CC BY-NC-ND
0Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 12 (2013) 396 - 401
8th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing Engineering
Meta-organization and manufacturing Web 3.0 for ubiquitous virtual enterprise of manufacturing SMEs: a framework
H. Castroa' c*, G. Putnika' c, M. M. Cruz-Cunhab' c, L. Ferreirab, V. Shaha' c, C. Alvesa c
aUniversity of Minho, School of Engineering, Campus de Azurem 4800-058 Guimaraes, Portugal bPolytechnic Institute of Cavado e Ave, School of Technology, Lugar do Aldao 4750-810 Vila Frescainha S. Martinho - Barcelos, Portugal cCGIT Research Centre, University of Minho, Campus de Azurem 4800-058 Guimaraes, Portugal
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +351-253-510-340; Fax: +351-253-510-343. E-mail address: hcastro@dps.uminho.pt_
Abstract
Manufacturing small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are drivers for economic and social development. Their importance and competitive challenges are increasing interest and attention on private and public sectors due to hyper-competition environment. In order to establish an environment that, not only, addresses hyper-competition but also sustainability, a Meta-Organization is proposed to support advanced manufacturing business models, namely, Virtual and Ubiquitous Enterprises. This Meta-Organization is organizational platform supported by information and communication technologies (ICT), such as Web 3.0. The paper introduces a framework to approach Ubiquitous Virtual Enterprises using Meta-Organization and Manufacturing Web 3.0, adopted by manufacturing SMEs. This paper is organized in six chapters. The chapter 1 presents the environment context that manufacturing SMEs faces and introduces the framework used in the paper. In chapter 2, a review addressing Meta-Organization in context of Ubiquitous Virtual Enterprises is presented. Chapter 3 covers the topic of Meta-Organizations members, specifically manufacturing SMEs. In chapter 4, to meet the technological platform Manufacturing Web 3.0 some Web 3.0 technologies are presented. Chapter 5 presents shortly the overall framework. Finally, chapter 6 draws conclusions.
© 2013 The Authors. PublishedbyElsevierB.V.
Selection and peer review under responsibility of Professor Roberto Teti
Keywords: Meta-Organization; Manufacturing SMEs; Ubiquitous Virtual Manufacturing; Web 3.0; Manufacturing Web 3.0.
1. Introduction
Manufacturing companies are facing challenges to meet changes in market needs, respond to changes in the market and how rapid products are delivered to the market [1]. The actual market turbulence forecast a new period of globalization [2] and volatile is here to stay [3]. This global competition environment contributes to hyper-competition [4], where elements like speed and aggressiveness play fundamental roles.
One of the concerns raised by development towards hyper-competition is its sustainability. More and more competition increases the gap between rich and poor [5]. Many authors define that sustainability development is based in three fundamentals: society, economy and
environment, and their interactions (see [6]). So, actual and upcoming manufacturing concepts must aim to achieve sustainable development addressing: 1) society, e.g., to generate and maintain jobs creating social cohesion; 2) economy, e.g., to generate economical returns to manufacturing companies and investors; and 3) environment, e.g., greener products and resource efficiency manufacturing.
It is largely known that small and medium enterprises (SME) in manufacturing create impact in economic and social development. For instance, European SMEs represents 99% of the total number of European manufacturing business and contributes with 22% of the European gross national product (GNP) [7]; and each job
2212-8271 © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Selection and peer review under responsibility of Professor Roberto Teti
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2013.09.068
in American manufacturing support three jobs in the rest of the American economy [8].
In this context, manufacturing SME must be able to adopt advanced manufacturing business models to keep competitive and, as seen more recently, sustainable. Advanced manufacturing business models are strongly based in the premises of networked enterprises supported by electronic networks. There are numerous manufacturing business models for networked enterprises. In this paper is addressed a combination of two models, Virtual Enterprise (VE) and Ubiquitous Enterprises (UE) that might be called Ubiquitous Virtual Enterprises (UVE). The corresponded manufacturing business model addresses competitive and sustainable context.
