Advertisement

Fit in Cloud Sourcing Arrangements: An Ontological Perspective

  • Jens FördererEmail author
  • Thomas Kude
  • Armin Heinzl
Conference paper
  • 540 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 195)

Abstract

Cloud sourcing seeks to leverage the vendor’s expertise to support a cost-effective, reliable platform to run a business. The standardized nature of these sourcing arrangements as well as their ecosystem structure impose a number of challenges to the decision-making at client side. In this study, we argue that, ahead other, the fit between the cloud ecosystem and the client organization is decisive. However, the concept of fit in this setting is highly complex, dynamic, and difficult to grasp, thus, tightening the need for a richer understanding of cloud ecosystems as a complex technological and organizational arrangement. Our analysis reveals dimensions of fit between a client and the cloud ecosystem and proposes a new conceptualization of the underlying IT artifact.

Keywords

Cloud ecosystem Sourcing Platform Fit Ontology 

References

  1. 1.
    Chen, P., Wu, S.: The impact and implications of on-demand services on market structure. Inf. Syst. Res. 24, 750–767 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Iyer, B., Henderson, J.: Preparing for the future: understanding the seven capabilities of cloud computing. MIS Q. Executive 9, 117–131 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    McAfee, A.: What every CEO needs to know about the cloud. Harvard Bus. Rev. 89, 125–132 (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marston, S., Li, Z., Bandyopadhyay, S., Zhang, J., Ghalsasi, A.: Cloud computing: the business perspective. Decis. Support Syst. 51, 176–189 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Venters, W., Whitley, E.A.: A critical review of cloud computing: researching desires and realities. J. Inf. Technol. 27, 179–197 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McKinsey: Disruptive Technologies: Advances That Will Transform Life, Business, and the Global Economy. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/disruptive_technologies
  7. 7.
    DiMaggio, P.J., Powell, W.W.: The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sia, S.K., Soh, C.: An assessment of package-organisation misalignment: institutional and ontological structures. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 16, 568–583 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cusumano, M.: Technology strategy and management: the evolution of platform thinking. Commun. ACM 53, 32–34 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B., Bush, A.A.: Platform evolution: coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Inf. Syst. Res. 21, 675–687 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gawer, A.: Platforms, Markets and Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Baldwin (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ceccagnoli, M., Forman, C., Huang, P., Wu, D.J.: Cocreation of value in a platform ecosystem: the case of enterprise software. MIS Q. 36, 263–290 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dibbern, J., Goles, T., Hirschheim, R., Jayatilaka, B.: Information systems outsourcing: a survey and analysis of the literature. SIGMIS Database 35, 6–102 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    BMC: One Size Does not Fit All: The Case for the Custom Cloud. https://communities.bmc.com/docs/DOC-12636
  15. 15.
    Ingholt, P., O’Brien, C., Bell, J.: Developing a business case for the cloud. http://www.boozallen.com/media/file/developing-a-business-case-for-cloud-vp.pdf
  16. 16.
    Boudreau, K.: Open platform strategies and innovation: granting access vs. devolving control. Manage. Sci. 56, 1849–1872 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    El Sawy, O.A., Malhotra, A., YoungKi, P., Pavlou, P.A.: Seeking the configurations of digital ecodynamics: it takes three to Tango. Inf. Syst. Res. 21, 835–848 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jae-Nam, L., Miranda, S.M., Yong-Mi, K.: IT outsourcing strategies: universalistic, contingency, and configurational explanations of success. Inf. Syst. Res. 15, 110–131 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Livari, J.: The organizational fit of information systems. Inf. Syst. J. 2, 3–29 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Strong, D.M., Volkoff, O.: Understanding organization-enterprise system fit: a path to theorizing the information technology artifact. MIS Q. 34, 731–756 (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wand, Y., Weber, R.: On the deep structure of information systems. Inf. Syst. J. 5, 203–223 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lacity, M.C., Hirschheim, R.: The information systems outsourcing bandwagon. Sloan Manage. Rev. 35, 73–86 (1993)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lacity, M.C., Willcocks, L.: Global Information Technology Outsourcing: In Search of Business Advantage. Wiley, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lacity, M.C., Willcocks, L.P.: An empirical investigation of information technology sourcing practices: lessons from experience. MIS Q. 22, 363–408 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lacity, M.C., Khan, S., Yan, A., Willcocks, L.P.: A review of the IT outsourcing empirical literature and future research directions. J. Inf. Technol. 25, 395–433 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
  27. 27.
    Juels, A., Oprea, A.: New approaches to security and availability for cloud data. Commun. ACM 56, 64–73 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Seddon, P.B., Calvert, C., Yang, S.: A multi-project model of key factors affecting organizational benefits from enterprise systems. MIS Q. 34, 305–340 (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Soh, C., Kien, S.S., Tay-Yap, J.: Enterprise resource planning: cultural fits and misfits: is ERP a universal solution? Commun. ACM 43, 47–51 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brehm, L., Heinzl, A., Markus, M.L.: Tailoring ERP systems: a spectrum of choices and their implications. In: HICSS (2001)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nöhren, M., Heinzl, A., Kude, T.: Structural and behavioral fit in software sourcing alignment. In: Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Waikoloa, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mani, D., Barua, A., Whinston, A.B.: An empirical analysis of the impact of information capabilities design on business process outsourcing performance. MIS Q. 34, 39–62 (2010)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lee, J.-N.: Outsourcing alignment with business strategy and firm performance. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 17, 2–50 (2006)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lee, J.-N., Miranda, S.M., Kim, Y.-M.: IT outsourcing strategies: universalistic, contingency, and configurational explanations of success. Inf. Syst. Res. 15, 110–131 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gurbaxani, V., Whang, S.: The impact of information systems on organizations and markets. Commun. ACM 34, 59–73 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dyer, J.H., Singh, H.: The relational view: cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad. Manage. Rev. 23, 660–679 (1998)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    McLaren, T.S., Head, M.M., Yuan, Y., Chan, Y.E.: A multilevel model for measuring fit between a firm’s competitive strategies and information systems capabilities. MIS Q. 35, 909–942 (2011)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Adomavicus, G., Bockstedt, J., Gupta, A., Kauffman, R.J.: Understanding evolution in technology ecosystems. Commun. ACM 51, 117–122 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cusumano, M.A., Gawer, A.: The elements of platform leadership. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 43, 51–58 (2002)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Katz, M.L., Shapiro, C.: Systems competition and network effects. J. Econ. Perspect. 8, 93–115 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Huang, P., Ceccagnoli, M., Forman, C., Wu, D.J.: Appropriability mechanisms and the platform partnership decision: evidence from enterprise software. Manage. Sci. 59, 102–121 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Baldwin, C.Y., Woodard, C.J.: The architecture of platforms: a unified view. Working papers – Harvard business school division of research. pp. 1–31 (2008)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Eisenmann, T.R.: Managing proprietary and shared platforms. Calif. Manag. Rev. 50, 31–53 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Schilling, M.A.: Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: the impact of learning orientation, timing, and network externalities. Acad. Manag. J. 45, 387–398 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schilling, M.A.: Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 25, 312–334 (2000)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Dyer, J.H.: Effective interfirm collaboration: how firms minimize transaction costs and maximize transaction value. Strateg. Manag. J. 18, 535–556 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yoffie, D.B., Kwak, M.: With friends like these. Harvard Bus. Rev. 84, 88–98 (2006)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Orlikowski, W.J., Iacono, C.S.: Research commentary: desperately seeking the “IT” in IT research – a call to theorizing the IT artifact. Inf. Syst. Res. 12, 121–134 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Venkatraman, N.: The concept of fit in strategy research: toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Acad. Manag. Rev. 14, 423–444 (1989)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Grover, V., Lyytinen, K., Srinivasan, A., Tan, B.C.Y.: Contributing to rigorous and forward thinking explanatory theory. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 9, 40–47 (2008)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Morgeson, F.P., Hofmann, D.A.: The structure and function of collective constructs: implications for multilevel research and theory development. Acad. Manage. Rev. 24, 249–265 (1999)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wynn, D., Williams, C.K.: Principles for conducting critical realist case study research in information systems. MIS Q. 36, 787–810 (2012)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Bunge, M.: Treatise on Basic Philosophy. Ontology I: The Furniture of the World. Riedel, Boston (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Green, P., Rosemann, M.: Applying ontologies to business and systems modelling techniques and perspectives: lessons learned. J. Database Manage. 15, 105–117 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Green, P.F., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M.: Ontological evaluation of enterprise systems interoperability using ebXML. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 17, 713–725 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Fensel, D.: Ontologies: Silver Bullet for Knowledge Management and Electronic Commerce. Springer, Berlin (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-López, M., Corcho, O.: Ontological Engineering: With Examples from the Areas of Knowledge Management, e-Commerce and the Semantic Web. Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing. Springer, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tegarden, D.P., Schaupp, L.C., Dull, R.B.: Identifying ontological modifications to the resource-event-agent (REA) enterprise ontology using a Bunge-Wand-Weber ontological evaluation. J. Inf. Syst. 27, 105–128 (2013)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Shapiro, C., Varian, H.: Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. Harvard Business Press, Boston (1999)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., Van Alstyne, M.: Platform envelopment. Strateg. Manag. J. 32, 1270–1285 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Cardinal, L.B.: Technological innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: the use of organizational control in managing research and development. Organ. Sci. 12, 19–36 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Messerschmitt, D.G., Szyperski, C.: Software Ecosystem: Understanding an Indispensable Technology and Industry. MIT Press Books, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Gawer, A., Cusumano, M.A.: Platform Leadership. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Simon, H.A.: The architecture of complexity. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 106, 467–482 (1962)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Tiwana, A., Konsynski, B.: Complementarities between organizational IT architecture and governance structure. Inf. Syst. Res. 21, 288–304 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Baldwin, C.Y., Clark, K.B.: Managing in an age of modularity. Harvard Bus. Rev. 75, 84–93 (1997)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Akhlaghpour, S., Wu, J., Lapointe, L., Pinsonneault, A.: The ongoing quest for the IT artifact. J. Inf. Technol. 28, 150–166 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Business SchoolUniversity of MannheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations