pro-ve 10 - special panel session on next generation collaborative networked organizations

Next Generation Collaborative Networked Organizations2nd Edition -Special Panel Session

Special Session Organizing Committee

David Romero (ITESM, Mexico City), Arturo Molina (ITESM, Mexico City)Ricardo Rabelo (UFSC, Brazil), Luca Cagnazzo (UNIPG, Italy)

PRO-VE’10Saint-Etienne, France, 11-13 October 2010

2nd Edition SPECIAL PANEL SESSION ON

Towards the Next Generation Collaborative Networked Organizations: International Challenges, Trends and Research Opportunities

“Emerging Collaborative Networks in Industry: Sharing Management Experiences”

Universidade Federal

De Santa Catarina

Universitàdegli

Studi di Perugia

CNOsCase Studies

SIG

copyright 2010

Universitàdegli

Studi di Perugia


• Foreword– David Romero, Panel Chair

• Aims and Scope• Presentations:

– Panelist 1: Gruppo Poligrafico Tiberino – Global Network Solutions, Italy• Lorenzo Tiacci, Luca Cagnazzo

– Panelist 2: Aerospace Enforcement Network, Mexico• Ricardo Ramírez, David Romero, Arturo Molina

– Panelist 3: VBE for Mould and Die Industries: The NuFerJ Case, Brazil• Fabiano Baldo, Ricardo Rabelo

– Panelist 4: SADECAL – Supporting e-Business Diffusion in Calabria, Italy• Antonio Volpentesta, Salvatore Ammirato

• Discussion Questions• Conclusions• Acknowledgements• Event Pictures

Index

copyright 2010


Foreword

copyright 2010

After the success of the 1st Special Panel Session on “Next Generation Collaborative Networked Organizations: International Challenges, Trends & Research Opportunities”, as part of PRO-VE 2009 Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises; this year forsecond time, the special panel session took place as part of PRO-VE 2010 edition, offering researchers and practitioners a major opportunity to continue discussing on current industrial practices regarding different emerging and established collaborative forms in the real world. The industrial practice case studies presented in this second e-book are intended to continue providing a set of living examples of Collaborative Networks in truly industrial environments, serving both the purpose of highlighting and studying their management experiences in their lifecycle stages, as well as identifying and sharing their best practices towards a smooth management of their collaborative endeavours.As the Collaborative Networks scientific discipline continues its consolidation, more application cases in industry and society continue appearing, making relevant to the academic and industrial communities to document and disseminate the best practices and most common errors in order to support the successful development of different collaboration networks in different domains and application environments.Main conclusions reached during this lively interactive forum appointed towards moving beyond business models prototypes into real business models, and this e-book stands for a second effort in this direction after the publication of the first e-book in 2009.

David Romero, Panel Chair


Panel Aims and Scope

copyright 2010

• The panel session was organized with the aim of sharing the experiences and lessons learned from a group of practitioners for the establishment and management of the Next Generation Collaborative Networked Organizations.

• The panel session will introduce a number of industrial cases that have been studied from both a theoretical and practical perspective to validate and demonstrate the applicability of collaborative networks concepts, methods and tools as a contribution to help facing the Next Generation Collaborative Networked Organizations challenges.

• The panel session scope will cover different regional manifestations of collaborative networks, especially in the manufacturing industry, and will depict their main strengths and current challenges in order to manage successful Collaborative Networked Organizations.


Lorenzo Tiacci*, Luca [email protected], [email protected]

REBNET - University of Perugia

GPT (Gruppo Poligrafico Tiberino)


copyright 2010


Starting Scenario:The district of paper converting, printing and publishing

in the Centre of Italy (the ‘Umbria’ region).

• 160 enterprises,• a high technical-productive specialization,

• historical handicraft tradition in the mechanical and printing field,• absence of leader firms capable of providing direction

for the system as a whole.

Introduction (1/3)

copyright 2010


Introduction (2/3)

Starting Scenario:The district of paper converting printing and publishing…

new company: GPT“Gruppo Poligrafico Tiberino”

… integrate the commercial and marketing functions…

… three firms …(Pasqui, Litop and Litograf)complementary products,

and solid personal knowledge.

copyright 2010


University of PerugiaRelevant National Research Project:

“MIGEN”Innovative models and tools for the networks management

2005

The VDO Model

GPT became

the model field test

Introduction (3/3)

copyright 2010

2005


21 partners

Idea GPT3 partnes

16 partnersEntry

GEPAFIN**

Development GPT(2008 – now)

Realizion GPT project(2007-2008)

Design

Entry SPIN-OFF*

* NETVALUE/PROMAN University Spin off on network enterprise

** Funding Society of REGIONE UMBRIA

Network Overview (1/4)

copyright 2010


21 partner companies.The aggregated turnover is of more than 150 million euros.More than 1,000 employs.More than 100 employs involved in R&D.24 production plants.


copyright 2010


In these sectors GPT is able to offer products, technologyand skills to satisfy all customers needs.


copyright 2010


“A strategic association/alliance of organizations and the related supporting institutions, adhering to a base long term cooperation agreement and adoption of common operating principles and infrastructures, with the main goal to create innovative BOs.”

