Content uploaded by Brian Sauser
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Brian Sauser on Sep 23, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
A Framework for Enterprise Resilience
Using Service Oriented Architecture Approach
Ozgur Erol Mo Mansouri Brian Sauser
oerol@stevens.edu mo.mansouri@stevens.edu brian.sauser@stevens.edu
School of Systems and Enterprises
Stevens Institute of Technology
Hoboken, NJ USA
Abstract-This paper proposes a framework to create enterprise
resilience using service oriented architecture approach (SOA).
The proposed framework is based on two enablers of enterprise
resilience: i) the capability of an enterprise to connect systems,
people, processes, and information in a way that allows enterprise
to become more connected and responsive to the dynamics of its
environment, stakeholders, and competitors; ii) the alignment of
information technology and business goals. The former requires
inter and intra- enterprise level interoperability and integration,
and the latter requires simplification of the underlying
technology infrastructure and creation of a consolidated view of,
and access to, all available resources in the enterprise that can be
attained by well-defined enterprise architecture. Based on these
two key enablers, we outline a theoretical model which explains
how SOA can help in creating enterprise resilience. This model
defines enterprise resilience as a function of enterprise flexibility,
adaptability, agility, and efficiency.
Keywords- Enterprise resilience, enterprise integration,
enterprise architecture, service oriented architecture
I. INTRODUCTION
Today’s highly competitive global business environment is
dynamic and changing rapidly, creating opportunities and
threats for any enterprise. Enterprises must have the ability to
cope with emerging threats, adapt to turbulent environments,
and still be able to satisfy stakeholder needs in a timely fashion.
From a strategic perspective, enterprises need to develop
strategies to identify the key internal and external factors which
make them vulnerable to foreseen or unforeseen events. While
in most cases the external factors are beyond an enterprise’s
control, internal factors can often be adapted to within a
changing environment. Enterprises not only must have the
ability to rapidly change processes to satisfy emerging business
needs, but they must be capable of maintaining operations
during these potential disruptions. From an operational
perspective, enterprises need to structure themselves and align
their businesses with appropriate technology and be able to
access resources with limited and timely information while
rapidly changing processes to satisfy emerging demands. To
address this, most enterprises depend on interaction and the
sharing of information and resources within and across their
boundaries. This requires a shift from disintegrated and
centralized enterprise structures to more integrated, open and
collaborative enterprise structures [1]. Thus, driven by the need
to deal with disruption, adapt to turbulent environments, cope
with emerging threats, and stay competitive, enterprises are
forced to design their operations, infrastructures, and processes
to be more resilient and flexible.
II. ENTERPRISE RESILIENCE
A. Concept of Resilience
The concept of resilience has gained importance for
engineered systems as a way to address their increasing
complexity and to design systems that are not only more
reliable but also more resilient to withstand unanticipated
failures without catastrophic losses. Resilience is identified as
an inherent attribute of a system in most of the definitions
found in the literature. For example, Holling [2] defines
resilience as a system’s ability to absorb external stresses.
Hollnagel et al. [3] define resilience as a system’s capability to
create foresight, to recognize, to anticipate, and to defend
against the changing shape of risk before adverse consequences
occur. According to Rose and Liao[4], resilience refers to the
inherent ability and adaptive responses of systems that enable
them to avoid potential losses. Westrum [5] defines resilience
as the result of a system of preventing adverse consequences,
minimizing adverse consequences, and recovering quickly
from adverse consequences. Dalziell and McManus [6] define
resilience as a system’s overreaching goal of continuing to
function to the fullest possible extent in the face of stress to
achieve its purpose. Haimes et al. [7] suggest that resilience is
the ability of the system to withstand a major disruption within
acceptable degradation parameters and to recover within an
acceptable cost and time. Van Opstal [8] defines resilience as
the capacity for complex systems to survive, adapt, evolve and
grow in the face of turbulent change.
