical activities at the plant

This dimension takes into consideration the site competence meaning the level of responsibility and autonomy assigned to the plant. Some changes compared to the list of activities proposed in [START_REF] Meijboom | Site competence dynamics in international manufacturing networks: instrument development and a test in Eastern European factories[END_REF] have been introduced and a total of 10 dimensions have been identified to characterize this axis. The choice of the dimensions has been driven by both literature analysis and expertise of authors in the fields of global operations management. In order to operationalize the framework each factor has been assigned equal importance (10%). The higher the percentage achieved by a plant, the more strategic its role is. In order to calculate the level of site competence expressed in percentage (100% means the highest strategic role), each one of the ten factors is analyzed by considering its constituting elements associated to the questions included in the questionnaire. Activities are presented in order of increasing importance so that the higher the number of elements included, the more strategic the role is. Even though the list of proposed factors is partially overlapping with the one introduced by [START_REF] Meijboom | Site competence dynamics in international manufacturing networks: instrument development and a test in Eastern European factories[END_REF], some changes have been introduced in order to take into account recent literature on both operations management and global production networks. For instance, it has been considered important to make explicit the possible ability of a plant to customize products. On the one hand, the need to customize is aligned with recent trends of production paradigms (see for example [START_REF] Piller | Observations on the present and future of mass customization[END_REF], [START_REF] Boër | Mass Customization and Sustainability. An assessment framework and industrial implementation[END_REF]) that are influencing also markets under development. At the same time, from the production point of view, the customization requires a higher level of autonomy for the management of processes. Also the factor "collaboration with center of knowledge" has been introduced in order to consider the closer and closer link between companies and research

Product customization Plant carries out complicated product development and customization

Complicated process changes & reengineering Plant carries out complicated process development and process reengineering

Minor modifications in products & processes Plant makes minor modifications and developments in products & processes

Innovation and introduction of new products & processes for the entire company Plant is capable of creating new products & processes for the entire company

STRATEGIC ROLE ASSESSMENT MODEL FOR MANUFACTURING PLANTS Investments in technical and managerial resources Plant invests in acquiring and maintaining local resources, and building on technical know-how

Level of Site Competence & Technical Activities at the Plant Production

Plant carries out mainly production activities

Production planning Plant is responsible for planning the production

Procurement autonomy Plant has autonomy in terms of procurement

Collaboration with centers of knowledge Plant collaborates with universities, research centers (governmental / independent), labs and other institutions

Production scheduling

Plant is responsible for scheduling the production • Innovation and introduction of new products & processes for the company [START_REF] Meijboom | Site competence dynamics in international manufacturing networks: instrument development and a test in Eastern European factories[END_REF] In Figure 1, the right side of the framework highlights the list of factors and the cumulative probability that determines the level of site competence. In order to determine the percentage of attainment of a certain competence is carried out following a similar reasoning than the one used for the strategic priority. For each competence a list of factors is assessed on a 5-point scale and then it is translated in to a percentage value between 0 and 10 in such a way that the ten factors can score a maximum of 100 % (the highest strategic role). The availability of a tool allowing a practical and systematic identification of the strategic role of plants and the observation of its evolution over time is recommendable for every manufacturing network, in particular for those run by SMEs that typically have a less structured monitoring system in place and have fewer resources to dedicate to this task.

Empirical validation

The proposed assessment tool has been validated collecting empirical data from a sample of four Turkish companies running an international production network. The main selection criteria has been the location of the headquarter, Turkey, in order to avoid possible bias due to cultural differences in managing the network. Out of the nine companies that have been contacted, four have shown positive interest to take part in the case study research by answering the questionnaires and carrying out faceto-face interviews. One of the sampled companies is a big one even though the proposed assessment has as primary beneficiary SMEs. This case has been used to further check that the tool is coherent with already existing procedures in place in multinational and big companies. According to the aim of the assessment model, for each company both the headquarters and one plant of the network located in a foreign country have been involved in the research. Main features of the sampled companies are summarized in Table 1. The use of the tool allowed the assessment of the vision of the headquarters and the one of the production plant. To give an example of the output the tool can provide, the case of company C is discussed. The questionnaire has been filled in separately by the supply chain manager of the headquarters and the plant manager of the plant located in Russia. The analysis carried out by both the headquarters and the plant led to the identification of "proximity to market" as the primary reason for locating the plant: in both cases, this strategic reason was the highest ranked with respectively 26,7 % (plant, Figure 2) and 28,9 % (headquarters, Figure 2). This strategic reason has been also confirmed by the open interview that was carried out with the headquarter managers to interpret and validate the tool's results. Moving to the site competence, the overall score obtained from the headquarters is 59% out of a possible score of 100%, whereas the score assigned by the plant itself is noticeably higher and equal to 83%. This can be interpreted as the plant seeing itself as more strategically important than the headquarters views it. It is worth noticing that the plant is a new one, set up in 2010: it could take some time to fine-tune the management of a plant and, in the first of operation, misalignment are likely to happen. Being able to highlight such gaps timely is a way to achieve a better level of integration since the beginning with a positive impact not only on the single plant, but also on the network profitability. The fact that the plant identify a higher level of competence probably means that the headquarters are not fully aware yet of the full potentialities of the plant. The identification of the main gaps between the two visions provides the headquarters with some valuable inputs to improve the management of the plant. A more detailed analysis should be carried out to understand the sources of the biggest differences appeared in the activities "Complicated process changes & reengineering", "product customization" and "Innovation and introduction of new products & processes for the entire company".

Sector

Managerial guidelines when using the tool

For the proposed tool to be easily accepted and put into use by executives, it has been designed as a self-evaluating tool, based on a set of simple and straightforward questions that graphically visualize the obtained results for facilitating their interpretation. As shown in the case study analysis, the tool allows highlighting possible gaps. At this point, it is important to be able to point out the difference, analyze it further to find the root cause and to take actions to increase the alignment. Some guidelines have been drawn to interpret the results of the tool. When the primary reason does not coincide between the two visions an important intervention is foreseen in order to realign the strategy, this entails a significant strategic change for at least one of the involved actors. On the contrary, a gap highlighted in the site competence could be confined to single activities that typically require interventions of a practical nature. In the case of a misalignment in terms of the current primary location driver, in order to quickly and objectively evaluate the scores the developed guidelines suggest the following actions:

• organization of a meeting involving managers from the headquarter and the plant;

• investigation of the most important causes or areas of misalignment; • information should be shared, if necessary, in order to align the perceptions

The gap or the misalignment about the site competences between the two viewpoints can arise from three possible scenarios:

• the headquarters has a realistic view of the plant, but the plant either overestimates or underestimates its current competence level.

• the plant has a realistic view of itself, but the headquarter either overestimates or underestimates the current competence level of the plant. • the headquarter and the plant have extreme views of the plant, one underestimating whereas the other overestimating. The developed guidelines suggest different approaches to be adopted depending on the magnitude of the gap. For differences up to 5% no important intervention is foreseen. For gaps between 5% and 10% the situation is more serious and a careful analysis of factors for which the gap is higher is needed since there is a clear misalignment for some activities. For gaps higher than 10%, the intervention of the headquarters is urgent to limit the derivation of the two visions. Possible interventions depend on contingent factors thus making difficult the development of a general procedure.

Conclusions

The model proposed in this paper is a tool meant to support a company not only in identifying the role of a plant, but also to understand whether the same vision is shared by both the plant and the headquarter. The main benefit for the plant managers is that they will be able to better evaluate the strengths of the plant as well as major areas that may provide opportunities for future improvements. On the other hand, the headquarters will have a better picture of the whole network that should result in a more balanced set of actors. Additional empirical data collection is needed to further validate and fine-tune the tool. An extension of the model is already under development that introduces a more detailed assessment model including a set of indicators for the different factors defining the site competence.

