A reference architecture for the collaborative planning modelling process in multi-tier supply chain networks: a Zachman-based approach

A prominent and contemporary challenge for supply chain (SC) managers concerns the coordination of the efforts of the nodes of the SC in order to mitigate unpredictable market behaviour and satisfy variable customer demand. A productive response to this challenge is to share pertinent market-related information, on a timely basis, in order to effectively manage the decision-making associated with the SC production and transportation planning processes. This paper analyses the most well-known reference modelling languages and frameworks in the collaborative SC field and proposes a novel reference architecture, based upon the Zachman Framework (ZF), for supporting collaborative plan- ning (CP) in multi-level, SC networks. The architecture is applied to an automotive supply chain configuration, where, under a collaborative and decentralised approach, improvements in the service levels for each node were observed. The architecture was shown to provide the base discipline for the organisation of the processes required to manage the CP activity.The authors thanks the support from the project 'Operations Design and Management in Global Supply Chains (GLOBOP)' (Ref. DPI2012-38061-C02-01), funded by the Ministry of Science and Education of Spain, for the supply chain environment research contribution.Hernández Hormazábal, JE.; Lyons, AC.; Poler, R.; Mula, J.; Goncalves, R. (2014). A reference architecture for the collaborative planning modelling process in multi-tier supply chain networks: a Zachman-based approach. Production Planning and Control. 25(13-14):1118-1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2013.808842S111811342513-14Al-Mutawah, K., Lee, V., & Cheung, Y. (2008). A new multi-agent system framework for tacit knowledge management in manufacturing supply chains. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 20(5), 593-610. doi:10.1007/s10845-008-0142-0Baïna, S., Panetto, H., & Morel, G. (2009). New paradigms for a product oriented modelling: Case study for traceability. Computers in Industry, 60(3), 172-183. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2008.12.004Berasategi, L., Arana, J., & Castellano, E. (2011). A comprehensive framework for collaborative networked innovation. Production Planning & Control, 22(5-6), 581-593. doi:10.1080/09537287.2010.536628Chan, H. K., & Chan, F. T. S. (2009). A review of coordination studies in the context of supply chain dynamics. International Journal of Production Research, 48(10), 2793-2819. doi:10.1080/00207540902791843Chen, D., Doumeingts, G., & Vernadat, F. (2008). Architectures for enterprise integration and interoperability: Past, present and future. Computers in Industry, 59(7), 647-659. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2007.12.016Choi, Y., Kang, D., Chae, H., & Kim, K. (2006). An enterprise architecture framework for collaboration of virtual enterprise chains. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 35(11-12), 1065-1078. doi:10.1007/s00170-006-0789-7Choi, Y., Kim, K., & Kim, C. (2005). A design chain collaboration framework using reference models. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 26(1-2), 183-190. doi:10.1007/s00170-004-2262-9COLQUHOUN, G. J., BAINES, R. W., & CROSSLEY, R. (1993). A state of the art review of IDEFO. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 6(4), 252-264. doi:10.1080/09511929308944576Danilovic, M., & Winroth, M. (2005). A tentative framework for analyzing integration in collaborative manufacturing network settings: a case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 22(1-2), 141-158. doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2004.11.008Derrouiche, R., Neubert, G., Bouras, A., & Savino, M. (2010). B2B relationship management: a framework to explore the impact of collaboration. Production Planning & Control, 21(6), 528-546. doi:10.1080/09537287.2010.488932Dudek, G., & Stadtler, H. (2005). Negotiation-based collaborative planning between supply chains partners. European Journal of Operational Research, 163(3), 668-687. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.01.014Gruat La Forme, F.-A., Genoulaz, V. B., & Campagne, J.-P. (2007). A framework to analyse collaborative performance. Computers in Industry, 58(7), 687-697. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2007.05.007Gutiérrez Vela, F. L., Isla Montes, J. L., Paderewski Rodríguez, P., Sánchez Román, M., & Jiménez Valverde, B. (2007). An architecture for access control management in collaborative enterprise systems based on organization models. Science of Computer Programming, 66(1), 44-59. doi:10.1016/j.scico.2006.10.005Hernández, J. E., Poler, R., Mula, J., & Lario, F. C. (2010). The Reverse Logistic Process of an Automobile Supply Chain Network Supported by a Collaborative Decision-Making Model. Group Decision and Negotiation, 20(1), 79-114. doi:10.1007/s10726-010-9205-7Hernández, J. E., J. Mula, R. Poler, and A. C. Lyons. 