B. Defining Enterprise Resilience
The organizational literature has widely used the term
resilience [9]; [10]; [11]; [12]; [13]. According to Vogus and
Sutcliffe [9], organizational resilience is defined as the
maintenance of positive adjustment under challenging
conditions such that the organization emerges from those
conditions strengthened and more resourceful. Accordingly,
creating organizational resilience is associated with the people
and management concerns [9]; [14]; [11]. We integrate
organizational and other resilience descriptions to adapt a wider
perspective of enterprise resilience than is defined in any of
these domains independently or additively. Fundamental to our
IEEE SysCon 2009 —3rd Annual IEEE International Systems Conference, 2009
Vancouver, Canada, March 23–26, 2009
9781-4244-3463-3/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: Stevens Institute of Technology. Downloaded on August 14, 2009 at 13:10 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
exploration into resilient enterprises is that we are attempting to
take a systems’ view of enterprise. Thus, by considering the
system’s lens, we define an enterprise as a complex system
consisting of people, processes, information systems, and
technology infrastructure, with the goal of producing goods or
services using physical, financial, and human resources [15];
[16].
Gallopin [17] discusses enterprise resilience as an
enterprise’s adaptive capacity and its ability to cope with, adapt
to and recover after a disruption. He also articulates how well
an enterprise can decrease the level of its vulnerability to
expected and unexpected risks, how flexible it is to reorganize
itself despite its changing environment, and how effective it
may be in recovering in the least possible time and at the least
possible expense [17]. He states that in order to adjust to
potential risks and tolerate the disruptions, enterprises are
required to reduce the complexity of their infrastructures [17].
Key to being able to achieve this and assessing the
vulnerabilities embedded within the enterprise elements is
understanding the interrelationships and interdependencies
between the business processes, information, and the
supporting technologies within the enterprises [18].
Sheffi and Rice [19] describe creating a resilient enterprise
as a strategic initiative that changes the way an enterprise
operates and that increases its competitiveness. They suggest
that enterprise resilience can be achieved by reducing
vulnerability, by creating redundancy, and by increasing
flexibility. Reducing vulnerability depends on reducing the
risk—the likelihood of a disruption [20]; [19]. The ability to
bounce back when a disruption occurs, as described earlier, can
be defined by the adaptive capacity of the enterprise and its
redundancy or increasing flexibility [19]. Sheffi and Rice [19]
also describe resilience as a function of its competitive position
and the responsiveness of its supply chain.
C. Relative Concepts of Enterprise Resilience
1) Resilience and Disruptive Events
Disruptive events are defined as random events caused by
internal and external factors affecting a system that have a
negative impact on system operations. Any disruptive event
affects the performance of the system [19] and creates a short
or long term impact. Sheffi and Rice [19] define eight phases
for disruptive events: preparation, occurrence of a disruptive
event, first response, initial impact, time of full impact,
preparation for recovery, recovery, and long term impact. The
resilience of the system depends on how much change there is
to the performance of the system during these phases, and the
time spent from the first impact of the disruptive event to the
full recovery. The preparation phase is the time period in
which the system can foresee and prepare for the disruptive
event. This phase is also important for increasing system’s
ability to bounce back from a disruption.
2) Resilience and Vulnerability
Resilience of a system is measured by the level of its
vulnerability to a specific risk [21]; [20]. Vulnerability is
defined as being at risk and the likelihood of having disruptions
[20]. The literature suggests that reducing the vulnerabilities
has positive impact on the resilience of a system [21]; [19].
Reducing vulnerability means reducing the likelihood of a
disruption and increasing resilience means the ability to bounce
back from a disruption. Sheffi and Rice [19] define the level of
vulnerability as the probability of the occurrence of a
disruption and the level of its consequences.
3) Resilience and Adaptive Capacity
Adaptive capacity is a concept that has been frequently
associated with characterizing resilience [6]; [22]; [18]; [23];
[24]; [17]. For example, Gallopin [17] defines resilience as a
system’s adaptive capacity which relates to the ability to cope
with, adapt to and recover after a disruption. In order to
enhance resilience, some have said that adaptive capacity
should be increased both before and after a problem is detected.
Thus, Stevenson and Spring [24] define adaptive capacity as
the system’s response to the changes in its environment.
