doi:10.2498/iti.2012.0459
Strategies for Information Systems Integration Katarina Tomicic-Pupek, Zeljko Dobrovic, and Martina Tomicic Furjan Fakultet organizacije i informatike, Pavlinska 2, Varazdin E-mail(s):
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
Abstract. This paper gives an overview of feasible strategies for integration of information systems in complex organizations. It represents strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and threats for the achievement of strategies.
Keywords. Information Systems, Integration, Strategy.
1. Introduction Development and implementation of an Information system (IS) is well described for organizations which can accept an Information technology (IT) project which treats the organization as a “green field” with no or easy to upgrade legacy systems. Recent studies however do not show new methods and methodologies for IT development which would fit modern organizations with existing legacy systems that must be kept and integrated in new IT ventures. Once a legacy system exists a question of integration and/ or interoperability raises.
definition that this national framework “aims at enabling the separate information systems of state government bodies to be connected to the government network, improving thereby process management and data exchange amongst state government bodies and simpler and faster public service delivery”. Wiki [10] states that interoperability is “a property to the ability of diverse systems and organizations to work together (inter-operate)”. In general, interoperability can be expressed as the ability of organizations or entities to cooperate with other entities or their information systems in order to deliver services requested by the customer without any additional interference of the customer. Unlike the statement of interoperability as ability, the term integration refers to coverage not to a property. Integration is thereby a statement of the extent and answers the question how wide or to which range, where interoperability answers the question who and how. Integration and interoperability are relevant attributes of complex organizations.
2. Integration vs. interoperability
3. Demanded characteristics of integrated information system
an
The terms integration and interoperability are often misinterpreted analogously. According to TOGAF [8] there are four forms of interoperability and integration: at the presentation level, Information Integration and Interoperability, application and technical Integration and Interoperability. Within the European Interoperability Framework for European Public Services [4], “interoperability is the ability of disparate and diverse organisations to interact towards mutually beneficial and agreed common goals, involving the sharing of information and knowledge between the organisations, through the business processes they support, by means of the exchange of data between their respective ICT systems". In 2010 Croatian government adopted the Croatian Interoperability Framework [6] with the
By complex organizations and organizational systems we understand entities with specific needs and demands on how their business is being done or how their mission is being achieved. They do not need to have formal constitution but can comprise of different collaborators included in one or more process flows. E.g. a complex organization can be a temporary governmental body, a project team or a civil NGO. Complex organizations consist of organizational entities which in their orientation to produce expectable results for their end-users or clients collaborate regardless of organizational boundaries. To be able to perform according to this principle, complex organizations have specific demands on IT and the IS that can be stated in one paradigm: integration of
311
information systems. Integrated information systems intended for complex organizations should have following characteristics: • Modularity: the application structure consists of modules which have been formed to provide optimal support to a process for which the module is intended. Modularity allows the implementation of further IT ventures and appending of modules with respect to priorities, redesign and optimization efforts. • Coherency: maximum connectivity and interoperability of modules to provide not only optimal support to a single process (as a partial set of related activities) achieving thereby possibly suboptimal support on the organizational level, but an optimal support on the level of process interoperability between several organizational participants. • The vertical interoperability: the ability of modules/applications to ensure optimal support of the entire process through different levels of performance operability, management and decision-making collaboration regardless of organizational boundaries. • Horizontal interoperability: the ability of modules/applications to ensure optimal support of the entire process within one same level of performance operability, management and decision-making collaboration regardless of organizational boundaries. • Integrity: the functionality of applications and the range of data must be defined with respect to the integrity of the process which is to be supported. • Transparency: clarified and disclosed rules and procedures for data access, retrieval and processing allowing collaboration regardless of organizational boundaries. • Availability: ability to access data or applications whenever a user needs via connections based on modern communication technologies. • Functionality: the ability of IS to perform expected set of functionalities. • Reliability: the ability of an IS to provide the expected level of functionality in certain circumstances, within the default time. • Usability: measure of the impression of how well the functionality meets the needs of users while performing assigned business processes (functional application itself does not have any to be useful).
• Efficiency: ability of an IT system to be functional and useful with minimal consumption of resources necessary to operate. • Sustainability: managerial ability to maintain the expected level of functionality, efficiency and effectiveness by performing corrective activities without disrupting the functionality of the IS in an organizational acceptable time of low or no availability (this feature can be also called reparability of products, such as electronic devices in a manufacturing industry). • Portability: ability of retaining the expected level of functionality, efficiency and effectiveness in a changing environment. These characteristics have an implicit influence on the selection of an appropriate strategic option for information system integration, as it will be denoted in the SWOT analyses where the influence can be related to specific strategies.
4. Integration approaches Many methods oriented towards architecting new IT systems are well known, but when it comes to the integration of existing information systems into one interoperable system, there seems to be a lack of appropriate methods for integration of IT systems which would rely on the possibility of business users to identify and state their need for interoperability. We will demonstrate our problem domain on a case study, relatively recent announcement which put the whole the IT sector in Croatia on their feet: the formation of the Committee for coordination of IT and IS integration. This committee has been formatted with a goal to orchestrate and enable serious integration activities of governmental IT and information systems in order to assure interoperability of governmental bodies and agencies. In a study of e-government performed in UK [3] authors propose an architecture framework for e-government adoption, which will reduce confusion surrounding e-government infrastructure in the public sector. The framework is structured into four layers: • Access layer illustrates who might use the government services (citizens, business, employees, other governments and other community members) and what are the channels of access.
312
• E-government layer allows the user to use the web browser to get all corporate information needed through a single window, a web portal. The e-government portal should integrate all government information and services from disparate departments and organizations, • E-business layer is emerged to manipulate and integrate government data sources across government bodies and make information and services available to the e-government portal in real-time. It provides a seamless, automatic and real-time communication between different systems at both a data and process level. • ICT infrastructure layer of e-government should be built to reach out all parts of government and hence, support the egovernment operation and provide effective and reliable e-government services. This layer focuses on technologies that should be in place before e-government services can be offered reliably and effectively to the public. This paper deals with the E-business layer, discussing the possible ways of how to create a qualitative application and/ or data environment in order to deliver proper e-services. In order to start properly with the identification of possible integration, first goal has been set: to absolve the citizens from waiting in lines by building capacities and strengthening e-government in Croatia. Preconditions for such an attempt have been laid by the Strategy for the development of electronic government [7] which defines four foundations for the strengthening of egovernment in Croatia. The first pillar, computer and communications infrastructure includes the physical equipment of computers and their connectivity communication network. Second foundation is the data / information infrastructure and documentation pool which include data contents that are managed and used for public authorities in serving public interests. The third important component is the availability of applications, online application or web services for making the public administration available online, respecting the principles of reliability and security, allowing interoperability and technological independence. The fourth foundation, human resources, implies the insurance of citizens-oriented working environments with motivated and trained employees which possess knowledge and skills for the provision of services in e-government.
Many efforts have been made on almost all preconditions, with different results. While developing fully functional applications, web services and online applications is taken for granted, there are many other reasons for poor indicators for availability and usage of eservices. Some of these reasons can be classified into: • cultural issues, like a habit to use internet for entertainment purposes, poor experience of citizens in using any e-services, lack of trust towards e-services, • technical issues, like uneven levels of technical compatibility, poor integration of partial informational infrastructure components, • legal and normative issues, like compliance with international legislation and norms, selection of appropriate communication and security protocols, and • organizational issues, like organizational barriers, dealing with lack of documented procedures followed by workflow and other process models for using e-services for citizens and administration staff. Following table (table 1) reports low percentage of usage of highly available online services in e-government, especially from individuals (Eurostat [5]). Table 1. Selection of e-government indicators [5]
indicator year e-government online availability (20 basic public services) e-government usage by enterprises (for interaction with public authorities) e-government usage by individuals (for interaction with public authorities
geographical reference EU27 Croatia 2009 2010 2009 2010 73% 84% 38% 65%
70%
76%
61%
63%
30%
31%
13%
16%
Indicators from table 1 are still not available for 2011. Another set of statistical data is also interesting because it indicates in which way eGovernment services are being used. This set of indicators is shown at table 2. The indicators are related to the percentage of different interaction types for individuals when interacting with
313
governmental e-services: for obtaining services from public authorities websites, for downloading official forms, for sending filled in forms. The values for these indicators imply that much needs to be done in this governmental sector.
