The seminar I shall present at Masaryk University in Brno on May 19, 2016. A video of this presentation is available at https://www.youtube.com/edit?video_id=Fu5kv0sFWG4
2. Times, they are a-changin’…
Less resources
Higher
request
peaks
Higher
number
of users…
ICT
Energy
production &
distribution
Enterprises
Transport
of goods
& people
Water treatment
& distribution
Healthcare
Crisis
management
3. With the meter in the red zone…
• …organizations that
appeared to work fine
reveal their limitations!
– cost too much
– use up too many resources
– do not scale well
– intolerable to changes
– fail to address new aspects
→ Traditional approaches are
reaching structural limits.
4. Questions and challenges
• Is there a "smarter way"?
• How do we address big societal
problems (healthcare, crisis mgmt...)?
• How do we rethink our organizations?
Which model, approach, software...?
1. Major stance
2. Two cases
3. Analysis
4. Models
5. Results
This ppt
5. It is the "axioms"
that make up the system...
• "Regardless of its nature, any system is
affected by its design assumptions.
Our organizations and services
are no exception"
(How Resilient Are Our Societies?
https://goo.gl/ftpFVo)
• New axioms are needed!
– “Wrong” assumptions ⇒ inefficiency & fragility
– In what follows: two examples
7. Healthcare "axioms" (1/2)
• Caregiver = producer of
care products
• Care receiver =
consumer = "destroyer"
of resources
• Producer and customer are not in
touch, except during the
"transactions"
• No value co-creation
• What do those axioms produce ?
8. • Caregiver = producer of
care products
• Care receiver =
consumer = "destroyer"
of resources
• Producer and customer are not in
touch, except during the
"transactions"
• No value co-creation
• What do those axioms produce ?
Axioms of a
Product Dominant Logic!
re: FI-PA194
9. Shortage of resources!
→ A subset of the
social actors serves
the whole set
• Growing
population +
progressive
aging⇒ shrinking
of the service
providers subset
→ Fragile society,
unable to serve
its citizens
10. Shortage of resources!
→ A subset of the
social actors serves
the whole set
• Growing
population +
progressive
aging⇒ shrinking
of the service
providers subset
→ Fragile society,
unable to serve
its citizens
21. How did it fare?
People
Private orgs
Local emergency
response orgs
State emergency
response orgs
Federal emergency
Dept of Homeland
Security
Private
circles
Institu-
tional
respon-
ders
WHY?
24. No collaborative sharing of
knowledge and resources
Product
dominant logic
Rigid hierarchy:
No inter-circle
value co-creation
Roles and values:
predefined and static
25. No collaborative sharing of
knowledge and resources
Plastic, fragile
organizations
Product
dominant logic
Rigid hierarchy:
No inter-circle
value co-creation
Roles and values:
predefined and static
26. Official cause:
Institutional-
only response!
“[Responders] would have been
able to do more if the tri-level
system (city, state, federal) of
emergency response was able to
effectively use, collaborate with,
and coordinate the combined
public and private efforts.
How to do so [...] is a central task of
enhancing community
resilience.”CARRI 3 Tech Report
27. Institutional-
only response!
“[Responders] would have been
able to do more if the tri-level
system (city, state, federal) of
emergency response was able to
effectively use, collaborate with,
and coordinate the combined
public and private efforts.
How to do so [...] is a central task of
enhancing community
resilience.”CARRI 3 Tech Report
Community resilience: response=
co-creation + co-evolution
28. Lessons learned
• Traditional organizations: Product
Predominant Logic
– Static definition of providers and suppliers; of
values; of hierarchical roles (⇒ distinction
between institutional and spontaneous
responses)
• New "axioms" are required!
→From the "local, static organization of an
obsolete yesterday" to an interconnected,
dynamic, smarter organization matching
our turbulent, resource-scarce new times!
