FromInteroperability
toInstalled Base Cultivation
Interoperability
• Interoperability = standards• Interoperability = paradise/nirvana?• The more the better?• Conflicts between interoperabilities?
Infrastructures• Evolve – not designed from scratch• Infrastructure design = shaping the evolution• Infra design strategy = process strategy
• Need– European Process Strategy– European Process Framework– European Process Architecture
• Interoperability generates processes
The EU’s eCustoms Initiative
eCustoms• Harmonizing, streamlining customs declarations in EU
(since 90-ies)• Aim:
– Originally: 25% cost reductions for traders: ”Single window”– Later: security
• Increased trade/globalization– New risks: Mad cow, terror, counterfeit, ..– Containers, big hubs– New customs control procedures
• From transaction to system based control
Figure 6. Development of the European e-Customs information infrastructure 2000-2010
Figure 5. Information flows in an export process
System abbreviations:ECS: Export Control SystemEORI: European Operators Registration and identification systemASS: Agriculture Subvention SystemEMCS: European Movement Control SystemCRMS: Customs Risk Management Systems
Figure 4. Organization of e-Customs projects at EU, national, and trader level.
EU DomainStrategy/Programme Projects
EU DomainStrategy/Programme Projects
NCTSNCTSMulti-Annual Strategic PlanMulti-Annual Strategic Plan
Customs 2002
Customs 2007
Customs 2013
ECSECS
ICSICS
AEOAEO
EORIEORI
......
Danish DomainProjects/Subprojects
Danish DomainProjects/Subprojects
e-Customs Projecte-Customs Project
NCTSNCTS
ECSECS
ICSICSAEOAEO
EORIEORI
......
Arla DomainProjects
Arla DomainProjects
Adaption projectsAdaption projects
ECSECS
ICSICS
TGB15 International Trade Single Window
TBG14 International Supply Chain Model & TBG2 UNeDocs Data Model
TBG17 UN/CEFACT Core Component Library
United Trade Data Elements Directory (UNTED)
TBG18Agriculture
TBG2Digital Paper
TBG15Trade Facilitation
TBG8Insurance
TBG19eGov
TBG1Supply Chain
TBG4WCO DM
TBG3Transport
TBG13Environment
TBG5Finance
Figure 3. UN/CEFACT International Trade and Business Processes Group (TBG) and key relationships between these working groups. Redrawn from Dill (2007).
Development activities
• First step: Transit system– Aim: One common export system– Extensive adaptation to national installed base
• Next: Export system– Developed one system in each country (=27
independent implementation of the same spec.)
• Next …– Aim: One common system …
Plus
• For each new system:– Control (RM) systems build on top of customs
systems– Additional data collected for control purposes
Dynamics• More trade, more risk, more needs for control• New systems for customs declaration
– => new opportunities for building new control systems
• Adapted to (national) installed base– => more stability– => more fragmentation
• Traders need to adapt their system to 27 diff. National IIs
Status
• National IB increasingly more complex• More fragmentation – increasingly frozen• Moved in wrong direction – harder to change
direction
• Conflicts between RM/control and efficiency• Conflict between national and European
interoperbility
The shaping of the evolution of the eCustoms II
• Process strategy: Specification driven, one system at the time
• Architecture: tight coupling within national IIs, loose coupling between national IIs (outcome of gov. regime)
• Governance: Loosely coupling between tightly coupled national projects, traders detached
• All wrong
Alternative?
• Process strategy: Evolutionary, learning focused
• Architecture: loose coupling within national IIs, tight coupling between national IIs, (minimum data), traders connected through one European portal/gateway
• Governance: Tight coupling between loosely coupled national projects, traders integrated
Critical issue
• Understanding complexity– Network effects/externalities– Process, path dependency (& lock-in)
• Complexities cannot be managed!– Avoid creating it!