This goals is accomplished by introducing a new for-profit company, the VDO, operating as a permanent network management/coordination entity. In pursuing these business opportunities the VDO realizes VOs and VEs of network members and/or external partners

The VDO Model:


copyright 2010


ROLES:• Opportunity Broker,• VO planner,• VO coordinator,• Supporting roles:

(network administrator, knowledge manager, etc.)

for-profit nature

permanently concentratedin the central entity


copyright 2010

The VDO Model:


Selecting the partners/staffing the GPT network:

Heterogeneity / complementarities between companies,

+ innovation attitude of the network, trust, information sharing,- conflicts,

Among the 21 network members, the vast majority (19) are companies covering different area of service/products.

Network Creation (1/4)

Applications of models and paradigms coming from scientific research to provide GPT with management staff.

Participates in the GPT venture capital.Eases loan access for GPT and the other network members.

+2

copyright 2010


Revenue sharing definition:

Network members:See GPT as a client to whom

provide its own products/services and from which to be paid.

GPT• individuates a BO,

• Forms the VO,• Coordinates the VO,

• Sells the final products/service.

is remunerated for the added valuebrought by its marketing, innovation

and coordination activities

receive the benefits related to their increasing volumes.


copyright 2010


The GPT Governance Model:

GPT is a for-profit company, with its own board of director and its own independence

Network members are share-holders of GPT

Independent(to avoid clash of interests)

The participation as shareholder allows

network members to profit by the extra benefitconsisting in GPT

dividends


copyright 2010

Independent(to avoid clash of interests)


Trust establishment:

The ‘external’ and independentrole of GPT…

…the for-profit natureGPT, which is obliged to involve the most competitive members

when creating a VO…

…members are not in competition.


Network contract:• Members put at GPT’s disposal their production capacity, know-how, technology.

• GPT commits it-self not to compete with single members.

facilitators

copyright 2010


VE/VO realization & coordination:

It is preferable these issues to be handled by a specialized entity (rather than by a network

member that changes every time).

A complex role (competence mapping, partners selection, etc.)

GPT implemented a knowledge managementproject in collaboration with the University of

Perugia (ICT-based KM tool)

Network Operation (1/2)

copyright 2010


Management of Collaborative Operations:

The supplier/customers interface it is always GPT itself,

and never a single member.


GPT always represents the whole network and naturally behaves like a larger dimension

virtual entity

Collaborative procurement opportunities have been evaluated utilizing the EASM procedure: Exploring, Analyzing, Selecting, Managing.

During 2008, nearly 2.000.000€ of Collaborative Procurement Opportunities have been evaluated, and cost reduction has been estimated about 5%.

copyright 2010


Relations with external subjects:Relationships with external subjects are all managed by a central entity

GPT

Network Management (1/3)

• Can interact for the community with institutional subjects as a single legalentity.

• Can promote innovation activities with research centers or other supporting of financial institutions (banks, government offices, etc.).

• Has the possibility and the interest of promoting the NETWORK BRAND.

copyright 2010



Marketing / Innovation Management:

GPT mission is to constantly interact with market

Members can market their traditionalproducts while GPT can promote

the innovative ones.

Thanks to GPT proactive activity it is possible to stimulate research

and innovation at the network level, in a centralized and proactive way.

copyright 2010



3. ProductionVirtual Enterprise

2. DesignVirtual Organization

1. Analysis

copyright 2010


University

GRADUATES DATABASE

• Graphics• printing• packaging• logistics

Diploma Customization/Production/Delivery

Example: Product/Service Integration

copyright 2010


Result Total

Market More than 2 M€ new GPT orders(turnover 2009 > 1 M€)

Innovative products

More than 150 k€ orders on new GPT products

Interbusiness and collaborative procurement

More than 2 M€ of collaborative opportunities examined; 100 k€ orders

R&D projects and innovation

5,7 M€ projects developed (investments, services, R&D)

Economic Results

copyright 2010


• GPT is the first case study in which the VDO model has been applied the VDO paradigm can positively influence many key factors as:

– Strategy definition,– Trust and collaboration,– Information system management,– Goal congruence,– Revenue sharing definition, and– Innovation management.