29. Axiom #1: Society
• Society should be part of the solution
• Society ≡ abundant "pool" of mobile
“resources” able to exercise complex
action
• Challenge: to engineer ways to tap
into the nearly unlimited source of
social energy of our societies
– cf. VLIR-UOS project SELFSERV, just
launched (http://goo.gl/yXi5Ju)
30. Axiom #2: Smart, service-based
• We need "smarter" systems: systems based on
service science and service systems
engineering
• Service system engineering: optimally
organizing resources: "dynamic configurations
of people, technologies, organizations and
shared information that create and deliver value
to customers, providers and other stakeholders"
[IBM, 2008]
⇒
31. Axiom #2: Smart, service-based
• We need "smarter" systems: systems based on
service science and service systems
engineering
• Service system engineering: optimally
organizing resources: "dynamic configurations
of people, technologies, organizations and
shared information that create and deliver value
to customers, providers and other stakeholders"
[IBM, 2008]
⇒
vs. static
32. Axiom #2: Smart, service-based
• We need "smarter" systems: systems based on
service science and service systems
engineering
• Service system engineering: optimally
organizing resources: "dynamic configurations
of people, technologies, organizations and
shared information that create and deliver value
to customers, providers and other stakeholders"
[IBM, 2008]
⇒
vs. static
"live" vs. local (& stale!)
33. Axiom #2: Smart, service-based
• We need "smarter" systems: systems based on
service science and service systems
engineering
• Service system engineering: optimally
organizing resources: "dynamic configurations
of people, technologies, organizations and
shared information that create and deliver value
to customers, providers and other stakeholders"
[IBM, 2008]
– "A body of knowledge that describes, explains,
predicts, and improves value co-creation
between interacting entities" [Sun, 2012]
⇒
vs. static
"live" vs. local (& stale!)
34. Axiom #3: Metarchies
• We need METARCHIES: better-than-
hierarchies!
–Organizations that match better
with service dominant logic
–Functioning as catalysts of value
creation:
≡ Identifying & manifesting
value propositions
–Not imposing predefined, static roles
–Managing "dynamic configurations of
people, technologies, organizations and
shared information"
⇒
35. 35
Service provider Service client
Service registry
Publish Discover
Bind
Service
description
A new model: the
service-oriented community
Starting point: classic SoA pattern
36. Party Party
Service registry
Service
description
Publish Publish
Bind
Reasoning & coordination
Individual &
social concerns
optimization
Capabilities
Policies
Availability
Location…
Events
People
Cyber-Phys.S.
Organizations
Catalyst party
Catalyst: "a person or thing that precipitates an event";
"an agent that provokes or speeds significant
change or action"
A new model: the
service-oriented community
(De Florio &
Blondia, 2010)
⇒ VALUE CO-CREATION
48. •"Adaptive Service Orchestration in Ambient
Assisted Living" (Hong Sun, 2006-2011)
Service systems engineering; integration of
human services for ambient assisted living;
optimally organize resources. Semantic service
description & matching. Simulations
My role: director of studies, supervisor, initiator
•IBM Service Innovation Student Contest
2007, number one winner (BeNeLux)
•IBM Ph.D. Fellowship (2009; only fellowship
awarded to a Belgian doctoral student in
2009)
Prototypic implementation:
Mutual Assistance Community
49. • Complement existing healthcare orgs
• Organize intelligent responses to AAL
scenarios
• Optimally orchestrate devices & beings
• Not just safety nets:
–Reducing social isolation of elderly people
–Reducing costs, best utilizing the social
resources
Service system
engineering
⇒
Prototypic implementation:
Mutual Assistance Community
50. Service-oriented Communities:
pluses and minuses
+ Exploits social energy (See Axiom #1)
+ dual service systems
+ Service-, semantic-based (Axiom #2)
+ Simulations prove effectiveness
+ Value co-creation via social translucence
[ - Social translucence: (Kellogg/IBM, 2006)
- Mathematical model in my latest paper,
"Fractal social organization as a
foundation to
pervasive social computing services":
https://arxiv.org/abs/1601.01222 ]
52. Service-oriented Communities:
pluses and minuses
– Not a metarchy (Axiom #3)
–Centralized: single-points-of-failure & -
congestion
–Single-level ⇒ does not match well
multi-level organizations (e.g., crisis
management organizations)
• How to deal with the minuses?