Dalziell and McManus [6] identify adaptive capacity along
with vulnerability as a metric to evaluate resilience. Adaptive
capacity has been related to concepts of robustness, agility, and
adaptability [25]; [20]. Robustness characterizes an ability to
be insensitive towards changing environments, and agility
indicates an ability to change rapidly. Likewise, adaptability
shows an ability to adapt towards changing environments while
delivering the intended functionality under varying operating
conditions [25].
4) Resilience and Flexibility
Flexibility has become an emerging construct of resilience
in the literature [7]; [24]; [19]. Such context regarding
resilience suggests that the adaptive capacity of a system in the
case of a disruption can be increased by designing, planning,
and building flexibility in systems [26]; [27]; [19]. Flexibility
can be defined as the ability of a system to adapt to the
changing requirements of its environment and its stakeholders
with minimum time and effort [28]; [29]. Fiksel [22] defines
flexibility as a major system characteristic that contributes to
resilience. Helaakoski [30] relates flexibility to agility and
adaptability suggesting that flexibility is a system’s ability to
rapidly adapt to its changing environment. Hu et al. [31] use
flexibility to define resilience and states that resilience is a
system’s ability to bounce back from disruptions and disasters
by building in redundancy and flexibility.
5) Resilience and Agility
Agility has been used in conjunction with flexibility as a
defining attribute of resilience [32]; [27]; [33]. Agility
characterizes a system’s ability to be changed rapidly [25].
Helaakoski defines agility as the system’s ability to respond to
changes in an uncertain and changing environment [30].
According to Christopher and Peck, resilience involves agility
and it helps a system to rapidly reorganize itself against the
changing environment [20]. Dalziell and McManus relate
agility to high resilience [6], while Morello [34] suggests that
agility may introduce new risks and vulnerabilities which result
in lower resilience.
III. FRAMEWORK FOR CREATING ENTERPRISE RESILIENCE
This framework relates enterprise resilience to the effective
use of enterprise systems. The success of enterprises today is
highly dependent of the enterprise systems that support them
[35]; [36]. Although several other terms are used in the
Authorized licensed use limited to: Stevens Institute of Technology. Downloaded on August 14, 2009 at 13:10 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
literature, namely enterprise applications, information systems
and enterprise information systems, we use the term enterprise
systems to refer to the enterprise-wide information systems and
applications which support business functions, processes,
operations, and services of the enterprise [36]. Information and
connectivity are two essential elements of resilience [37].
Creating resilience relies on perceiving environmental change
quickly and implementing adaptive responses early [38].
Effective use of enterprise systems can provide timely
information and faster decision-making abilities that result in
increased flexibility, agility, and adaptability, all of which are
supporting attributes of resilience [30]; [22]; [29]; [7].
Figure 1. Framework for Creating Enterprise Resilience
This framework suggests two key enablers of enterprise
resilience as shown in Figure 1. First enabler is the capability
of an enterprise to connect people, processes, and information
in a way that allows enterprise to become more flexible and
responsive to the dynamics of its environment, stakeholders,
and competitors. Such connectivity requires integration within
the enterprise and across the partners, suppliers, and customers
of the enterprise. Second enabler is alignment of information
technology and business goals. Attaining this requires
simplification of the underlying technology infrastructure and
creation of a consolidated view of, and access to, all available
resources in the enterprise. A well-defined enterprise
architecture provides a simple and consolidated view of the
enterprise and supports the integration and connectivity at inter
and intra enterprise levels.