Design principles: Installed Base Cultivation
• Bootstrapping• Simplicity
– Maximum feasible simplicity– Maximum imaginable complexity– Minimum imaginable simplicity
• gateways
Granovetter/Schelling model
• Ex: Dying seminar, crossing a street
• Our preferences depends on others actions• Preferences vary• Processes depends on distribution of
preferences• Small changes may have large effects
Growing networks
• Manipulating preferences• Arranging users• Bootstrapping
’Bootstrapping’
• Enclocypedia: ’She bootstrapped herself to the top’ – to manage on one’s own
• Lifting yourselves by your hair• Booting a computer• Implementing a programming language• Language learning• Making a tool/network by means of the tool/network• ”Deliver a better today, rather than promise a better
tomorrow”. • Late adopters adopt because the others have already• First adopters must adopt for another reason
Identifying and arranging preferences• Multi-dimensional• Personal, individual• Use areas and situations• Technological aspects• Coordination/governance structures• Arranging preferences and dimensions
(dynamically)
Bootstrapping Network Technologies
• Select motivated and knowledgeable users• Simple, non-critical, non-complicated use
areas where no large organisational changes are required.
• Select simple, relatively cheap and well supported technical solutions.
• Users first, then functionality/technology
Individual/personal preferences
• Motivation, attitudes towards technology• Knowledge about technology
Aspects of use areas and situations
• Resources• Benefits of communication within a small
network• Critical/non-critical activities• Complexity of tasks and work practices• Organizational changes needed
Aspects of technology
• “Distance” between users and designers/vendors
• complexity• costs• flexibility• “allied with the future”
Coordination and governance
• Structures and institutions have to be established (bootstrapped)
• “Standardization bodies”– Technology (protocols)– Work practices/procedures (protocols)
• (The Internet is an example to learn from in this respect as well)
Interdependencies and conflicts
• Highest benefits: – Radical change, – critical situations– complex technology
• Advance along one dimension before another• In general: use (enrol more users) before
technology
Design strategy 1
• Start with– simple, cheap, flexible solution– small network of users that may benefit
significantly from improved com. with each other only
– simple practices– non-critical practices– motivated users– knowledgeable users
Design strategy 2
1. Repeat as long as possible: enrol more users2. Find and implement more innovative use, go to 13. Use solution in more critical cases, go to 14. Use solution in more complex cases, go to 15. Improve the solution so new tasks can be supported
Lock-in and gateways
• Large networks are never made from scratch – extending and improving the installed base
• Backward compatibility• EPR: institutionalised (standardized network) of
practices• Fit/support existing practices (otherwise no
bootstrapping)• Makes a larger network – harder to change• Gateways between old and new networks:
connected and different
Changing networks & infrastructures
• Extensions – transformations• Changing large infra: Changing individual
modules
Change strategies
• “Flag day”– Everybody changes at the same time– Requires tight coordination– Coordination must be possible– Now needs for technological support
• Continuous– No coordination needed– Needs technological support
Example 1: IPv6
• Extending functionality (range)• Continuous change• Tunnelling (=gateways)
Example 2: E-mail
• Many gateways : Internet, AOL, nets based on proprietary prot( cc:mail ++)
• Permanent solution • Not trivial (addresses)
Example 3: NORDUNET
• Nordic universities: Establish interoperability– Many different networks:– HEPnet: physicists (CERN), DEC– EARN: ?, EDB-centres, IBM– Internet: computer science, – ....
• Strategy: Common protocol - OSI !!• Different interests – all users wanted a quick solution, i.e. based
on their existing technology• OSI – slow progress, complicated, …• Flow of money was about to be closed• Had to find a pragmatic solution! Fast!
Solution
• Tried out various strategies and technologies, ..
• Two important events occurred:– IBM wanted to transfer EARN to the univ.– A Cisco-router that also was running DECnet, IBM,
X.25 over IP appeared
The NORDUNET Plug
IBM
DECnet
IP
Gateways
• Important because– Quick, efficient, well working solution– Compromise: Everybody’s interests were
accounted for
• Were considered traitors in the rest of Europe
Further developments
• Made connections to other networks easy – install SW on own computer– Especially relevant for Internet– dual stack solutions
• Caused transition to Internet• Important reason behind Scandinavia’s early
adoption of the Internet