Centralized vs. decentralized computing : organizational considerations and management options

The long-standing debate over whether to centralize or decentralize computing is examined in terms of the fundamental organizational and economic factors at stake. The traditional debate is examined and found to focus predominantly on issues of efficiency vs. effectiveness, with solutions based on a rationalistic strategy of optimizing in this tradeoff. A more behavioralistic assessment suggests that the driving issues in the debate are the politics of organization and resources, centering on the issue of control. The economics of computing deployment decisions is presented as an important issue, but one that often serves as a field of argument that is based on more political concerns. The current situation facing managers of computing, given the advent of small and comparatively inexpensive computers, is examined in detail, and a set of management options for dealing with this persistent issue is presented

The industrial relations implications of automation

Thesis (M.S.)--Boston Universit

Impersonal efficiency and the dangers of a fully automated securities exchange

This report identifies impersonal efficiency as a driver of market automation during the past four decades, and speculates about the future problems it might pose. The ideology of impersonal efficiency is rooted in a mistrust of financial intermediaries such as floor brokers and specialists. Impersonal efficiency has guided the development of market automation towards transparency and impersonality, at the expense of human trading floors. The result has been an erosion of the informal norms and human judgment that characterize less anonymous markets. We call impersonal efficiency an ideology because we do not think that impersonal markets are always superior to markets built on social ties. This report traces the historical origins of this ideology, considers the problems it has already created in the recent Flash Crash of 2010, and asks what potential risks it might pose in the future

A new approach to the organizational structure of library staff at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

The scope of this dissertation is not to provide an organization chart for the library system of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece but to define each unit in the system and its relation and interaction with other units and groups in order to apply a new way of organizing library staff. Reviewing the major theories of organization provides us with the basic knowledge on the function of organizing. Academic libraries in the United Kingdom and the United States have used various methods of organizing staff. This experience is analyzed in chapters three and four along with some alternative methods in chapter five. The use of computers in libraries has introduced many changes and we examine the extend of impact on the organization of library staff. Having analyzed the major aspects of library staff organization we suggest a different organization for the library staff of Aristotle University of Thessaloniki

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TRANSITIONS IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE: A COMPARISON OF SCANDINAVIA AND THE UNITED STATES

New information technologies have the potential for transforming the ways governments are organized, the activities they perform, the manner which they are performed, and the nature of work itself. Governments in the US and Scandinavia have followed fundamental different approaches to the introduction of computing and to dealing with its effects. In the US, automation has been individualistic— each individual unit of government has introduced the technology for its own needs. For the most part, the systems that have been implemented have been small scale, have followed functional lines, have merely automated existing operations, have been implemented incrementally, and have evolved slowly over time. In contrast, in Scandinavia automation has been communal-systems have been designed, developed, and implemented by communal data processing agencies serving an entire level of government-national or local. The systems that have been introduced have been relatively large scale, have crossed functional lines, have involved the reorganization of work, have integrated both data and work processes, and have been implemented more or less simultaneously for all units or agencies of government. These differences in approach to automation have influences each country’s view of the role of government in anticipating and dealing with the effects of changes in computer technology on the public workforce