According to Putnik et al. [9], an external entity as environment for supporting VE is mandatory and, due to this premise, a Meta-Organization is proposed to support UVE. The Meta-Organization (MO) is a legally constituted organization (/institution), independent from all its members, that works for the interests of all members, leverage and regulate whole community and its members.
To support UVE an online technological platform a platform based on Web 3.0, or even higher level, technologies [10] is suggested. Such technologies enable more interoperability and access to information, mainly because of large-scale web applications [11] and empowers members to collaborate more, based on realtime and social collaboration in the development and discussion, in our specific case, on new innovative and knowledge manufacturing products and services. To achieve IT cost and services flexibility, a cloud computing-based system will be projected.
The Manufacturing Web 3.0 is an online technological platform to create new markets spaces and cultures, to support the development and offering of new innovative and knowledge manufacturing services provided by SME members of the MO, and to support the implementation of UVE.
Therefore, this paper proposes a framework for analysis and design of UVE of manufacturing SMEs that use Meta-Organizations and Manufacturing Web 3.0 as supporting instruments.
Fig. 1. Framework for UVE
2. Meta-Organizations
Institutions and institutional mechanisms are considered the 'missing link' to development outcomes
[12], such as sustainability and competitiveness.
However, this type of instruments, i.e. institution and institutional mechanisms are known from long time. These are well known institution of the form of associations, e.g. <Industrial Association>, <Commercial Association>, <Economic Chamber>, <Commercial Chamber>, etc. In recent years, along with the development of the concept and models of networked and virtual enterprises there are proposed institutions and institutional mechanism for supporting their development and operation. Some of them were aimed to support advanced manufacturing business models, such as virtual enterprise and one-product-integrated-manufacturing institutionalization framework [13], market of resources [14; 15], breeding environment [16], and collaborative engineering environment [17]. This new type of institution is settled for development purpose.
In the last years, this new type of institution was growing fast in number [18]. These institutions could be named Meta-Organization (e.g. see [18]). Meta-organization (MO) is a higher level organization made by organizations. By Ahrne and Brunsson [19], MO are characterized by the following premises:
• MO is an association and its members are autonomous, individual and independent organizations;
• Membership is voluntary act;
• Members are considered equals;
• Membership is based on a common mission or vision;
• MO are based in collaborative work and stresses high level of connectivity among members;
• MO purpose is to work in the interests of all its members.
"Meta-organizations comprise networks of firms or individuals not bound by authority based on employment
relationships, but characterized by a system-level goal. " [20].
There is a contract relation between the MO and its members in order to assure trust between meta-organization and members (relation meta-organization — member), and among members (relation member-member).
Among the proposed MO for advanced manufacturing business models, VE is the most cited advanced manufacturing business models in the MO, although other manufacturing business models are also supported [15], [16]. The collaborative component of the MO and its members has two levels:
1) Stable relation: relation established by membership in MO, and
2) Dynamic relation: relations dynamically established among members within the MO.
A MO framework is presented in Figure 2.
STATUTES
MO Members Membership Trust Relation
a) Association a]Autonomous, a) Voluntary act a) Contractual a) Stable: M0-
b}Collaborative individual and bJBasedona member
work independent common b) Dynamic:
c)High level of ^Manufacturing mission or member-
connectivity SMEs vision member
members
d)Supervisor
e) Regulator
Fig. 2. MO framework
The stable relation is celebrated by a contract made between the MO and the member, in order to assure terms and conditions (rights and obligations) between these parties, including relations between MO and a member, and between a member and other members. Rules, infractions, and penalties are regulated by the MO and bounded in the contract for conflicts resolution and decision-making problems. Also, this contract regulates the members' activities, for example, two members developed a joint work and one member considers that another member abused, for any reason, and did not fulfill the MO rules, the self-considered injured member could report to the MO the incident, in order to the MO mediate and apply a resolution to this situation based in the contract.
The dynamic relation is established by negotiation between members and there are three dimensions in changes: 1) members; 2) relation of the members in network, and 3) UVE project. The dynamic relation starts with a hierarchical relation, where the member owner/leader of the UVE project - idea/service/product -(Client) defines the initial terms of the relation with other members (Resources). This relation could be:
a) Owned: a member owns the project in 100% (knowledge and capital) and subcontracts (outsourcing) other members to provide products and services;
b) Co-owned closed: a group of members owns the project, and project shares are divided in accordance with all group members;
c) Co-owned open: all members could contribute to the project, having a share of the project depending of the contribution;
d) Open: all members could contribute freely to the project, and this project does not have ownership, it is open to the community of members.
To assure the changes in the relation, i.e., business alignment during the UVE project, it is necessary a dynamic reconfiguration of the relations [19]. This dynamic reconfiguration of the relations is highly influenced by the mechanism for integration. The mechanisms for integration belong to the following levels: physical, empirical, syntactic, semantic, and pragmatics [21].
The pragmatic mechanisms for integration address collaboration. The semantic mechanisms for integration address meaning.
By these, different application systems interpret and share data/information in an assertive and coherent way, i.e. common and shared information is interpreted in the same manner by different applications systems. (Concerning ontologies only, ontologies are considered as one solution to support semantic integration. However, it is recognized ontologies' limitations and problems, including their integration [22].)
The integration mechanisms are related with coordination, synchronization and interaction (e.g. learning, co-creation) of intra- and inter-enterprises activities related to the collaborative UVE project, considering strategic, management and operational levels of the MO member. To integrate MO member strategy with the UVE project strategy, to integrate MO member management decision-making with UVE project management, and to integrate business operations and manufacturing processes (design, supply chain, people, machines, production, logistics, etc.) of the MO member with UVE project operations (design and re-design of the UVE project and network, negotiations, supply network design, and others).
An UVE framework in MO is presented in Figure 3.
I UBIQUITOUS VIRTUAL ENTERPRISES 1
Ownership Integration
•Owned •Pragmatics
•Co-Owned Close •Semantic
•Co-Owned Open •Syntactic
•Open •Empirical
•Physical
MANUFACTURING SMEs
Fig. 3. UVE framework in MO
3. Manufacturing SMEs
Enablers
Customer-oriented Adaptiveto new market conditions Flexible structures Quick decision-making Agility
Intra-and inter-enterprise relation
Constraints
Lack of resources and manpower
Product innovation due to Lack of knowledge employees
Small number of customers and in limited markets Limited degree of ICT implementation due to financial limitations
Fig. 4 Some of the enablers and constraints of manufacturing SMEs.
Members are core issue in MO and, as mentioned before, these are individuals, autonomous and independent entity, enterprise or person. Members could vary according to legal form and size but, within MO, members are regarded equals. Individual entrepreneurs, micro enterprises, SME and large enterprises are potential members in MO. As mentioned before, manufacturing SMEs represent an important role in economic and social development, and, for this reason, are a target type of member within MO.
Their nature and behavior enables and constraints their integration with MO and other member of MO. From the point view of membership, they already are accustomed to relation with some cases of MO mainly MO oriented to local and/or sector intervention. From the point of view of relation with other members of MO, many manufacturing SMEs create alliances and partnerships but outside these 'platforms'.
Manufacturing SMEs, on one hand, are characterized by lack of resources and manpower [23], especially knowledge employees, creating constraints in the product innovation and expansion to new clients and markets, and bounded by a small number of customers and operate in limited markets [24]. On the other hand, their competitive advantage with customer-oriented strategy are more adaptive to new market conditions [25]. Flexible structures, quick decision-making [23] and agility are enablers to have a better market alignment, and use of distributed team work tools [26] creates strong intra- and inter-enterprises relations, through e.g. alliances and partnerships.
