e-business strategy Business/IT alignment engineering Yves Pigneur HEC Lausanne yves.pigneur@unil.ch Fall 2006 Thursday 8:30-12:00 Room 237 (Internef) 1 Course Description Despite the dot-com bubble burst, e-commerce have redefined the ways of conducting business, providing new business models, and competing in the global marketplace. This course provides the participants with an understanding of e-business from a business perspective, in a Internet-enabled economy. The course integrates principles suggested by the science of design, and mainly concerns business/it alignment engineering. The course introduces concepts, frameworks, and models for analyzing business models, designing enterprise architectures, and evaluating business/it alignment. Learning will be accomplished through lectures, case studies, group presentation, and research. 2 Course Objectives Upon completion this course, the participants will have a general understanding of the current state and trends of e-business, and be aware of the desirable business/it alignment. More specifically, the participants will be able to analyze the business model of a company, design an enterprise architecture, and assess the environment, the evolution and the innovation. 3 Course Materials Course materials are provided on the web site (http://www.hec.unil.ch/yp/gti). Weekly reading materials will acquaint the participants with the topic to be covered in the upcoming class. Students are required to read all of them for the course. The assigned reading list is provided in the Course Schedule section of this syllabus. 1
Recommended text Weill, P. and Vitale, M. (2001). Place to Space - Migrating to ebusiness Models. Harvard Business School Press. 4 Course Requirements Class preparation, attendance and participation are vital to a productive and stimulating learning environment. Allow ample time to read and reflect on the assigned readings prior the class period. Further details on the objectives, contents, and the report structure will be presented during the course. First, starting at the fourth session, all the groups are requested to prepare comments and questions on the second assigned paper, which have to be posted on the group web site (blog) no later than 6pm the day before a class session. Second, also starting at the fourth session, a one-hour sessions dedicated to the second covered thema will be alternately animated and stimulated by a group of participants (with my assistance during the preparation and the presentation). The people on duty will prepare a 30-minute slide show for supporting the discussion. The schedule and the people assignment will be decided in one of the first classes. Third, student will conduct a group project for defining a case study, write and refine a report consisting of the three following main parts: business model, enterprise architecture, and environment assessment. The deliverables have also to be uploaded on the group web site (blog) on the due dates. The group blog and project will produce the three following sets of deliverables: First Deliverables - Business model In this first phase, your main goal is to present the business model or strategy map of a case study, with the financial aspects, the value proposition and customer targets, the value configuration and partners, and the main capabilities, as well as with information about an eventual balanced scorecard. Post on application portfolio (due November 15) Post on service-orientation (due November 22) Post on SERVQUAL (due November 29) Case study (I) - BUSINESS MODEL (due December 7) Second Deliverables - Enterprise architecture During this phase, you will sketch the enterprise architecture of the case study, with information about the application portfolio, the IT infrastructure, and the service quality. Post on SCM (due December 6) Post on reputation (due December 13) Post on auction (due December 20) Case study (II) - ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE (due January 11) Third Deliverables - Environment assessment During this phase, you will present a environment assessment for the case study, choosing the most appropriate tool, such as scenario planning, technology roadmap, disruptive analysis, or multi-criterion decision-making. 2
Post on technology roadmap (due January 10) Post on technology foresight with MCDM (due January 17) Post on collective intelligence (due January 24) Case study (III) - ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT (due February 1) Finally, there will be a three-hour written closed-book exam, which will consist of questions, essays, and exercices. 5 Grading Criteria For grading purpose, activities will be issued based on the following scheme: Participation 20% Project 30% Exam 50% 6 Course Schedule 6.1 Business Model This first part presents the concept of business model with its main components: value proposition, customer relationship, and operations management. Oct. 26 Course introduction and business model [Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2005] Value proposition and customer relationship [Kim and Mauborgne, 2002] Nov. 2 Value configuration (and capability) [Stabell and Fjeldstad, 1998] e3value model [Gordijn and Akkermans, 2001] Nov. 9 Strategy map [Kaplan and Norton, 2000] Balanced ScoreCard (BSC) [Bremser and Chung, 2004] 6.2 Enterprise architecture This second part presents the concepts of (service-oriented) enterprise architecture, application portfolio and IT infrastructure. The notions of service level agreement and service quality are also presented. Nov. 16 Enterprise architecture [Lankhorst, 2004] Application portfolio [Jeffery and Leliveld, 2004] Nov. 23 IT infrastructure [Weill et al., 2002] Service-oriented IT [Crawford et al., 2005] Nov. 30 Service level agreement (SLA) [Trienekens et al., 2004] Service quality (SERVQUAL) [Kettinger and Lee, 1997] 3