• GPT can play the role of the leader firm.

• Main future GPT challenges:– Implement an automatic estimate systems for price formation.– Internationalization (new markets and foreign partners).

Conclusions

copyright 2010


• Laurea Degree in Mechanical Engineering, Doctoral Degree in Industrial Engineering, Lorenzo Tiacci* is currently Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Engineering of the University of Perugia, Department of Industrial Engineering. Before joining the University, he matured a significant experience in the automotive industry.

• He is in the operative committee of REBNET, the Research on Business Networking unit of the University of Perugia, a new interdisciplinary laboratory born from the collaboration between the Faculty of Engineering and the Faculty of Economy.

• He has been involved in numerous research projects related to collaborative networks, including the ones related to the GPT case study

Panelist Short Biography

copyright 2010


Ricardo Ramírez, David Romero*, Arturo Molina, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Tecnológico de Monterrey

Aerospace Enforcement NetworkAE Network

http://www.fortalecimientoaeroespacial.org


copyright 2010


• The Aerospace Enforcement Network aims are:– To promote and foster the aerospace industry as a driver for

the national economic development, – To provide manufacturing industry with the technological infrastructure

and qualified human capital to support the aerospace sector development in the country,

– To contribute to technology-based enterprises incubation needed to complete and extend the aerospace productive value chain in Mexico.

Introduction

copyright 2010


Background: Aerospace Industry

• The aerospace manufacturing industriesare typically organised in a pyramidal supply chain, with SMEs at the bottom, Tier 2 & Tier 3 in the middle, and Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) at top.

• Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier and Embraer are examples of OEM’s.

• Manufacturing firms have traditionally grown in adjacent areas and thus are grouped by similar goods produced or related functions.

copyright 2010


AE Network Lifecycle

2005

2009

2010

201X

AE N

etwork Lifecycle

• The Aerospace Enforcement Network was originally founded under the name: “Aerospace Industry Development Center”, as a public-private partnership between the Mexican Ministry of Economy and the Tecnológico de Monterrey (University) to develop the aerospace sector in Mexico.

• The Aerospace Industry Development Center was re-named later on to the “Aerospace Enforcement Network” as the technological development center aimed to continue growing to include more manufacturing enterprises and their related support institutions such as research centers as part of its strategic partners’ network and became truly an aerospace virtual industry cluster.

• The Aerospace Enforcement Network becomes a service provider (training and consulting) to the manufacturing enterprises, member of the aerospace virtual industry cluster, in order to help themto obtain their certifications in AS9100 and NADCAP in order to be globally competitive and be inserted into the major aerospaceplayers supply chains with an offer of highly added-value products and services.

copyright 2010


• During its first two years of operation (2005-2007), the Aerospace Enforcement Network focused on three main strategies:

1. Industry Partnerships creation - aiming to identify the key stakeholders for the aerospace value chain development in Mexico by promoting new enterprises relationships as a business strategy for value co-creation based on network-enabled manufacturing processes & commercialization activities. The Aerospace Industry Development Center served as a competitive and technological business intelligence unit, a kind of technology broker for the virtual industry cluster, by providing the aerospace sector with valuable information regarding market and technological trends that were afterward translated into new technological development projects and technical training programmes.

2. Technology Transfer projects - between research centers and aerospace OEMs, including their first three tier levels, promoting the adoption of novel technologies for new products developments, manufacturing processes and supply chain management. Furthermore, researcher centers also acted within the aerospace virtual industry cluster as technology service providers for laboratory and tests facilities matching technologies to meet the industry needs.


copyright 2010


3. Technical Training - supporting new instructional programmes for human capital development in order to create and grow a highly specialized work-force as a competitive advantage in the sector.

• In 2008, the Aerospace Enforcement Network launched a new and fourth strategy in order to support successful landing initiatives for major aerospace players in Mexico and attract foreign investment.

4. Aerospace suppliers’ development - a strategy based on the one hand in continue supporting new technology-based enterprises incubationtargeting the aerospace market with innovative engineering services, and on the other hand reconverting automotive suppliers into the aerospace sector in order to diversify their business opportunities.


copyright 2010



Aerospace Enforcement Network Operational Model I

copyright 2010


• Year 2009 was the Aerospace Enforcement Network consolidation period, which also brought an important new actor to the public-private partnership: the National Aerospace & Defense Contractors Accreditation Program (USA).

• With NADCAP incorporation, the Aerospace Enforcement Network became international and started a new operational phase that promoted a strategy evolution, now based on five strategies to let existing and in development/reconversion process aerospace and automotive suppliers to obtain their certifications in AS9100 and NADCAP:

1. Technical Training, with a larger catalogue of instructional courses and workshops for the aerospace human capital development,

2. Entrepreneur Guidance, to help enterprises in their preparation and appliance of best practices for quality systems, project management, and production planning and control in their business operations,


copyright 2010



3. Internships, focused on specific implementation projects related to state-of-the-art techniques and tools for the quality assurance procedures that the aerospace sector requires,

4. AS91000 preparation, supporting diagnostic services to state the current situation and specific strategies towards an aerospace supplier certification, and

5. Certifications, in specific AS9100 and NADCAP certifications in order to provide global recognition to the Mexican aerospace suppliers.

AS9100Certification

NADCAPCertification

AS9100Certification

NADCAPCertification

copyright 2010


Network Evolution (1/2)

• Nowadays (2010), the Aerospace Enforcement Network main objectives are to give supporting services in training and consulting to the manufacturing enterprises, member of the aerospace virtual industry cluster, to help them to obtain their certifications in AS9100 and NADCAP in order to be globally competitive and be inserted into the major aerospace players supply chains with an offer of highly added-value products and services.

copyright 2010


Network Evolution (2/2)

Aerospace Enforcement Network Operational Model II

copyright 2010


• The Aerospace Enforcement Network is a unique public-private partnership in Mexico deploying collaboration strategies between government, industry and academia to develop an international competitive base of Mexican suppliers for the aerospace sector.

Conclusions

copyright 2010


• Ricardo Ramirez is the Dean of the School of Engineering and Architecture of Tecnologico de Monterrey, Campus Mexico City. He holds a PhD in Automatic Control from Grenoble Institute of Technology, France in 1997. He has been a Senior Consultant in Vehicle Dynamics and Automotive Control for more than 15 years. He is member of the National Researchers System of Mexico (SNI-I). His research interest are: intelligent transportation systems, automotive control, supervision and fault detection and isolation systems.

• David Romero* is the Director & Scientific Project Manager of Center for Incubation and High Technology Transfer of the Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Mexico City. He holds a Master’s Degree in Administration of Information Technologies (2007) and two specialties in Knowledge Management and Business Informatics Management. He has participated in various National and International Research Projects, Consulting Services and Training Programs related to: Enterprise Architectures, Integration, Interoperability and Networking; Concurrent Engineering Enterprise; Collaborative Networks and Technology & Innovation Management.

• Arturo Molina is the President of the Tecnológico de Monterrey, Campus Mexico City. He holds two PhDs, one in Manufacturing Engineering from Loughborough University of Technology, England in 1995, and the second PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the Technical University of Budapest, Hungary in 1992. He is member of the National Researchers System of Mexico (SNI-II), Mexican Academy of Sciences, IFAC TC-WG5.3, IFIP WG5.12 and IFIP WG5.3 Furthermore, Prof. Molina has been involved in many Latin-American and European projects oriented to the creation of virtual industry clusters, virtual organization breeding environments and virtual enterprises.

Panelists Short Biography

copyright 2010


Fabiano Baldo, Ricardo Rabelo* [email protected], [email protected]

Santa Catarina State University, Federal University of Santa Catarina

Virtual Organization Breeding Environment for Mould and Die Industries:

The NuFerJ Case


copyright 2010


De Santa Catarina


NuFerJCluster of Mold and Die

Industries of Joinville

• Composed of mold and die producers around Joinville City, south of Brazil;

• Joinville is a very industrialized medium-sized city;

• NuFerJ has been founded in 1993, having now ~50 members (all SMEs).

NuFerJ Overview (1/3)

copyright 2010


• There are ~450 mold makers around Joinville, making it the 2nd largest pole of M&D in LA; ~4K direct employees.

• A total turnover of ~US$ 200 millions in 2009.

• Very low level of exportation: focus on internal market.

• Main customers: Automobile and household appliancecompanies.

• Although some existing complementarities and sporadic pre-defined partnerships, they compete to each other.


copyright 2010



copyright 2010

The main reason for the cluster creation was to strengthen cooperation among partners and to create better conditions for being more competitive.


• Labor costs:– BR 7,6 US$/hour; MX US$ 3,9; IND US$ 1,6; CH US$ 0,8.– Increasingly loss of business for China (40%).

