Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intellectual ...

Igor Hawryszkiewycz
made by <strong>the</strong> client manager to <strong>the</strong> operations manager by <strong>the</strong> client manager, who decodes it and
transmits it to a meeting to consider <strong>the</strong> request. The request and any decision are recorded by <strong>the</strong>
document manager. It is at <strong>the</strong> meeting that all previous information is associated with <strong>the</strong> request
and where learning on managing change takes place. Similarly a fault report is transmitted to a ‘fault
report analysis meeting’ composed <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fault coordinator, fault report manager and repairers to
analyze <strong>the</strong> fault and suggest a repair action.
2.4 Extending to complexity
There are now many systems that exist in complex environments that need to deal with unanticipated
messages. System evolution in complex environments has been described systematically using
complexity <strong>the</strong>ory as interpreted in (Kovacs, 2004, Merali, 2006) for information systems and
expressed in terms <strong>of</strong> changes to relationships. Broadly changes to a system can be described as:
Support emergence to deal with complex problems. One example here would be where <strong>the</strong> fault
coordinator finds that <strong>the</strong> fault cannot be repaired using what has been learned earlier and needs
to create a special team to deal with <strong>the</strong> fault. This requires <strong>the</strong> emergence <strong>of</strong> a new activity
‘Transient report activity’.
The ability to self organize at local levels in response to a wide variety <strong>of</strong> external changes which
implies changes to network operations to meet newly negotiated requirements. This <strong>of</strong>ten
requires reassessment <strong>of</strong> responsibilities and rearranging relationships between people in <strong>the</strong>
business. This can mean adding new artifacts, changing people responsibilities and adding new
roles,
Ways to quickly set up new relationships that add to a person’s knowledge (Cross, Thomas,
2011) needed to accomplish <strong>the</strong>ir responsibility.
The community model easily satisfies <strong>the</strong>se as it is possible to create new communities as needed.
Responding to unanticipated events through <strong>the</strong> creation <strong>of</strong> special purpose communities
(Hawryszkiewycz, 2007) – for example to create a team to respond to a system faults requiring
identification <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> cause <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fault.
3. Summary
This paper described a framework for designing collaborative architectures to maintain collaboration
between communities. It defined a community architecture as a combination <strong>of</strong> knowledge,
monitoring, coordinating and assisting communities. It <strong>the</strong>n defined ways to model such architectures
in detail. The detailed modeled focused on selected relationships. It <strong>the</strong>n defined a way to model
knowledge flows based on living systems <strong>the</strong>ory. This defined message flows through <strong>the</strong> system and
<strong>the</strong> responsibilities for processing for each role. These are <strong>the</strong>n used to define <strong>the</strong> services to be
provided for each role.
References
Cova, B., Salle, R. (2008): “Marketing solutions in accordance with S-D logic: Co-creating value with customer
network actors” Industrial Marketing Management 37, pp. 270-277, Elsevier Press
Cross, R., Thomas, R. (2011): “A Smarter Way to Network” Harvard Business Review, July-August, 2011, pp.
149-153.
Hawryszkiewycz, I.T. (2010): Knowledge Management: Organizing <strong>the</strong> Knowledge Based Enterprise: Palgrave-
Macmillan.
Hawryszkiewycz, I.T. (2007): “Lightweight Technologies for Knowledge Based Collaborative Applications”
<strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> IEEE CEC/EEE2007 <strong>Conference</strong> on E-Commerce Technology, Tokyo, July 2007, pp.
255-264.
Kovacs, A.I., Ueno, H. (2004): “Towards Complex Adaptive Information Systems” <strong>Proceedings</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 2 nd
<strong>International</strong> <strong>Conference</strong> on Information Technology and Application,
Lane, T., Swanson, G.A. (1993): “Application <strong>of</strong> Living Systems Theory to <strong>the</strong> Study <strong>of</strong> Management and
Organizational Behavior, Vol. 38, No.3.
McAfee, A.P. (2006): “Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn <strong>of</strong> Emergent Collaboration” MIT Sloan Management Review,
Spring 2006, pp. 21-28.
Mintzberg, H. (2009): “Rebuilding Companies as Communities” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84, No. 4, July-
August, 2009, pp. 140-143.
Merali, Y., McKelvey, B. (2006): “Using Complexity Science to effect a paradigm shift in Information systems for
<strong>the</strong> 21 st . century” Journal <strong>of</strong> Information Technology 21, pp. 211-215.
Miller, J. (1978): “Living Systems” McGraw-Hill, New York.
Pisano, G.P., Verganti, R. (2008): “What Kind <strong>of</strong> Collaboration is Right for You”. Harvard Business Review, Vol.
83, No. 8, December 2008, pp. 80-86.
232