Responsive Production in Manufacturing: A Modular Architecture

[EN] This paper proposes an architecture aiming at promoting the convergence of the physical and digital worlds, through CPS and IoT technologies, to accommodate more customized and higher quality products following Industry 4.0 concepts. The architecture combines concepts such as cyber-physical systems, decentralization, modularity and scalability aiming at responsive production. Combining these aspects with virtualization, contextualization, modeling and simulation capabilities it will enable self-adaptation, situational awareness and decentralized decision-making to answer dynamic market demands and support the design and reconfiguration of the manufacturing enterprise.The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union H2020 project C2 NET (FoF-01-2014) nr 636909.Marques, M.; Agostinho, C.; Zacharewicz, G.; Poler, R.; Jardim-Goncalves, R. (2018). Responsive Production in Manufacturing: A Modular Architecture. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control. 140:231-254. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78437-3_10S231254140European Commission: For a European Industrial Renaissance, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions (2014)Hartmann, B., King, W.P., Narayanan, S.: Digital manufacturing: the revolution will be virtualized. McKinsey & Company (2015)European Forum for Manufacture: Driving Innovation and Growth in European Manufacturing (2015)European Factories of the Future Research Association (EFFRA): Factories of the Future: Multi-annual Roadmap for the Contractual PPP under the Horizon 2020 (2013)European Commission: Horizon 2020—Work Programme 2016–2017: 17. Cross-cutting Activities (2016)Schlaepfer, R.C., Koch, M., Merkofer, P.: Industry 4.0 challenges and solutions for the digital transformation and use of exponential technologies. Deloitte AG (2015)7iD: Industry 4.0. https://www.7id.com/technology/industry-4-0/ (2016)European Commission: Horizon 2020—Work Program 2016-2017—Cross-cutting Activities, 25 July 2016EFFRA: Factories of the Future: Multi-annual Roadmap for the Contractual PPP under the Horizon 2020 (2013)FInES Research Roadmap Task Force (2012)Jacinto, J.: Smart manufacturing? Industry 4.0? What’s it all about? Siements Totally Integrated Automation, Automation World & Design World (2014)Monostori, L.: Cyber-physical production systems: roots, expectations and R&D challenges. Procedia CIRP 17, 9–13 (2014)Adolphs, P.: RAMI 4.0—An architectural Model for Industrie 4.0. Platform Industrie 4.0 (2015)Collins, M.: Why America has a shortage of skilled workers. Industry Week (2015)Forbes, J., Naujok, N., Geissbauer, R., Vedso, J., Schrauf, S.: Industry 4.0: building the digital enterprise. PWC (2016)World Economic Forum Industrial Internet Survey (2014)Chen, D., Vernadat, F.B.: Enterprise interoperability: a standardisation view. Enterprise Inter- and Intra-Organizational Integration, Volume 108 of the series IFIP—The International Federation for Information Processing, pp. 273–282 (2003)Yan, L., Li, Z., Yuan, X.: Study on method-of-robust-multidisciplinary-design-collaborative-decision for product design. Inf. Technol. J. 8(4), 441–452 (2009)Ruiz Dominguez, G. A.: Caractérisation de l’activité de conception collaborative à distance: étude des effets de synchronisation cognitive (2005)Jung, J.J.: Reusing ontology mappings for query routing in semantic peer-to-peer environment. Inf. Sci. (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2010.04.018Ranjan, R., Zhao, L., Wu, X., Liu, A., Quiroz, A., Parashar, M.: Peer-to-Peer Cloud Provisioning: Service Discovery and Load-Balancing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84996-241-4_12Agostinho, C., Pinto, P., Jardim-goncalves, R.: Dynamic adaptors to support model-driven interoperability and enhance sensing enterprise networks. In: 19th World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC’14), Cape Town, South Africa (2014)Chen, D., Doumeingts, G., Vernadat, F.: Architectures for enterprise integration and interoperability: past, present and future. Comput. Ind. 59, 647–659 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2007.12.016Ducq, Y., Chen, D., Alix, T.: Principles of servitization and definition of an architecture for model driven service system engineering. In: 4th International IFIP Working Conference on Enterprise Interoperability (IWEI 2012), Harbin, China, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33068-17_12Elvesæter, B., Hahn, A., Berre, A., Neple, T.: Towards an interoperability framework for model-driven development of software systems. In: 1st International Conference on Interoperability Enterprise Software and Applications. Springer. http://www.springerlink.com/index/L10NU4306N054T6G.pdf (2005)OMG: MDA Guide Version 1.0.1 (omg/2003-06-01), Object Management Group. http://www.omg.org/cgibin/doc?omg/03-06-01.pdf (2003)Agostinho, C., Ducq, Y., Zacharewicz, G., Sarraipa, J., Lampathaki, F., Poler, R., Jardim-Goncalves, R.: Towards a sustainable interoperability in networked enterprise information systems: trends of knowledge and model-driven technology. Comput. Ind. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2015.07.001Santucci, G., Martinez, C., Vlad-câlcic, D.: The sensing enterprise. In: FInES Work. FIA 2012, Aalborg, Denmark. http://www.theinternetofthings.eu/sites/default/files/%5Buser-name%5D/Sensing-enterprise.pdf (2012)Sriram, R.: Smart networked systems and societies: what will the future look like? In: IEEE IT Professional Conference (IT Pro). IEEE Computer Society (2014)Manyika, J., Chui, M., Brown, B., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Roxburgh, C., et al.: Big data: the next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/big_data_the_next_frontier_for_innovation (2011)Zacharewicz, G., Diallo, S., Ducq, Y., Agostinho, C., Jardim-Goncalves, R., Bazoun, H., Wang, Z., Doumeingts, G.: Model-based approaches for interoperability of next generation enterprise information systems: state of the art and future challenges. Inf. Syst. e-Bus. Manag. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-016-0317-8Jardim-Goncalves, R., Agostinho, C., Steiger-Garcao, A.: A reference model for sustainable interoperability in networked enterprises: towards the foundation of EI science base. Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 25(10) (2012). (Special Issue on Collaborative Manufacturing and Supply Chains). https://doi.org/10.1080/0951192x.2011.653831Schatsky, D., Muraskin, C.: Blockchain is coming to disrupt your industry. Deloitte (2015)Shi, J., Wan, J., Yan, H., Suo, H.: A survey of cyber-physical systems. In: International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing, pp. 1–6 (2011)Rajkumar, R.: Workshop report on foundations for innovation in cyber-physical systems. NIST. http://www.nist.gov/el/upload/CPS-WorkshopReport-1-30-13-Final.pdf/ (2013)Lee, J., Lapira, E., Yang, S. Kao, H.-A.: Predictive manufacturing system trends of next generation production systems. In: 11th IFAC Workshop on Intelligent Manufacturing Systems, vol. 11, issue 1, pp. 150–156 (2013)IDC: The digital universe of opportunities: rich data and increasing value of the internet of things. EMC Digital Universe. emc.com/collateral/analyst-reports/idc-digital-universe-2014.pdf . (2014)Baheti, R., Gill, H.: Cyber-physical systems. Impact Control Technol. 1–6 (2011)Lee, J., Bagheri, B., Kao, H.-A.: A cyber physical systems architecture for Industry 4.0-based manufacturing system. Manuf. Lett. 2015, 3, 18–23 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mfglet.2014.12.001Bagheri, B., Lee, J.: Big future for cyber-physical manufacturing systems. Design World. http://www.designworldonline.com/big-future-for-cyber-physical-manufacturing-systems/ (2015)Lucke, D., Constantinescu, C., Westkämper, E.: Smart factory-a step towards the next generation of manufacturing. Manufacturing Systems and Technologies for the New Frontier, pp. 115–118. Springer, London (2008)Weiser, M.: The Computer for the 21st Century. Scientific American, Special Issue on Communications. Comput. Netw. (1991)Westkämper, E., Jendoubi, L., Eissele, M., Ertl, T.: Smart factory—bridging the gap between digital planning and reality. Manuf. Syst. 35(4), 307–314 (2006)Goryachev, A., Kozhevnikov, S., Kolbova, E., Kuznetsov, O., Simonova, E., Skobelev, P., Tsarev, A., Shepilov, Y.: Smart factory: intelligent system for workshop resource allocation, scheduling, optimization and controlling in real time. Adv. Mater. Res. 630, 508–513 (2012)Agostinho, C., Marques-Lucena, C., Sesana, M., Felic, A., Fischer, K., Rubattino, C., Sarraipa, J.: Osmosis process development for innovative product design and validation. 2015 ASME IMECE, Houston, USA (2015)Ko, J., Lee, B., Lee, K., Hong, S.G., Kim, N., Paek, J.: Sensor virtualization module: virtualizing IoT devices on mobile smartphones for effective sensor data management. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/730762Guo, T., Papaioannou, T.G., Aberer, K.: Efficient indexing and query processing of model-view sensor data in the cloud. J. Big Data Res. 1, 52–65 (2014)Kumra, S., Sharma, L., Khanna, Y., Chattri, A.: Analysing an industrial automation pyramid and providing service oriented architecture. Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol. 3(5), 586–594 (2012)Endsley, M.: Design and evaluation for situational awareness enhancement. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting. HFES, Santa Monica, pp. 97–10 (1988)Stanton, N.A., Chambers, P.R., Piggott, J.: Situational awareness and safety. Saf. Sci. 39(3), 189–204 (2001)Endsley, M.: Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum. Factors (The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society) 37, 32–64 (1995)Bedny, G., Meister, D.: Theory of activity and situation awareness. Int. J. Cogn. Ergon. 3(1), 63–72 (1999)Smith, K., Hancock, P.A.: Situation awareness is adaptive, externally directed consciousness. Hum. Factors (The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society) 37(1), 137–148 (1995)Ranganathan, A., Campbell, R.H.: An infrastructure for context-awareness based on first order logic. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 7(6), 353–364 (2003)Ning, K., Scholze, S., Marques, M., Campos, A, Neves-Silva, R. O’Sullivan, D.: A service oriented platform for context aware knowledge enhancing. In: 5th IFAC Conference on Management and Control of Production and Logistics (2010)Marques, M., Sucic, B., Vuk, T.: Context-based decision support for sustainable optimization of energy consumption. KES Trans. Sustain. Des. Manuf. 