Fig 1 .

 1 Fig 1. Dashboard presenting the assessment scope and factors

  Access to low-cost production input factors♦ Low-cost labor ♦ Raw materials ♦ Energy ♦ Key suppliers ♦ Capital Use of local technological resources ♦ Local technical know-how ♦ Skilled labor force ♦ Advanced infrastructure Proximity to market ♦ Proximity to important markets ♦ Proximity to key customers ♦ Access to tax benefits ♦ Quicker and more reliable distribution ♦ Easier customization of products ♦ To gain market share from competition

  for the Location of the Plant Level of Site Competence & Technical Activities at the Plant centers whenever the introduction of innovation requires important investments as well as cutting edge knowledge. The ten activities use to define the level of site competence are the following (for space constraints they are not detailed further): • Production (1) • Production scheduling (2) • Procurement autonomy (3) • Production planning (4) • Minor modifications in products & processes (5) • Complicated process changes & reengineering (6)• Product customization[START_REF] Forsgren | Managing the embedded multinational: A business network view[END_REF] • Investments in technical and managerial resources (8)• Collaboration with centers of knowledge[START_REF] Kinkel | Trends in production relocation and backshoring activities. Changing patterns in the course of the global economic crisis[END_REF]

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. Company C-Russian plant: assessment of % of matching with reasons according to the primary strategic reason (left: vision of the plant; right: vision of the headquarter)

Table 1 .

 1 Summary of information for the analyzed sample

			Turnover	No. plants	Analyzed plant	No. em-ployees (total)	No. em-ployees (plant)
	A	Fabricated steel production	100-500 Mln	3	China	2400	270
	B	Beer production	>1 billion	16	Russia	10000	4500
	C Building products	100-500 Mln	3	Russia	220	80
	D	Construction	< 100 Mln	3	Russia	900	200


Hans " Wortmann

K Peters

Future of ERP: challenges and opportunities in the SaaSera

Keywords:

This paper is concerned with ERP systems, which are defined as company-wide transaction processing systems based on packaged standard software. ERP systems provide the benefit of sharing data between functional areas in a firm. The paper argues that there is room for expansion of these benefits by sharing data with supply chain partners. The paper investigates the role of vendors and concludes that there are interesting new possibilities. These are related to the SaaS delivery model of enterprise software. This model calls for attention of the (enterprise) software supply chain in academic research.

Introduction

ERP systems are standard software packages for transaction processing, which integrate various functional areas of organizations, such as finance, logistics and HRM. The term "integration" means in this context that data on objects are stored and maintained only once, and are made available to each functional area concerned. This creates a common communication language and a "single version of the truth". The value proposition of ERP systems is that organizational processes and transactions can be executed efficiently, even if these processes cross the functional boundaries in organizations. Accordingly, ERP systems have grown mature with the claim that the entire organization needs integrated transaction processing which can be covered by a single investment -in ERP. This paper investigates the value proposition of ERP in the nearby future.

The classical value proposition of ERP can be reviewed in the light of recent and ongoing developments in the ERP and business environment. Four relevant developments are observed. Firstly, the focus of organizational improvement has changed towards supply chain issues [START_REF] Miles | Organization theory and supply chain management: An evolving research perspective[END_REF]. In the past, organizations were focused internally: streamlining all internal processes was a major goal. Nowadays, streamlined internal processes (enabled by e.g. ERP) are mostly in place, and room for improvement should be sought outside the boundaries of the own organization. Consequently it would be logical to explore if the benefits of ERP can be realized in the supply chain. Many of the supply chain opportunities that can be identified for ERP vendors are mentioned in academic literature on collaborative enterprise systems (see e.g., [START_REF] Bititci | Creating and managing value in collaborative networks[END_REF]). However, these opportunities still constitute considerable challenges in practice, because the technologies needed are perhaps described in research, but not available on the market (see [START_REF] Alvarez-Rodríguez | New trends on e-Procurement applying semantic technologies: Current status and future challenges[END_REF] [p.817] for a list of business opportunities not yet fulfilled in collaborative commerce, which could be addressed by ERP vendors).

Secondly, much standard software for transaction processing is nowadays offered in the form of Software as a Service (SaaS). This offering creates cost reductions for most customers. However, SaaS creates also new opportunities for various standard software vendors. Vendors could move upstream or downstream in their own supply chain. This second development relates to the (standard) software supply chain.

Thirdly, modern information systems cover much more than merely transaction processing systems. There is ICT support for professionals executing their work (Decision Support and Work Flow Management), there are real-time systems governing the execution of processes, there are office applications and social media to support human communication and interaction, and so on. All these other forms of ICT usage in organizations do not exhibit the typical transaction processing nature and require different technologies than classical ERP.

Last but not least, implementing and maintaining ERP systems may (still) require considerable effort. This is not only due to the number of parameters, which have to be set in order to configure ERP systems, but it is also due to the organization-wide nature of ERP projects.

This paper explores the future of ERP against the background of the above four developments. The first development ("organizational improvement has changed towards supply chain issues") is explored in section 2. Section 2 analyzes the supply chain of a company using ERP and identifies opportunities for improvement in data sharing, using arguments that have been explained at length in academic papers. This leads to the conclusion that ERP customers would benefit from more sharing of data and processes with supply chain partners. Accordingly, section 3 analyses the vendor's position, again using well-known academic frameworks. In this section, we will also return to the second ("SaaS creates new opportunities for various standard software vendors") and third developments ("modern information systems cover much more than merely transaction processing systems"). This leads to the conclusion, that vendors can exploit opportunities to expand their offering into the (enterprise) software supply chain. Section 4 gives a view on ongoing and future academic research. Section 5 provides conclusions.

Towards a supply network of content

As mentioned in the introduction, one of the main benefits of company-wide transaction processing systems, such as ERP systems, is that data on relevant objects are maintained at a single place and are made available to any authorized party in need of these data. This is sometimes called: the single version of the truth. Organizations that rigorously follow this principle have considerable benefits, as compared to organizations who still struggle with multiple versions of the truth. Additional advantages of focusing on the single version of the truth are the agreements that are obtained on the semantics and ontologies related to the objects involved, and the streamlining of business processes. The classical value proposition of ERP systems is largely related to these points [START_REF] Wortmann | Enterprise Information Systems as a Service: Re-engineering Enterprise Software as Product-Service System[END_REF].

However, l'histoire se répète: what used to be true for data content in single organizations is now true for the ecosystems in which these organizations operate. For example, a vendor catalogue's content is copied into the systems of all wholesalers who sell products of this particular vendor. This creates multiple update problems when the catalogue is maintained. It seems better to have these catalogues not copied, but retrieved as a service when necessary. This argument is not only true for so-called master data, but also for transactional content data on contracts, orders, shipments, receipts, invoices and payments, which can be stored in multiple systems. If we want to avoid multiple data storage efforts and the corresponding organizational burdens, the principle of a single version of the truth should be maintained. This principle leads to the idea of objects servitization: for each object there is a single data source and when data on this object ("content") is needed by authorized parties, these will be retrieved from the source via a service provided by the object.

Unfortunately, a caveat is needed with respect to this idea. While it allows organizations to retrieve data from business partners, it does not guarantee that data updates are consistent with the requirements of all these partners. For example, if a vendor eliminates an item from the vendor's catalogue, this data update may not be consistent with the requirements of a wholesaler who still has to deliver orders for this item. Such issues are covered by ERP but not by interfaces based on services.

Accordingly, ERP has been adopted as preferred solution by many organizations and even for business units across the globe, consisting of many local organizations residing under a joint owner. For such business units, the above considerations have resulted in so-called multi-site ERP: a multi-site ERP implementation covers several organizational units who share part of their data. For example, a company with both production facilities and distribution centers (DC) would share the orders from the DCs to the factories, rather than having all orders entered and maintained twice. In this way, a single version of the truth is created. However, remember the fourth issue given above: implementing and maintaining ERP systems is extremely cumbersome. For this reason, viz. to avoid complexity, multiple single-site implementations are sometimes preferred above a multi-site implementation in business units. If so, data are shared in the way mentioned above: there is one party responsible for a set of objects, e.g. a catalogue, and the other party retrieves the catalogue data when needed. The drawback, that data consistency is jeopardized, is taken for granted in order to avoid cumbersome implementation and upgrade issues.

Altogether, there is a need in supply networks to avoid multiple storage of the same data. In the energy branch, special metering companies manage delivery data. In freight transportation, the main carrier takes this role. Many projects are currently ongoing to enable electronic invoices, which may be regarded as a move to avoid dupli-cate data storage. In fact, e-commerce is often a way to ensure that duplicate data are avoided or that automatic synchronization of the same data objects is enforced.

Accordingly, the notion of a content supply network emerges: organizations create information on objects ("content"), and this content is delivered to business partners. Such delivery may be accompanied by payments, as in the case of energy metering services. Note, that the content supply network may consist of the same partners as encountered in the physical supply chain, but the direction of the value stream may be different (see figure 1). Also, independent players can take a position in this network, if they provide content related services to other network participants.

Finally, there may be also other players who add value in content networks. Examples are providers of consumer market sales (Nielsen), on stock exchange transactions (Bloomberg), on the organization's financial situation (accountants), etc.

Introduction

In recent years, ICT vendors have offered cloud-based solutions to their customers. The essence of this offering is that ICT infrastructures and platforms are not sold to customers and deployed by customers, but these are owned and run by vendors and offered "as-a-service". ICT can become much cheaper and more scalable when infrastructure and platform are shared between customers. Ultimately, the cost reduction of hardware infrastructure is based on Moore's law, which states that the costs of key hardware are reduced by 50% every 18 months, combined with the gains obtained from sharing risks. The cost reduction of platforms such as operating systems is based on virtualization techniques, allowing multiple software platforms to share hardware.

By itself, this cost reduction due to Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) and Platformas-a-Service (PaaS) has nothing to do with applications such as ERP. However, there is also a good reason to have standard software such as ERP delivered as "as-a-Service": the costs of application management can be reduced considerably if the same standard software is shared between user organizations. Sharing of software reduces the number of different software variants which are maintained, and conse-quently bypasses many tasks, such as adopting platform changes, installing patches, testing upgrades, database backup and recovery, helpdesk work, contracting 2 nd tier ICT suppliers, and so on. Therefore an interesting value proposition for ERP vendors emerges, namely to offer their solution as SaaS to customers. Many major vendors have already begun exploiting this opportunity. However, the move towards SaaS brings vendors also into a different competitive arena. This issue will be analyzed in the next subsection.

Analysis of ERP vendor position when adopting SaaS

SaaS can be regarded as a new technology emerging in the business context, and comes with new challenges and new opportunities for ERP vendors. However, ERP vendors who embrace the SaaS offering will normally not refrain from their classical "on premise" offering. In order to analyze this change, we will use the well-known organizational adaptation framework of Miles and Snow [START_REF] Miles | Organizational strategy, structure, and process[END_REF], who distinguish three types of adaptation problems in organizations: the entrepreneurial problem, the engineering problem, and the administrative problem.

In case of ERP vendors, the entrepreneurial problem is mainly concerned with selection (new) product-market strategies, the engineering problem is mainly concerned with the software design and infrastructure, and the administrative problem is mainly concerned with the vendor's internal organization structure and processes. The adoption of SaaS concerns the transition from a product to a service offering, and may also include changing markets. SaaS also involves creating new ways of delivering value to customers. These are strategic decisions, and therefore concern the entrepreneurial problem. From there, the engineering problem is involved: an ERP product that really allows multiple customers to use the same software (and presumably the same database) requires additional software development in ERP. The software has to be made fit for SaaS and for multiple customers (also called "tenants"). Additionally, appropriate systems and infrastructure have to be implemented for providing the service(s) to tenants. There are many ways to design and implement multi-tenancy and SaaS architectures [START_REF] Kabbedijk | Comparing Two Architectural Patterns for Dynamically Adapting Functionality in Online Software Products[END_REF]. Finally, SaaS requires support from the organization and management processes. For instance, the monitoring and reward system should be adjusted in order to stimulate salesmen to sell the new value proposition based on SaaS.

When moving with an ERP product from the classical on premise delivery model to a SaaS model, ERP vendors should not only address the engineering problem, but also address the entrepreneurial and administrative problems. The value proposition of the ERP vendor shifts from a focus on product features to a focus on costs. In terms of the value disciplines of Tracey and Wiersema [START_REF] Treacy | Customer intimacy and other value disciplines[END_REF], ERP vendors are traditionally oriented towards product leadership and they start to compete on operational excellence. In terms of Porter [START_REF] Porter | What is strategy?[END_REF], the vendors who used to have a differentiation strategy are seduced to compete on cost leadership. However, there is only one party in the market who can dominate based on cost leadership, according to Porter. For most ERP vendors, even for the vendors with a large market share, it is unlikely that they will survive in a market competing on costs. This brings the discussion to the follow-ing question: what options do ERP vendors have after adopting SaaS? The next section tries to answer this question.

3.3

Different positions in the software supply chain: options for ERP SaaS Like many other companies, software product companies are part of a supply chain. Actually, there are two supply chains involved, which should be properly distinguished, viz. the design-time supply chain and the run-time supply chain. The design-time supply chain describes partnerships during design and supply of (design) components for the product or service offered by the focal company. The run-time supply chain described partnerships during actual delivery of products and services to the final customer.

This distinction is well known and clear for physical goods, such as apparel, electronics or buildings. During new product development, the focal company searches for design partners who may either supply off-the-shelf knowledge products or perform design tasks for the focal company. However, this knowledge supply chain may be entirely different from the physical goods flow necessary to serve the market.

The same distinction is well known in the software industry. For designing a classical ERP product, the design team may use off-the-shelf components such as security components, user-management and authentication components, database management systems, a UI-framework, a java framework, 4GL tools, configuration management tools and so on. Also, an ERP package may be combined with other application software such as MS Project. After development, these components are delivered to customers jointly with the ERP offering. This is similar to physical products where e.g. an add-on is included in the delivery.

When designing a SaaS product, the situation changes. Five options are highlighted. First, in case of ERP SaaS, license contracts for additional ERP components, such as the DBMS, will be made with the SaaS supplier, i.e. with the ERP supplier, instead of with the DBMS supplier. This means that the ERP vendor integrates upstream in the software supply chain.

Secondly, the ERP vendor may also choose to refrain from added value upstream in the software supply chain. For example, the ERP SaaS provider could choose to leave all authentications to a third party authentication service in SaaS mode. If so, someone should pay for the authentication service, probably the ERP customer. Accordingly, the ERP SaaS vendor leaves the added value to suppliers and thus refrains from integrating upstream.

Thirdly, if the ERP package is designed to work with a third party applications e.g., CRM, warehousing or even finance, these third party applications could be delivered as part of SaaS ERP or it could run in SaaS mode. This option for service delivery may be called: specialization in the software supply chain.

Fourthly, ERP vendors have the option to integrate downstream in the supply chain by e.g. investments in mobile apps for specific sessions in ERP. (This option is not restricted to SaaS but fits well with a SaaS offering). Such investments would enhance the customer experience. Obviously, the vendors can also refrain from such investments and leave these e.g. to their resellers or implementation partners. An in-teresting example in moving downstream in the supply chain is the mobile app "My-Order". MyOrder enables customers in any shop (or restaurant) to download a catalogue, place an order, pay, and receive the paid order from the shop's personnel.

Last but not least, ERP vendors or their competitors could take a position in the content delivery network. Section 2 describes there will be new players in the content delivery network, either to provide information services for several parties or to add value to information (such as in the case of financial analysis by accountants).

Discussion

This paper investigated the value proposition of ERP in the nearby future. In the above section we have argued, that there are many options for ERP vendors and others in implementing SaaS. In the current practice, it is unclear to what extent ERP vendors and other parties are implementing or have implemented the various options. Our pending research focuses on both the organizational context (organizational adaptation) as well as the institutional context of ERP vendors in adapting to software supply chain changes and SaaS developments.

First, SaaS adoption does not only require ERP vendors to address the engineering problem, such as new software and architecture design for SaaS, but also to address entrepreneurial and administrative problems, such as implementing new business models and update the financial and reward structures in the organization. Secondly, the three adaptation problems will be affected by how ERP vendors strategically employ SaaS. ERP vendors are originally product leadership and differentiation oriented with regard to their competitive strategies, yet SaaS may tempt ERP vendors to move towards cost leadership and operational excellence competition instead. Such a move makes it difficult to sustain a competitive advantage for most ERP vendors, because only one or a few players will survive in a cost competition arena.

It is therefore of interest to investigate 1) whether and how ERP vendors make the transition from their classical on premise solution to SaaS, and 2) whether and how they resist the temptation to move into cost leadership competition with SaaS.

Institutional theory, and institutional preconditions in particular, offer an explanation on whether and how ERP vendors make the transition from their classical on premise solution business to SaaS [START_REF] Teracino | Conceptualization of the Convergence Phenomenon to Develop an Applicable and Integrated Framework for the Emergence of Software-as-a-Service[END_REF][START_REF] Greenwood | Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms[END_REF][START_REF] Scott | Institutions and organizations[END_REF]. Institutional preconditions are related to three domains, i.e., the regulative, the normative and the cognitive domains, and concern e.g., perception of importance of SaaS adoption (cognitive), importance of relationships in the supply chain (normative) and the role of professional standards and rules (regulative). If the institutional preconditions are for example preventing a move towards a new value proposition, then it is unlikely that such a move will occur.

The five identified options for ERP vendors can be used to understand to what extent ERP vendors are shedding components and services to others in the software supply chain, and thus decrease their added-value and to what extent ERP vendors are integrating upstream and/or downstream, or specializing in their supply chains to increase their added-value. There may be also good opportunities to take a position in the content supply network, but this may contradict their institutional preconditions.

Accordingly, the case of ERP and SaaS is not only an opportunity to position these subjects in a theory of a supply chain of services as outlined above in sections 2 and 3. It is also an opportunity to add new insights to supply chain design choices from the perspectives of institutional theory and the framework of Miles and Snow as outlined in section 3.2. This line of research may lead to interesting cross-fertilizing towards physical supply chains.

Conclusion

In this paper, several challenges and opportunities for ERP in the SaaS era have been identified. Section 2 analyzed the role of ERP in supply networks. The conclusion was the following. ERP is not likely to be extended beyond the boundaries of organizations. However, the increasing awareness of content supply networks will give rise to new services around data, and may invoke new players to take roles in these networks. ERP vendors have many opportunities to move upstream and downstream in their own software supply chains. Although they could enter into the content supply networks, it remains subject of further investigation if they will do so, and how.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. Content supply network


Christoph Koch
email: christoph.koch@tuhh.de

Hermann Lödding
email: loedding@tuhh.de

Requirements for a Value Stream Mapping in Make-To-Order Environments

Keywords: value stream mapping, make-to-order, production control

Value stream mapping (VSM) is a widely proven method to optimize a production. The practical approach, the manageable effort and the targetoriented procedure are the factors of success of this method. However, the method is of limited use when applied to make-to-order (MTO) environments. This paper aims to describe the shortcomings of VSM with respect to an application in a MTO production. The paper concentrates on the different logistic targets VSM impacts, as well as the manufacturing control tasks VSM applies. To set the basis for an application of VSM in MTO companies, requirements are described both for the logistic targets of VSM and the related manufacturing control tasks.

Introduction

It´s not only the quality and the price of products but also the quality of logistic processes that satisfy customer demands. Especially for make-to-order companies, high delivery reliability is mandatory to satisfy the customer [START_REF] Kingsman | Responding to customer enquiries in make-to-order companies -Problems and solutions[END_REF]. Value Stream Mapping (VSM) is a widely proven and powerful tool in the field of continuous improvement of logistic targets. It has been established as a de facto standard in the industrial environment. It is composed of common rules that help to support targets like low inventory levels, short throughput times and high productivity [START_REF] Irani | Value stream mapping of a complete product[END_REF]. It was developed as a communication standard within the high-volume-low-mix (HVLM) industry [START_REF] Rother | Learning to see: Value stream mapping to create value and eliminate muda[END_REF]. Thus, the method is tailored to the needs of the corresponding production system. Its implicit assumptions (make-to-stock) and explicit recommendations (design guidelines) are of limited use for make-to-order (MTO) companies. Companies with a high number of variants particularly criticize structural problems of the method [START_REF] Spath | Wertschöpfung steigern[END_REF]. Therefore, we seek for an approach to apply this practical method even in a MTO environment.

This paper analyzes the shortcomings of VSM with respect to an application in the field of MTO. The analysis allows formulating requirements for a MTO specific VSM. The focus lays on the logistic targets and on the involved methods of manufacturing control.

Make-to-Order Production

Production can be divided into different manufacturing strategies that come along with different characteristics. The manufacturing strategy usually depends on the type of product a company produces. In this context make-to-order (MTO) and make-tostock (MTS) are two ideal types of processing an order. These two concepts differ in several criteria [START_REF] Schuh | Produktionsplanung und -steuerung -Grundlagen, Gestaltung, Konzepte[END_REF]:

The customer decoupling point describes the point in the value chain, where the product is linked to a specific customer order. A MTS production usually produces according to forecasts without concrete customer orders. The customer orders are satisfied by stocks of finished goods. Contrary to that, manufacturing orders in MTO companies are initialized directly by customers. A customer order triggers a manufacturing order, so that every manufacturing order can be connected to a customer [START_REF] Deep | Investigating factors affecting ERP selection in made-to-order SME sector[END_REF].

MTS companies often produce standard products without any customer specific influence on the product design. Customers are then accustomed to a limited choice of products. In a MTO environment the influence of the customer on the product is usually higher, so that the number of different products is typically much higher than in a MTS production and the volume per product is much lower [START_REF] Aslan | Enterprise Resource Planning systems: An assessment of applicability to Make-To-Order companies[END_REF].

According to the range of products, the structure of the products also differs. While MTS companies often produce low priced products with a simple structure, MTO companies typically have multi-part products with complex structures [START_REF] Deep | Investigating factors affecting ERP selection in made-to-order SME sector[END_REF].

MTS companies typically organize their production as a flow production. The workstations are arranged according to the flow of material. The number of variants that can be produced is limited. MTO companies have complex and customer specific products, so the flow of material is normally undirected and complex. Due to this fact the manufacturing often is arranged as a workshop production to guarantee high flexibility. A job shop is a typical form of this arrangement [START_REF] Schuh | Produktionsplanung und -steuerung -Grundlagen, Gestaltung, Konzepte[END_REF].

Both types of firms also differ in their logistic targets. MTS companies serve their customers from a stock. Therefore, it is necessary to have the relevant parts available to immediately satisfy the customer demand. For MTO firms the logistic target is different. Keeping the promised delivery date is one of the most important targets for MTO companies [START_REF] Nyhuis | Fundamentals of Production Logistics[END_REF].

