Automated Identification and Prioritization of Business Risks in e-service Networks

Abstract

Abstract. Modern e-service providers rely on service innovation to stay relevant. Once a new service package is designed, implementation-specific aspects such as value (co-)creation and cost/benefit analysis are investigated. However, due to time-to-market or competitive advantage constraints, innovative services are rarely assessed for potential risks of fraud before they are put out on the market. But these risks may result in loss of economic value for actors involved in the e-service's provision. Our e 3 fraud approach automatically generates and prioritizes undesiredable scenarios from a business value model of the e-service, thereby drastically reducing the time needed to conduct an assessment. We provide examples from telecom service provision to motivate and illustrate the utility of the tool.

Value Modeling for Ecosystem Analysis

“…The modified SimulValor [28] or the value delivery metamodel [21] depict activity-level interdependence and could therefore serve as a conceptual basis to enable ecosystem risk analysis. From a tooling perspective, due to its sound scientific foundations, documentation and availability, e3value [63] with its e3tool [2,64], which already supports advanced fraud risk analysis, can be a good basis to support ecosystem risk analysis. Regarding the nature of complementarities, the concepts presented by [17] shed some light on how to model supermodular complementarities, which, especially since it reaches down to the IS/IT layer, is very valuable to analyze the socio-technical systems that platform ecosystems are.…”

Quantitative, Value-Driven Risk Analysis of e-Services

“…Furthermore, by leveraging research into relating value models and process models (Pijpers and Gordijn 2008), deriving process models from value models (Wieringa, Pijpers, Bodenstaff, and Gordijn 2008;Hotie and Gordin 2017), and the other way around (Ionita, Wieringa, and Gordijn 2016b), it is possible to obtain in a partly automated way, for a given service, a value model, a coordination process model, and a mapping between the two. The value model can then be checked and any errors traced back to the coordination model, thereby providing an understanding of both the cause of the issue and its potential impact on profitability.…”

“…Quantitative projections of the financials involved in potential fraud scenarios are used to provide an indication of the fraud's potential impact as well as its attractiveness, which can also be used to derive thresholds for flagging or cutting off suspicious users. Because of the large search space, the process is slow and could benefit from (partial) automation (Ionita et al 2016b). Furthermore, the results of the assessment need to be communicated to business stakeholders, so a graphical representation of the relevant fraud scenarios may promote a better understanding and clearer communication of the fraud scenarios to decision-makers.…”

“…Step 1: Derive Value Model from Coordination Model Figure 6 shows the coordination process model of the order handling process using the BPMN formalism. By applying the derivation technique, described in (Ionita et al 2016b) and summarized in the previous section, to this coordination process 1 summarizes the decisions made in terms of mapping BPMN activities and flows to e 3 value value transfers.…”