IV. CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE FRAMEWORK
A. Enterprise Integration, Interoperability, and Connectivity
Enterprise Integration connects and combines people,
processes, systems, and technologies [35] to ensure the correct
people, processes, information and resources all come together
at the right times. Enterprise integration helps to establish a
technology infrastructure that seamlessly links its complex
enterprise systems in to a homogenous system so that the
processes and the data can be shared across the company, with
business partners, and with customers [39]; [40]; [41]; [42]. In
general, enterprise integration involves process integration,
applications/systems integration, and data integration [43];
[44]; [45]. Data integration is defined as the basic level of
enterprise integration. Data integration requires semantic
compatibility and exchange of information on the data level
[45]; [39]. As a result of data integration, heterogeneous
applications can exchange information and compatibility can
be achieved between business processes and
applications/systems [39]. Process integration is defined as
integration of business processes across multiple systems and
environments within or across enterprises [46]; [47]. Process
integration increases the efficiency of the enterprise and its
ability to compete in terms of its agility, cost, and service
capabilities [44]. Another level of enterprise integration
involves the integration of enterprise systems. Enterprise
systems integration focuses on information and data integration
at application level [48]; [49]; [47]. The primary purpose of
enterprise systems integration is to integrate enterprise systems
and resources, so they can easily access or share business
processes and exchange data [50]; [51]; [52].
B. Enterprise Architecture
Enterprise architecture is an important instrument in
addressing the alignment of business and technology and
achieving enterprise integration [53]; [54]. Enterprise
architecture is a high-level definition of the data, applications,
and technology needed to support the business [40] that
provides a common view of both the primary resources of any
enterprise (people, processes and technology), and how they
integrate to provide the primary drivers of the enterprise [55].
According to ANSI/IEEE Standard 1471-2000 [56],
architecture is defined as the “fundamental organization of a
system, embodied in its components, their relationships to each
other and the environment, and the principles governing its
design and evolution” [56]. Zachman [57] describes enterprise
architecture as a model and states that it is a set of descriptive
representations that are relevant for describing an enterprise so
that it can be produced to management’s requirements and
maintained over the period of its useful life. A well-defined
and readily available enterprise architecture supports enterprise
integration by enabling the common view of business
processes, data, and systems across the enterprise and its
partners[58]; [59]; [60]; [61]. It is foundational for planning
enterprise integration [62];[63]; [40] and aligning technology to
business processes. It is also an important tool to create
connectivity within the extended enterprise and help achieve
agility and flexibility[30]; [53].
C. Service Oriented Architecture
Enterprise resilience requires interoperability and
integration between the processes, systems, and underlying
technology across business partners. Service oriented
architecture is a widely accepted software architecture
approach in enterprise information systems development and
enterprise integration [64]. SOA is known to overcome
integration and interoperability issues. SOA is a technology
initiative which requires a software architecture approach
where basic element of design and development is a service
[65]. SOA simplifies the development of enterprise
applications as modular, reusable business services that are
Authorized licensed use limited to: Stevens Institute of Technology. Downloaded on August 14, 2009 at 13:10 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
easily integrated, changed and maintained. SOA facilitates
aligning existing information technology infrastructure and
systems to achieve end-to-end enterprise integration by
removing redundancies, generating collaboration tools, and
streamlining information technology processes. By adopting
an SOA approach and implementing it using supporting
technologies, companies can build flexible systems that
implement changing business processes quickly, and make
extensive use of reusable components [66]. SOA supports an
information environment built upon loosely coupled, reusable,
standards-based services. Increased interoperability, increased
business and technology domain alignment, increased return-
on-investment, and increased organizational agility are all
benefits of SOA approach [67].
D. Creating Enterprise Resilience Using SOA Approach
In the previous sections, we discussed the concepts which
provide a foundation for our framework to create enterprise
resilience. This section summarizes our theoretical model
which explains the relationship between the attributes of
service oriented architecture and enterprise resilience.
We define enterprise resilience and enterprise flexibility as
a function of agility, efficiency, and adaptability. We define
enterprise flexibility as the ability of enterprise to adapt to
changing business and stakeholder requirements more
efficiently, easily and quickly. In this definition, we emphasize
efficiency, agility, and adaptability. Efficiency is related to
optimal use of resources. Agility is related to timely and faster
response to rapidly changing business requirements.
Adaptability is the ability of an enterprise to respond to the
changing business requirements and to change its business
processes. Adaptability is associated by integration of new and
existing systems and processes. Enterprise flexibility requires
the integration of business processes and systems within the
enterprise and across the partners of the enterprise. Alignment
of business processes and information technology is also an
enabling factor for enterprise flexibility which requires simple
and manageable enterprise architecture.
