Understanding the Dynamics of Service-Oriented Architecture Implementation

Abstract Despite the potential benefits, many organizations have failed in service-oriented architecture (SOA) implementation projects. Prior research often used a variance perspective and neglected to explore the complex interactions and timing dependencies between the critical success factors. This study adopts a process perspective to capture the dynamics while providing a new explanation for the mixed outcomes of SOA implementation. We develop a system dynamics model and use simulation analysis to demonstrate the phenomenon of “tipping point.” That is, under certain conditions, even a small reduction in the duration of normative commitment can dramatically reverse, from success to failure, the outcome of an SOA implementation. The simulation results also suggest that (1) the duration of normative commitment can play a more critical role than the strength, and (2) the minimal duration of normative commitment for a successful SOA implementation is associated positively with the information delay of organizational learning of SOA knowledge. Finally, we discuss the theoretical causes and organizational traps associated with SOA implementation to help IT managers make better decisions about their implementation projects.

[1]  Nancy M. Lorenzi,et al.  Organizational ISSUES=change , 2003, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[2]  Jae Choi,et al.  The Impact of SOA Implementation on IT-Business Alignment: A System Dynamics Approach , 2013, TMIS.

[3]  Lawrence B. Mohr,et al.  Explaining Organizational Behavior: The Limits and Possibilities of Theory and Research. , 1983 .

[4]  Qing Hu,et al.  Assimilation of Enterprise Systems: The Effect of Institutional Pressures and the Mediating Role of Top Management , 2007, MIS Q..

[5]  N. Allen,et al.  Assessing dissimilarity relations under missing data conditions: evidence from computer simulations. , 2007, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  E. Clemons,et al.  Newly vulnerable markets in an age of pure information products: an analysis of online music and online news , 2002, Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[7]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[8]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[9]  Erica L. Wagner,et al.  Networks, negotiations, and new times: the implementation of enterprise resource planning into an academic administration , 2003, Inf. Organ..

[10]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  Dominant actors, political agendas, and strategic shifts over time: a critical ethnography of an enterprise systems implementation , 2004, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[11]  J Swanson,et al.  Business Dynamics—Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World , 2002, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[12]  Jung Hoon Lee,et al.  Critical Success Factors in SOA Implementation: An Exploratory Study , 2010, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[13]  Jae Choi,et al.  Implementing Service-Oriented Architecture in Organizations , 2010, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[14]  Walter Brenner,et al.  Where to Start with SOA: Criteria for Selecting SOA Projects , 2008, Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008).

[15]  Nelson P. Repenning,et al.  A Simulation-Based Approach to Understanding the Dynamics of Innovation Implementation , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[16]  Daniel M. Yellin,et al.  Enablers and benefits of implementing Service-Oriented Architecture: an empirical investigation , 2010, Int. J. Inf. Technol. Manag..

[17]  Jeffrey L. Brudney,et al.  Public Sector Information Technology Initiatives , 1998 .

[18]  K. Arrow.  The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing , 1962 .

[19]  Fethi A. Rabhi,et al.  Service-Oriented Architectures: Myth or Reality? , 2012, IEEE Software.

[20]  Daniel Beimborn,et al.  The influence of SOA governance mechanisms on IT flexibility and service reuse , 2013, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[21]  Nick Wailes.  The False Promise of Technological Determinism: The Case of Enterprise Resource Planning Systems , 2006 .

[22]  A. Pettigrew.  Longitudinal Field Research on Change: Theory and Practice , 1990 .

[23]  W. Orlikowski.  The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations , 2014 .

[24]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  CASE Tools as Organizational Change: Investigating Incremental and Radical Changes in Systems Development , 1993, MIS Q..

[25]  Michael Goul,et al.  Service-Oriented Methodology for Systems Development , 2013, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[26]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[27]  Karen Locke.  Grounded Theory in Management Research , 2000 .

[28]  David M. Weiss,et al.  Dynamics of concurrent software development , 2009 .

[29]  J.D. Sterman,et al.  Nobody Ever Gets Credit for Fixing Problems That Never Happened: Creating and Sustaining Process Improvement , 2001, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[30]  Robert J. Kauffman,et al.  An Interdisciplinary Perspective on IT Services Management and Service Science , 2010, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[31]  John D. Sterman,et al.  Business dynamics : systems thinking and modelling for acomplex world , 2002 .

[32]  Jeanne W. Ross,et al.  Learning to Implement Enterprise Systems: An Exploratory Study of the Dialectics of Change , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[33]  M. Sastry.  Problems and Paradoxes in a Model of Punctuated Organizational Change , 1997 .

[34]  Qianhui Althea Liang,et al.  SOA Performance Enhancement Through XML Fragment Caching , 2012, Inf. Syst. Res..

[35]  Mark Keil,et al.  The Effect of an Initial Budget and Schedule Goal on Software Project Escalation , 2012, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[36]  Gary Klein,et al.  Achieving IT Program Goals with Integrative Conflict Management , 2014, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[37]  Diane M. Strong,et al.  Technological Embeddedness and Organizational Change , 2007, Organ. Sci..

[38]  Jenny W. Rudolph,et al.  The Dynamics of Action-Oriented Problem Solving: Linking Interpretation and Choice , 2009 .

[39]  Frank Leymann,et al.  Service-Oriented Computing , 2008, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[40]  Gerold Riempp,et al.  Understanding the Economic Potential of Service-Oriented Architecture , 2010, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[41]  Franziska Zellweger,et al.  Faculty Adoption of Educational Technology , 2007 .

[42]  V. Vroom.  Work and motivation , 1964 .

[43]  Michel Avital,et al.  SAP implementation at Metalica: an organizational drama in two acts , 2000, J. Inf. Technol..

[44]  Sanjay Bose,et al.  Impact of service-oriented architecture on enterprise systems, organizational structures, and individuals , 2005, IBM Syst. J..

[45]  Mike P. Papazoglou,et al.  Introduction: Service-oriented computing , 2003, CACM.

[46]  Stuart E. Madnick,et al.  Software Project Dynamics: An Integrated Approach , 1991 .

[47]  Evangelos Katsamakas,et al.  Information systems research with system dynamics , 2008 .

[48]  Luba Cherbakov,et al.  Impact of service orientation at the business level , 2005, IBM Syst. J..

[49]  Nelson P. Repenning,et al.  Capability Traps and Self-Confirming Attribution Errors in the Dynamics of Process Improvement , 2002 .

[50]  Abdul Allam,et al.  Increasing business flexibility and SOA adoption through effective SOA governance , 2008, IBM Syst. J..

[51]  Lan Cao,et al.  Modeling dynamics in agile software development , 2004, TMIS.

[52]  J. Kotter.  Leading change: why transformation efforts fail , 2009, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[53]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics , 1984 .

[54]  Fethi A. Rabhi,et al.  Service Oriented Computing in Practice - An Agenda for Research into the Factors Influencing the Organizational Adoption of Service Oriented Architectures , 2009, J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res..