4. Manufacturing Web 3.0
Due to ICT transformations, opportunities emerge thanks to the possibilities to collaborate in the Web. To support manufacturing/ business process activities of the MO and its manufacturing SMEs members, it is required an ICT platform based in state-of-the-art ICT technologies and beyond.
In order to achieve a collaborative technological platform, a web application designed in Web 3.0 principals is suggested. Since the appearance of the Web, some shifts in approach occurred, mainly due to Web applications development. The first shift in approach was after the appearance of the Web, where companies detected the opportunity to reach the market and colonized the Web with their brochures transformed in static webpages [27]. This 'era' is so called Web 1.0. Then, new technological instruments were created to provide users' participation, giving the possibility to create technological environments for social interaction
[28]. Through these instruments, companies benefit from users (/consumers/clients)-generated contents, i.e. users are creators of contents and companies gain with users' experience and opinion. In general terms, it is considered that this Web technology created collaborative Web tools
[29] and a "social networking" revolution [30]. The term Web 2.0 emerged in order to present this shift [31].
After, the 'era' of Web 3.0 started to come out, this shift in approach is considered the next evolutionary stage of the Web [11], is the technological point of view. Also known as Semantic Web, Web 3.0 is creating a cloud effect, where all software and hardware is being connected. Software is shifting from individual products to online services based on cloud computing, e.g., Adobe is changing its software business model from individual products (for examples, Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator) to a cloud service provider (Adobe Creative Cloud)a, making these products affordable services for enterprises and public in general. And hardware is becoming smarter. Internet of Things is a concept associated to a variety of things (hardware) that interact with each other and cooperate [32].
According to Nova Spivak [33], Web 3.0 nature is characterized by the following topics:
Achieved at: http://www.adobe.com on May 17th, 2012.
• Ubiquitous networking: to have full data access from any device, anywhere, anytime. Multi-platform web access to software.
• Open everything: to have full access to data and services, open technologies are contributing
• Adaptive information: this adaptive information is all about combining information and reassembling information depending on the call.
• Adaptive service clouds: data and data models are services inside cloud computing. Software as a Service (SaaS) business models, distributed computing applications and grid computing are related to Web 3.0
• Federated data: structured data and unstructured/semi-structured content will become widely accessible in federated data formats
• Simulated intelligence: Artificial intelligence and automation to work with data is a premise for Web 3.0.
In parallel to technological evolution, businesses are becoming more and more social, enhancing collaborative work, facilitating knowledge share and learning processes, and accelerating innovative creation.
Manufacturing Web 3.0 could be considered a particular case of the Web 3.0 that engages all the technological and social business founded in Web 3.0.
The elements of the Manufacturing Web 3.0 are presented in Figure 5.
MANUFACTURING WEB 3.0
Social Business Cloud Computing Ubiquitous Open Adaptive Networking Information Adaptive Federated Simulated Service Data Intelligence Cloud
Fig. 5. ICT Platform for Manufacturing Web 3.0.
5. Overall framework
The previous analyses, and taking into account the actual manufacturing/business environment, MO context for UVE, the manufacturing SMEs and the Web 3.0 technologies, results in the framework presented in following Figure 6.
6. Conclusions and future work
It is factual that today's environment is extremely
competitive and, for this reason, advanced manufacturing business models must be based in dynamic models, such as Ubiquitous Virtual Enterprises, to keep manufacturing enterprises sustainable.
Due to the importance of manufacturing SME in social and economic development and the Web development based in Web 3.0 technologies, Ubiquitous
Environment
Fig. 6. A Framework for Meta-Organization and Manufacturing Web 3.0 for Ubiquitous Virtual Enterprise of Manufacturing SMEs
Virtual Enterprises are highly influenced by triple Meta-Organization/Manufacturing SMEs/Manufacturing Web 3.0.
This paper introduces a framework to approach Ubiquitous Virtual Enterprises using Meta-Organization and Manufacturing Web 3.0, adopted by manufacturing SMEs.