Table 1 lists the attributes of SOA, business outcome of
each attribute, and each attribute’s impact on agility, efficiency
and adaptability.
Table 1 Enterprise Resilience Using SOA Approach
SOA Enterprise Resilience
Attributes of SOA Business Outcome Agility Efficiency Adaptability
SOA enables the development
of applications as reusable and
modular business services
Applications which are
developed as reusable and
modular services make them
easy to be integrated, changed
and maintained.
Agility is obtained as a
result of timely
response to the
changing business
requirements
Reusable services
provide cost savings
Applications which are developed
Reusable and modular services
can easily be changed to support
emerging business needs and
requirements.
SOA promotes loose-coupling.
Loose coupling is an attribute
of systems, referring to an
approach of designing
interfaces to reduce the
interdependencies across
modules or components.
This approach minimizes the
interdependencies between
applications. Adding new
applications or modules or
replacing modules and
changing operations within
individual business processes
do not impact the other
applications or modules.
The risk of
unanticipated changes
due to a change in
another business
application will be
minimized. This will
enable faster
modifications to
business application
resulting in agility.
Due to minimized
risk and time of
change, efficiency
will be obtained.
Enterprise will respond to
changing business requirement
maximizing its adaptability.
Adaptability, efficiency and
agility will result in higher
enterprise flexibility.
SOA enables reusability of
existing applications
Rather than developing
applications from scratch,
companies can utilize existing
functionality and create new
solutions by assembling
component applications from
existing and new technology.
This attribute enables
rapid deployment of
new solutions.
Use of existing
functionality provides
cost savings.
Enterprise can respond to
changing business needs,
resulting in higher enterprise
flexibility.
SOA promotes development
and use of standards-based
services. Standard-based
services leverage the
integration of new and existing
applications and enterprise
integration.
Use of standards provides
interoperability between
applications and systems,
regardless of their technology
or location. As a result, lower
cost and shorter time-to-
market will be obtained.
Shorter development
and integration of
applications will
increase the agility.
Lower cost of
application
development and
deployment due to
support of universal
standards will
increase the
efficiency.
Shorter time to market, shorter
integration times will enable the
faster response to emerging
business requirements. Obtained
agility and efficiency will result
in higher enterprise flexibility.
SOA requires use of self-
contained services. Having
self-contained services means
that the state of each service
does not depend upon the state
of another service.
SOA speeds time through
parallel development. Since
each service is self-contained
and does not depend upon the
state of another service, sub-
systems can be developed
independently.
This provides faster
development or
modification of sub-
systems. Agility
increases.
Through the use of
resources optimally,
efficiency is
increased.
Faster and efficient response to
new business requirements
increases the adaptability of the
enterprise, resulting in higher
enterprise flexibility.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Stevens Institute of Technology. Downloaded on August 14, 2009 at 13:10 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SOA Enterprise Resilience
Attributes of SOA Business Outcome Agility Efficiency Adaptability
SOA requires wrapping of
applications with well-defined
interfaces. This process turns
applications into a set of
services. The wrapping process
creates an abstraction layer that
hides all the complex details of
the applications.
As a result the services can be
integrated with any other
application easily. The
integration of the applications
will not depend on the
language, operating system,
or database the application
uses.
Easy integration of
applications enables
faster response to
business changes. New
applications can be
integrated rapidly into
existing systems
without any
interoperability
problems.
This will help to
economic use of
existing and legacy
systems. The
economic life of
legacy systems will
be longer which will
provide cost savings.
Ease of integration with new and
existing systems will increase the
ability of enterprises to respond to
new business requirements
efficiently and rapidly. Higher
enterprise flexibility will be
obtained.
REFERENCES
[1] W. A. X. Tan, J.S.; Wang, J.L, "A Service-Oriented Virtual
Enterprise Architecture and its Applications in Chinese Tobacco
Industrial Sector," in IEEE International Conference on e-Business
Engineering, 2006.
[2] C. S. Holling, "Resilience and stability of ecological systems,"
Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, vol. 4, pp. 1-23, 1973.