2013. “Collaborative Planning in Multi-Tier Supply Chains Supported by a Negotiation-Based Mechanism and Multi-Agent System.”Group Decision and Negotiation Journal. doi:10.1007/s10726-013-9358-2.Jardim-Goncalves, R., Grilo, A., Agostinho, C., Lampathaki, F., & Charalabidis, Y. (2013). Systematisation of Interoperability Body of Knowledge: the foundation for Enterprise Interoperability as a science. Enterprise Information Systems, 7(1), 7-32. doi:10.1080/17517575.2012.684401Kampstra, R. P., Ashayeri, J., & Gattorna, J. L. (2006). Realities of supply chain collaboration. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 17(3), 312-330. doi:10.1108/09574090610717509Kim, W., Chung, M. J., Qureshi, K., & Choi, Y. K. (2006). WSCPC: An architecture using semantic web services for collaborative product commerce. Computers in Industry, 57(8-9), 787-796. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2006.04.007Ku, K.-C., Kao, H.-P., & Gurumurthy, C. K. (2007). Virtual inter-firm collaborative framework—An IC foundry merger/acquisition project. Technovation, 27(6-7), 388-401. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2007.02.010LEE, J., GRUNINGER, M., JIN, Y., MALONE, T., TATE, A., YOST, G., & OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PIF WORKING GROUP. (1998). The Process Interchange Format and Framework. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 13(1), 91-120. doi:10.1017/s0269888998001015Lee, J., Chae, H., Kim, C.-H., & Kim, K. (2009). Design of product ontology architecture for collaborative enterprises. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 2300-2309. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2007.12.042Liu, J., Zhang, S., & Hu, J. (2005). A case study of an inter-enterprise workflow-supported supply chain management system. Information & Management, 42(3), 441-454. doi:10.1016/j.im.2004.01.010Marques, D. M. N., & Guerrini, F. M. (2011). Reference model for implementing an MRP system in a highly diverse component and seasonal lean production environment. Production Planning & Control, 23(8), 609-623. doi:10.1080/09537287.2011.572469Mula, J., Peidro, D., & Poler, R. (2010). The effectiveness of a fuzzy mathematical programming approach for supply chain production planning with fuzzy demand. International Journal of Production Economics, 128(1), 136-143. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.06.007Murata, T. (1989). Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE, 77(4), 541-580. doi:10.1109/5.24143Noran, O. (2003). An analysis of the Zachman framework for enterprise architecture from the GERAM perspective. Annual Reviews in Control, 27(2), 163-183. doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2003.09.002Olorunniwo, F. O., & Li, X. (2010). Information sharing and collaboration practices in reverse logistics. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 15(6), 454-462. doi:10.1108/13598541011080437Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., … Green, P. (2009). Business Process Modeling- A Comparative Analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(04), 333-363. doi:10.17705/1jais.00193Rodriguez, K., & Al-Ashaab, A. (2005). Knowledge web-based system architecture for collaborative product development. Computers in Industry, 56(1), 125-140. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2004.07.004Romero, F., Company, P., Agost, M.-J., & Vila, C. (2008). Activity modelling in a collaborative ceramic tile design chain: an enhanced IDEF0 approach. Research in Engineering Design, 19(1), 1-20. doi:10.1007/s00163-007-0040-zSandberg, E. (2007). Logistics collaboration in supply chains: practice vs. theory. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 18(2), 274-293. doi:10.1108/09574090710816977Spekman, R. E., & Carraway, R. (2006). Making the transition to collaborative buyer–seller relationships: An emerging framework. Industrial Marketing Management, 35(1), 10-19. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2005.07.002Stevens, W. P., Myers, G. J., & Constantine, L. L. (1974). Structured design. IBM Systems Journal, 13(2), 115-139. doi:10.1147/sj.132.0115Ulieru, M. (2000). A multi-resolution collaborative architecture for web-centric global manufacturing. Information Sciences, 127(1-2), 3-21. doi:10.1016/s0020-0255(00)00026-8Van der Aalst, W. M. P. (1999). Formalization and verification of event-driven process chains. Information and Software Technology, 41(10), 639-650. doi:10.1016/s0950-5849(99)00016-6Zachman, J. A. (1987). A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 26(3), 276-292. doi:10.1147/sj.263.0276Zapp, M., Forster, C., Verl, A., & Bauernhansl, T. (2012). A Reference Model for Collaborative Capacity Planning Between Automotive and Semiconductor Industry. Procedia CIRP, 3, 155-160. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2012.07.028Zeng, Y., Wang, L., Deng, X., Cao, X., & Khundker, N. (2012). Secure collaboration in global design and supply chain environment: Problem analysis and literature review. Computers in Industry, 63(6), 545-556. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2012.05.00