Value Stream Mapping

Value Stream Mapping is the process of picturing both the material flow and the information flow to coordinate all activities [START_REF] Jones | Seeing the Whole: Mapping the Extended Value Stream. The Lean Enterprise Institute[END_REF]. VSM is divided into two stages: analysis and design. Rother and Shook deliver a standard procedure for drawing the current state map [START_REF] Rother | Learning to see: Value stream mapping to create value and eliminate muda[END_REF]. This procedure can be separated into five steps that should be followed in order to generate the current state map: 1) Select a product family; 2) Collect the relevant data; 3) Incorporate the information flow; 4) Draw the timeline; 5) Interpret the current state map.

After having established the current state map, the question arises how to get to a future state map. The design stage provides structured guidelines that lead to future state maps. Rother and Shook propose seven guidelines [START_REF] Rother | Learning to see: Value stream mapping to create value and eliminate muda[END_REF]: 1) Produce to takt time; 2) Implement continuous flow and FIFO lanes; 3) Use Kanban supermarkets; 4) Send the production planning information only to the pacemaker; 5) Level the product mix evenly; 6) Distribute the production volume evenly (batch sizes); 7) Manufacture every part every day.

By applying these guidelines, a future state map can be developed stepwise. The guidelines represent the standard configuration for a manufacturing control system for a MTS production.

Shortcomings of Conventional VSM for MTO Productions

The discrepancy between the conventional VSM and a MTO production can be illustrated by three points: Differences in logistic objectives, a mismatch of the applied tasks of manufacturing control and the manufacturing environment.

Logistic Objectives

Both types of companies, MTS and MTO, differ in logistic objectives amongst other criteria (see chapter 2). As the conventional VSM is tailored to a MTS environment, the method also inherits the logistic objectives of a MTS production. The conventional VSM thus omits the most important logistic objective in MTO environments: schedule reliability.

Schedule reliability is one of the most important internal logistic objectives for MTO companies [START_REF] Lödding | Modelling lateness and schedule reliability: how companies can produce on time[END_REF]. The schedule reliability describes the stability of logistic processes within a production [START_REF] Wiendahl | Wie aus der Logistik eine Wissenschaft wurde[END_REF]. It directly affects the delivery reliability towards the customer. It is defined as the percentage of orders completed within a defined range of tolerance [START_REF] Yu | Terminkennlinie. Eine Beschreibungsmethodik für die Terminabweichung im Produktionsbereich[END_REF]. The schedule reliability is influenced by the lateness and by the sequence deviation. Kuyumcu developed a causal model that is able to separate the overall lateness into lateness resulting from backlog and lateness resulting from sequence deviation [START_REF] Kuyumcu | Modellierung der Termintreue in der Produktion[END_REF]. The current VSM ignores the schedule reliability as an important key figure for MTO companies.

In the analysis stage of the conventional VSM the focus lays on work-in-progress (WIP) and throughput time (TTP). The former key figure is directly recorded during the value stream analysis, the latter derived from the WIP level and the customer takt. Both figures are important also for MTO companies. However, the measurement method of both figures is not practicable for MTO companies. The WIP is measured in number of parts. This is sufficient and practicable for companies with standard products and standardized container contents. Recording the number of parts in a MTO environment with highly fluctuating processing times and batch sizes can be less helpful. Usually, the number of parts is not representative for the workload of the orders and the counting itself can be time-consuming if there are no standard container contents. The throughput time is calculated with Little´s Law by dividing the WIP level in front of the workstation by the customer takt. However, the customer takt is hardly to determine in a MTO production as the material flow is more complex and the order contents are varying strongly.

Applied Functions of Manufacturing Control

The design stage of VSM includes methods for controlling manufacturing in terms of guidelines. These guidelines act in accordance with the logistic objectives of a MTS production. In the section below the guidelines are evaluated with respect to their use in a MTO production: 1. Produce to takt time: The customer takt is highly fluctuating in a MTO environment, so that it is much more difficult to produce to takt time than in high volume MTS productions. 2. Develop continuous flow with FIFO sequencing: Due to highly fluctuating processing times and complex material flows the implementation of continuous flow is often not applicable in MTO productions. The FIFO lanes help to avoid a chaotic sequencing in MTO productions as well. However, they do not support schedule reliability because delayed orders won´t be accelerated when they are processed in their incoming sequence. 3. Use Kanban supermarkets to control production: The Kanban method is by definition a decentralized order generation mechanism for companies that produce to stock. In this case the Kanaban logic is responsible to refill the consumption of a stock / supermarket. Thus, it is not applicable for a MTO production. 4. Send the production planning information only to the pacemaker: The PPC information should only be sent to the pacemaker process, so that not all processes are controlled by a superior production planning department. The upstream processes should be decoupled by Kanban supermarkets, which is not possible for MTO companies.

Level the product mix evenly:

To level the product mix evenly at the pacemaker process one need to have a good forecast of the individual demands and to know a constant pacemaker / bottleneck system. Both points can often not be achieved in MTO environments. 6. Distribute the production volume evenly: After leveling the product mix in the next step the production volume should be distributed evenly on the pacemaker process. This is often not possible to install immediately as it is necessary to know the exact demands and a stable pacemaker process. 7. Build the capability to produce every part every day: Building up the capability to produce every part every day means to decrease setup times and batch sizes to react flexible on changes in demand. Generally, this guideline is also useful for MTO companies. By reducing setup times the need for building setup families disappears. Some of the guidelines, generally those who manage the informational flow, are based on a stable pacemaker process. As a MTO production often arranges their manufacturing in form of a job shop with complex and changing material flows, a stable pacemaker often is hardly to achieve. Quite the contrary: job shops have complex flows of material and changing bottlenecks. Other guidelines directly assume the functions of the manufacturing control tasks, e.g. installing supermarkets and FIFOlanes. This is reasonable for a MTS, but not for a MTO production. The supermarkets connect the processes that are located upstream of the pacemaker process and stock semi-finished goods. Downstream of the pacemaker workstation, a continuous flow should be established with FIFO sequencing. As mentioned before, FIFO does not support the schedule reliability.

Missing Functions of Manufacturing Control

The guidelines aim to optimize the manufacturing area by introducing and accomplishing functions of manufacturing control in a structured manner. Both the information and the material flow are controlled to improve the logistic objectives WIP and throughput time. The following figure describes the relationship between the logistic objectives of a manufacturing system and the relevant tasks of manufacturing control to achieve the objectives. Fig. 1. A manufacturing control model [START_REF] Kuyumcu | Modellierung der Termintreue in der Produktion[END_REF] The model contains tasks of manufacturing control that impact the logistic objectives of a production with the help of actuating and control variables. These tasks can be roughly divided in production planning (Fig. 1 right hand section) and production control (Fig. 1 left hand section) tasks. The model includes the following control tasks: order release, capacity control and sequencing While sequencing is handled by the conventional VSM approach (FIFO-lanes) both order release and capacity control are not taken into consideration. As mentioned before, FIFO sequencing does not support the schedule reliability actively. It merely avoids sequencing at the discretion of the operators, who sometimes may pursue different objectives than schedule reliability.

The capacity control is one of the two levers to control the schedule reliability. It decides about the adjustment of capacity which can mean overtime or shortened work hours [START_REF] Lödding | Handbook of Manufacturing Control[END_REF]. The current VSM method completely neglects the capacity control. This is very problematic even for MTS environments, as backlogs can accumulate and affect the inventory level in the supermarket. It is even more problematic for MTO companies, as backlogs directly influence schedule reliability.

By releasing an order, the production is allowed to process the order. The order release can operate based on different criteria (e.g. WIP, due dates), which have to be defined. The order release provides a lever to control the work in progress and the throughput time in a MTO production. The need and effectiveness of a structured order release to control the mean throughput time have been quoted by several authors [START_REF] Land | Workload Control concepts in job shops: a critical assessment[END_REF][START_REF] Hendry | The effect of workload control (WLC) on performance in make-to-order companies[END_REF][START_REF] Wiendahl | Load-oriented manufacturing control[END_REF]. It is thus an elementary function of manufacturing control, which is missing in the conventional VSM.