[3] E. Hollnagel, D. D. Woods, and N. Levesson, "Resilience
engineering: Concepts and precepts," Hampshire: Ashgate, 2006.
[4] A. Rose and S. Liao, "Modeling regional economic resilience to
disasters: A computable general equilibrium analysis of water service
disruptions," Journal of Regional Science, vol. 45, pp. 75-112, 2005.
[5] R. Westrum, "A typology of resilience situations," in Resilience
Engineering: Concepts and Precepts, E. Hollnagel, D. D. Woods, and
N. Leveson, Eds. Aldershot, UK, : Ashgate Press, , 2006, pp. 49-60.
[6] E. P. Dalziell and S. T. McManus, "Resilience, Vulnerability,
Adaptive Capacity: Implications for System Performance," in
International Forum for Engineering Decision Making (IFED) Stoos,
Switzerland, 2004.
[7] Y. Y. Haimes, K. Crowther, and B. M. Horowitz, "Homeland
Security Preparedness: Balancing Protection with Resilience in
Emergent Systems," Systems Engineering, vol. 11, pp. 287-308, 2008.
[8] D. van Opstal, "The Resilient Economy: Integrating Competitiveness
and Security," Council on Competitiveness 2007.
[9] T. J. Vogus and K. M. Sutcliffe, "Organizational Resilience: Towards
a Theory and Research Agenda," in Systems, Man and Cybernetics,
2007. ISIC. IEEE International Conference on, 2007.
[10] K. Sutcliffe and V. T., "Organizing for Resilience " in Positive
Organizational Scholarship, K. S. Cameron, I. E. Dutton, and R. E.
Quinn, Eds. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler,, 2003, pp. 94 - 110.
[11] L. Mallak, "Toward a Theory of Organizational Resilience," in
Portland International Conference on Technology and Innovation
Management. PICMET. vol. 1: IEEE, 1999, p. 223.
[12] L. Mallak, "Putting Organizational Resilience to Work," Industrial
Management, vol. 40, pp. 8-13, 1998.
[13] M. Scott, G. Sorcinelli, P. Gutierrez, C. Moffatt, and P. DesAutels,
"CONFERENCEXP: An Enabling Technology for Organizational
Resilience," in The Transfer and Diffusion of Information Technology
for Organizational Resilience. vol. 206, B. Donnellan, Larsen T.,
Levine L., and D. J., Eds.: Boston: Springer, 2006, pp. 219-227.
[14] E. S. Patterson, D. D. Woods, R. I. Cook, and M. L. Render,
"Collaborative Cross-Checking to Enhance Resilience," Cogn Tech
Work, pp. 155-162, 2007.
[15] J. Boardman and B. Sauser, Systems Thinking: Coping with 21st
Centurty Problems. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis.,
2008.
[16] W. B. Rouse, "Enterprises as Systems: Essential Challenges and
Approaches to Transformation," Systems Engineering Journal, vol. 8,
pp. 138-150, 2005.
[17] G. C. Gallopin, "Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and
adaptive capacity," Global Environmental Change, vol. 16, pp. 293–
303, 2006.
[18] G. Goble, H. Fields, and R. Cocchiara, "Resilient infrastructure," IBM
Global Services September 2002.
[19] Y. Sheffi and J. B. Rice Jr., "A Supply Chain View of the Resilient
Enterprise," MIT Sloan Management Review vol. 47.1, pp. 41-48,
2005.
[20] M. Christopher and H. Peck, "Building Resilient Supply Chain,"
International Journal of Logistics Management, vol. 15, pp. 1-13
2004.
[21] F. Berkes, "Understanding uncertainty and reducing vulnerability:
lessons from resilience thinking," Nat Hazards, vol. 41, pp. 283–295,
2007.
[22] J. Fiksel, "Sustainability and Resilience: Toward a Systems
Approach," Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, vol. 2, pp. 14-
21, 2006.
[23] M. T. Gibbs, "Resilience: What is it and what does it mean for marine
policymakers?," Marine Policy, vol. 33, pp. 322–331, 2009.