One of the future works' Sections will be developed to evaluate awareness and preparedness of manufacturing SMEs to adopt Ubiquitous Virtual Enterprises using Meta-Organization and Manufacturing Web 3.0, which is considered one of the critical issues.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of: 1) The Foundation for Science and Technology - FCT, Project PTDC/EME-GIN/102143/2008, 'Ubiquitous oriented embedded systems for globally distributed factories of manufacturing enterprises', 2) EUREKA, Project E! 4177 -Pro -Factory UES.
References
[1] Vinodh, S., Madhyasta, U. R., Praveen, T., 2011. Scoring and multi-grade fuzzy assessment of agility in an Indian electric automotive car manufacturing organisation, International Journal of Production Res earch, November 2011, p. 1.
[2] Economist Intelligence Unit. Organizational Agility: How business can survive and thrive in turbulent times. A report from the Economist Intelligence Unit. 2009.
[3] Prahalad, C.K., 2009. In Volatile Times, Agility Rules. BusinessWeek. 2009. Vol. 4147. p. 80.
[4] D'Aveni, R.A., 1994. Hypercompetition: managing the dynamics of strategic maneuvering. The Free Press. New York, USA. 1994.
[5] Reay Atkinson, S., Goodger, A., Caldwell, N., Hossain, L., 2012. How lean the machine: how agile the mind? The Learning Organization. 2012. Vol. 19 Iss: 3, p. 183.
[6] Jovane, F.,Yoshikawa, H., Alting, L., Boer, C.R., Westkamper, E., Williams, D., Tseng, M., Seliger, G., Paci, A.M., 2008. The incoming global technological and industrial revolution towards competitive sustainable manufacturing, CIRP Annals -Manufacturing Technology, Volume 57, Issue 2, 2008, p. 641.
[7] Manufuture. MANUFUTURE - a vision for 2020 - Assuring the future of manufacturing in Europe. Bruxelles: European Commission. 2004.
[8] The White House — President Barack Obama. A Framework for Revitalizing American Manufacturing. Executive Office of the President of the United States. Washington, USA. 2009.
[9] Putnik, G. P., Cunha, M. M., Sousa, R., Ávila, P., 2005. Virtual Enterprise Integration: Challenges of a New Paradigm. 2005. Idea Group, Inc. p. 3.
[10] Carbone, F., Contreras, J., Hernández, J.Z., Gomez-Perez, J.M., 2012. Open Innovation in an Enterprise 3.0 framework: Three case studies, Expert Systems with Applications, 2012. Volume 39, Issue 10, p. 8929.
[11] Hendler, J. Web 3.0 emerging. Computer: IEEE Computer Society, 2009. 42(1).
[12] OCDE — Development Co-operation Directorate. Institutional approaches to policy coherence for development OECD policy workshop: a comparative analysis of institutional mechanisms to promote policy coherence for development. 2004. Available: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0731/31659769.pdf.
[13] Putnik, G.D., Guimaraes, P.F., Silva, F.C., 1996. "Virtual Enterprise / OPIM concepts: an institutionalization framework" Balanced Automation Systems II — Implementation challenges for anthropocentric manufacturing. Proceedings of BASYS 96, Chapman & Hall, p. 391.
[14] Cunha, M.M., Putnik, G.D., Ávila, P., 2000. Towards Focused Markets of Resources for Agile / Virtual Enterprise Integration. In L. M. Camarinha-Matos & H. Afsarmanesh & H. Erbe (Eds.), "Advances in Networked Enterprises: Virtual Organisations, Balanced Automation, and Systems IntegrationBerlin: Kluwer Academic Publishers, p. 15.
[15] Cunha, M.M., Putnik, G.D., 2006. Identification of the domain of opportunities for a market of resources for virtual enterprise integration, International Journal of Production Research, 2006 44: 12, p. 2277.
