Maria-Jose Verdecho
email: mverdecho@cigip.upv.es

Juan-Jose Alfaro-Saiz

Raul Rodriguez-Rodriguez

A Performance Management Framework for Managing Sustainable Collaborative Enterprise Networks

Keywords: collaborative enterprise networks, sustainability, performance management framework, case study

Many enterprises have difficulties to understand how sustainability can be managed. This scenario requires new tools that aid to define and collect the necessary information for managing the performance of the network and assuring its sustainability at the same time. The purpose of this paper is to introduce an integrated performance management framework that fills this research gap and aid to manage the sustainability of the enterprise network from its strategy into its operations in order to provide a tool for managing the sustainability performance more efficiently and effectively. The framework has been applied within a bathroom furniture supply chain.

Introduction

In the current global competitive environment, enterprises need to constantly adopt new strategies to remain competitive in the marketplace. One of these strategies is the adoption of a sustainable culture. There are numerous causes that make enterprises to pursue sustainability such as legal demands/regulation, response to stakeholders, competitive advantage, customer demands, reputation loss, and environmental and social pressure groups. In the literature, one can find success cases of implementation of sustainable practices. However, many enterprises have difficulties to understand how sustainability can be managed. This scenario requires new tools that aid to define and collect the necessary information for managing the performance of the network and ensuring its sustainability at the same time. For that purpose, performance management frameworks are tools that, if properly designed and implemented, may aid collaborative enterprises to manage the sustainability of their operations.

In addition, an organization's sustainability initiatives and its corporate strategy must be closely interrelated instead of keeping separate programs that are managed independently of one another [START_REF] Shrivastava | The role of corporations in achieving ecological sustainability[END_REF]. Then, it is essential to note that a proper implementation of the sustainable culture of the enterprise network should be first included in the strategy, and then, derived from the strategy into operations. [START_REF] Seuring | From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management[END_REF] define sustainable supply chain as 'the management of material, information and capital flows as well as cooperation among companies along the supply chain while taking goals from all three dimensions of sustainable development, i.e., economic, environmental and social into account which are derived from customer and stakeholder requirements'. [START_REF] Carter | A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory[END_REF] define sustainable supply chain management as 'the strategic, transparent integration and achievement of an organization's social, environmental and economic goals in the system coordination of key interorganizational business processes for improving the long-term economic performance of individual enterprises and its supply chains'. Based on the aspects that appear in the definitions, a proper performance management framework for sustainable collaborative networks can be derived including various characteristics. First, all the enterprises within the enterprise network should agree on common goals/objectives that are pursued by all the enterprises. Otherwise, monitoring performance will be an isolated task lacking value to management. Then, it is necessary to establish mechanisms to deploy the strategy into operations which can be measured, and therefore, managed through performance measurement elements (objectives, performance indicators, etc.). Second, all three sustainable dimensions (economic, environmental and social dimensions) should be managed within the structure of the performance framework. Third, the interorganizational processes must be considered in the structure of the performance management framework in order to manage the value flows to customers. Fourth, both individual enterprise and collaborative enterprise network performance levels have to be monitored and linked as it is needed a strategic and operations alignment between both levels in order to prevent collaboration to fail.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce an integrated performance management framework for collaborative contexts that meet all four characteristics and aid to manage the sustainability of the enterprise network from its strategy into its operations by including all the required aspects within its structure in order to provide a tool for managing the sustainability performance more efficiently and effectively. The developed framework has been applied within a bathroom furniture supply chain presented as case study.

Background

The study of the benefits and success of implementing practices of supply chain sustainability is at an initial stage of development [START_REF] Ageron | Sustainable supply management: an empirical study[END_REF]. This fact is probably one of motives why there are few works developed in this field, the majority published in the recent years. Some of these works have exposed frameworks that aid to conceptualise and classify supply chain sustainability literature such as the works by [START_REF] Seuring | From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management[END_REF] and [START_REF] Carter | A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory[END_REF]. Other works present models for evaluating some aspects of supply chain sustainability such as supplier selection [START_REF] Bai | Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies[END_REF] or the selection of a supply chain configuration [START_REF] Sarkis | A strategic decision framework for green supply chain management[END_REF]. In fact, most of these works only consider economic and environmental sustainability and the social dimension has barely been considered [START_REF] Seuring | From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management[END_REF].

Regarding the main focus of this paper, few works deal with the development of performance management frameworks for managing the sustainability of collaborative enterprise networks. In this section, the four characteristics exposed before (strategic focus, three sustainability dimensions, interorganizational processes, and individual and collaborative performance levels) are the key points to perform the literature review. It is observed that the works that present a performance management framework for collaborative contexts use to lack of a pillar for measuring sustainability dimensions and a complete solid structure. In this work, when we say that a work does not consider the sustainability dimensions, in fact we refer that framework specifically does not include the social and environmental dimensions. The economic dimension is always included within the performance management frameworks.

Performance management literature has proposed different frameworks for managing performance in collaborative contexts. Table 1 shows a summary of these frameworks regarding the consideration of the four characteristics: strategy deployment, sustainability dimensions, interorganizational processes and performance management levels. [START_REF] Brewer | Using the balanced scorecard to measure supply chain performance[END_REF] x x Gunasekaran et al. [START_REF] Gunasekaran | Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment[END_REF] x x x Chan & Qi [START_REF] Chan | Feasibility of performance measurement system for supply chain: a process-based approach and measures[END_REF] x Bititci et al. [START_REF] Bititci | Measuring and managing performance in extended enterprises[END_REF] x Folan & Browne [START_REF] Folan | Development of an Extended Enterprise Performance Measurement System[END_REF] x x Chalmeta & Grangel [START_REF] Chalmeta | Performance measurement systems for virtual enterprise integration[END_REF] x Alfaro et al. [START_REF] Alfaro | Performance measurement system for Enterprise Networks[END_REF] x Romero et al. [START_REF] Romero | A conceptual Model for Virtual Breeding Environments Value System[END_REF] x x x Westphal et al. [START_REF] Westphal | Measuring collaboration performance in virtual organizations[END_REF] x x x

As can be observed in the table, the environmental and social dimensions are overlooked in all the works. In addition, the deployment of the strategy is commonly introduced despite it is missing in one work ( [START_REF] Gunasekaran | Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment[END_REF]), the interorganizational processes are missing in three works ( [START_REF] Folan | Development of an Extended Enterprise Performance Measurement System[END_REF], [START_REF] Romero | A conceptual Model for Virtual Breeding Environments Value System[END_REF] and [START_REF] Westphal | Measuring collaboration performance in virtual organizations[END_REF]) and the two necessary management levels are missing in four works ( [START_REF] Brewer | Using the balanced scorecard to measure supply chain performance[END_REF], [START_REF] Gunasekaran | Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment[END_REF], [START_REF] Romero | A conceptual Model for Virtual Breeding Environments Value System[END_REF] and [START_REF] Westphal | Measuring collaboration performance in virtual organizations[END_REF]). Therefore, the limitations exposed justify the lack of a framework that meets all four characteristics under a solid performance structure. The framework proposed on this paper aims to fill this research gap.

The Performance Management Framework for Managing Sustainable Collaborative Enterprise Networks

As stated in a previous section, it can be observed that there is a need of tools (methods, systems and procedures) that aid enterprises to manage sustainability within collaborative contexts following an integrated approach. The framework proposed in this section introduces these characteristics by adapting the performance framework developed by Alfaro et al. [START_REF] Alfaro | Performance measurement system for Enterprise Networks[END_REF] whose methodology is founded on three phases: 1) definition of the strategic framework, 2) definition of the process framework and 3) monitoring. The characteristics of a framework for managing the sustainability of collaborative environments are related to the requirements that should be covered by the framework in order to be considered solid and integrated. This means that the framework should have all the proper functions to manage the context for which it was designed. Also, that framework should support the decision-making process of the enterprises and entities that collaborate. For that reason, it is necessary that it considers two levels: interorganizational level (where collaboration takes place) and individual enterprise level. Both levels should be aligned and linked in order to keep traceability among the performance elements that are to be defined and monitored.