[24] M. Stevenson and M. Spring, "Flexibility from a supply chain
perspective: definition and review," International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, vol. 27, 2007.
[25] E. Fricke and A. P. Schulz, "Design for Changeability (DfC):
Principles To Enable Changes in Systems Throughout Their Entire
Lifecycle," Systems Engineering Journal, vol. 8, pp. 342-359, August
2005.
[26] B. Walker, Holling, C. S. ;, S. R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig,
"Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social–ecological
Systems," Ecology and Society, vol. 9, 2004.
[27] S. Carpenter, B. Walker, J. M. Anderies, and N. Abel, "From
Metaphor to Measurement: Resilience of What to What?,"
Ecosystems, vol. 4, pp. 765–781, 2001.
[28] Sushil, "Enterprise Flexibility," Global Journal of Flexible Systems
Management, vol. 2, pp. 53-58, 2006.
[29] A. De Leeuw and H. Volberda, "On the Concept of Flexibility: A
Dual Control Perspective " Omega International Journal of
Management Science, vol. 24, pp. 121-139, 1996.
[30] H. Helaakoski, P. Iskanius, and I. Peltomaa, "Agent-based
Architecture For Virtual Enterprirses To Support Agility," in
Establishing the Foundation of Collaborative Networks. vol. 243, L.
Camarinha-Matos, H. Afsarmanesh, P. Novais, and C. Analide, Eds.:
Boston: Springer, 2007, pp. 299–306.
[31] Y. Hu, J. Li, and E. L. Holloway, "Towards Modeling of Resilience
Dynamics in Manufacturing Enterprises: Literature Review and
Problem Formulation," in 4th IEEE Conference on Automation
Science and Engineering Washington DC: IEEE, 2008, pp. 279-284.
[32] M. Christopher and H. Peck, "The Five Principles of Supply Chain
Resilience," Logistics Europe, vol. 12, pp. 16-21, February 2004.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Stevens Institute of Technology. Downloaded on August 14, 2009 at 13:10 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[33] B. Walker, S.;, J. Carpenter, N. Anderies, G. Abel, M. Cumming, L.
Janssen, J. Lebel, G. Norberg, D. Peterson, and R. Pritchard,
"Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working
hypothesis for a participatory approach," Conservation Ecology, vol.
6, pp. 14-31, 2002.
[34] D. Morello, "The Blueprint for the Resilient Virtual Organization,"
Gartner January 2001.
[35] B. Gold-Bernstein and W. Ruh, Enterprise integration: The essential
guide to integration solutions. Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2004.
[36] I. Ignatiadis and J. Nandhakumar, "The impact of enterprise systems
on organizational resilience," Journal of Information Technology
Case and Application Research, vol. 22, pp. 36–43, 2007.
[37] J. F. Horne, "The Coming Age of Organizational Resilience,"
Business Forum, pp. 22-24, 1997.
[38] K. E. Weick and K. M. Sutcliffe, Managing the Unexpected. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.
[39] A. R. Venkatachalam, "A Holistic Perspective on Enterprise
Integration," Journal of Information Technology Case and
Application Research, vol. 8, pp. 1-6, 2006.
[40] D. Smith, L. O’Brien, K. Kontogiannis, and M. Barbacci, "Enterprise
Integration," Architect (SEI Interactive News), vol. 4Q, 2002.
[41] W. D. Brosey, E. R. Neal, and D. F. Marks, "Grand Challenges of
Enterprise Integration," in IEEE, 2001.
[42] K. Kosanke, F. Vernadat, and M. Zelm, "CIMOSA: enterprise
engineering and integration," Computers in Industry vol. 40, pp. 83-
97, 1999.
[43] W. Lam, "Investigating Success Factors in Enterprise Application
Integration: A Case-Driven Analysis," European Journal of
Information Systems, vol. 14, pp. 175-187, May 2005 2005.
[44] E. A. Stohr and J. V. Nickerson, "Intra Enterprise Integration:
Methods and Direction," in Competing in the Information Age, J.