54. Party Party
Service registry
Service
description
Publish
Publish
Reasoning & coordination
"There's
fire here!"
Catalyst party
Enhanced
service-oriented community
PartyParty PartyParty
2) Events trigger protocols, e.g. FIRE(firesquad, firetruck,
driver, extinguishers)
Fire event ⇒
FIRE() protocol
55. Party Party
Service registry
Service
description
Publish
Publish
Reasoning & coordination
3) Catalyst
locates actors
willing & able
to play roles:
firesquad,
firetruck, driver,
extinguishers
Capabilities
Policies
Availability
Location…
People
Cyber-Phys.S.
Organizations
Catalyst party
Enhanced
service-oriented community
PartyParty PartyParty
Fire event ⇒
FIRE() protocol
59. Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
PartyPartyParty
PartyPartyParty
PartyPartyParty
PartyPartyParty
60. Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party PartyPartyParty PartyParty
Party
PartyPartyParty
PartyPartyParty
PartyPartyParty
PartyPartyParty
FIRE(r1, r2, r3, r4, r5)
5-service system to
deal with a "Fire"
event
Organization identifies
a complex opportunity
for value co-creation:
61. Applications, studies, and results
• "Models and Concepts for Socio-
technical Complex Systems: Towards
Fractal Social Organizations"
http://bit.ly/1o63TEj
• Geometrical and audio representations
–Modularity
–Self-similarity
–Fractal dimension!
–2013 IBM Faculty Award
http://goo.gl/vO8RKj
1) Formal model
67. • Services structured within hierarchical
federation reflecting structure of
deployment environment
• All resources wrapped as manageable
web services
• Standard pub-sub mechanism
• Seamless integration w/ external apps
• Each service group hosts a catalyst
(middleware component)
Applications, studies, and results
2) Little Sister
68. • Aim: measure the potential of "new axioms"
(service-orientation, social energy,
metarchies)
• Case study: falls detection
– Two falls detectors coupled with a cloud of
"verificators" (volunteers that tell whether a fall
was real or not)
• Approach: NetLogo model, written by
a M.Sc. student
– IEEE Conf. paper, ACM Conf. paper
Applications, studies, and results
3) Multi-agent simulation
74. 4) Reduced waiting times
Modicum of
social energy
produces
significant
results!
75. Conclusions
• Novel "axioms" to create "smarter"
systems
– Shift from a Product Dominant Logic to a
Service Dominant Logic
– Social energy
– Metarchies of catalysts: discoverers and
proposers of value (win-win's!)
• Future work: e2e-referral
– Enterprise orchestrates optimal value
propositions
– Enterprise takes responsibility: the user is
not left alone
76. Conclusions
• Novel "axioms" to create "smarter"
systems
– Shift from a Product Dominant Logic to a
Service Dominant Logic
– Social energy
– Metarchies of catalysts: discoverers and
proposers of value (win-win's!)
• Future work: e2e-referral
– Enterprise orchestrates optimal value
propositions
– Enterprise takes responsibility: the user is
not left alone
"How Resilient Are Our Societies?
Analyses, Models, and Preliminary Results"
https://goo.gl/ftpFVo
77. Other results
• 2013 IBM Faculty Award (two in BE)
• 2009 IBM Fellowship (only in BE)
• 2008 FITCE.be "best young enterpreneur"
• 2007 IBM Student context: best BeNeLux
• I'm a good catalyst myself ;-)
78. Possible R&E overlaps
Service ecology
Systems analysis
Community
resilience
Service analysis/
modeling
Resilience /
antifragility
Pervasive social
computing
Semantics modeling
Service evolution
Economics of
information