1(1), 899–910 (2014)Schneeweiss, C.: Distributed decision making in supply chain management. Int. J. Product. Econ. 84, 71–83 (2003)Alemany, M.M.E., Alarcón, F., Lario, F.C., Boj, J.J.: An application to support the temporal and spatial distributed decision-making process in supply chain collaborative planning. Comput. Ind. 62(5), 519–540 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2011.02.002Hong, I.H., Ammons, J.C., Realff, M.J.: Centralized versus decentralized decision-making for recycled material flows. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42(4), 1172–1177 (2008)Pibernik, R., Sucky, E.: An approach to inter-domain master planning in supply chains. Int. J. Product. Econ. 108, 200–212 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2006.12.010Lee, H., Whang, S.: Decentralized multi-echelon supply chains: incentives and information. Manag. Sci. 45(5), 633–640 (1999)Jung, H., Chen, F., Jeong, B.: Decentralized supply chain planning framework for third party logistics partnership. Comput. Ind. Eng. 55(2), 348–364 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2007.12.017Wang, K.-J., Chen, M.-J.: Cooperative capacity planning and resource allocation by mutual outsourcing using ant algorithm in a decentralized supply chain. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(2), 2831–2842 (2009)Simon, H.A.: The Science of the Artificial, 1st edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, (1969). (3rd ed. in 1996, MIT Press)Mesarovic, M.D., Masko, D., Takahara, Y.: Theory of Hierarchical Multilevel Systems. Academic Press, New York and London (1970)Camarinha-Matos, L.M., Afsarmanesh, H.J.: Collaborative networks: a new scientific discipline. J. Intell. Manuf. 16(4), 439–452 (2005)Popplewell, K., Stojanovic, N., Abecker, A., Apostolou, D., Mentzas, G., Harding, J.: Supporting adaptive enterprise collaboration through semantic knowledge services. In: Enterprise Interoperability Iii: New Challenges and Industrial Approaches, pp. 381–393 (2008). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-221-0_30Agostinho, C., Ducq, Y., Zacharewicz, G., Sarraipa, J., Lampathaki, F., Jardim-Goncalves, R., Poler, R.: Towards a sustainable interoperability in networked enterprise information systems: trends of knowledge and model-driven technology. Accepted for Publication at Computers in Industry. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2015.07.001Agostinho, C., Jardim-Gonçalves, R.: Sustaining interoperability of networked liquid-sensing enterprises: a complex systems perspective. Annu. Rev. Control 39, 128–143 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2015.03.012Weichhart, G., Molina, A., Chen, D., Whitman, L. E., Vernadat, F.: Challenges and current developments for sensing, smart and sustainable enterprise systems. Computers in Industry (2015). http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2015.07.002Weichhart, G.: Supporting Interoperability for Chaotic and Complex Adaptive Enterprise Systems. On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2013 Workshops. Confederated International Workshops: OTM Academy, OTM Industry Case Studies Program, ACM, EI2N, ISDE, META4eS, ORM, SeDeS, SINCOM, SMS, and SOMOCO 2013. Proceedings: LNCS 8186, 86–92. (2013). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41033-8_14Truex, D.P., Baskerville, R., Klein, H.: Growing systems in emergent organizations. Mag. Commun. ACM CACM Homepage Arch. 42(8), 117–123 (1999)Weiberg, S.: Facilitating collaborative decision-making in six steps. International Association of Facilitators Annual Meeting, pp. 14–15 (1999)Delbecq, A.L., VandeVen, A.H.: A group process model for problem identification and program planning. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 7, 466–492 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1177/002188637100700404Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA (1980

Multi Agent Systems in Logistics: A Literature and State-of-the-art Review

Based on a literature survey, we aim to answer our main question: “How should we plan and execute logistics in supply chains that aim to meet today’s requirements, and how can we support such planning and execution using IT?†Today’s requirements in supply chains include inter-organizational collaboration and more responsive and tailored supply to meet specific demand. Enterprise systems fall short in meeting these requirements The focus of planning and execution systems should move towards an inter-enterprise and event-driven mode. Inter-organizational systems may support planning going from supporting information exchange and henceforth enable synchronized planning within the organizations towards the capability to do network planning based on available information throughout the network. We provide a framework for planning systems, constituting a rich landscape of possible configurations, where the centralized and fully decentralized approaches are two extremes. We define and discuss agent based systems and in particular multi agent systems (MAS). We emphasize the issue of the role of MAS coordination architectures, and then explain that transportation is, next to production, an important domain in which MAS can and actually are applied. However, implementation is not widespread and some implementation issues are explored. In this manner, we conclude that planning problems in transportation have characteristics that comply with the specific capabilities of agent systems. In particular, these systems are capable to deal with inter-organizational and event-driven planning settings, hence meeting today’s requirements in supply chain planning and execution.supply chain;MAS;multi agent systems