Luftman, Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
[45] A. Huang, D. C. Yen, D. C. Chou, and Y. Xu, "Corporate
Applications Integration: Challenges, Opportunities, and
Implementation Strategies," Journal of Business and Management,
vol. 9, pp. 137-150, 2003.
[46] Zhu J., Z. Tian, T. Li, W. Sun, S. Ye, W. Ding, C. C. Wang, G. Wu,
L. Weng, S. Huang, B. Liu, and D. Chou, "Model-driven business
process integration and management: A case study with the Bank
SinoPac regional service platform," IBM Journal of Research and
Development, vol. 48, pp. 649-669, 2004.
[47] M. Themistocleous and G. Corbitt, "Is business process integration
feasible?," Journal of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 19,
pp. 434-449, 2006.
[48] A. Raut and A. Basavaraja, "Enterprise Business Process Integration,"
in TENCON 2003: Conference on Convergent Technologies for Asia-
Pacific Region, 2003, pp. 1549- 1553.
[49] W. Hasselbring, "Information System Integration," Association for
Computing Machinery. Communications of the ACM, vol. 43, pp. 32-
38, June 2000.
[50] H. M. Yang and F. V. Lu, "Integrating Inter- and Extra-Enterprise
Applications Using Web Services," Review of Business, vol. 26, pp.
3-9, 2005.
[51] F. A. Cummins, Enterprise Integration: An Architecture for
Enterprise Application and Systems Integration: John Wiley and
Sons, Inc., 2002.
[52] Z. Irani, M. Themistocleous, and P. E. D. Love, "The Impact of
Enterprise Application Integration on Information System
Lifecycles," Information and Management, vol. 41, pp. 177-187,
2003.
[53] F. Goethals, J. Vandenbulcke, and W. Lemahieu, "Developing the
Extended Enterprise with the FADEE," in 2004 ACM Symposium on
Applied Computing Nicosia, Cyprus, 2004.
[54] H. Kühnle and G. Wagenhaus, "Extended Enterprise Architectures
(E2A)- Towards a powerful Mode of Production," 2005.
[55] V. O. Anaya, A., "How Enterprise Architectures Can Support
Integration," in IHIS’05 Bremen Germany, 2005.
[56] IEEE-Std-1471, "Recommended Practice for Architectural
Description of Software-Intensive Systems," IEEE 2000.
[57] J. Zachman, " A Framework for Information Systems Architecture,"
IBM Systems Journal, vol. 26, 1987.
[58] P. Bernus, L. Nemes, and G. Schmidt, Handbook on Enterprise
Architecture: Springer, 2003.
[59] K. Kosanke and J. G. Nell, "Enterprise engineering and integration:
Building international consensus," Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1997.
[60] C. J. Petrie, "Enterprise integration modeling," Cambridge: The MIT
Press, 1992.
[61] F. B. Vernadat, Enterprise Modeling and Integration: Principles and
Applications. London: Chapman & Hall, 1996.
[62] F. B. Vernadat, "Interoperable enterprise systems: Principles,
concepts, and methods," Annual Reviews in Control, vol. 31, pp. 137–
145, 2007.
[63] A. Presley, J. Sarkis, W. Barnett, and D. Liles, "Engineering the
Virtual Enterprise: An Architecture-driven Modeling Approach,"
International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems, vol. 13,
2001.
[64] T. Erl, SOA Principles of Service Design: Prentice Hall, 2007.
[65] S. Kumar, V. Dakshinamoorthy, and K. M.S., "Does SOA Improve
the Supply Chain? An Empirical Analysis of the Impact of SOA
Adoption on Electronic Supply Chain Performance," in 40th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, 2007.
[66] IBM, "The Solution Designer’s Guide to IBM on Demand Business
Solutions," IBM 2005.
[67] N. Bieberstein, S. Bose, M. Fiammante, K. Jones, and R. Shah,
Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) Compass – Business Value,
Planning, and Enterprise Roadmap: IBM Press, published by Pearson
plc, 2006.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Stevens Institute of Technology. Downloaded on August 14, 2009 at 13:10 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