4.1. Integration by application interoperability
Table 2. Selection of e-government indicators [5]
Indicator Individuals using the Internet for interaction with public authorities - % of individuals aged 16 to 74 Individuals using the Internet for interaction with public authorities: obtaining information from public authorities web sites - % of individuals aged 16 to 74 Individuals using the Internet for interaction with public authorities: downloading official forms - % of individuals aged 16 to 74 Individuals using the Internet for interaction with public authorities: sending filled forms - % of individuals aged 16 to 74
Integration by application interoperability include development and alteration of applications for gathering and the retrieval of data to provide the collection of data from various databases in order to ensure that applications can perform an expected functionality. The procedure of gathering and retrieval of data can be conducted via web services and similar applications and services based on XML or CSV protocols for transformation of various record types from distributed databases into a content string or some other data structure needed by the primarily user applications. Any data transformation carry however a certain risk in mapping data.
geographical reference EU27 Croatia 2011 2011 41 17
35
12
25
11
21
6
tools and common functionalities (security, data exchange mechanisms, electronic signature) that allow service delivery. Both approaches have been successfully employed separately and in combination by different countries.
4.2. Integration of partial data infrastructure components
Chen et.al. [2] stated that IT enabled governments to collect a great amount of data, but in order for them to be useful, they have to be properly organized, standardized and maintained. This leads to a comprehension that towards the integration only two possible strategic options are feasible: Integration by application interoperability and Integration of partial data infrastructure components. The selection between the two integration approaches is justified by two previous researches. Ebrahim and Irani [3] stated that the most government departments and organisations have maintained separate databases, and that creates barriers between organisations systems and processes, in term of data transmission and communication. In the United Nations studies [9] two approaches are distinguished: portal and platform approach. A basic requirement for a one-stop government portal is that there should be a government information infrastructure. The platform approach does not aim at centralizing and dispatching the data but provides common
Integration of partial data infrastructure components into one public data infrastructure is according to Brumec [1] an approach that redefines the concept of mutually independent and unrelated databases into a logically integrated set of contents. This means that the existing databases included in present legacy systems need to be reconstructed in a way that some database contents must be published as public registries which are to be used as reference data for specific organizational or business activities (by public we understand the gathering of all interested collaborators with no organizational boundaries).
5. Selecting the better fitting Integration approach Compliance analysis of business requirements and concepts of integration must be performed to select best fitting defined integration approach for any complex organization. The selection process can be based on the extended SWOT analysis comprising the identification of possible
314
strategies for achieving the desired integration level. The procedure of selection via extended SWOT analysis will be illustrated on the actual example of integration attempts of e-government services in Croatia. First we will assume that the described two integration approaches are feasible for integration of e-government services integration. Next we must identify SWOT elements for each of these two integration approaches. We will estimate the priorities of each of SWOT elements then sort them by priority (S1 to Sx, W1 to Wy, etc.) and define strategies for achieving the integration (tables 3 and 4). Strategies that can be identified have different signification, they can be corrective, shape-up-the-future strategies, implicit strategies. We will then evaluate approaches by 2 criteria: 1) which approach has less corrective strategies who take up the most efforts to be overruled in order to remove these elements as the biggest obstacles in achieving the desired strategic option of integration; and 2) which approach has more shape-up-the-future strategies for enabling prosperity in long term. Strategies can contribute to the improvement of demanded characteristics (bold in strategy statement) of an integrated IS. Table 3. Extended SWOT for Strategic option 1: Integration by application interoperability Strategic option 1: Integration by application interoperability Strengths Weaknesses S1: Available protocols W1: Not all existing and Schemes for data databases are suitable migration, gathering and for online retrieval of retrieval mapped data S2: Existing application (depending on database infrastructure with realization technologies appropriate like hierarchical or functionalities relational databases) S3: Modern concept of W2: Need for citizen oriented service is clarification over already implemented in functionality some applications and e- “ownership” because services some public administration processes extend organizational borders W3: Need for communicating new working procedures through legislation and organizational rulebooks
Opportunities O1: Data retrieval applications are reusable O2: Possible application functionality upgrade O3: Organizational changes in public administration institutions for compliance with EU directives/guidelines
