Advertisement

Establishing Transparent Interorganizational Relationships Through Shared Goals for Anti-corruption in Brazil

  • Bruna DiirrEmail author
  • Claudia Cappelli
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 308)

Abstract

Market changes and the need to remain competitive have lead organizations to establish partnerships that allow them to share resources with each other for better handling an identified opportunity. Such associations are also established at the government level, where the limited resources are shared at the service of society’s common good. However, besides having a mutual or compatible goal, it is common that partner organizations have distinct characteristics, which may lead to several challenges to be faced. The present research explores the interorganizational relationship management. For this, this paper outlines an approach based on shared goals, making the involved organizations more transparent, integrated, prepared to interoperate their processes and information and able to develop skills to act and achieve shared goals even with existing differences. An anti-corruption partnership in Brazil illustrates the approach application.

Keywords

Interorganizational relationships Process integration Shared goals 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank CAPES by grants supporting the research.

References

  1. 1.
    Drews, P., Schirmer, I.: From enterprise architecture to business ecosystem architecture. In: International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, Ulm, pp. 13–22 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guanciale, R., Gurov, D.: Privacy preserving business process fusion. In: Fournier, F., Mendling, J. (eds.) BPM 2014. LNBIP, vol. 202, pp. 96–101. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15895-2_9 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mueller, T., Schuldt, D., Sewald, B., Morisse, M., Petrikina, J.: Towards inter-organizational enterprise architecture management. In: Americas Conference on Information Systems, Chicago (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ranaei, H., Zareei, A., Alikhani, F.: Inter-organizational relationship management: a theoretical model. Int. Bull. Bus. Adm. 9, 20–30 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van Fenema, P., Keers, B., Zijm, H.: Interorganizational shared services: creating value across organizational boundaries. In: Shared Services as a New Organizational Form, vol. 13, pp. 175–217 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Del-Río-Ortega, A., Gutiérrez, A.M., Durán, A., Resinas, M., Ruiz-Cortés, A.: Modelling service level agreements for business process outsourcing services. In: Zdravkovic, J., Kirikova, M., Johannesson, P. (eds.) CAiSE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9097, pp. 485–500. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19069-3_30 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Del-Río-Ortega, A., Resinas, M., Durán, A., Ruiz-Cortés, A., Toroa, M.: Visual PPINOT: a graphical notation for process performance indicators. Decis. Support Syst. 1–25 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-017-0483-3
  8. 8.
    Khalfallah, M., Figay, N., Ghodous, P., Da Silva, C.F.: Cross-organizational business processes modeling using design-by-contract approach. In: van Sinderen, M., Oude Luttighuis, P., Folmer, E., Bosems, S. (eds.) IWEI 2013. LNBIP, vol. 144, pp. 77–90. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36796-0_8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sebu, M., Ciocârlie, H.: Merging business processes for a common workflow in an organizational collaborative scenario. In: International Conference on System Theory, Control and Computing, Cheile Gradistei, pp. 134–139 (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harrison, J.: Strategic Management of Resources and Relationships. Wiley, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Luna-Reyes, L., Picazo-Vela, S., Luna, D., Gil-Garcia, R.: Creating public value through digital government: lessons on inter-organizational collaboration and information technologies. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 2840–2849 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Markus, M.L., Bui, Q.: Governing public sector interorganizational network infrastructures: the importance of formal and legal arrangements. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    BBC: Brazil’s Odebrecht corruption scandal. http://www.bbc.com/news/business-39194395
  14. 14.
    The Guardian: Brazil: explosive recordings implicate President Michel Temer in bribery. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/18/brazil-explosive-recordings-implicate-president-michel-temer-in-bribery
  15. 15.
    The Guardian: Brazil’s former richest man sought by police in vast corruption inquiry. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/26/brazil-corruption-investigation-eike-batista-bribes
  16. 16.
    The New York Times: Sérgio Cabral, Ex-Governor of Rio de Janeiro, Arrested on Corruption Charges. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/world/americas/sergio-cabral-rio-governor-corruption.html
  17. 17.
    The Wall Street Journal: Brazil’s Former House Speaker Eduardo Cunha Arrested in Corruption Investigation. https://www.wsj.com/articles/brazils-former-house-speaker-eduardo-cunha-arrested-in-corruption-investigation-1476895613
  18. 18.
    Time: Brazil Prosecutor Says Massive Corruption Probe Could Double in Size. http://time.com/4651414/brazil-corruption-probe-car-wash/
  19. 19.