At the individual enterprise level, the framework derivates from the vision and vision and reflects the most important aspects of the business. If this concept is extended within the interorganizational context, it can be said that it is a process of strategic planning for all the partners and implies a common understanding of their goals what facilitates the evaluation and degree of success reached in their objectives. Thus, the framework starts with a strategic approach for its adequate interpretation and application. Therefore, the starting point is the definition of the strategic framework (phase 1).

Figure 1 shows the composition of the performance management framework which distinguishes, at the same time, between two types of sub-frameworks: strategic and process framework. In detail, the definition of the strategic framework needs to incorporate all the performance elements mission and vision, objectives and key performance indicators (KPIs). All these elements at defined for the four performance perspectives: financial, customer, process, and learning & growth. These perspectives aid to structure performance measurement following relationships of cause-effect. In addition, it is necessary to introduce one perspective oriented to manage sustainability that covers the environmental and social dimensions of sustainability. The aspects of the economic/business dimension of sustainability are already considered in the financial, customer and process perspectives. Then, the sustainability perspective supports the consecution of the other three perspectives located above, due to the fact that environmental and social practices are to support the internal processes, the customer value proposition (as we said customers demands are common causes of implementing sustainable practices) and the financial management of both individual enterprises and collaborative enterprise networks. The Growth and Learning perspective stands below the sustainability perspective because its purpose is to support the training, partnerships, and information technology aspects to assure the consecution of the rest of perspectives in the long term.

The content of the sustainability perspective will consist of a set of objectives and corresponding KPIs related to environmental and social sustainable dimensions. Some authors have proposed different structures for these two dimensions. In [START_REF] Bai | Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies[END_REF], it is presented an interesting classification of the content of these dimensions. On the one side, environmental dimension comprises pollution controls, pollution prevention, environmental management system, resource consumption, and pollution production. Regarding social dimension, it distinguishes between employment practices, health and safety, local community influence, contractual stakeholders influence and other stakeholders influence.

It is not the purpose of this paper to provide a full overview of the content of these dimensions but to present the elements that a performance management framework on monitoring the key aspects for developing the strategy into operations and monitoring its evolution.

The main conclusion from the partners is that the process followed to elaborate this framework has provided them knowledge about the main areas of interest of the evolution of supply chain as well as a tool for monitoring performance. For each objective, a percentage target has been established (i.e. Reduce by 10% raw material cost). In addition, a percentage of achievement of the different objectives is to be monitored through the collected data of KPIs. Decision makers of the supply chain have defined that at least the percentage of achievement of the objectives has to be 75% in order to meet sustainability requirements.

Conclusions

This paper has reviewed the literature regarding managing sustainable collaborative enterprise networks. From the review, we have observed that there is a lack of a proposal that meets the four characteristics that we consider essential for managing sustainability in these contexts (strategic focus, three sustainability dimensions, interorganizational processes, and individual and collaborative performance levels).

Based on the gaps coming from the literature review, we have introduced a new performance management framework, which includes all four characteristics and the necessary connection mechanisms within its structure in order to provide a tool for managing the performance of sustainable collaborative enterprise networks.

This framework considers five performance perspectives in order to manage performance. In fact, there is a need to consider a specific perspective for managing the sustainability dimensions (environmental and social dimensions) as they act as a link element for reaching the elements that compose the other performance perspectives. In addition, we have presented a case study of a pilot developed within a supply chain dedicated to manufacture bathroom furniture. The initial stage has focused in applying the framework to the furniture supply chain and two interorganizational processes: new product development and collaborative planning. Next development stages will consider its extension to the enterprise network level as well as other interorganizational processes.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. Performance Management Framework for Sustainable Collaborative Networks

Table 1 .

 1 Literature review summary (x means that the framework does not have the characteristic)

	Performance framework	Strategy	Sustainability dimensions	Interorganizational processes	Management Levels
	Brewer & Speh

Acknowledgments. This work has been developed within the research project called "Design of business scenarios to improve the efficiency and management of industrial supply chain" (reference GV/2013/045).

should have to manage them. For that reason, this classification is only given as example that may be considered but do not conform a definitive list.

Once the strategic framework is obtained, performance elements of the process framework (objectives and KPIs) are defined for those key business processes associated to the collaborative context (Phase 2). These key processes are processes directly linked to a common product/service produced by the partners or processes that support the success of the production of those products/services.

In the previous phases (phase 1 and 2), all the performance elements have been defined. Finally, the third phase aims at monitoring of all those elements in order to know which are the most important elements, i.e. what levels are the most relevant from a performance management point of view and where are located special indicators for a specific partner.

Case Study

The performance management framework has been applied within a Spanish bathroom furniture enterprise network. Specifically, as an initial stage, it has been developed the pilot for the furniture supply chain. From the mission and vision of the supply chain, the main objectives were defined. Table 2 shows the objectives and corresponding KPIs of the strategic framework. The strategic framework was established after two meetings of two hours with four managers of the supply chain and comprises fourteen objectives and eighteen KPIs what seems reasonable. As can be observed, for each objective, it has been needed to define at least one KPI to monitor its evolution. In some cases, e.g. profitability, two KPIs were necessary (KPI2=ROI and KPI3=ROA). The sustainability perspective comprises at this stage four objectives and five KPIs. After defining the strategic framework of the supply chain, the process framework was defined for two key interorganizational processes of the supply chain: new product development and production planning. Table 3 shows the objectives and KPIs for the new product development process. In this case, eleven objectives and fifteen KPIs were defined in two meetings of two hours by the new product development team composed of members from all the enterprises within the supply chain. Once the process framework was defined for the supply chain, every enterprise has adapted its performance management system. Some of the enterprises of the supply chain have one performance management framework already implemented so that they have to modify it accommodate the new requirements from the supply chain level performance framework. However, some of the enterprises do not have a proper system and they are beginning to work in it. That is the reason why some aspects such as coordination and collaboration objectives and KPIs so far have not been introduced despite its importance. In one year, it is planned to review the status of the whole performance management framework but quarterly reviews are established as well to monitor its evolution. The sustainability of the network will come as the members use the information provided by the performance framework monitoring, analyzing the objectives reached and defining proper action plans when the objectives are not reached. This will help to create and manage operational supply chains due to the focus


Raul Rodriguez-Rodriguez

Juan-Jose Alfaro-Saiz

María-José Verdecho
email: mverdecho@cigip.upv.es

A Performance Measurement System to Manage CEN Operations, Evolution and Innovation

Keywords: Collaborative enterprise network, operations, glocal, co-innovation, co-evolution

Nowadays, many enterprises collaborate forming a collaborative enterprise network in order to achieve competitive and sustainable advantages. These collaborative enterprise networks are operating many times under a glocal approach, which means that they have less time to react, to properly evolve and more challenges to face, mainly the fact of operate both locally (product design, sales) and globally (manufacturing, distribution). In this context, collaborative enterprise networks need to manage not only their classic operations (costs, quality, response, flexibility, etc) but they also need to integrally incorporate to their management and decision-making systems their collaborative practices regarding evolution and innovation. Then, this work presents an evolved performance measurement system to manage collaborative enterprise networks operations including co-innovation and co-evolution practices. Such a system has got four phases and, through the identification and quantification of relationships among performance elements, it offers a new management approach, which will provide collaborative enterprise network decision-makers with additional and meaningful information.