• Tougher competition with other Brazilian poles and with M&D companies from abroad:

– Bigger and highly variable orders.– Shorter delivery times, lower prices, higher quality.

• Low production capacity:– Very few companies capable to absorb these requirements

alone.– Limited innovation and training capacities.

Concrete Challenges (1/2)

copyright 2010


• Traditional business model:– No strategic alliances, or absence of methods on how doing this;– Business sector: passive “let´s have a sit and wait for clients”.

• The cluster type of alliance is no longer providing the current required level of competitiveness to face problems in a sustainable way:

– Cooperation among companies, when exist, is at too operational / sporadic level.

– The typical currently cooperation among partners involves lobbying and exchange of experiences.

Concrete Challenges (2/2)

copyright 2010


• In resume, they are losing money and competiveness due to the lack of agility, flexibility, production scalability and increase of scale,in a global market of ~25 billion US$ (2009).

What is needed?

copyright 2010

But how to

introduce this?


• NuFerJ has been already invested on advanced manufacturing machines, new machining processes, training, modern ICT, use of standards, etc.

• The economic and organization models based on higher productivity and local / maximal efficiency has reached its saturation. It is no longer adequate (at least) for this sector (at least in Brazil).

• A new model is needed !

• There are several types of strategic alliances of companies based on collaboration.

• We have chosen exploiting & applying two new models of strategic alliances: Virtual organization Breeding Environment (VBE) and Virtual Enterprises (VE).

• They were chosen not because they seem to be a “trend”, but because it is believed that they can provide the required level of competitiveness & sustainability to NuferJ, for today and for the future.

Essential Diagnostic

copyright 2010

Which Model?

Answer: the ones which rely on

COLLABORATION

among companies!


• This presentation aims at sharing our experience on how NuFerJ cluster is being “transformed” into a VBE (first main goal) and hence VEs can be created from it (second main goal).

• For this, a supporting methodology to assist managers on this is being devised.

• This is still an ongoing work.

Objective

copyright 2010


A VBE is a long-term strategic alliance of autonomous, geographically dispersed, multi-sectorial and heterogeneous organizations (in terms of governance, expertise, culture, social capital and objectives) that share common policies and rules along the VBE lifecycle in order to better achieve its goals (including the breeding of VEs), and whose interactions are supported by computer networks and collaborative ICTs.

VBE and their VEs

copyright 2010

A Virtual Enterprise (VE) is a opportunity-driven strategic alliance formed by autonomous, geographically dispersed and heterogeneous organizations from a VBE, that is dynamically and temporarily created to attend to a business or collaboration opportunity (its essential commongoal), sharing resources, information, governance principles, benefits and risks, whose interactions are supported by computer networks and collaborative ICTs, and that acts as it was one single organization.


Existing methodologiesto create a VBE are too generic. They do not provide very concrete guidelines and stepshow to do that.

Existing VBEs have been created in an ad-hoc manner, in a bottom-up way, very much difficult to replicate.

Research Motivation

copyright 2010

Top-down approachBased on solid theoretical foundations

Bottom-up approachConsideration of characteristics of

particular sectors and existing companies

Top-down:

Starting from solid theoretical foundations

for modeling Collaborative Networks.

• ARCON framework (Camarinha-Matos & Afsarmanesh, 2008)

• VBE reference model & instantiation methodology

(Romero et al., 2008)

Bottom-up:

Understanding the M&D sector and

the clusters’ members as well as mapping them against the reference

framework


Perspective Characteristic

Business Process

- Production planning process- Production control process and performance data collection- Purchase process- …

Organizational Structure

- Level of roles definition and of organization areas- Functions and responsibilities defined- Level of work overloading by employees- …

Resources (human and ICT)

- Level of utilization of ICT- Enterprise resource planning system- Collaborative systems utilization (e-mail, chat, workflow, forum, etc.)- …

Organizational Culture

- Resource utilization optimization - Quality prioritization- Standards and norms utilization (technology and process models)- …

Market- Target market well-defined- Customer interaction (post-sales)- Long-term planning- …

Structured Approach

copyright 2010

Summary of identified aspects:• Endogenous Elements:– 20 Structural;– 23 Componential;– 27 Functional;– 25 Behavioral.• Exogenous Interactions:– 24 Market;– 21 Support;– 17 Societal;– 10 Constituency.