Requirements for a VSM for MTO Productions

The shortcomings of the conventional VSM were partially mentioned by other authors without drawing structured conclusions [START_REF] Chitturi | Value Stream Mapping in a Jobshop[END_REF][START_REF] Alves | Value Stream Mapping for Make-to-Order Products in a Job Shop[END_REF]. However, the shortcomings can be translated into requirements for an adapted VSM that is applicable on a MTO production. These requirements affect the value stream analysis as well as the value stream design.

Requirements for a Value Stream Analysis

The production systems of MTS and MTO companies differ. This concerns the logistic goals the production tries to achieve as well as the complexity of the production itself. Thus, the following requirements for a MTO tailored VSM arise: 1. Take into consideration all the relevant logistic objectives:

Besides the productivity oriented measures, the main measures considered by the conventional VSM are logistic objectives. Thus, within the value stream analysis all relevant logistic objectives and their control variables must be recorded. As in the conventional VSM, all measurements should be recorded directly on the shop floor. The WIP should be grasped in a unit more convenient for MTO environments. The throughput time depends on the WIP, so this relation must also be considered while choosing the appropriate units.

The schedule reliability depends on the lateness of orders, which is influenced by backlog and sequence deviation [START_REF] Yu | Terminkennlinie. Eine Beschreibungsmethodik für die Terminabweichung im Produktionsbereich[END_REF]. Similar to the relation of WIP and throughput time, backlog and sequence deviation act as control variables for the schedule reliability. Both measures then have to be recorded in the analysis stage of the MTO tailored VSM.

Cover the complexity of job shops:

The first step of the analysis contains the choice of an adequate product family using a product-process-matrix. Having a large amount of product families, this procedure becomes very extensive. A VSM for MTO should rather focus on the entirety of work systems than on single product families. By doing this, the procedure will be to cover the complexity of production systems of MTO companies, such as backflows or shared resources.

Requirements for a Value Stream Design

For a VSM that is tailored for a MTO production new requirements regarding the guidelines occur.

The guidelines should consider all tasks of manufacturing control:

It is not sufficient to concentrate on single tasks of manufacturing control. In order to configure the manufacturing control comprehensively, all the relevant tasks of manufacturing control must be considered. To have a lever on the control variable WIP, the order release mechanism must be controlled. The backlog results from the difference of actual and planned output. Thus, it is fundamental to configure the capacity control task, which directly affects the actual output. Additionally, the sequencing rule must be configured to minimize sequence deviations. Planned due dates of operations are often determined during the production planning. Thus, sequencing the orders according to their due dates could be possible.

The guidelines should support the user with developing a future state map:

The configuration of a comprehensive manufacturing control system is a complex task. Thus, it is elementary to have a structured process for the configuration. The guidelines must support this by offering a consistent and logical sequence of introducing the manufacturing control tasks. Moreover, the guidelines should be independent of each others, so that the failure of one guideline does not automatically lead to the failure of another guideline.

Conclusion and Outlook

The paper evaluates the conventional VSM method with respect for a use in a MTO environment. Based on the field of application, the logistic targets aimed at by VSM do not correspond with the logistic targets of a MTO company. From this follows that the manufacturing control functions introduced by the value stream design, which should support the target achievement, also are either incomplete or impracticable for MTO productions. A VSM tailored for MTO should aim at all logistic objectives, especially at the schedule reliability. Therefore the appropriate manufacturing control tasks have to be considered, including order release, capacity control, and sequencing.

The ongoing studies at the IPMT include the development of a value stream analysis and a value stream design procedure. Therefore, a recording method for the logistic objectives as well as a standard configuration of manufacturing control for MTO companies must be developed and evaluated. Guidelines to develop a future state map must then be derived from the standard configuration of manufacturing control. Furthermore, the complete method has to be evaluated with different industrial partners to cover different types of MTO productions.


João F Santanna Filho

Ricardo J Rabelo
email: ricardo.rabelo@ufsc.br

Alexandra A Pereira-Klen

Enacting innovation within collaborative-driven SOA providers networks

Keywords: Collaborative Networks, Innovation, Software Services, SOA

Software industry has become a very important sector nowadays. New ICT paradigms have emerged to cope with current global-local world challenges, such as Service-oriented architecture (SOA). SOA has the potential to raise SMEs to new levels of sustainability in terms of software innovation. However, SMEs are limited in their resources, and both innovation and SOA are complex, costly and risky. This paper presents preliminary results of an ongoing research towards developing an innovation model that relies on collaboration, enabling software/SOA providers to work as an open network to jointly develop an innovative SOA-base software product. The proposed model identifies not only the processes to be involved in but also identifies the most relevant supporting issues to be taken into account along the innovation and collaboration processes. Final considerations about the work are presented at the end.

Introduction

Software industry has become a very important sector nowadays. In Europe, for instance, there are more than fifty thousand SMEs within the ICT sector [1]. Being by far composed of SMEs, they usually have tough difficulties for engaging assets to feasibly invest on innovation with acceptable risk [START_REF] Westphal | Managing collaboration performance to govern virtual organizations[END_REF]. So it is crucial to develop sustainable models to allow them taking advantage of more recent ICT and organizational trends and hence to innovate. Li et al. [START_REF] Li | Multi-model driven collaborative development platform for service-oriented e-Business systems[END_REF] point out that software innovation is a key aspect to increase SMEs competitiveness.

Some recent ICT paradigms have emerged with the potential to support that. This paper deals with SOA (Service Oriented Architecture) paradigm. SOA represents a new vision in terms of systems design, development, integration and servitization. In the SOA vision, all system's features are seen as independent and self-contained software modules -called software services -that jointly form virtually a single logical unit to create products and processes [START_REF] Westphal | Managing collaboration performance to govern virtual organizations[END_REF]. There are some technologies for implementing services-based systems, being web services the most used one.

Reports anticipate a SOA market of $15 billion dollars in 2019 [4]. However, SOA projects are complex, risky, costly and unique, impacting companies (both customers and providers) at many dimensions [START_REF] Westphal | Managing collaboration performance to govern virtual organizations[END_REF]. This paper exploits the premise that SOA providers SMEs can mitigate such barriers if they collaborate more intensively with each other towards jointly developing SOA-based innovative software products.

It is important to highlight that a SOA/software product has many differences when compared to manufacturing sector/product, in terms of e.g. development stages and methodologies, supporting constructs, physical deployment, SLA treatment, software / services quality, and product contracting, access and usage.

Working collaboratively is rather difficult. Companies are heterogeneous and autonomous, largely distributed, meaning that their different strategies must be accommodated and interoperate regarding their different priorities and trade-offs in terms of acceptable risks, trust and benefits [START_REF] Rabelo | Advanced collaborative business ICT infrastructures[END_REF].

A sort of collaborative/networked-based innovation models have been presented in the literature. However, none of them are devoted to SOA/software sector and do not consider a wider open scenario where services' providers can participate in all phases of the innovation process, collaboratively and as a network, sharing benefits, costs and risks. Besides that, most of models are very abstract, without providing more detailed processes and even less for a collaborative SOA scenario.

This paper shows preliminary results of an ongoing research which aims to contribute to face this gap, presenting an innovation model that deals with that general scenario. It has been conducted as an essentially research-action, qualitative, deductive and applied work, strongly grounded on literature revision.

The paper is organized as follows. Section has introduced the problem and research goals. Section 2 presents a basic foundations review. Section 3 introduces the proposed model. Section 4 provides a summary of the achieved results and next steps.

Basic concepts and revision of the state-of-the-art

This section presents a resumed description of the main core theoretical foundations that have been used in the conception of the proposed innovation model.