Introduction

Currently, it is a common practice to do business in globalized markets under a collaborative approach, constituting a Collaborative Enterprises Network (CEN). Additionally, global markets dictate conditions difficult to achieve at the same time such as highly customized products/services (even locally customized), to be offered in high amounts (products/services produced and supplied from geographically distributed enterprises), within very short lifecycles and volatile business environments. This approach represents what it is widely known as Glocal approach: to think globally and to act locally. From a CEN point of view, this implies to coordinate many complex operations at a global level in order to supply products and services that are responding to the gathered locally identified customers' needs and tastes. The associated challenges are, even nowadays with all the technological and managerial advances at disposal, of enormous proportions. Further, if taking into consideration the timely factor, it seems evident that the customers' needs and tastes, the market evolution and trends and the own CEN are dynamic and should evolve over time. Focusing on the CEN level, its individual partners should be able to evolve together in order to be able to adapt to both customer and markets changes for not getting dismissed from the marketplace, what it can be seen as a co-evolution process of the CEN. In addition to this co-evolution issue, if a CEN wants to be competitive over time, it must be able to design and offer innovative products and services, which is known as co-innovative products and services process. In this process, customers could also be invited to participate during the innovation process, adopting new roles and even being formally part of the CEN [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative networked organizations: Status and trends in manufacturing[END_REF]. But a CEN cannot be only a source of locally customized products and services to be produced and supplied in a global basis but it must also make it efficiently. This implies to control and manage the CEN's operations in order that the CEN will be cost-efficient, robust, with a high degree of responsiveness, etc. Then, tools and mechanisms that will help to properly manage CEN operations from a dynamic point of view are needed. This paper deals with the co-evolution issue from a decision-making point of view, presenting a methodology that will be able to improve both CEN's short-term decisions and CEN's strategic long-term definition.

The next section looks at the academic literature that have dealt, in some manner, with this approach, setting the basis for the framework developed in this work: A performance measurement system to manage CEN operations, whose base is to identify and quantify the existing relationships among performance elements, it is presented in the point 3. Lastly, point 4 highlights some findings from a real application of the proposed system.

Background

CEN co-evolution

As stating above, a CEN is dynamic and it changes over time, not only from an external point of view (due to exogenous factors) but also from an internal one (due to endogenous factors). All these factors are influencing over the CEN's lifecycle whose main states are next explained [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative Networked Organizations: Concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises[END_REF]. After a first phase of Creation where the partners are stated together with their duties, responsibilities, etc., the Operations phase takes place. It is within this phase when the CEN develops its main tasks of product/service design, manufacturing, distributing, etc. This is the natural state of a CEN. Within this Operations phase, it is the sub-phase called Evolution that takes place when there are non-significant changes in members, roles, etc. [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative Networked Organizations: Concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises[END_REF]. Nowadays, CEN evolution is not seen in isolation but it must be carried out under a collaborative approach, forming the called co-evolution. The ability to get adapted to environmental and internal changes within shorter and shorter product/services lifecycles, together with the need to efficiently and timely respond to changes makes individual evolutions of CEN members not longer efficient and demands a collaborative response. Therefore, there is a crescent need to manage such a co-evolution of a CEN from an integrated point of view, assessing its degree and its impact over the whole CEN's operations. Finally, a CEN may experiment a Metamorphosis when a great change in the CEN takes place or a Dissolution that it is when the CEN does not exit anymore [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative Networked Organizations: Concepts and practice in manufacturing enterprises[END_REF].

Then, co-evolution practices and actions are becoming more and more important and, then, they should be incorporated in an integrated manner to the CEN's decisionmaking tools and mechanisms. It is important to point out that this work deals with all types of CEN, as long as they have previously, as starting point, formally defined a set of strategic objectives and associated KPIs.

CEN co-innovation

One of the most recent collaborative forms is the collaborative innovation or coinnovation. Within this co-innovation form, [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative networked organizations: Status and trends in manufacturing[END_REF] mentions the next relevant features/elements:

• Understanding the innovation process.

• Brainstorming.

• Value identification.

• Mechanisms for safety/protection. • Trust management.

• Supporting sharing activities.

All of these are important and to take into account when undertaking collaborative innovation practices. From an assessment point of view, the value identification is the one that has more to do with performance measurement systems. Further, at the CEN context, the value identification is carried out in a subjective way, as it is presented in [START_REF] Macedo | A qualitative approach to assess the alignment of Value Systems in collaborative enterprises networks[END_REF]. They develop a set of qualitative assessments methods for assessing the called Value Systems in a CEN by applying fuzzy casual maps. The objective is to integrate multiple aspects regarding the alignment of value systems within a CEN, where different member has got different values and preferences.

Additionally, when looking deeper at the glocal concept, it is evident that nowadays the customer demands products/services that are more customized than ever. If these products/services are going to be operated through a CEN, this implies that new efforts regarding, among others, co-innovation should be done. Then, [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative networked organizations: Status and trends in manufacturing[END_REF] identifies the called "customer involvement" as one of the most important task to accomplish. This implies that not only the CEN members, but also the customers, should participate when innovation is at stake. It is even mentioned that the customer could become a member of the CEN, extending therefore the approach of customers participating on product design of individual companies. Therefore, co-innovation practices are an important part of the current CEN's operations and, therefore, they need to be integrally taken into account within the CEN's management system.

CEN operations

Regarding a CEN's operations: how can be these controlled and managed in the current business ecosystem? There are numerous approaches developed during the last years that deal with managing a CEN's performance that is already working under operation [START_REF] Bititci | Measuring and managing performance in extended enterprises[END_REF][START_REF] Folan | Development of an Extended Enterprise Performance Measurement System[END_REF][START_REF] Alfaro | Performance measurement system for Enterprise Networks[END_REF][START_REF] Francisco | Dynamic Performance Management In Business Networks Environment[END_REF]. All these frameworks manage performance by linking the stages of both creation and operation through the whole CEN lifecycle. However, none of them provides any direction on how to measure and manage overtime a CEN's operations by taking into account the results achieved by the performance measurement in the previous period as an input for the current period definition. Additionally, these works do not establish any meaningful link between the defined performance elements (mainly between the defined strategic objectives and the performance indicators), when it is widely accepted that these elements are intrinsic linked [START_REF] Rodriguez-Rodriguez | Quantitative relationships between key performance indicators for supporting decision-making processes[END_REF]; further, there is not yet any framework at the CEN context that identifies and quantifies these relationships. Additionally, a CEN's operations should be not taken as isolated in the current glocal business environment. Derived from the previously introduced, co-evolution and co-innovation are key issues that are directly and strongly impacting over a CEN's operations performance. Therefore, this work has gathered all this together and, in the next point, presents an innovative and evolved performance measurement system to manage CEN operations, integrating not only the classic operations such as cost, quality, responsiveness, etc, but also performance elements regarding the CEN's degree of co-evolution and co-innovation.

A Performance Measurement System to Manage CEN Operations (PMS-CEN OP)

This point presents the developed Performance Measurement System to manage CEN operations (PMS-CEN OP). The main tasks to be developed within each of the phases are next introduced:

• Phase 1. Definition of the CEN's targets and associated responsibilities. In this first phase, the accorded CEN targets are defined. This is a complex process, as all the different CEN partners must reach an agreement at both the strategic and the associated operational levels. Then, they must agree on the strategic objectives (called in this paper indistinctly targets) to be pursued during the next time-period (usually one year). It should be kept in mind that a given individual member of the CEN might have some own individual strategic objectives that are in conflict with some of the strategic objectives that the CEN aims to define. Negotiation processes must then be carried out, as this initial phase is key for the CEN's success.