[16] Luis, M., Camarinha, M., Afsarmanesh, H., 2003. Elements of a base VE infrastructure, Computers in Industry, Volume 51, Issue 2, June 2003, ISSN 0166-3615, 10.1016/S0166-3615(03)00033-2, p. 139.
[17] Shen, W., Chao, K.M., 2007. Special Issue on techniques to support collaborative engineering environments, Advanced Engineering Informatics, 2007, 21(2), p. 181.
[18] Ahrne, G., Brunsson, N., 2005. Organizations and meta-organizations, Scandinavian Journal of Management, Volume 21, Issue 4, December 2005, ISSN 0956-5221, 10.1016/j.scaman.2005.09.005, p. 249.
[19] Ahrne, G., Brunsson, N., 2008. Meta-organizations. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. 2008.
[20] Gulati, R., Puranam, P., Tushman, M., 2012. Meta-organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strat. Mgmt. J., 33: 571-586. doi: 10.1002/smj.1975
[21] Putnik, G., Putnik, Z., 2010. A semiotic framework for manufacturing systems integration -Part I: Generative integration model, International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 2010, 23: 8, p. 691.
[22] Putnik, G., Ferreira, L., Cunha, M., Putnik, Z., Castro, H., Shah, V., 2012. User Pragmatics for Effective Ontologies Interoperability for Cloud-based Applications: The case of Ubiquitous Manufacturing System UI. (submitted in April 2012)
[23] Baba Md Deros, Sha'ri Mohd Yusof, Azhari Md Salleh. A benchmarking implementation framework for automotive manufacturing SMEs, Benchmarking: An International Journal, 2006, Vol. 13 Iss: 4, p. 396.
[24] Sharma, M.K., Bhagwat, R., 2006. Practice of information systems: Evidence from select Indian SMEs, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 2006, Vol. 17 Iss: 2, p.199.
[25] Kee S. Kim, Tami L. Knotts, Stephen C. Jones, Characterizing viability of small manufacturing enterprises (SME) in the market,
Expert Systems with Applications, Volume 34, Issue 1, January 2008, Pages 128-134, ISSN 0957-4174, 10.1016/j.eswa.2006.08.009.
[26] Chen, M., Liou, Y., Wang, C-W, Fan, Y-W, Chi, Y-P J., 2007. TeamSpirit: Design, implementation, and evaluation of a Web-based group decision support system, Decision Support Systems, Volume 43, Issue 4, August 2007, Pages 1186-1202, ISSN 01679236, 10.1016/j.dss.2005.07.008.
[27] Berthon, P.R., Pitt, L.F., Plangger, K., Shapiro, D., 2012. Marketing meets Web 2.0, social media, and creative consumers: Implications for international marketing strategy, Business Horizons, Volume 55, Issue 3, May-June 2012, p. 261, ISSN 0007-6813, 10.1016/j.bushor.2012.01.007.
[28] Ferron, M., Massa, P., Odella, F., 2011. Analyzing collaborative networks emerging in Enterprise 2.0: the Taolin Platform, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 10, 2011, ISSN 1877-0428, 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.01.010, p. 68.
[29] Adebanjo, D., Michaelides, R., 2010. Analysis of Web 2.0 enabled e-clusters: A case study, Technovation, Volume 30, Issue 4, April 2010, ISSN 0166-4972, 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.09.001, p. 238
[30] Lassila, O., Hendler, J., 2007. Embracing "Web 3.0". IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 90-93, May/June, 2007.
[31] DiNucci, D., 1999. Fragmented Future. Print magazine. 1999. 53 (4), p.32.
[32] Atzori, L., Iera, A., Morabito, G., 2010. The Internet of Things: A survey, Computer Networks, Volume 54, Issue 15, 28 October 2010, ISSN 1389-1286, 10.1016/j.comnet.2010.05.010, p. 2787.
[33] Pollock, J.T., 2009. Semantic Web For Dummies. Wiley Publishing, Inc. Indiana, USA. 2009.