2.1

Innovation models By innovation model it is meant the general conceptual construct that helps an organization and its actors to set up the innovation framework, to develop the innovation itself and to manage this progress and its results (adapted from [START_REF] Tidd | Innovation Management[END_REF]). The literature presents an extensive list of innovation models. In essence, they basically describe the main phases and general processes necessary to carry an innovation out via the socalled funnel, namely: selection and/or generation of ideas, concept development, concept evaluation/selection, concept design/specification, implementation and exploitation (adapted from [START_REF] Du Preez | A framework for managing the innovation process[END_REF]).

Innovation models have evolved from linear models to network and open models, which can go back and forth through each phase (stage). Evaluation actions (gate) use to be added between each stage so releasing or not the process continuation. Different actors can contribute along the innovation process' stages, being them intraorganizational members or external partners/stakeholders, and even customers [START_REF] Rothwell | Successful industrial innovation: critical factors for the 1990s[END_REF].

Regarding this paper's goal, two innovation models are of particular relevance: the Network and Open innovation models. Roughly, the Network model considers an open environment composed of companies prepared and willing to work on an innovative idea when it comes up. Processes and operating rules are then set up accordingly. Open innovation focuses on a new logic based in openness and collaboration. It has been often adopted by large corporations that have the innovative idea reasonably well clear and looks for some complementarities and added value in some processes or product's parts. This can come from established partners or from wider ecosystems.

2.2

Collaborative Networks CN is a general concept that embraces the diverse manifestations of collaboration among organizations. Its essentials relies on allowing organizations to keep focused on their skills and aggregating competencies and diverse resources with other organizations -so creating networked organizations -in order to offer products with higher value to meet businesses in a better way [START_REF] Rothwell | Successful industrial innovation: critical factors for the 1990s[END_REF].

Two manifestations are of particular importance in this work: VO (Virtual Organization) and VBE (Virtual organization Breeding Environments). Generally, a VO can be defined as a temporary alliance formed by autonomous and heterogeneous organizations that collaboratively join their complementary core-competences and resources to better attend to a given demand, dismantling itself after all its legal obligations have been accomplished. During its lifecycle (VO creation, operation, evolution and dissolution), new members can get in and existing members can get out from it. VOs are mostly originated from long-term alliances, namely a VBE. A VBE formally groups organizations aiming at creating VOs with the most adequate partners in a more agile and trustful way, thanks to enough pre-conditions and basic/common operating rules for collaboration which are set up when its members get into it [START_REF] Baldo | For a methodology to implement virtual breeding environments-a case study in the mold and die sector in Brazil. Leveraging Knowledge for Innovation in Collaborative Networks[END_REF].

A VBE is classically seen as a closed world, not supporting larger and open digital business ecosystem at all. Adaptations in the VBE concept towards handling such more ample scenarios have been proposed, as the Federation [START_REF] Rabelo | Advanced collaborative business ICT infrastructures[END_REF] and the sectoral system innovation [10] concepts.

2.3

Governance Governance in Networked Enterprises can be defined as "the definition of rules, criteria for decision-making, responsibilities, and boundaries of actions and autonomy for the involved actors. It is created by the own set of organizations to regulate itself. The fundamental role of governance is not managing, but rather to delimitate the management. Actors can use their knowledge within the defined governance framework in way to help organizations to best reaching their common goals" [START_REF] Roth | Differences and Inter-Relations of Governance Concepts and Horizontal Networked Enterprises Managemen[END_REF] .

During the collaboration life cycle companies share assets and sensible information. However, they are independent enterprises and have their own business strategies, creating a complex and intrinsically conflicting operating scenario. Therefore, it is extreme relevant to properly govern that in way to minimize conflicts among all the involved actors and hence the risks for achieving the innovation goals.

In the CN perspective, a VO embraces different partners, with different roles and hence rights and duties, according to the business' profile, VO life cycle and the VBElike/network's principles, bylaws and rules. This should be regulated by the VBE-like and VO governance models. Costa et al. [START_REF] Costa | A Governance Model for Virtual Enterprises[END_REF] have proposed an integrated VBE-VO governance model on top of some classical network governance models, e.g. [START_REF] Storper | Flexibility, hierarchy and regional development: The changing structure of industrial production systems and their forms of governance in the 1990s[END_REF] [START_REF] Gereffi | The governance of global value chains[END_REF].

2.4

State-of-the-Art The Systematic Literature Review methodology [START_REF] Kitchenham | Systematic literature reviews in software engineering -A systematic literature review[END_REF] was applied to support the state-of-the-art review. IEEExplore, ACM, and ScienceDirect databases were searched, collecting papers written in English and published in journals and conference proceedings in the period Jan 2000-Feb 2014. It also considered some ad-hoc searches over the Internet and a search at CORDIS, the EU research projects database.

Any work was found out which dealt with the envisaged open and networkedbased innovation models and devoted to SOA & software providers. On the other hand, 5 papers and 6 projects presented more useful insights for the proposed innovation model, its processes and constructs.

Du Preez et al. [START_REF] Du Preez | A framework for managing the innovation process[END_REF] have devised an innovation model for products and general services (i.e. not for software services) identifying the most important required macro processes. Berre et al. [START_REF] Berre | Service Innovation and Service Realisation with VDML and ServiceML[END_REF] have proposed supporting languages to express the value delivery and services chain for the general area of services. Hoyer et al. [START_REF] Hoyer | Collaborative e-business process modelling: a holistic analysis framework focused on small and medium-sized enterprises[END_REF] have stressed the obstacles faced by SMEs when collaborating. Belussi et al. [START_REF] Belussi | A typology of networks: flexible and evolutionary firms[END_REF] have proposed a framework and services typology in the innovation context. Therefore, they are all innovation initiatives on services but anyone on software services/SOA. Li et al. [START_REF] Li | Multi-model driven collaborative development platform for service-oriented e-Business systems[END_REF] have proposed a model driven collaborative development platform for SOA-based e-business systems, but not devoted anyhow to support innovation.

In terms of EU projects, BIVEE, ComVantage, IMAGINE, CoVES, Laboranova and PLENT [19] have tackled innovation at different perspectives and levels, fundamentally devoted to manufacturing sector, some considering the open innovation model, some don´t. Anyone has applied the network innovation model and/or more directed to software or SOA sector.

3

Proposed Innovation Model

General Requirements and rationale

Regarding the various aspects mentioned in the previous sections, the innovation model basically intends to endow groups of SOA-related and supporting software SMEs (belonging to a federation-like ecosystem) to carry an innovation out towards providing a (SOA) software (product) solution to attend to a given request.

In order to devise the model, this vision was decomposed into fifteen specific requirements. In a resumed way, the most relevant ones are: i) The 'product' is a SOAbased software, composed of existing web services; ii) Different companies own services or are in charge of developing such services; iii) This ownership should be protected and accounted; iv) Each web service and its supporting infrastructure can be developed / provided by one or by more companies or ad-hoc supporting partnerships; v) Companies that will participate in the innovation process should be properly selected; vi) Companies may participate along the entire innovation process and related software development cycle, depending on their agreed roles, rights and duties; vii) Companies may/can/should enter to, operate in, and exit from the collaborative innovation network in different moments and number of times, both in the normal operation of the network and when problems, changes or severe conflicts take place.

The model's structure took the "classical" processes proposed by Du Preez at al. [START_REF] Du Preez | A framework for managing the innovation process[END_REF] into account (section 2.1) as they can comprehensively embrace the general processes necessary for the envisaged model. Processes' names and sub-processes were adapted to better reflect their role regarding the intrinsic nature of SOA development.

Regarding that SOA & supporting software providers have web services assets and related expertizes, it is also important that the necessary expertizes can be joined, covering the diverse dimensions involved in an innovation, such as legal, financial, commercial, technological and software engineering.