1 VBE Specification1 VBE Specification1 Assessment Description2 Assessment Description2

Preparedness Per-Evaluation3The characteristics to be evaluated have been transformed

into 45 questions, associated to those five perspectives:• Business Process: 9 questions;• Organizational Structure: 4 questions;• Resources (human and ICT): 14 questions;• Organizational Culture: 13 questions;• Market: 5 questions


Instantiation Methodology

28 companies (of 50)

Excellent (4)

Good (3)

Average (2)

Bad (1)

Very bad (0)

Preparedness Analysis

Structured Approach

copyright 2010

114 25

CreationOperation

Dissolution

Evolution

Initiation &Recruiting Operation

Dissolution

Evolution

Foundation Metamorphosis

VBE

VEi SeveralSteps


• Presentation of an ongoing work about the development of a methodology to create a VBE based on reference models.

• One of the most important outcomes has been the knowledge about the intrinsic high complexity of such task as well as the systematization of the process in a form of a concrete sequence of steps and aspects to be considered along the creation of a VBE.

• Although the NuFerJ VBE is not created yet, the general “process” so far carried out inside NuFerJ has already generated lots of synergies among partners, which is one of the goals of a VBE.

• The devised methodology does not classify (yet) the complexity and criticality of each of its steps as well as it does not define (yet) the governance model.

• There many challenges to face along the VBE creation process. In particular, the cultural ones (trust, collaboration [to give and to receive], information exchange, etc.).

• CNO & VBE areas are relatively new and many (open) things should be more deeply researched in order to put theory in practice (e.g. economic models, legal frameworks, inter-org. governance models, IPR).

Conclusions

copyright 2010


• Fabiano Baldo is currently an associate professor of Computer Science Department at Santa Catarina State University – Brazil. He obtained his Ph.D. in Automation and System at Federal University of Santa Catarina in 2008. His research focuses mainly on the definition of methodologies for Collaborative Networked Organizations implementation, covering also specific CNO’s issues like partner search and selection, interoperability and decision support systems for CNOs. He has been involved in Brazilian and European research projects on CNOs since 2000.

• Ricardo J. Rabelo* is an associate professor of the Department of Automation and Systems at the Federal University of Santa Catarina in Brazil, where he heads the GSIGMA research group. He obtained his Ph.D. in Robotics and Computer Integrated Manufacturing from the New University of Lisbon, Portugal, in 1997. His focus of research covers the entire lifecycle of collaborative networks,involving issues like: SOA and interoperability, knowledge management, decision support systems, reference and business models for CNOs, ICT-infrastructures, multi-agent systems and integration with shop-floor. Prof. Rabelo has been involved in many National and European research projects and program committees of relevant conferences. He is currently the Head of the Department of Automation and Systems of UFSC.


copyright 2010


Antonio P. Volpentesta, Salvatore Ammirato*{volpentesta; ammirato} @deis.unical.it

Department of Electronics, Computer Science and SystemsUniversity of Calabria - ITALY

SADECALSupporting e-Business Diffusion in Calabria


copyright 2010


Introduction (1/2)

• The agribusiness evolution:

– Deregulation and globalisation of the markets– Growing power of retailers increasing pressure on producers prices

– Increasing consumer demands for safe, healthy and ethically correct food and attractive countryside ‘Relocalisation’ process i.e. the identification and valorisation of local resources

Clementina PGI of Calabria

Origin (farmer) price 0.18 €/KgSelling (greengrocer) price 1.8 €/Kg

Nettarina PGI of Calabria

Origin (farmer) price 0.50 €/KgSelling (greengrocer) price 2.50 €/Kg

copyright 2010


Introduction (2/2)

• Agrifood producers search for new ways of doing business able to:– guarantee competitive advantages, – improve farm revenue streams,– develop new consumer market niches.

• Agrifood consumers search for: – High quality agrifood products with a local identity– Reduced purchasing prices

• Producers and consumers need of alternatives to create proximity among them in territorial and social sense.

• Consumers want to be closer to the food origins, experiment direct contact with farmers, share their experiences, feelings and needs with other consumers.

copyright 2010


• Number of members: – 9 agrifood producers (SMEs or simple farms) of high quality agrifood goods

forming a firms’ aggregation (for-profit organization) named Agrifood Producers sub-community (AC).

– 73 final consumers (typically, households), gathered around a no-profit and self-organized purchasing group named Consumer Group (CG), who want to purchase high quality agrifood goods at reduced prices.

– 1 Trusted Third Party (TTP) aimed to influence innovation decisions, facilitate transactions, organize the agrifood trade network and provide and manage the eBusiness platform where consumers and producers act.

