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