3.2

The Proposed Innovation Model The model is showed in Fig 1 . It also uses the funnel notion to represent the multiple ideas that go through evaluation phases where only the approved ideas can go on.

However, differently from the classical models, the funnel is here split into two sequential but somehow decoupled macro phases. Whilst the first funnel aims to discuss and select the best ideas and then to define the respective members of the innovation network (i.e. t VO), the second one aims to develop the selected innovation(s) inside the formed VO(s). This separation is also important as there are different notions of budget, time and H resources allocations, the importance of the research, and the involvement of customers, experts and external supporting entities in each funnel.

Processes and nature of discussions, type of knowledge, information flow, type of responsibilities, etc., are intrinsically different in each funnel. Regarding that, the innovation behaves more like as the network type inside the first funnel and more like as the open innovation type in the second funnel. In terms of governance model, while the all-ring no-core and buyer-driven models [START_REF] Storper | Flexibility, hierarchy and regional development: The changing structure of industrial production systems and their forms of governance in the 1990s[END_REF][START_REF] Gereffi | The governance of global value chains[END_REF] tends to largely prevail in the first funnel, this tends to be more core-ring with coordination firm and information-driven in the second funnel. The innovation can move forward and backward in both funnels. However, this tends to happen much more frequently in the first funnel due to the natural not so structured way of exchanging more abstract/business ideas towards more concrete plans. In the second funnel this tends to be more controlled, based on evaluations performed in the intermediate gates (illustrated as "vertical lines" separating the processes within the funnels), deciding if the whole process can go on or not (and further actions). This decision involves interactions among partners, observing the governance model. It can be said that a more human-driven approach tends to predominate in the first funnel and a process-driven approach tends to do so in the second funnel, where the (software) development process is usually well defined and more structured. Briefly, the processes are the following:

First funnel 1) Idea Analysis: one (or group of) company from the federation can propose a joint innovation to the federation's committee, which will firstly evaluate the idea's potential. At this moment the idea is presented shallowly. 2) Briefing: the idea is now detailed presented, describing the necessary technologies, potential partnerships, estimated ROI, foreseen market, etc. 3) Network assembly: formation of the VO that will execute the innovation. It involves partners' search and selection, negotiation, VO governance model and revenue mode setting up, and contract signature. Yet, performance indicators and eventual metrics upon partners and the innovation process itself.

Second funnel 4) Presentation: a complete project plan and ICT analysis are conceived and the business model is eventually refined. This is done by the involved companies helped by some external actor (from inside or outside the federation) depending on the VO governance model. It also includes issues of IPR and ownership, accounting, and knowledge gaps in the VO and in the federation. 5) Software-service conceptualization: it refers to the idealization of the SOA solution, the required services to be composed and expected end-to-end QoS. 6) Software development: this process basically deals with the same issues tacked in the previous step. However, at a much more detailed level, including the services coding themselves, their integration and final verifications. It covers the SOA/services life cycle development [START_REF] O'brien | A framework for scope, cost and effort estimation for service oriented architecture (SOA) projects[END_REF], but respecting the many particularities when the SOA project is developed by a group of companies [START_REF] Cancian | Supporting Processes for Collaborative SaaS[END_REF]. 7) SOA solution launching: this process ends the innovation development, making the idealized SOA solution available to who has requested it. Further actions are very much dependent on the business and contract / its term. Therefore, it may include processes that are out of a typical innovation framework, like the SOA product effective provision to clients/customers. An underlying construct in the proposed innovation model is the VO life cycle. Its importance is twofold: i) knowing in which processes a VO can change its configurations, including partners' entrance/withdrawing and their respective roles; ii) helping partners in the VO management as this requires additional processes for each VO phase other than innovation or software engineering related. These processes have different complexities and demands different efforts, costs and supporting methods from the VO members [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative Networks: Reference Modeling[END_REF].

3.3

Functional Guidelines Functional guidelines (FG) correspond to supporting aspects that should be considered by network members along the collaborative innovation. It is a construct not presented in other innovation models. They represent methods, techniques, tools and foundations that are required at the different phases of the whole process and at different levels. Ten main FGs have been identified through an inductive method over a number of papers on innovation got from the literature review (e.g. [START_REF] Munkongsujarit | Key success factors for open innovation intermediaries for SMEs: A case study of iTAP in Thailand[END_REF] and [START_REF] Van Zyl | Process innovation imperative [software product development organisation[END_REF]). FGs are grouped into categories, which act at three levels of the innovation process. Briefly:

• Business level: it embraces the FGs related to the innovation commercialization, in more particular: Business Model management -guarantee that the innovation results are aligned with the defined business model; Legal management -guarantee that the innovation results have been developed and are aligned within the required legal framework, respecting contracts, IPR and services ownership. • Operational level: FGs to support the "daily" operation of the innovation development, in more particular: Actors' management - guarantee that all the involved actors will consider their rights and duties according to the governance model; Project/Resources management -it supports the usual issues related to manage the innovation process as a project, e.g. financial, HR and material resources; Network operation -it is also related to the governance model, adapting the power and structural elements of decision-making; Incentive systems -issues to guarantee the correct application of collaboration incentives in the innovation also regarding productivity and adherence to the project's goals; Performance indicators: selection and application of adequate indicators to correctly measure and manage the performance of the project, individual services, partners and the innovation itself. • Policies level: FGs related to general relations among the VO, the VO with other actors (internal or external to the federation), and with customers, in more particu-lar: Governance -rules and models to set up how the innovation will be executed and managed; Software process improvement -models, standards, specifications, practices and methodologies to guarantee the right way of developing software and services; Knowledge sharing -to guarantee that the necessary information and knowledge to support the innovation are properly shared and managed.

Final Considerations

This paper has presented preliminary results of a research which aims at conceiving an innovation model devoted to support collaborative innovation among SMEs of software/ services providers towards a SOA solution.

The proposed model has been developed in the light of Collaborative Networks, enabling SMEs to work as a network, so sharing costs, risks and benefits. A Virtual Organization (VO) represents the group of SMEs that jointly carry an innovation out. One of the underlying assumptions is that they should come from a VBE-like network of ICT companies which should have some preparedness to collaborate, which includes sharing of common principles and operating rules.

It could be observed that quite few works have dealt with collaborative innovation targeting networked SMEs and anyone looking at the software services sector and related products. Besides that, most of the innovation models that have been proposed are directed to manufacturing, a sector very different than the SOA/software sector.

The proposed model also identifies the most relevant supporting issues that should be taken into account along the innovation process and the VO life cycle. To be highlighted the governance issue, fundamental to guarantee the correct evolution of a given innovation as long as it progresses, regulating partners' roles, rights and duties. This mitigates conflicts among companies and hence the innovation risks. Such issues, taken as functional guidelines in the proposed model, help companies to allocate proper resources and to be aware about different levels of complexities along the collaborative innovation life cycle. These FGs and their placement along the innovation process should however be seen here as a reference. Therefore, regarding the particularities of the given ecosystem in terms of e.g. existing culture, type of customers, adopted business models, and regional/national/international accounting and legal frameworks and associated requirements, they can support processes in a different way as and can have different degrees of importance. Yet, new FGs can also be added.

Regarding the particularities of software/SOA sector, the nature of the innovation process, and the fact companies should work in a network, the classical innovation funnel was adapted and split into two sequential but decoupled funnels.

Next steps of this research include the verification of the model and its elements (for further refinements) close to a real cluster of ICT/SOA providers already identified. This also comprises refinements on top of the work of [START_REF] Cancian | Supporting Processes for Collaborative SaaS[END_REF] in terms of detailed processes and practices to develop SOA collaboratively with a focus on innovation.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. The proposed Innovation Model. Source: authors.