– 1 Consumers sub-community where all consumers can share information and knowledge using web 2.0 tools made available by the TTP.

• Sector: Agrifood• Geographic localization: DAQ-Sibari (Calabria, Italy)

SADECAL Network Overview

Agrifood Products

• Wine;• Olive and olive oil;• Fruit & Vegetables;• Dairy Products.

copyright 2010


• Need to operate on: – Agrifood products, setting them with high “typical and quality” features

(i.e. strictly related with local territory); – Production processes, directly relating producers and consumers in order

to build trust and customer loyalty– Distribution processes, making the long and complex agrifood supply chains

shorter;– Technological platforms, supporting adequate e-business solutions for SMEs

and web 2.0 tools for consumers.

• Goals to reach:– Support the ‘Relocalisation’ process, i.e. the identification and valorisation of

local resources;– Foster the emergence of ‘Regional Alternative Agrifood Networks’ (RAANs);– By-pass the large-scale retail trade;– Create sustainable relationships between agrifood producers and consumers;– Provide Internet-based ‘electronic trade platforms’ for agribusiness.


copyright 2010


• Constraints for a RAAN organizational model:

– Importance of setting up organizational and technological aspectsin order to support the socio-economic strength points and valorise the cultural heritage of the territory.

– Prerequisite: presence in the territory of an initial set of agribusiness firms possibly showing flexible embedded inter-firm relationships allowing for economies of scope

– Need to set up a RAAN as a learning community where members and stakeholders are all involved in maintenance and innovation which is based on common aims, shared meanings, common approaches commitment to effective implementation and mutual accountability.

Network Creation(2/2)

copyright 2010


• Agrifood producers selected after a public call on the base of: – Geografic localization,– Types of productions,– Pre-existance of inter-firm relationships.

• RAAN representation:


copyright 2010


Roles and relations:• TTP: played by the ‘District Centre’ of the “Società di Distretto”

(a consortium of 92 organizations among the ones belonging to the DAQ-Sibari) supported by the DEIS-UNICAL staff… played roles :

– Technology intermediary. Provide and manage an e-business platform including hardware, security, training and continuous assistance;

– Transaction intermediary. Provides services and coordinates and manages the logistic chain. Operatively, it collects and structures producers offer by means of an e-catalog; collects cumulative purchase orders from consumers groups and processes them in order to form single purchase orders for each agrifood producer; manages the payment system. Once goods arrive from producers, it packs them with respect to each consumers group order and sends them to the consumers group pick-up point;

– Guarantee authority. Defines an “ethical code” and behavioural rules in transaction processes; provides a broad governance function, enables the promotion of cooperation among consumers and producers, and controls transactions to ensure behavioural correctness of members interactions in the network.

– Infomediary. Coordinates information and knowledge flows. Provides communitymembers of a web platform for sharing information and knowledge among users. By means of web 2.0 tools (social networking, photo and video sharing, mashups, podcast, ecc.) the TTP enables the development of virtual communities among consumers and producers and allows the creation and exchange of user-generated content.


copyright 2010


• UNICAL-CG:– 73 permanent subjects among the UNICAL staff members. – Aim: purchase, at reduced prices, agrifood secured typical regional foods. – Members share their “shopping lists” to create a cumulative order for an heterogeneous bundle

of products to be submitted to the TTP.

• Consumers sub-community:– UNICAL-CG members research products characteristics and price through social networks,

consumer product reviews, and prices comparison before making a final decision of purchasing.

– The web platform is a virtual arena where individuals share experiences and build up relationships.

– Consumers research all aspects of a product performance, value and social acceptance in relative comparison to similar products of different producers.

• AC:– Producers sends information about products it sells to the TTP in order to be included in

the e-catalog. – Once a producer receives purchasing orders, it sends the requested goods to the TTP

collection point. – Continuous interactions give producers new possibilities to get valuable insight for

the innovation process and to use the creative potential of consumers. – Interaction, lead producers in setting products characteristics and meanings in order to address

sub-community expectations. – Aim: make production process much more transparent and open in order to build a greater

sense of community through consumers/producers active participation.


copyright 2010


Two pilot tests highlight some trends:

• Economic-organizational perspective: – An increasing number of participants up to hundred people at the end of the

second test; – an average reduction in selling prices, with respect to other marketing channels; – a continuous increase in the number of offered products present in the e-catalog,

which can be interpreted as a continuous growth in producers’ interest for the system.

• Knowledge management perspective:– A virtual community has been created who published, enriched, shared,

communicated and combined information and knowledge mainly about products prices and nutritional characteristics, recipes, and local tourism.