Regarding the CEN's strategic objectives, these will be defined according to the CEN's strategic line that needs to be covered in this precise moment. For instance, if the CEN wants to compete under a strategic line of "operational excellence", the strategic objectives to be defined will have to be about reducing CEN's operational time, augmenting the CEN's responsiveness, augmenting the CEN's robustness, etc. Additionally, the PMS-CEN OP allows CEN decision-makers to define strategic objectives that have to do with both co-innovation and with coevolution. These objectives can be defined under a more general context, and should focus on issues such as the CEN's co-innovative practices, success, members participating, degree of response, etc., and also on the CEN's co-evolution state, tasks, adaptations, etc. This will provide a complete definition of strategic objectives, moving then to define associate key performance indicators (KPIs). These KPIs will check out whether the associated strategic objectives have been reached or not. The KPIs will be of different nature regarding their frequency and units of measurement. The final task within this phase is to allocate responsibilities of each CEN member over each of the defined objectives. This is an innovative and important point in order to properly carry out the last phase of this framework. If the responsibilities of each member is well limited and defined and everybody has agreed on this point, when the leading (or cause) performance elements have been identified and quantified within the PMS-CEN OP, the actions to be taken will be more easily defined and assigned. • Phase 2: Identification of metrics' relationships. Once the strategic objectives and associated KPIs have been defined, the PMS-CEN OP starts to operate and the KPIs start to measure and store data. This data contains important information, which is usually ignored, as it reveals patterns and behaviors that, when extended to the KPIs and strategic objectives levels, it is the source of valuable additional information. Then, it is possible to think in identifying relationships, in a quantitative manner, between the defined KPIs. Different techniques may be used depending of the number of observations, number of KPIs, missing values, etc. Some techniques that might be used are the well-known Multi-Criteria Decision Aid techniques; being widely used the Analytic Network Process [START_REF] Saaty | The analytic network process: decision-making with dependence and feedback[END_REF]. On the other hand, it is also possible to apply statistical techniques such as correlation analysis, multiple regression or principal component analysis.

The results are sets of cause-results KPIs. This mean that, when a cause KPI changes in value over time it makes that a result KPI changes too. From a decisional point of view, this means that this framework offers the possibility of focusing on less KPIs (the cause ones) when making decisions. Further, it allows bringing together relationships between all the defined KPIs, operational, co-innovation and co-evolution ones. • Phase 3: Projection of relationships to targets/strategic objectives level.

Additionally, the found relationships can also be projected towards the associated strategic objectives, carrying then out similar reasoning but at the strategic level (Figure 1 illustrates this tasks). This implies that, with the application of this framework, it might turn out that, for example, a certain co-evolution KPI (associated to the strategic objective of "Degree of adaptability to business requirements of the CEN") is the cause of a KPI that measure the global CEN cost (and associated to a strategic objective of "Reducing the CEN cost in a 10%"), when projecting these cause-effect relationships to the targets level, it will be possible to conclude that positive changes on the CEN's degree of adaptability are leading to reach a lower CEN cost. This type of analysis is an innovative one at the CEN context and it provides decision-makers with important and additional information. • Phase 4: Allocation of responsibilities. It is necessary to keep in mind that the PMS-CEN OP works at the CEN level but that there another lower level: the individual CEN members level. Then, once that the cause-effect relationships between performance elements have been establish and decisions made, this phase offers an innovative approach of responsibility allocation between the different members of the CEN.

Finally, it is important to point out that all the efforts carried out when applying the PMS-CEN OP should be taken into account in the next period when defining again the CEN's performance elements.

Application

Generally speaking, it is possible to enumerate a list, from a general viewpoint, of useful KPIs to apply to measure CEN operations. Therefore, these KPIs are susceptible of being used at this context. Some examples of KPIs are the following: "Number of collaborative methodologies for improving resource efficiency and overall added value", "Definition of best practices and guidelines to re-engineer intercompany operations collaboratively in order reduce and eliminate wastes", "Number of business opportunities identified within the life-cycle of manufacturing products", "Number of supply chain reconfigurations", "Number of business model innovations", "Expected improvement of the overall equipment effectiveness/functional unit in the value chain", etc. However, each CEN will have different needs in terms of operations and defined performance elements as well as different maturity degree regarding the necessary expertise to implement the PMS-CEN OP.

This point aims to be illustrative in terms of presenting the main results coming from applying the PMS-CEN OP to a CEN that manufactures and supplies bathroom furniture. Then, as a result of applying phases 1, 2 and 3 several important (with strong intensity) targets cause-effect relationships were found. Further, 17 important cause-effect relationships were found and studied, being the different effect KPIs from the Financial (7), Customer (2), Internal Processes (6) and Learning and Growth (2) perspectives. Proper decision-making analyses were carried out for each of these 17 cause-effect relationships in order to improve the additional information to make better decisions at the CEN level and, extensively, being more efficient.

For instance, it was identified that the strategic objective F1 (Increment 5% net profit) was directly affected by F3 (decrement in a 10% product development costs), C5 (Increment in a 15% the percentage of new products based on customer input/design) and P1 (Decrement stock variability in a 15%). This means that the CEN should focus on achieving F3, C5 and P1 in order to successfully achieve F1. As a result of allocating responsibilities, it was clearly stated which CEN members should focus more on achieving these cause strategic objectives, resulting on a more coordinated and smooth actions. Since F1 was the most important strategic objective, it was decided to include it again in the next period PMS definition and, therefore, F1's cause strategic objectives (F3, C5 and P1) should be also included in such next definition, providing dynamicity to such a definition process.

This approach can be applied to any CEN that has a fully operating PMS in terms of defined objective and associated performance indicators. More applications would also enrich this initial approach and would, therefore, help to overcome the drawbacks found during its applications, being the main one the lack of knowledge of people in the CEN to apply and interpret the additional information that this evolved PMS points out. Additionally, it would be of great importance to set up some mechanisms that would make smoother and easier both the negotiation and definition activities within the CEN members.

Conclusions

This work has presented an innovative evolved performance measurement system to manage CEN operations (PMS-CEN OP). It includes not only the classic operations but it also incorporates both the co-innovation and co-evolution practices within the PMS-CEN OP, as in current competitive markets and under the glocal perspective these practices must be integrally taken into account and introduced within the CEN's management systems. Additionally, the PMS-CEN OP is dynamic (the main results of applying it in a certain period should be an input to the next period's definition) and it applies quantitative techniques in order to identify and quantify cause-effect relationships among the performance elements.

In terms of future research lines, it can be mentioned the need of further implementing the PMS-CEN OP to other CENs: Product, service, service-product. This will allow enriching this first approach and, therefore, it will turn into a better management tool.

Fig. 1

 1 Fig. 1 PMS-CEN OP

Acknowledgements

This work has been developed within the research project called "Design of business scenarios to improve the efficiency and management of industrial supply chain" (Ref.: GV/2013/045) funded by the Generalitat Valenciana.


Diego Jacob Kurtz
email: diegokurtz@gmail.com

Rolando Vargas Vallejos

Marcos Da-Ré

Gregório Varvakis

Measurement of Entrepreneurial Dynamism Capabilities and Performance in Collaborative Networks

Keywords: Collaborative networks, Dynamic Capabilities, Turbulent Environments, Virtual Organizations Breeding Environments

In turbulent markets and scenarios that require extremely competitive and innovative organizations, the need to transform the resource base in accordance with the changing markets and technology is apparent. In order to do this, it is necessary to quickly identify and incorporate market opportunities, provide high capacity for learning, innovation and work collaboratively with other organizations in a network -in a collaborative way -to coordinate and transform their resource base. It is based on this information that this work aims to discuss the association between the role of an organization in a collaborative network and the development of dynamic capabilities, in response to environmental pressures and turbulence. Similarly, we seek to identify the impact (the improvement, or not) that generates the dynamics of organizations in a collaborative network. This paper brings two main contributions: the first lists a theoretical framework associating three main constructs: Dynamic Capabilities, Collaborative Networks and Turbulent Environments. The second proposes a conceptual model involving these three main constructs, facing adaptation, resilience and competitiveness of organizations.

