| |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||
 |
Standardization
and Web Services -
Objectives and Research Question A
rapid rate of technical progress leaves formal standardization efforts
slow to catch up, if the standards are formulated by relatively slow
moving and deliberate standard-setting bodies. In the case of web
services, the underlying technologies are relatively new and still
evolving --with some apprehension that the technology evolution is
still trying to catch up to the marketing hype. There is also a need
to create consensus across multiple stakeholders among different organizations
that are impacted by the standards. Also, a number of different standard-setting
bodies (W3C, IETF, OASIS, WS-I etc.) are involved with developing
standards for different areas that impact the design, development
and deployment of web services. This variety has been due to the different
functional scopes, different time frames, and different approaches
to protection of intellectual capital, among others. While standard-setting
organizations help to mediate between different interests and technologies
to impose a standard they are often slow to react to change and, in
the absence of concrete implementations, may lack specification clarity.
This study aims to provide insights for enterprises to deal with the lack of a complete set of standards at the higher layers of the protocol stack (e.g. security, choreography, provisioning etc.) as they build business applications that use existing web-services protocols.
Approach This study draws upon coordination theory to develop a conceptual framework outlining three approaches for organizations to deal with changing standardization regimes: (a) The dependencies across components, conforming to different standardization regimes, are continually bridged through intermediary services (e.g., using a protocol adapter that translates to an unanticipated emergent standard), (b) The dependencies across components are minimized through loose coupling so that standardization regime changes for any component have a minimal impact on other components (e.g., encapsulating the functionality susceptible to design change into a module with abstract interfaces), and (c) The impacted components are rapidly reconfigurable as and when standardization regime changes (e.g., by building in "extension" features into applications). The risk for organizations investing in web services can be further managed by mechanisms such as organization's attention to signals from the periphery, undertaking low-risk experiments to learn in different areas, and bricolage-like improvisations of their legacy components. In the next stage we envisage collecting data through surveys and interviews from software architects to validate and extend the theoretical insights.
Status The first stage of the study (theory development) has been completed. The second stage (empirical validation) is now underway. Please download a first presentation on the research topic and contact the investigators for details on the study.
Acknowledgments This study has been supported by Digital Evolution (www.digev.com) and the Center for Telecom Management (CTM) at the Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, Los Angeles (www.marshall.usc.edu/ctm).
References Adams, H., Gisolfi, D., Snell, J., and Varadan, R. "Service oriented architecture, Web services, and IBM patterns for e-business," IBM DeveloperWorks, http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-best2/, 2002. Albornoz, J. "Finding your Way through Web Services Standards," IBM DeveloperWorks, http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws-stand3.html, 2002. Bailetti, A.J., Callahan, J.R. "Managing Consistency between Product Development and Public Standards Evolution," Research Policy (24:6), 1995, pp. 913-931. Bolles, G.A. "Technology: Web Services," CIO Insight, April 1, 2003. Burber,
M. "The Deliberate Revolution --Transforming Integration With
XML Web Services?" ACM Queue, http://www.acmqueue.org/issue/burner1.cfm?client_no=NEW,
2003. Chiesa, V., Manzini, R., and Toletti, G. "Standard-setting processes: Evidence from two case studies," R & D Management (32: 5), 2002, pp. 431-450. Chiusano, J.M. "Web Services Security and More: The Global XML Web Services Architecture (GXA)," Booz Allen Hamilton Presentation, 2003. David, P., and Greenstein, S. "The Economics of compatibility standards: An introduction to recent research," Economics of innovation and new technology (1), 1990, pp. 3-41. Farrell, J., and Saloner, G. "Standardization and Variety," Economic Letters (20), 1986a, pp. 71-74. Farrel, J., and Saloner, G. "Installed base and compatibility: Innovation, product pre-announcements and predation," American Economic Review (76), 1986b, pp. 940-955. Gandal, N. "Compatibility, standardization, and network effects: Some policy implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy (18:1) 2002, pp. 80-91. Garud, R and Karnoe, P. "Path creation as a process of mindful deviation", in Garud, R and Karnoe, P. (eds.) Path dependence and creation, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 2001, pp: 1-38. Garud, R., and Kumaraswamy, A.. "Coupling the technical and institutional faces of Janus in network industries", in R. Scott and S. Christensen (Eds.) Advances in the Institutional Analysis of Organizations: International and Longitudinal Studies, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1994, pp. 226-242. Garud, R. and Kumaraswamy, A. "Technological and organizational designs for realizing economies of substitution," Strategic Management Journal (16), 1995, pp. 93-109. Gartner. "Will web services standards ever happen," Gartner Report by M. Pezzini, 2002. Hagel III, J. "Edging into Web Services," The Mckinsey Quarterly (4), 2002. Hong, T. "Advancing SOAP Interoperability," IBM Developer Works, http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-asio/, 2003. Irani, R. "Versioning of Web Services - Solving the Problem of Maintenance," http://www.webservicesarchitect.com/content/articles/irani04.asp, 2001. Katz, M., and Shapiro, C. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review (75), 1985, pp. 424-440. Kobielus, J. "Web services work, but will they scale?" Business Communications Review (33:4), 2003, pp. 40-46. Koch, C. "The Battle for Web Services," CIO, October 1, 2003. Leibowitz, S.J., and Margolis, S.E. "Path dependence, lock-in and history," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization (11:1), 1995, pp. 204-226. O'Rourke, C. "Waiting for web services," Oracle Magazine (March/April), 2003, p. 61. Vinoski, S. "Multi-middleware web services," XML Journal (4:11), 2004. W3C.