– The 2.0 web-portal provided a flexible environment for members where they have been creative and innovative, participating in social networks, creating and spreading knowledge in a collaborative way, taking advantages of others’ wisdom.

– The use of the social network allowed the creation of groups of users with common interests on particular agri-food products or recipes.

Network Management

copyright 2010


• The process of developing learning communities is long and related with theories of change and leadership.

• Sustainable change begins with recognition and modification of core values, assumptions and ideologies shared by members within organisations. Because of the complexities of the culture of change, many past projects of collecting farmers around agribusiness initiatives failed.

• Further studies are underway in order to: – Define an evaluation model to evaluate if forms of RAAN initiatives can

help to foster the development of the regional area where they are applied and, thus, to estimate direct and indirect economic advantage for both agrifood producers and consumers.

– Follow up with some interviews to try point out the level of organizational and cultural change. Such analysis might lead to further insights into the impact of clan culture and other aspects of organizational culture on sustaining regional agribusiness initiatives.

Conclusions

copyright 2010


• Antonio P. Volpentesta is an Associate Professor of Economics and Management Engineering at the University of Calabria (Italy). He has been carrying out researches and studies for 32 years in the areas of operation research, information systems and management engineering. He has published some books and over 90 papers in these areas. He is the Director of GiudaLab, a management engineering laboratory at DEIS, where much work about regional, national and European projects have been carried out in the past 20 years. His current research interests include virtual enterprises, knowledge management, learning systems, e-business and collaborative networks.

• Salvatore Ammirato* is Researcher in Economics and Management Engineering at the University of Calabria (Italy) and External Researcher of the ‘Centre for Research in Transnational Education, Leadership and Performance’ at the University of Canberra (Australia). He received his Master degree in Management Engineering and PhD in Operation Research from the University of Calabria. He teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in Information Management and Business Process Management. His main research interests are organizational learning, collaborative networks and information management.


copyright 2010


Panel Discussion Question

copyright 2010

How we can support the development of successful business models for

collaborative networks?“By understanding the unique value proposition of a collaborative network to its stakeholders and customers”

“By learning how to target the right stakeholders and market/customers for a collaborative network”

“By knowing how to build competitive distribution channels by means of collaborative logistics to reach the customer”

“By building links and strategies to maintain good customer and stakeholder relationships”

“By proper managing distributed activities and resources to co-create value for the customer”

“By integrating capabilities to underpin an added value proposition for the customer”

“By forming strategic alliances, joint-ventures and long-term partnerships to improve a collaborative network”

“By identifying the costs incurred in the creation and delivering of a value proposition within a collaborative network”

“By defining different strategies to achieve economic sustainability through a variety of revenue flows”


Panel Conclusions

• The panel audience reached some common agreements towards supporting the development of successful business models for collaborative networks:

– The call for business model design templates.– The call for governance model design templates.– The strong need for value architectures to define a value proposition and

its value network to deliver it to the customer.– The demand for new financial models based on:

• Innovative revenue models.• Sustainable costs structures.• Attractive income share models.

– The call for new value systems for different:• Leadership styles.• Relationships styles.

copyright 2010

Next Generation Collaborative Networked OrganizationsSpecial Panel Session

Session Organizing Committee

David Romero (ITESM, Mexico City) Arturo Molina (ITESM, Mexico City)Myrna Flores (CEMEX, Switzerland) Ricardo Rabelo (UFSC, Brazil) Michel Pouly (EPFL, Switzerland)

Download e-Book:http://www.uninova.pt/~prove09/2009/presentations/PRO-VE09_Special_Panel_Session_ebook.pdf

PRO-VE’09Thessaloniki, Greece, 7-9 October 2009

SPECIAL PANEL SESSION ONTowards the Next Generation Collaborative Networked Organizations:

International Challenges, Trends and Research Opportunities

“Past, Present and Future of Collaborative Networks: Moving from Theory to Practice”


De Santa Catarina

copyright 2009


CNOsCase Studies

SIG

Panel Acknowledgments


De Santa Catarina

PRO-VE Program Chair: Prof. Luis M. Camarinha-Matos

Universitàdegli

Studi di Perugia

Universitàdegli

Studi di Perugia

copyright 2010

pro-ve 10 - special panel session on next generation collaborative networked organizations

Business

collaborative endeavours

collaborative forms

industrial environments

arturo molina panelist

luca cagnazzo panelist

ricardo rabelo panelist

current industrial practices

industrial communities