2015
DOI: 10.1080/07421222.2015.1063284
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding the Dynamics of Service-Oriented Architecture Implementation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Efficiency refers to the ability of the organisation to only use minimal resources while still ensuring that all necessary IS capabilities are provided with sufficient quality (Lange et al, 2016;Schmidt & Buxmann, 2011). Flexibility captures how quickly an organisation can adapt their IS architecture in reaction to novel or changing objectives and conditions (Amarilli et al, 2016;Li & Madnick, 2015). Transparency relates to the ability to track and understand the detailed operation of the organisation's IS architecture (Attewell, 1992).…”
Section: Architectural Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Efficiency refers to the ability of the organisation to only use minimal resources while still ensuring that all necessary IS capabilities are provided with sufficient quality (Lange et al, 2016;Schmidt & Buxmann, 2011). Flexibility captures how quickly an organisation can adapt their IS architecture in reaction to novel or changing objectives and conditions (Amarilli et al, 2016;Li & Madnick, 2015). Transparency relates to the ability to track and understand the detailed operation of the organisation's IS architecture (Attewell, 1992).…”
Section: Architectural Outcomesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…EAM activities thereby allow to align local short-term, projectrelated IS investments with long-term, organisationwide objectives (Sidorova & Kappelman, 2011). In the following, we use the term architectural outcomes to refer to these long-term, organisation-wide EAM objectives, comprising efficiency, i.e., the ability to provide all necessary IS capabilities with minimal resources (Lange et al, 2016;Schmidt & Buxmann, 2011), flexibility, i.e., the ability to quickly adapt an organisation's IS to changing conditions or objectives (Amarilli et al, 2016;Li & Madnick, 2015), transparency, i.e., the ability to understand how an organisation's IS operate (Attewell, 1992), and predictability, i.e., the ability to predict the effects of changes on IS (Geraldi, 2009;Renn et al, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In IS research, the development of software for system dynamics modeling and simulation has been demonstrated (Druckenmiller and Acar 2009). System dynamics has also been applied to develop and analyze formal mathematical models through simulation (Dutta 2001;Dutta and Roy 2005;Fang et al 2018) and to study technology implementation (Black et al 2004;Choi et al 2010;Li and Madnick 2015). Perhaps more often, however, system dynamics has been employed in management and IS research as an approach for conceptual (non-mathematical) modeling to assimilate findings from prior literature or to represent findings from interpretive case research (Azoulay et al 2010;Clark et al 2007;Perlow et al 2002;Repenning and Sterman 2002;Rudolph and Repenning 2002;Sutanto et al 2008-9;Van Oorschot et al 2013).…”
Section: Strategic Alignment and The System Dynamics Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to describe socio-technical systems (STS), scholars have examined the common attributes of those systems. In general, common features of STS include (1) large number of elements [3], (2) nonlinear interactions [8], [15], [17], [19], adaptive capacity [11], feedback loops [13], [12], and emergent properties [16]. Another relevant aspect is that since socio-technical systems are highly complex, a deliberate and comprehensive and outcome-oriented planning process may not be possible for such systems [1].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%