Introduction

A number of studies highlight that the biggest challenges for managers in turbulent environments consist in making decisions quickly [START_REF] Pavlou | From IT leveraging competence to competitive advantage in turbulent environments: The case of new product development[END_REF][2][3][4] [START_REF] Leidner | An empirical investigation of the relationship of IS strategy with firm performance[END_REF]. Most studies consider dynamic capabilities as a source of competitive advantage and as alternatives to guide these managers in rapidly changing contexts [START_REF] Eisenhardt | Dynamic capabilities: what are they?[END_REF]. This context highlights the relevance of the Virtual Organizations Breeding Environments (VBE) [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Creation of virtual organizations in a breeding environment[END_REF][8] [START_REF] Romero | Reverse -Green Virtual Enterprises and their Breeding Environments: Closed-Loop Networks[END_REF][10] [START_REF] Vallejos | Um Modelo para Formação de Empresas Virtuais no Setor de Moldes e Matrizes[END_REF] and the relations in collaborative networks [START_REF] Balestrin | Redes de cooperação empresarial: estratégias de gestão na nova economia[END_REF] [START_REF] Johnson | The role of relational knowledge stores in interfirm partnering[END_REF] that enable organizations to increase resilience, maintaining the competitiveness and the capacity to enter into new businesses.

To adapt to this reality and promote growth, organizations must be able to recognize the evolution of the environment, as well as anticipate and react quickly and effectively. This makes necessary to identify and incorporate market opportunities rapidly, provide high capacity for learning, innovation and work collaboratively with other organizations to coordinate and transform the resource base [START_REF] Teece | Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and micro-foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance[END_REF].

In a context of collaborative networks, business success is closely related to the synergistic interactions of the organizations and involves achievements that cannot be reached individually or demand a high cost of the parts, when separated [START_REF] Pereira | Modelo de análise do comportamento das redes interorganizacionais sob o prisma organizacional[END_REF][16] [START_REF] Antonelli | Conditions for Effective Collaboration in SME Networks based on graph model In 14th[END_REF] [START_REF] Jähn | Performance Management A Comprehensive Approach for the Management of Virtual Enterprises Including Performance Analysis, Provision of Incentives and Allocation of Income[END_REF][19] [START_REF] Petersen | A Collaborative Planning, Information and Decision Support System[END_REF] [START_REF] Picard | Simulating the Influence of Collaborative Networks on the Structure of Networks of Organizations, Employment Structure, and Organization Value[END_REF]. It is in this context that companies share resources and skills to achieve their missions and goals [START_REF] Cardoni | Enterprises' Network Agreement": The Italian Way to Stimulate Reindustrialization for Entrepreneurial and Economic Development of SMEsIn 14[END_REF][23] [START_REF] Daudi | Modeling of Evolution and Sustainability of Rational Trust in Dynamic VOsIn 14th[END_REF][25] [START_REF] Alfaro-Saiz | How to Achieve Dynamic and Flexible Performance Management Systems for Collaborative ProcessesIn[END_REF] [START_REF] Pagano | Collaborative Inter-firm Relationships Based on Sustainability: Towards a New Framework[END_REF]. The organizational interrelationships may have a powerful influence on competitive advantage by reducing costs, increasing profits, revenue, or market differentiation.

This work aims at understanding the association between the role of an organization in a collaborative network and the development of dynamic capabilities, in response to environmental pressures and turbulence. Similarly, we seek to identify the impact (the improvement, or not) that generates the dynamics of organizations in a collaborative network.

This paper has two main contributions: the first is a theoretical framework associating three main constructs: Dynamic Capabilities, Collaborative Networks and Turbulent Environments. The second consists in proposing a conceptual model involving these three main constructs, facing adaptation, resilience and competitiveness of organizations. This model will support a future empirical study. In this sense, we present three main assumptions that will guide the research development: P1 The set of dynamic capabilities (organizational level) is extended by Collaborative Networks; P2 -The result of a collaborative network is leveraged by the Dynamic Capabilities of organizations; P3 -The level of environmental turbulence is positively associated with the above assumptions

Theoretical Background

Dynamic capabilities consist in creating resources combinations that are hard to reproduce, including an effective coordination of inter-organizational relationships on a global basis that is able to provide competitive advantage to the company. Dynamic capabilities are conceived as a source of sustainable advantage in Schumpeterian regimes of rapid change [START_REF] Griffith | A Resource Perspective on Global Dynamic Capabilities[END_REF]. Pavlou and El Sawy [START_REF] Pavlou | Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities[END_REF] identify a set of capabilities focused on the detection of opportunities, learning, coordination and integration aiming at reconfigure the existing capabilities, in order to better match the environment. Given these scenarios, it is important to explore market opportunities quickly, providing high capacity for learning, innovation and integration [START_REF] Teece | Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and micro-foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance[END_REF].

By definition [START_REF] Mintzberg | O Processo da Estratégia, 3ª edição[END_REF], the environment is the "pattern of all external conditions and influences affecting the life and organizations development." In turbulent environments, such patterns present continuous and substantial changes that are uncertain and unpredictable [START_REF] Brown | Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos[END_REF]. A turbulent environment is difficult to predict and is composed by disruptive changes [START_REF] Dankbaar | Training issues for the European automotive industry[END_REF]. Ansoff and McDonnell [32] provide a multilevel model with five stages (1 for minimum and 5 to maximum) of turbulence to categorize the current condition in which an organization operates.

Facing the need of rapid adaptation and resources reconfiguration, the establishment of Collaborative Networks appears as an emerging form of multidisciplinary cooperation between companies, involving different knowledge areas (eg socioeconomic, cognitive science, operations research, organizational business and management, legal, social and ethical) to achieve common objectives [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Creation of virtual organizations in a breeding environment[END_REF] and respond, or even predict possible conditions imposed by the environment.

The operationalization of relations in collaborative networks may occur in specific (physical and conceptual) environments, known as Virtual Organizations Breeding Environments. Such environments are defined as an association of organizations supporting institutions related to them [START_REF] Loss | um arcabouço para o aprendizado de redes colaborativas de organizações uma abordagem baseada em aprendizagem organizacional e gestão do conhecimento[END_REF]. These organizations have the potential and willingness to cooperate with each other through the establishment of a cooperation agreement and an infrastructure for long-lasting interoperation, which has as its main objective to increase both their chances, as their preparation for a potential collaboration in the form of a Collaborative Network [33] [34].

Among the various cooperation activities cited by Vallejos [START_REF] Vallejos | Um Modelo para Formação de Empresas Virtuais no Setor de Moldes e Matrizes[END_REF] and the environment aspects needed for its operation, described by Loss [START_REF] Loss | um arcabouço para o aprendizado de redes colaborativas de organizações uma abordagem baseada em aprendizagem organizacional e gestão do conhecimento[END_REF], this proposal argues that the most appropriate form of cooperation (in this research context) occurs from Virtual Organizations or Virtual Enterprises operating in a Virtual Organizations Breeding Environments through Collaborative Networks. The arrangement that involves these organizations supports the maintenance and development of dynamic capabilities in high turbulence environments.

Methodological Procedures and Context Research

This research is proposed within the context of two ongoing projects in the CERTI1 Foundation (Florianópolis, SC/Brazil). The first consists in the development of a VBE to host "innovative initiatives", seeking to converge efforts to generate value for nature conservation. It is focused in innovation to the conservation of private natural areas.

The second VBE is composed by an "Innovation Ecosystem", that identifies a purpose of innovation based on vocations, trends and potential for a given region. Based on this purpose, it integrates several actors, creating a synergistic and supportive environment. The organizations involved are connected to a differentiated market, formed by a coalition of "anchor companies" or angel investors. The knowledge generated in both VBEs aims to improve products, processes and business models for the Network.

The articles included in this study were obtained through a literature review in Scopus (Social Sciences & Humanities) and Web of Science databases (Social Sciences Citation Index / Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science & Humanities (CPCI-SSH)). The PRO-VE Proceedings of the last two years (Collaborative Networks in the Internet of Services (2012) and Collaborative Systems for Reindustrialization (2013)) were also analyzed.

