Advertisement

Triple-Agile: Cloud Solutions for SMEs

  • Marite Kirikova
  • Edgars Salna
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 295)

Abstract

Agility has become the must have feature for small and medium sized companies (SMEs). One of the enablers of agility is the use of appropriate information technology solutions. In turn, cloud solutions have been advocated as the ones well suited to SMEs. Agility as a concept includes the fast reaction to changes. So, for supporting agile SMEs, the providers of cloud solutions have to be able to produce their products and services in an agile manner, so that agile adoption or acquisition of these solutions is possible. The Triple-Agile paradigm is proposed to address all three aforementioned issues of agility by stating that in a business ecosystem of SMEs and cloud service providers three types of processes should be agile: the SME processes, the service development and maintenance processes, and the service adoption/provision processes. This research in progress paper reports on the first step in the use of this paradigm, namely, it shows the conceptual outlook of the Triple-Agile paradigm applied to cloud solutions dedicated to SMEs. The conceptual outlook is illustrated by the ArchiMate language of enterprise architecture representation.

Keywords

SME Cloud computing Agile 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This research is part of the project “Competence Centre of Information and Communication Technologies” run by IT Competence Centre, contract No. 1.2.1.1/16/A/007, co-financed by European Regional Development Fund, Research No. 1.3 “Agile paradigm application in small and medium enterprises business support processes management”. More information at http://www.itkc.lv/.

References

  1. 1.
    Burton, M.: The future of organization design: an interpretative synthesis in three themes. J. Organ. Des. 2(1), 42–44 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sawas, M.S., Watfa, M.K.: The impact of cloud computing on information systems agility. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 19, 97–112 (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Martenson, A.: Produsing and consuming agility. In: Desouza, K.C. (ed.) Agile Information Systems, pp. 41–51 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ArchiMate 2.1. ArchiMate 2.1 specification. Open Group (2013). http://pubs.opengroup.org/architecture/archimate2-doc/
  5. 5.
    ArchiMate 3.0 ArchiMate 3.0 specification. Open Group (2016). http://pubs.opengroup.org/architecture/archimate3-doc/
  6. 6.
    Dillon, T.S., Wu, C., Chang, E.: Reference architectural styles for service-oriented computing. In: Li, K., Jesshope, C., Jin, H., Gaudiot, J.-L. (eds.) NPC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4672, pp. 543–555. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-74784-0_57 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wadhwa, B., Jaitly, A., Hasija, N., Suri, B.: Cloud service brokers: addressing the new cloud phenomenon. In: Rajsingh, E.B., Bhojan, A., Peter, J.D. (eds.) Informatics and Communication Technologies for Societal Development, pp. 29–40. Springer, New Delhi (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-81-322-1916-3_4 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ralyté, J., Deneckère, R., Rolland, C.: Towards a generic model for situational method engineering. In: Eder, J., Missikoff, M. (eds.) CAiSE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2681, pp. 95–110. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi: 10.1007/3-540-45017-3_9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feld, T., Hoffmann, M.: Process on demand: planning and control of adaptive business processes. In: Brunetti, G., Feld, T., Heuser, L., Schnitter, J., Webel, C. (eds.) Future Business Software. PI, pp. 55–66. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-04144-5_5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vasiljeva, T., Shaikhulina, S., Kreslins, K.: Cloud computing: business perspectives, benefits and challenges for small and medium enterprises (Case of Latvia). Procedia Eng. 178, 443–451 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uluhan, E., Aydin, M.N.: Complex adaptive systems theory in the context of business process management. In: Zehbold, C. (ed.) S-BPM ONE 2014. CCIS, vol. 422, pp. 147–156. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-06191-7_10 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ávila, P., Putnik, G.D., Cunha, M.M.: Brokerage function in agile virtual enterprise integration — a literature review. In: Camarinha-Matos, L.M. (ed.) PRO-VE 2002. ITIFIP, vol. 85, pp. 65–72. Springer, Boston, MA (2002). doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-35585-6_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hoda, R., Salleh, N., Grundy, J., Tee, H.M.: Systematic literature reviews in agile software development: a tertiary study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 85, 60–70 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martini, A., Pareto, L., Bosch, J.: A framework for speeding up interactions between agile teams and other parts of the organization. In: Bosch, J. (ed.) Continuous Software Engineering, pp. 67–82. Springer, Cham (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-11283-1_6 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Artificial Intelligence and Systems EngineeringRiga Technical UniversityRigaLatvia
  2. 2.Datorzinību CentrsRigaLatvia

Personalised recommendations