Content-driven design and architecture of E-learning applications

E-learning applications combine content with learning technology systems to support the creation of content and its delivery to the learner. In the future, we can expect the distinction between learning content and its supporting infrastructure to become blurred. Content objects will interact with infrastructure services as independent objects. Our solution to the development of e-learning applications – content-driven design and architecture – is based on content-centric ontological modelling and development of architectures. Knowledge and modelling will play an important role in the development of content and architectures. Our approach integrates content with interaction (in technical and educational terms) and services (the principle organization for a system architecture), based on techniques from different fields, including software engineering, learning design, and knowledge engineering

A Process Framework for Semantics-aware Tourism Information Systems

The growing sophistication of user requirements in tourism due to the advent of new technologies such as the Semantic Web and mobile computing has imposed new possibilities for improved intelligence in Tourism Information Systems (TIS). Traditional software engineering and web engineering approaches cannot suffice, hence the need to find new product development approaches that would sufficiently enable the next generation of TIS. The next generation of TIS are expected among other things to: enable semantics-based information processing, exhibit natural language capabilities, facilitate inter-organization exchange of information in a seamless way, and evolve proactively in tandem with dynamic user requirements. In this paper, a product development approach called Product Line for Ontology-based Semantics-Aware Tourism Information Systems (PLOSATIS) which is a novel hybridization of software product line engineering, and Semantic Web engineering concepts is proposed. PLOSATIS is presented as potentially effective, predictable and amenable to software process improvement initiatives

Mercury: using the QuPreSS reference model to evaluate predictive services

Nowadays, lots of service providers offer predictive services that show in advance a condition or occurrence about the future. As a consequence, it becomes necessary for service customers to select the predictive service that best satisfies their needs. The QuPreSS reference model provides a standard solution for the selection of predictive services based on the quality of their predictions. QuPreSS has been designed to be applicable in any predictive domain (e.g., weather forecasting, economics, and medicine). This paper presents Mercury, a tool based on the QuPreSS reference model and customized to the weather forecast domain. Mercury measures weather predictive services' quality, and automates the context-dependent selection of the most accurate predictive service to satisfy a customer query. To do so, candidate predictive services are monitored so that their predictions can be eventually compared to real observations obtained from a trusted source. Mercury is a proof-of-concept of QuPreSS that aims to show that the selection of predictive services can be driven by the quality of their predictions. Throughout the paper, we show how Mercury was built from the QuPreSS reference model and how it can be installed and used.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Semantic web services for simulation component reuse and interoperability: An ontology approach

Commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Simulation Packages (CSPs) are widely used in industry primarily due to economic factors associated with developing proprietary software platforms. Regardless of their widespread use, CSPs have yet to operate across organizational boundaries. The limited reuse and interoperability of CSPs are affected by the same semantic issues that restrict the inter-organizational use of software components and web services. The current representations of Web components are predominantly syntactic in nature lacking the fundamental semantic underpinning required to support discovery on the emerging Semantic Web. The authors present new research that partially alleviates the problem of limited semantic reuse and interoperability of simulation components in CSPs. Semantic models, in the form of ontologies, utilized by the authors’ Web service discovery and deployment architecture provide one approach to support simulation model reuse. Semantic interoperation is achieved through a simulation component ontology that is used to identify required components at varying levels of granularity (i.e. including both abstract and specialized components). Selected simulation components are loaded into a CSP, modified according to the requirements of the new model and executed. The research presented here is based on the development of an ontology, connector software, and a Web service discovery architecture. The ontology is extracted from simulation scenarios involving airport, restaurant and kitchen service suppliers. The ontology engineering framework and discovery architecture provide a novel approach to inter-organizational simulation, by adopting a less intrusive interface between participants Although specific to CSPs this work has wider implications for the simulation community. The reason being that the community as a whole stands to benefit through from an increased awareness of the state-of-the-art in Software Engineering (for example, ontology-supported component discovery and reuse, and service-oriented computing), and it is expected that this will eventually lead to the development of a unique Software Engineering-inspired methodology to build simulations in future