The theoretical framework associated to dynamic capabilities and turbulent environments were accessed through the keywords "dynamic capabilities" (dynamic capability*) and "turbulent environments" (turbulent*) used in the search fields "Article Title, Abstract, Key Words" for Scopus and "Topic" for Web of Science. The articles included were located in "Article, Review Papers and Proceedings" formats. The reference associated with collaborative networks and VBEs was designed from the PRO-VE 2012 and 2013 Proceedings. The filter selection was applied according to the following steps: (1) Identification of the converging papers from titles; (2) Selection or exclusion in accordance with the Abstracts and; finally (3) the systematization and classification of adherent articles.

According to Table 1, the first step selected convergent articles through the titles, keywords and respective themes analysis. A total set of 61 papers was obtained. A second check was performed (by the abstracts analysis) in order to select only those papers that directly addressed the topic. A final set of 39 papers were obtained that were then classified according to their (1) objectives, (2) the research method (3) variables; (4) context / application level; (5) results; (6) main conclusions and [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Creation of virtual organizations in a breeding environment[END_REF] proposals for further research. These steps were the guiding factors for the development of the Results and Discussion Section. This work describes the first development stage of an instrument which aims to elicit organization's performance metrics operating in collaborative networks. Three milestones will be achieved through the application of future empirical study based on this Conceptual Model proposed in the next Section: (1) Understanding the associations between the organizations dynamic capabilities and activities in collaborative networks, through different levels of environment turbulence; (2) Examine how the relationship between the variables influence the practices and process analyzed and organization performance; (3) Develop a methodology to measure dynamic capabilities and activities in collaborative networks according different environmental turbulence levels and organizational performance. The instrument proposed will be applied in organizations involved in the VBEs described above.

Results and Discussion

In turbulent markets and scenarios that require extremely competitive and innovative organizations, it is apparent the need to transform the resource base in accordance with the changing markets and technology.

Based on previous research models focused on measuring dynamic capabilities [START_REF] Pavlou | Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities[END_REF] and performance [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Creation of virtual organizations in a breeding environment[END_REF] in collaborative networks [START_REF] Loss | um arcabouço para o aprendizado de redes colaborativas de organizações uma abordagem baseada em aprendizagem organizacional e gestão do conhecimento[END_REF] [11] [START_REF] Rojas | Business Model Development for Virtual Enterprises[END_REF] [36] [START_REF] Macedo | Modelling a Collaborative Network in the Agri-food Sector using ARCON Framework: The PROVE Case Study[END_REF] [38] [START_REF] Tiacci | A Genetic Algorithm approach for Collaborative Networked Organizations Partners Selection[END_REF], this research aims to identify an optimal solution according to the different turbulence and pressures levels imposed by the environment [3] [32]. This section presents and discusses the main issues identified in the universe of the articles selected for this research. Among the 39 papers that formed the basis for the contextualization and conceptualization of collaborative networks associated with dynamic capabilities in turbulent environments, three contribute directly to the proposition of the Conceptual Model: Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities [START_REF] Pavlou | Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities[END_REF]; Business Model Development for Virtual Enterprises [START_REF] Rojas | Business Model Development for Virtual Enterprises[END_REF] and A Method to Quantify the Power Distribution Networks in Collaborative nonhierarchical [START_REF] Andres | A Method to Quantify the Power Distribution in Collaborative Nonhierarchical Networks[END_REF].

Pavlou and El Sawy [START_REF] Pavlou | Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities[END_REF] research brings two main conclusions. First, it identifies and articulates a set of dynamic capabilities, and proposes a measurable model to represent the nature of dynamic capabilities. Second, it empirically supports a structural model in which dynamic capabilities have an indirect positive effect on performance by reconfiguring operational capabilities in NPD, an effect that is positively moderated (reinforced) by environmental turbulence. According to the authors, this study has implications for (i) conceptualization, operationalization and measurement of dynamic capabilities, and (ii) to understand the effects of dynamic capabilities in turbulent environments.

Rojas et al. [START_REF] Rojas | Business Model Development for Virtual Enterprises[END_REF] proposes a set of business model elements to be used by the virtual enterprise in order to explore a new business opportunity for its network. The authors identify sixteen elements needed to define the business model of virtual enterprise. These elements structure five main areas: Customers, Value Network, Value Exchange, Value Capture and Network Governance. The contribution of the authors is one of the cornerstones the Conceptual Model proposed in Figure 1. Following the authors recommendation, we intend to apply the model in two distinct contexts of collaborative networks, in order to validate it. Finally, the variables proposed by Andres and Poler [START_REF] Andres | A Method to Quantify the Power Distribution in Collaborative Nonhierarchical Networks[END_REF] and the 7 steps to estimate the power distribution within the network will also be considered to have a better view of power interaction and collaboration.

The Conceptual Model associated to entrepreneurial dynamism and performance in collaborative networks of organizations proposed below, is the result of refinement, adaptation and creation of new perspectives from the studies identified in the researches described above. Based on this, we made some adjustments in the original model proposed by Rojas et al. [START_REF] Rojas | Business Model Development for Virtual Enterprises[END_REF]. The Conceptual Model will enable the system of metrics and indicators design for future application to organizations involved in VBEs cited in Section 3.

The presented Model considers the influence and pressure of high turbulent environments on the dynamic capabilities of organizations in collaborative networks. The relationship between dynamic capabilities and performance in a collaborative network has a positive direct relationship to the extent that the set of dynamic capabilities (measured according to the methodology proposed by Pavlou and El Sawy [START_REF] Pavlou | Understanding the Elusive Black Box of Dynamic Capabilities[END_REF]) potentiate the result of a collaborative network (measured according to the methodology proposed by Andres and Poler. [START_REF] Andres | A Method to Quantify the Power Distribution in Collaborative Nonhierarchical Networks[END_REF]) As the network relationships and results are able to be shared by all organizations involved, it also increases the possibility of dynamic capabilities development. A consequence of this process is the increase of the adaptive capacity and resilience of the organization while facing unstable, unpredictable and complex environments.

The present section briefly tried to understand how the literature addresses the dynamic capabilities and collaborative networks in contexts of high instability and rapid change. It is expected that the proposed conceptual model will further develop the operationalization and measurement of dynamic capabilities and collaborative networks to assist the quality of decisions in turbulent environments.

Conclusions and Further Research

The present research is still in its initial stage. We assume that there is a positive association between the environment pressure / turbulence, the development and maintenance of dynamic capabilities, and performance in organizations' collaborative networks. From a systemic literature review, we identified 39 convergent studies to our research problem. As the main result, three key papers were selected and served as a cornerstone to the Conceptual Model proposed. The validation of the metrics system must be concluded and performed by consulting experts in related fields. After the validation and refinements, we intend to collect data from the Virtual Organizations Breeding Environments companies presented in Section 3.

The data collection will occur in three stages: ( 1 ) Diagnosis of VBE entry, (2 ) intermediate Tracking evolution and ( 3) final diagnosis evaluation to validate the assumptions from the research. From the evolution of the present research, we aim to answer the following questions through future empirical study: (1) How organizations allocate their resources (processes associated with dynamic capabilities and performance in collaborative networks) according to the different turbulence environment levels identified and what is the impact on organizational performance? (2) Dynamic capabilities could leverage a collaborative network? (3) A collaborative network can actually be a precursor of organizational reconfiguration (dynamic capabilities)? (4) How it affects organizational performance in a turbulent environment?

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1.Conceptual Model for business dynamism and performance in collaborative networks considering turbulent environments. Adapted from Rojas et al. [35].

Table 1 .

 1 Quantitative paper analysis for the development of research.

	Thematic	Number of selected papers in the first stage	Number of selected papers in the final stage
	Dynamic Capabilities
	and Turbulent	20	8
	Environments
	PRO-VE 2012	21	15
	PRO-VE 2013	20	16
	TOTAL	61	39

Innovative Technologies Reference Centers / Centros de Referência em Tecnologias Inovadoras (www.certi.org.br)


Patricia Franconetti
email: pfranconetti@gmail.com

Angel Ortiz
email: aortiz@omp.upv.es

Early Warning System Potential for Single Sourcing Risk Mitigation

Keywords: Risk management, governance, early warning system, performance measurement

Network governance is described as a framework of policies and business rules, which is applied to manage an extended organization. Nowadays, one of its main concerns is risk management (RM) and the operational risk mitigation is crucial to avoid disruptions, delays and quality fades. Single sourcing can be interesting to reduce economic costs enabling the product design but at the same time can synergize the above-mentioned risks. Traditional RM approach for sourcing risks is based on selecting reliable partners, sharing knowledge and creating standard procedures that need to be complied. But the development of sensing networks based on early-warning systems (EWS) based on performance metrics to support decisions will be a promising alternative

Introduction

Some real cases reveal that several global supply chain relationships that had begun on the premise of cost savings (e.g. offshoring or outsourcing) can be risky, not only due to natural disasters or accidents but also during the daily operation of the network. The quality problems experienced by Mattel in the sourcing of toys from China illustrate the issues [START_REF] Enderwick | Avoiding quality fade in Chinese global supply chains[END_REF]. In global networks, from the view of the customer-supplier relationship, the main sources of supplier risk comprise product development problems, suppliers' bankruptcy, performance loss and operational failure [START_REF] Christopher | Mitigating supply chain risk through improved confidence[END_REF]. And it is important to remark that business structure, and especially in the case of single sourcing of important raw materials or components, the economic impact of the above-mentioned risks could be quite important. A typical practical example about the previous scenarios was a fire in one of the Philips plants that caused serious damage to its customer Ericsson, while the disruption to Nokia SC was minimal [START_REF] Chopra | Managing Risk to avoid Supply-Chain breakdown[END_REF]. However, the risk cause should not be attributed to the structure of the network itself, the root cause is related to the management and governance. Single sourcing (SS) can enable a lean management strategy if collaboration between partners is close in order to integrate its business processes. Its benefits include cost reductions and increased return on assets, as well as better reliability and responsiveness to market needs [START_REF] Zeng | A synthetic study of sourcing strategies[END_REF]. But SS also exposes partners to certain vulnerabilities that must be properly managed. Product development or supplier bankruptcy can be critical risks that deserve singular risk management projects, but operational risks will immediately pose a great risk to customer firm (cost hike, quality deterioration…).

During the execution of business processes certain unexpected events happen to deviate processes from performance goals. ISO 31000 standard define risk as "the effect of uncertainty on objectives". This uncertainty, associated to each event, is determined by a combination of a pair of indicators: probability of occurrence and potential loss. After the risks assessment associated with each potential event, risk taxonomy can be created and the most damaging events are called Risk Major Events (RME). The main feature of RME is that if they occur, significant economic losses will be sure. Some typical examples of operational RME are: inventory disruption or inability to operational responsiveness. Certain previous conditions can substantially modify a RME (its occurrence and/or loss), the authors of the present work call this preconditions as Risk Triggers (RT). Some RT examples are: high rate of inventory obsolescence, a sourcing delay…Separately these preconditions can not be very important, but when they are combined or they occur previously to an RME, they could seriously affect the organization.

Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) traditional approach is based on periodical assessment of risks. This method is powerful but may have a reduced responsiveness when numerous risks of daily SC operations are studied. This work proposes real-time business process performance assurance methodology, based on the quality control approach [START_REF] Wu | A single control chart for monitoring the frequency and magnitude of an event[END_REF], as a complement to improve the SCRM responsiveness. The aim is to achieve a smart governance of the network in which Early-Warning Systems (EWS) try to automatically maintain BP performance as high as possible by means of short-range measures. Furthermore, EWS has the possibility to alert the process owners when this path does not achieve the performance goal in order to prevent risk major events.

Conceptualization of the Problem

The notion of service-enhanced product brings new perspectives for value creation and differentiation in manufacturing. But complex and highly customized products and the inclusion of business services that add value to the product typically require the collaboration of multiple stakeholders. Because it is natural that each stakeholder has its own set of values and preferences and as a result, conflicts among them might emerge due to some values misalignment [START_REF] Camarinha-Matos | Collaborative Environment for Service-enhanced Products[END_REF].

To understand the above-mentioned problem from an operational standpoint, the simplest configuration of a collaborative network (CN) has been studied. A single supplier and a manufacturer integrate the collaborative network. Supplier adds value to customer through processes like production or product delivering. Customers tend to assign sourcing risk to suppliers and they limit to control sourcing process performance. However this is not always true because, sometimes, customer does not properly collaborate with the supplier in defining the specifications, delivering on-time appropriate information and sharing risk and rewards. In this sense, an early warning system based on real-time measurement of process performance can be an excellent tool not only to prevent own risks but also to share valuable information with suppliers. Traditionally risks have been faced using the formal methodology known as "SAM". SAM is an effective multistep process in which sources of risk are identified (Specified), Assessed and Mitigated [START_REF] Tummala | Assessing and managing risks using the Supply Chain Risk Management Process (SCRMP)[END_REF] but probably it can be more efficient to introduce certain aspects of smart network governance.

Risk management in collaborative networks (CN) should be supported on three pillars see Figure 1. Network configuration analysis starts with Business Process analysis and it determines the material, financial and information flows. Synchronously, organization should try to identify the main sources of risk. But risk management is not only based on facts and data, behavioral patterns are crucial too. The organization's character (understood as a set of behaviors and organizational values like trust, loyalty and liability among partners) is the key to identify real risks for the CN as a whole and to apply the best solutions at the lowest cost. At the next level, using performance measurement as an integrator, network model is ready to help decision-makers not only about operations management but also to be aware about certain risks associated to specific events. Then, risk taxonomy can be build and the best performance indicator to estimate them can be defined. From this point EWS can be designed for KPI or "Key Performance Indicator" real-time monitoring and contingency plan. And EWS will alert about risks and counter-measures will be launched according with the previously established contingency plan. But fast and effective policy will be decisive to apply a continuous improvement approach in order to polish an effective contingency plan that collect the best strategies against risk. This proposal can be very effective, time-efficient and fair because global decisions will be based on real data not on power relationships. During the execution of risk assessment task is when real-time performance metric monitoring can be more relevant because it could exist a connection between the risks triggers (defined by its likelihood and economic impact) and the analysis of performance metrics evolution. Our premise is EWS can detect previous events that are triggers for risk major events thus if they are detected in real-time, short-range preventive measures can be automatically launched to prevent consequences until root causes are deeply analyzed using SAM if it is a recurrent problem.

Starting from the taxonomy proposed by Franconetti and Ortiz [START_REF] Franconetti | Sourcing risk management in industrial collaborative networks[END_REF], authors have conducted a cause-effect analysis in which each trigger was analyzed in order to determine its effects and then it was thought the monitoring of what performance metric could have anticipated the consequences. Table 1 examples show how realtime performance measurement systems could help to prevent risk consequences. Fig. 1. Proposed approach to achieve competitive advantage using risk management Blackhurst et al have successfully applied SAM methodology to analyze supplier's risk over time for an automotive manufacturer [START_REF] Blackhurst | Supplier risk assessment and monitoring for the automotive industry[END_REF]. They use a multi-criteria scoring to calculate supplier risk indices in order to select the best option or periodically monitor the risk trends. Subjective assignation of weights to each category is used to rate them and avoid the always-unpleasant procedure of calculating occurrence probabilities. Probabilities are necessary to calculate a standard indicator of the potential loss used in SAM is known as "VAR" (value at risk). It is the product of the occurrence probability and the associated economic loss. The first drawback of this indicator is that economic loss is quite objective, but the probability must be predicted. If specific risk event likelihood is low and its inherent impact is very high, information about past decisions probably cannot predict the future, thus expert opinion and probabilistic approaches are used. The second is related to determine the VAR maximum percentage change as well as to establish the control limits that will activate the typical SAM long-range corrective actions.

However, when the risk exposure is moderated and the predictability, based on past decisions is high, probabilistic approach can be complemented using real time performance measurement. Banks and insurance companies have designed decisions systems based on performance key risk indicators that are continuously monitored and stored in the information system for future decisions [START_REF] Scandizzo | Risk Mapping and Key Risk Indicators in Operational Risk Management[END_REF]. The authors of this study believe in the appropriateness of this approach for managing operational risks because information systems (like ERP) collect a lot of information about past actions. So it would be advisable to use them not only in SAM methodology but also for continuous improvement of process performance. Relevant information will help to short risk management time cycle because computational systems and the process owners will collaborate to make decisions using quantitative and trusted information.

Early-Warning System based on Performance Monitoring for Risk Management

Early-warning systems (EWS) must be based on the monitoring of reliable and representative signals from business processes. All BPs have objectives that are periodically evaluated through performance metrics measurement. There are different SC reference models, each emphasizing certain aspects considered fundamental, but most of them include key performance indicators to align processes with strategy [START_REF] Stavrulaki | Aligning products with supply chain processes and strategy[END_REF]. Therefore, KPIs monitoring can be an excellent option for risk assessment. But real time data collection can be a daunting task, although with the help of Manufacturing Execution Systems (MES) this task can be greatly simplified. MES are computerized systems used in manufacturing that provide the right information at the right time. MES might operate across multiple function areas and they have modules for tracking and tracing of Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) or other KPIs. The idea of MES might be seen as an intermediate step between, an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system and a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) [START_REF] Chakraborty | Real time statistical process advisor for effective quality control[END_REF]. Using these tools supplier and customer can simultaneously monitor KPIs and in each case the data will be recorded at their own ERP to assess its own processes. For instance, Guiledge and Chavusholu have worked in the automatic collection and integration of KPIs along the SC as enabler for process-oriented supply chain business intelligence. They have found that automated support for KPIs is feasible and achievable for the majority of ERP systems and it supposes a great advantage to make SC decisions as a whole [START_REF] Guiledge | Automating the construction of supply chain key performance indicators[END_REF]. The adoption of a reference model will guarantee the interoperability between partners thanks to information standardization. Hence it will be easier to share information and it will facilitate the understanding of the problem to the managers because all of them are familiarized with the model.

Business process control and automated alerts

The optimization of EWS includes the choice of signals to be monitored, the sensitivity of the alert level and the response to these alerts. Alerts are established at a certain level of each performance metrics, they are a borderline that BP does not cross when it is under control, now it will be explained how to determine these limits. The concept of control limit (CL) is well known in statistical chart control and it has the aim of avoiding false alerts and detecting real warnings. This is important, because BPs performance can vary due to a cloud of small events generated by chance and they must be distinguished from real threats in order to avoid random automatic actions. Therefore, process owners establish a threshold δ to each performance metric monitored F(t) in order to calculate de control limit for a certain instant t like CL(t)= F(t-1) -δ. If F(t)>CL(t), EWS assume process is under control and no automatic preventive action is launched. In other case, EWS alert process owners in order to reduce the time to recover BP performance. This is a more efficient approach than periodical SAM execution because resources are used only when necessary to overcome specific threats. In addition, it would be interesting to enable EWS to automatically launch certain short-range preventive actions. This would convert EWS in a real smart device that collaborates with humans to reduce performance loss until SAM study will be completed.

An example of EWS control

A very important procurement KPI is "% of orders on time". Periodically, collaborative network meetings define business rules and performance goals after revising the KPI trace and risk reports. However, risks triggers can appear at any time (e.g. shipment delay), probably the performance risk indicator will be affected and the process starts to move away from target (this is defined as risk). If counter measures are only applied after a fixed time period, it is probable that major event exposure (e.g. inventory disruption) will be unacceptable because time between identification and actuation is too long. Nevertheless, EWSs can be an advantage because it detects small deviations from expected target and SAM process will be just in time initiated to reduce major event risk. Example of Figure 2 represents customer sourcing KPI real time monitoring. It has been agreed with supplier a performance goal of 90% orders on time as well as a lower control limit of 75% to avoid inventory disruptions. EWS. Procurement process owner has decided EWS save the maximum performance and it will launch an automatic alert if it registers a greater deviation than 3% over the maximum. If this occurs, collaborative SAM process with the supplier will be started. Both partners will identify specific orders that are causing performance loss in their ERP system and they will seek the causes and the best solutions.

Meanwhile SAM process is executed; there is the possibility that EWS try to avoid progressive performance deterioration using short-term counter measures. This preventive actions are inside the internal operations domain, they include actions as order deferring, rerouting using the processes interoperability or buffering. Its economic cost is much less than long-range actions like process/product redesign, business rules modification or new partner selection [START_REF] Bandaly | Supply Chain Risk Management -II: A Review of Operational, Financial and Integrated Approaches[END_REF]. So it is acceptable that short-range actions will be automatically launched by EWS to prevent risk major events. Consequences of most of risk triggers shown in Table 1, can be prevented if EWS modifies sourcing scheduled program with specific actions. Table 2 contains some examples to illustrate the concept. This work outlines the agility that can suppose this approach but there is still much work to be done. Future works will deepen the understanding of the interrelationship between the sources of risk using fault trees and the proposal of specific metrics and short-range measures for each one to be implemented in an expert system based MES+EWS tools.

Conclusions

Collaborative systems between humans and devices are interesting to overcome operational risks, improving time cycle of decision systems. However, this approach is based on quantitative information (like performance measurements) as well as a learning process to understand limitations and benefits of computational systems.

Risk triggers interact with business processes and they affect some performance metrics. These metrics, defined as representative key performance indicators, can be a potential tool to predict future risk major events (RME) because they detect the presence of previous triggers.

Traditional approach for risk management is based on SAM methodology; it is a powerful tool, but it presents some limitations like high time cycle or complex methods to determine the risk likelihood.

Automated EWSs can complement SAM. Real time monitoring of KPIs detects small deviations from performance goal. Using quality assurance methods, shortrange preventive actions can be launched in order to avoid RME.

Information obtained from EWS is also crucial to generate risk reports for risk management periodic meetings. Both parties can contrast to the opportunity cost they incurred since the last revision in order to decide a joint strategy to manage risk.

Fig. 2 .

 2 Fig. 2. Schematic representation of business process control using SAM and EWS

Table 1 .

 1 Cause-Effect connections found between some sourcing risk triggers and performance metrics time evolution.

	SOURCING RISK TRIGGERS	METRIC EVOLUTION
	Inappropriate inventory level	Stock level is low/high
	Operational/Manufacturing stoppage	Number of process breakdowns augment
	Supplier inability to conform specifications % Bad quality orders augment
	Inappropriate business process resources	Capacity utilization is extremely low/high
	High rate of material obsolescence	Cost of materials obsolescence is continuous increasing
	Shipment disruptions or delays	% Orders/lines received on time reduction

Table 2 .

 2 Examples of EWS automatic short-range actions that can prevent sourcing risk major events after specific warnings detected.

	Warning Detected			Aim of automatic preventive action
	Stock level is very low/high			Modify security stock level of selected
						items
	Number of process breakdowns augment	Rebuild workload to schedule maintenance
	% Bad quality orders augment			Re-scheduling poor quality orders
	Capacity utilization is extremely low/high			Minor orders deferring
	% Orders/lines received on time reduction		Increase sourcing time for this supplier
	95%
	90%
	85%
	80%
	75%
	%
	70%
	65%
	60%
	0	5	10	15	20	25	30

Orders on Time time (Weeks)

	Short-range actions
	Performance
	EWS warning	goal
	SAM cycle-time	Inventory disruption
	EWS+SAM	SAM