Web Services Architecture. W3C Working Draft, 14 November 2002. http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-arch/ (Created by: sg, 07/01/04; last modified by: sg, 07/01/04.)
Objectives and Research Question Information systems that use Web services (WS) technology are expected to improve inter-system interaction, or machine-to-machine communications (Hagel and Brown 2001). Furthermore, it is expected that WS technology can reduce the trade-off between ease of integration and flexibility. One such example is "on-the-fly" linkages across independent WS modules. In short, many of the WS features appear to affect IS architecture design. Therefore, we pose the following research question: How do WSs affect IS architecture design? IS architecture refers to the manner in which the components of an information system are organized and integrated (IEEE 1990,10; Lloyd and Galambos 1999, 54-55). More specifically, in the computer science literature, architecture is concerned with the assignment of responsibilities of components and ways of interaction between components within a system (Dewayne and Wolf 1992). IT components include computer hardware, application software and databases, and telecommunication networks (IEEE 1990, 18). This assortment of physical IT artifacts is often referred to as the base of IT infrastructure (Broadbent and Weill 1997, Figure 1, 78; Earl 1989). Other IT infrastructure elements include intellectual assets-knowledge, skills, and experience that complement physical IT components (i.e., Weiss and Birnbaum 1989).
Approach Because WSs are a still an emerging phenomenon in 2002, and because key components, such as WSDL, are still under construction (www.w3c.org), it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to capture any WS effects on IS architecture design in a quantitative empirical manner. Therefore, a qualitative research approach has been devised that includes the construction of a WS prototype. Instead of working with a WS pioneer's existing system, we preferred lab experiments, because this allowed for greater control of the research design and the tests.XX In order to mitigate potential lack of authenticity and, therefore, external validity concerns, we selected an existing system as a reference installation and re-engineered selective aspects of it using WS technology. Our choice of reference installation was a large university's Web-based course registration system. It was selected, first because, as teachers, we understand the underlying business transactions well and, secondly because it is a "selection and ordering" process, which is a type of process that is very common in B2C and B2B relationships.
High-level Description of Reference IS The Web registration system allows authorized students to browse listings of course offerings and to select courses and classes for registration. The system checks for prerequisites and time conflicts, and then registers the student for a particular class of a course. If a class is already full, the student is automatically queued up in a waiting list. The waiting list then needs some manual management. The system has additional features, including automatic generation of a weekly schedule and a schedule for the final exams. In order to capture the reference system's properties and capabilities in ways that are useful for our specific analytical purposes and reconstruction efforts we captured (1) systems interfaces and the control flow using Use Case Diagrams (UCDs), (2) user behavior using a Customer Behavior Graph Model (CBGM), and (3) a high-level client/server interaction diagram.
Results Please check Publications.
References Broadbent, M., and P. Weill. 1997. Management by Maxim: How Business and IT Managers Can Create IT Infrastructure. Sloan Management Review (Spring 1997): 77-92. Dewayne, E. P., and A. L. Wolf. 1992. Foundations for the Study of Software Architecture. ACM Software Engineering Notes 17(4): 40-52. Earl, M. J. 1989. Management for Information Technology. Prentice-Hall: London, UK. Hagel, J., and J. S. Brown. 2001. Your Next IT Strategy. Harvard Business Review (October): 105-113. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. 1990. IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology (as approved by the IEEE Standards Board). IEEE: New York, NY. Lloyd, P. T. L., and G. M. Galambos. 1999. Technical Reference Architecture. IBM Systems Journal 38(1): 51-75. Weiss, A., and P. Birnbaum. 1989. Technological Infrastructure and the Implementation of Technical Strategies. Management Science 35(8): 1015-1027.
(Created by: csl, 02/14/02; last modified by: csl, 07/05/03.)