6.3 e-business patterns This third part illustrates the concept of patterns applied to three e-business situations: direct sale, virtual community, and e-marketplaces. Moreover it deals with three related notions: supply chain management, reputation mechanisms, and auctions. At each session, we will have an invited person who will present a concrete case or company, illustrating one of the three e-business situations: online sale (LeShop), virtual community (CampToCamp), and intermediary (TicketCorner). Dec. 7 Direct to customer [Weill and Vitale, 2002] Supply chain management (SCM) [Swaminathan and Tayur, 2003] Dec. 14 Virtual community (open source) [Markus et al., 2000] Reputation mechanism [Dellarocas, 2003] Dec. 21 Intermediary (and e-market) [Kambill, 1997] Auction [Pinker et al., 2003] 6.4 Environment assessment This last part deals with business intelligence, technology foresight, and environment assessment, analyzed from a market, actor, and issue perspectives. Researchers working on technology foresight with multi-criterion decision models (with experts) and prediction market (with the crowd ) will also present (and oppose) their research during this part of the course. Jan. 11 Scenario planning (and real options) [Miller and Waller, 2003] Technology roadmap [Phaal et al., 2004] Jan. 18 Disruptive technology [Danneels, 2004] Technology foresight (with MCDM) [Salo et al., 2003] Jan. 25 Prediction markets [Wolfers and Zitzewitz, 2004] Collective intelligence [Boder, 2006] 7 Class policies 1. (Classroom attendance and contribution) Students are expected to attend all classes and group meetings; class participation grades will be significantly reduced for absences. Individual contributions to class sessions are very important and will be evaluated for the course grade. 2. (Group project) Collaboration within groups is encouraged for project work. However individual contribution in the project has to be specified for each member. 3. (Plagiarism) Copying work form the Internet or other sources without reference or acknowledgement is considered plagiarism, and subject to disciplinary action, as enforced by the University of Lausanne. 4
References [Boder, 2006] Boder, A. (2006). Collective intelligence: a keystone in knowledge management. Journal of knowledge management, 10(1):81 93. [Bremser and Chung, 2004] Bremser, W. and Chung, Q. (2004). A framework for performance measurement in the e-business environment. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 4:395 412. [Crawford et al., 2005] Crawford, C., Bate, P., Cherbakov, L., Holley, K., and Tsocanos, C. (2005). Toward an on demand service-oriented architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 44(1):81 107. [Danneels, 2004] Danneels, E. (2004). Disruptive technology reconsidered: A critique and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21:246 258. [Dellarocas, 2003] Dellarocas, C. (2003). The digitization of word of mouth: Promise and challenges of online feedback mechanisms. Management Science, 49(10):1407 1424. [Gordijn and Akkermans, 2001] Gordijn, J. and Akkermans, H. (2001). Designing and evaluating e- business models. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16:11 17. [Jeffery and Leliveld, 2004] Jeffery, M. and Leliveld, I. (2004). Best practices in it portfolio management. Sloan management Review, 45(3):41 49. [Kambill, 1997] Kambill, A. (1997). Doing business in the wired world. IEEE Computer, 30(5):56 61. [Kaplan and Norton, 2000] Kaplan, R. and Norton, D. (2000). Having trouble with your strategy? then map it. Harvard Business Review, 78(5):167 76. [Kettinger and Lee, 1997] Kettinger, W. and Lee, C. (1997). Pragmatic perspectives on the measurement of information systems service quality. MIS Quarterly, 21(2):223 240. [Kim and Mauborgne, 2002] Kim, C. and Mauborgne, R. (2002). Charting your company s future. Harvard Business Review, 80(6):5 11. [Lankhorst, 2004] Lankhorst, M. (2004). Enterprise architecture modelling - the issue of integration. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 18:205 216. [Markus et al., 2000] Markus, L., Manville, B., and Agnes, C. (2000). What makes a virtual organization work? Sloan Management Review, 42:13 26. [Miller and Waller, 2003] Miller, K. and Waller, G. (2003). Scenarios, real options and integrated risk management. Long Range Planning, pages 93 107. [Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2005] Osterwalder, A. and Pigneur, Y. (2005). Clarifying business models: Origins, present and future of the concept. Comm. Association for Information Systems, 15:751 775. [Phaal et al., 2004] Phaal, R., Farrukh, C., and Probert, D. (2004). Technology roadmapping a planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71:5 26. [Pinker et al., 2003] Pinker, E., Seidmann, A., and Vakrat, Y. (2003). Managing online auctions: Current business and research issues. Management Science, 49(11):1457 1484. [Salo et al., 2003] Salo, A., Gustafsson, T., and Ramanathan, R. (2003). Multicriteria methods for technology foresight. Journal of Forecasting, 22(2):235 256. [Stabell and Fjeldstad, 1998] Stabell, C. and Fjeldstad, O. (1998). Configuring value for competitive advantage: on chains, shops, and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19:413 437. 5
[Swaminathan and Tayur, 2003] Swaminathan, J. and Tayur, S. (2003). Models for supply chains in e-business. Management Science, 49(10):1387 1406. [Trienekens et al., 2004] Trienekens, J., Bouman, J., and VanDerZwan, M. (2004). Specification of service level agreements: Problems, principles and practices. Softwarew Quality Journal, 12:43 57. [Weill et al., 2002] Weill, P., Sibramani, M., and Broadbent, M. (2002). Building it infrastructure for strategic agility. Sloan Management Review, 44(1):57 65. [Weill and Vitale, 2002] Weill, P. and Vitale, M. (2002). What it infrastructure capabilities are needed to implement e-business models? MIS Quarterly Executive, 1(1):17 34. [Wolfers and Zitzewitz, 2004] Wolfers, J. and Zitzewitz, E. (2004). Prediction markets. Journal of Economics, 18(2):107 126. The students can access the BCU digital library (http://dbserv1-bcu.unil.ch/dbbcu/cds/menu.php), for consulting many useful databases (ABI/Inform, Business Source Premier, ScienceDirect, Blackwell, Ingenta, Kluwer, JSTOR,...). 6