Threats T1: Unavailability of “easy to understand” presentation techniques for end-users to monitor data mapping or retrieval T2: By integration with applications the existing large number of separate databases remains Corrective strategies (S,W), (O,T), (S,T), (O,W) S1-W1: Achieve interoperability by using appropriate protocols and schemes for data retrieval S2-T2: Efforts in alteration of existing applications will result with better functionality but will not resolve large number of separate databases O3-W2: While redesigning organizational responsibilities in order to assure compliance with EU directives/ guidelines organizational boundaries can be eliminated S3-W3: In order to assure transparency new application functionalities must be well documented via appropriate workflow and other process models for administration staff Shape-up-the-future strategies (S,O) S1-O1: Use appropriate protocols and schemes for developing portable data retrieval applications Defensive strategies (W,T) W3-T1: Involve users in designing and documenting data retrieval applications Uncovered weaknesses and threats partially W1, partially T2 Table 4. Extended SWOT for Strategic option 1: Integration of partial data infrastructure components Strategic option 2: Integration of partial data infrastructure components Strengths Weaknesses S1: Large number of W1: Existing separate databases applications must be containing a respectable altered to new data volume of domain contents specific data W2: Need for S2: End users can shape clarification over data their collections of “ownership” because needed data and extend some public it to the expected level of administration accessibility processes extend S3: Modern concept of organizational borders citizen oriented service is W3: Need for already implemented in communicating new some legislation working procedures documents through operative legislation and organizational rulebooks
315
information easy and on time in order to give expectable results. This paper deals with possibilities of how to integrate different information systems into one. In that sense, two strategic approaches were investigated: Integration by application interoperability and Integration of partial data infrastructure components. Both approaches have their advantages and limitations. In order to compare them and to select the better approach, a SWOT analysis was performed and illustrated by the example of the development of e-government in Croatia.
Opportunities Threats O1: Forming public data T1: Privacy of data infrastructure consisting must be properly of one logical data provided and security content structure protocols must detain O2: Decreasing cost and misuse of data time consumption T2: Users with a strong O3: Organizational feeling for changes in public “ownerships” over data administration collections institutions for compliance with EU directives/guidelines Corrective strategies (S,W), (O,T), (S,T), (O,W) S2-T1: Public data infrastructure will contribute to data availability and accuracy as well as to referencing reliability O2-W1: Decreased cost and time consumption will release/create funds for upgrading existing applications and achieving more modularity O3-W2: While redesigning organizational responsibilities in order to assure compliance with EU directives/ guidelines organizational ownerships” over data collections can be clarified to insure transparency S3-W3: Positive legislation for e-government need to be communicated to the operational level Shape-up-the-future strategies (S,O) S1-O1: Create a public data infrastructure consisting of logically unique and related data contents as a central gathering pool of data for horizontal interoperability S3-O1: Communicate and implement positive legislation for forming a sustainable non redundant public data infrastructure Defensive strategies (W,T) W2-T2:Clafiry misunderstandings of “ownership” and educate about benefits of data integration Uncovered weaknesses and threats partially W1, partially T1
7. References
With consideration of identified SWOT elements integrating partial data into one information infrastructure is the better strategic option, since it deals with fewer corrective strategies and more shape-up-the-future strategies and therefore has more probability to be successful.
6. Conclusion Most complex organizations through time of their existence have developed several and separate information systems, implemented on different platforms and with different database management systems. This fact influences the time to react to user requests, to the point that it is sometimes impossible to get the right
[1] Brumec J. Javna informacijska infrastruktura. Proceedings of CASE 16: 2004 June 7-9: Opatija, Croatia. CASE Rijeka 2004. P 1-11. [2] Chen, H., Brandt, L., Gregg, V., Traunmueller, R., Dawes, S., Hovy, E., Macintosh, A., Larson, C. A., Digital Government, E-government Research, Case Studies, and Implementation. Springer, New York, USA, 2008. [3] Ebrahim Z., Irani Z. E-government adoption: architecture and barriers. Business Process Management Journal 2005; 11(5): 589-611. [4] European Interoperability Framework for European Public Services. http://ec.europa. eu/idabc/ [10/13/2011] [5] Eurostat. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu [02/14/2012] [6] Odrednice Hrvatskog okvira za interoperabilnost (HROI), Vlada Republike Hrvatske, 2010. [7] Strategija razvoja elektronicke uprave u Republici Hrvatskoj za razdoblje 2009. do 2012. Godine. Vlada Republike Hrvatske, Zagreb, 2009. [8] The Open Group Architecture Framework. http://www.opengroup.org/togaf/ [10/13/2011] [9] United Nations e-Government Survey 2012, E-governmanet for the people, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nation, New York, USA, 2012. http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/d ocuments/un/unpan048065.pdf [18/04/2012] [10] Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability [02/14/2012]
316