P1: WS--Emerging Technology/Business Process/Market-level Effects
Objectives and Research Questions Web Services (WSs) are frequently touted by IT vendors, systems integrators, and trade journals as "the next big thing" in the computer industry. Information systems that use WSs are expected to facilitate inter-system interaction (e.g., machine-to-machine communications) more easily than systems built with conventional IT components and techniques. Furthermore, such systems promise to reduce the trade-off between ease of integration and flexibility. One such example is "on-the-fly" linkages across independent WS modules. However, as of 2002, and with many WS components (such as WSDL) still under construction, WS success appears to be uncertain. On the one hand, there is confusion about the concept of WS itself. For one thing, in part as a consequence of confusion over the concept, the implications of WS in business are still too fuzzy to be captured quantitatively in a business plan. Therefore, we pose as research questions: 1. What is a WS? Is it a piece of information technology (IT) or a business service? Is it available online and on-demand like a utility such as electricity? If so, what are Microsoft's .NET and Sun's ONE? 2. How do WS investments affect IS architectures and capabilities, the IS function, and ultimately the alignment of business and IS strategy?
Approach and Theory In a first step, we distill WS descriptions provided by IT vendors, such as Microsoft - the .NET developer - and standard setting bodies such as the W3 consortium (www.w3c.org) to develop a working definition of WS. Secondly, we use our working definition and the 3-layer model, a common framework from the IS literature, to categorize WS effects. Our choice of conceptual IS framework is frequently used in the IS literature to distinguish between the three layers of technology, business processes and markets (i.e., Turban, McLean and Wetherbe 2001, 517-556; first two layers in great detail in Umar 1997, 7-9). IS is also often used as the foundation for more specific concepts, such as Henderson and Venkatraman's Strategic Alignment model (1993, 9).
Data Collection For case-based research, the IS literature suggests the use of multiple methods of data collection, because it offers "the opportunity of triangulation and lends greater support to the researcher's conclusion" (Benbasat et al. 1987, 374). Hence, we employed multiple data collection methods. First and foremost, we rely on the assessment of developers and system architects of actual WS-based systems and prototypes. This data has been collected through a formal questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. Cases include WS systems and prototypes from DaimlerChrysler and Accenture, for example. Second, we've constructed our own experimental prototype, which is subject of our RA4 Research Project P2. Third, we surveyed the literature for anticipated and hypothesized WS effects.
Survey of WS Definitions The primary WS technology vendors-IBM, Microsoft, and SUN-and the key standard-setting body, the W3 Consortium, provide many different descriptions, as follows: A WS as an application interface: "The World Wide Web is more and more used for application-to-application communication. The programmatic interfaces made available are referred to as Web services" (W3C 2002, Web site: <http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/>). "A Web service is an interface that describes a collection of operations that are network-accessible through standardized XML messaging" (Kreger 2001). A WS as a software application: "Web services are Internet-based, modular applications that perform a specific business task and conform to a particular technical format" (IBM Corp. 2000, 1). "Web services are self-describing components that can discover and engage other Web services or applications to complete complex tasks over the Internet" (Reichardt 2001). A WS as a software application development platform: Web services are "large-granularity, implementation-independent, [and virtual] building blocks for application construction" (IBM Corp. 2001, 3). A WS as a service: "Web services, as the name implies, are services offered via the Web" (Fisher 2001). A common thread throughout most of these WS descriptions is the notion of software applications the functionality of which can be identified and accessed by other applications through common interfaces via the Internet. This is well captured in a description by the META Group, an IT research and consulting firm: "Web services technology is a platform-independent, standards-based means of enabling asynchronous access to application interfaces" (META Group 2002). As can be seen, the WS descriptions listed above are not consistent with one another. For research purposes we need a consistent understanding of WS, and this understanding has to be aligned with the IS literature so that we can take advantage of past research.
Working Definition of WS Based on a review of WS descriptions provided by IT vendors and standard-setting bodies such as the W3 consortium, we propose to distinguish between the components (such as the XML standard) that are used to build a WS system or WSS - which, in turn, is required in order to provide a ES as a service. Our working definition is aligned with the IS literature in that it recognizes the distinction between information technology (IT) components and an information system (IS) as a group of IT components serving a common purpose, which is the automation of business activities and processes. Specifically, we suggest the definitions listed below. WS = Service A WS is a facility providing a method or function that is accessible online. (Or, a WS is the provisioning of a method/function accessible online.) WS System = Information System (IS) A WS is enabled by a WS system. A WS system is a group of WS IT components, such as the Web Service Definition Language (WSDL), and IT components, such as UDDI, SOAP, and XML, serving a common purpose. Microsoft's .NET and SUN's ONE are competing development platforms for software applications (= IT components). "In a typical technical scenario, a software application, A, sends a request to another application, B. B receives and processes the request and then sends a reply to A. This interaction is based on standards that are independent of platform or operation systems (Fisher 2001; Kreger 2001). The SOAP protocol allows for the remote procedure calls over HTTP and, therefore, the Web. XML is used to format the data so that it can be read and interpreted from both sides. Because WSDL is used to document the technical specifications of B, and because they are listed in a UDDI directory (together with B's URL) A can select and find B without manual intervention" (Schlueter Langdon and Hars 2002, p. 7).
Perspectives on WS Business Effects Work in progress; interim results presented at WISRD 2002 (see our Events section). Please refer to our Working Paper, Marshall School of Business IOM-02-07 for additional material (see RA3 Publication category). Using the common 3-layer framework from the IS literature that clarifies the relationship between IS, business process design, and business strategy we distinguish between four perspectives on WS effects. Technology Perspective Development of a component such as protocols and application platform technology. Issues include development time, shared services, etc. Business Process Perspective Designing information systems to meet process automation needs/systems requirements. Exemplary issues: IS architecture, functional decompositioning. Services Process View Turning technical services into a business service. Issues: Choice of business model, service attributes (availability, etc.), pricing, etc. Market View/Business and IS Strategy Alignment Perspective Changing firm and market structures. Issues: Extent of outsourcing, topology of supply chains, structure of channel systems, etc.
References Bakopoulos, J.Y. 1985. Toward a More Precise Concept of Information Technology. Proceedings of International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Indianapolis, Indiana, IN: 17-24. Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K., and Mead, M. 1987. The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems. MIS Quarterly (11:3) (September): 369-386. Broadbent, M., and Weill, P. 1997. Management by Maxim: How Business and IT Managers Can Create IT Infrastructure. Sloan Management Review (Spring): 77-92. Dewett, T., and Jones, G.R. 2001. The Role of Information Technology in The Organization: A Review, Model, And Assessment. Journal of Management (27): 313-346. Earl, M. J. 1989. Management for Information Technology. Prentice-Hall: London, UK. Fisher, M. 2001. Introduction to Web Services [electronic document] (accessed 03/14/02); available from http://java.sun.com/webservices/docs/ea1/tutorial/doc/IntroWS.html; Internet. Henderson, J.C., and Venkatraman, N. 1993. Strategic Alignment: Leveraging Information Technology for Transforming Organizations. IBM Systems Journal 32 (1): 4-16. IBM & Microsoft. 2001. Web Services Framework: for W3C Workshop on Web Services 11-12 April 2001, San Jose, CA, USA [electronic document] (accessed 03/08/02); available from http://www.w3.org/2001/03/WSWS-popa/paper51; Internet. IBM. 2000. Web Services: Taking e-business to the next level [electronic document] (accessed 05/21/02); available from http://www-3.ibm.com/services/uddi/papers/e-businessj.pdf; Internet. Kreger, H. 2001. Web Services Conceptual Architecture (WSCA 1.0) USA [electronic document] (accessed 05/17/02); available from http://www-4.ibm.com/software/solutions/webservices/pdf/WSCA.pdf; Internet. META Group. 2002. META Report: What Are Web Services, Anyway? [Electronic document] (accessed 05/17/02); available from http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/it_res/article/0,,3031_955861,00.html; Internet. Reichardt, D. 2001. A Field Guide to Services On Demand and SunTM ONE [electronic document] (accessed 05/17/02); available from http://wwws.sun.com/software/sunone/wp-fieldguide/wp-fieldguide.pdf; Internet. Schlueter Langdon, C, and A. Hars. 2002. Web Services: An Exploratory Study of Emerging Business Consequences. Working Paper IOM-02-07, Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA. Turban, E., E. McLean, und J. Wetherbe. 2001. Information Technology for Management--Making Connections for Strategic Advantage. 2nd Ed. John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY. Umar, A. 1997. Object-Oriented Client/Server Internet Environments. Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ. Weiss, A., and Birnbaum, P. 1989. Technological Infrastructure and the Implementation of Technical Strategies. Management Science (35:8):1015-1027.
(Created by: csl, 02/14/02; last modified by: csl, 07/05/03.)
Information systems typically include network infrastructure. We like to point you to National Science Foundation research at the Network Convergence Laboratory that is explicitly focused on architectural issues in broadband convergenced networks or "Cyberinfrastructures." The lab is a critical part of Internet2 testbed on videoconferencing over IP and has adopted an interdisciplinary approach to studying the convergence of the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN), PC-based enterprise data networks and the Internet. Please
contact: |
|||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