    Legner, C., Wende, K.: The challenges of inter-organizational business process design – a research agenda. In: European Conference on Information Systems (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhu, Z., Huang, H.: The cultural integration in the process of cross-border mergers and acquisitions. Int. Manag. Rev. 3(2), 40–44 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J.: Culture and Organizations: Software of the Mind. McGraw-Hill, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bocanegra, J., Pena, J., Ruiz-Cortes, A.: Interorganizational business modeling: an approach for traceability of goals, organizational models and business processes. IEEE Lat. Am. Trans. 9(1), 847–854 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Transparency International: Corruption perception index. https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_perceptions_index_2016
  24. 24.
    Fung, A., Graham, M., Weil, D.: Full Disclosure, the Perils and Promise of Transparency. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Denis, J.A., Nunes, V., Ralha, C., Cappelli, C.: E-gov transparency implementation using multi-agent system: a brazilian study-case in lawsuit distribution process. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 2772–2781 (2017)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Planejamento: Portaria no 68 – Estratégia de Governança Digital da Administração Pública Federal. http://www.planejamento.gov.br/EGD/arquivos/portaria-68-07-03-2016.pdf
  27. 27.
    Brasil: Lei no 12.527 – Lei de acesso à informação, http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/lei/l12527.htm
  28. 28.
    Brasil: Lei complementar no 131 – Disponibilização em tempo real de informações. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Leis/LCP/Lcp131.htm
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
    Kutvonen, L.: Enhancing the maturity of open service ecosystems and inter-enterprise collaborations. In: van Sinderen, M., Oude Luttighuis, P., Folmer, E., Bosems, S. (eds.) IWEI 2013. LNBIP, vol. 144, pp. 6–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36796-0_3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Santos, R., Cappelli, C., Maciel, C., Leite, J.C.: Transparência em Ecossistemas de Software. In: Workshop de Desenvolvimento Distribuído de Software, Ecossistemas de Software e Sistemas-de-Sistemas, Maringá, pp. 75–79 (2016)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Choi, T., Kröschel, I.: Challenges of governing inter-organizational relationships: insights from a case study. In: European Conference on Information Systems, Münster, pp. 1–16 (2015)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Köpke, J., Eder, J., Künstner, M.: Projections of abstract interorganizational business processes. In: Decker, H., Lhotská, L., Link, S., Spies, M., Wagner, Roland R. (eds.) DEXA 2014. LNCS, vol. 8645, pp. 472–479. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10085-2_43 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Montarnal, A., Wang, T., Truptil, S., Bénaben, F., Lauras, M., Lamothe, J.: A social platform for knowledge gathering and exploitation, towards the deduction of inter-enterprise collaborations. Procedia Comput. Sci. 60, 438–447 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dang, D., Pekkola, S.: Systematic literature review on enterprise architecture in the public sector. Electron. J. e-Gov. 15(2), 132–154 (2017)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eid-Sabbagh, R.-H., Dijkman, R., Weske, M.: Business process architecture: use and correctness. In: Barros, A., Gal, A., Kindler, E. (eds.) BPM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7481, pp. 65–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32885-5_5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Eid-Sabbagh, R.-H., Hewelt, M., Weske, M.: Business process architectures with multiplicities: transformation and correctness. In: Daniel, F., Wang, J., Weber, B. (eds.) BPM 2013. LNCS, vol. 8094, pp. 227–234. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40176-3_19 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bouchbout, K., Alimazighi, Z.: Inter-organizational business processes modelling framework. In: Conference on Advances in Databases and Information Systems, Vienna (2011)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lawall, A., Schaller, T., Reichelt, D.: Restricted relations between organizations for cross-organizational processes. In: Conference on Business Informatics, Lisbon (2014)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lin, D., Ishida, T.: Coordination of local process views in interorganizational business process. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. E97-D(5), 1119–1126 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hsu, C., Lin, Y.-T., Wang, T.: A legitimacy challenge of a cross-cultural interorganizational information system. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 24, 278–294 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kauremaa, J., Tanskanen, K.: Designing interorganizational information systems for supply chain integration: a framework. Int. J. Logist. Manag. 27(1), 71–94 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sun, K., Lai, W.C.: ISAM-based inter-organization information systems alignment process. In: International Conference on Computer Science and Service System, Nanjing, pp. 1358–1361 (2011)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sun, K., Yu, K.: Research on project management for inter-organizational information systems. In: International Conference on E-Business and E-Government, Shanghai, pp. 1–4 (2011)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    José, H.S.S., Gonçalves, F.E., Cappelli, C., Santoro, F.M.: Providing semantics to implement aspects in BPM. In: Dumas, M., Fantinato, M. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNBIP, vol. 281, pp. 264–276. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58457-7_20 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cappelli, C., Leite, J.C.: Software transparency. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2(3), 127–139 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Programa de Pós-Graduação em InformáticaUniversidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (PPGI/UNIRIO)Rio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations