Tecnologías para el acoplamiento de sectores

Phase two of MAID, Artefact Evaluation, is concerned about the evaluation of M & A artefacts that were identified during Collaborative Planning. This evaluation is conducted with the predefined set of MAID criteria as outlined in Section 6.5.5. Thereby, we want to assign a rating to each MAID criterion including a rationale for this rating. Additionally, we need to prepare a

questionnaire which will be used later in in phase three On-site evaluation (cf. Sec. 6.5.7.). The overview of the Artefact Evaluation phase is outlined in Table 6-8.

Stage/Activity Information Needed Products

Prepare for Artefact Evaluation

 List of MAID team members

 List of customer SMEs

 M & A artefact inventory

 Approved MAID plan

 M & A artefacts received from customer organization

Conduct M & A Evaluation

 M & A artefact inventory  M & A artefacts received from

customer stakeholder

 MAID criteria form

 MAID criteria form – Phase 2 results

Perform Quality Audit of Results

 MAID criteria form – Phase 2 results

 Quality-audited MAID criteria form – Phase 2 results

Prepare for On-Site

Evaluation  MAID scope statement

Prepare On-site Evaluation Agenda

 M & A artefact inventory

 Approved MAID plan

 Quality-audited MAID criteria form – Phase 2 results

 Approved agenda for on-site evaluation

Prepare Materials

 M & A artefact inventory

 Approved MAID plan

 Approved agenda for on-site evaluation

 Quality-audited MAID criteria form – Phase 2 results

 Interview questions organized by interviewee

 Contact list for questionnaire target audience

 Orientation presentation from Phase 3

Administer MAID Questionnaire

 Contact list for questionnaire target audience

 Self-administered questionnaire  Interview questions organized by

interviewee

 Questionnaire results

 Questionnaire results organized for reporting purposes

Manage Logistics

 Approved MAID plan

 Approved agenda for on-site evaluation

 Action item list to support Phase 3

Table 6-8: MAID Artefact Evaluation overview

6.5.6.1. Prepare for Artefact Evaluation

The first activity is concerned with the preparation of MAID artefacts. For this purpose, we first need the list of MAID team members which also includes contact information and availability information. Furthermore, we require the list of customer SMEs. Most importantly, we necessitate the M & A inventory which must be organized and assigned for evaluation to team members. Further required is the approved MAID plan. All MAID artefacts use the versioning employed for our DSR artefacts. The product in this phase are actual copies of the M & A

artefacts from the customer organization. Since all our M & A artefacts are available intra- organizational, we do not specifically arrange for obtaining copies and documentation from other organizations. We still consider customers in this M & A context since some artefacts, e.g. the EA BSC, is likely to be used by managers from different organizations and they could express their interest to evaluate it in terms of their M & A capabilities.

6.5.6.2. Conduct M & A Artefact Evaluation

This activity deals with conducting the actual analysis of M & A artefacts. Consequently, we require the M & A artefact inventory and all relevant M & A artefact information. An important input for the actual evaluation is the MAID criteria form. The template we employ is illustrated in Table 6-9 based on the recommendation of (Kasunic 2010a).

Item Description

Criterion number The criterion number according to (Kasunic 2010b).

Criterion The evaluation criterion description.

Rating Value of rating according to evaluator depending on

how well criterion is satisfied.

Evidence of Rating A reference to the relevant location of the artefact that

supports the rating.

Rationale

The evaluator’s reasoning for assigning that particular rating. This field is optional and used if it is not clear why a rating was given.

Interview questions

Captures interview questions used in Phase 3 – On- site Evaluation. The intention is to clarify criterion issues.

DSR Artefact Describes which DSR artefact is evaluated with this

criterion.

DSR Criteria Describes to which DSR criterion this MAID criterion

is mapped to.

Notes Captures any kind of information which the evaluator

sees fit for this particular criterion.

Table 6-9: MAID criteria form (based on (Kasunic 2010a))

Regarding the rating scale, we adopt the recommended scale described in (Kasunic 2010b). We summarize it in the following Table 6-10.

Rating Description

Very adequate Exceeds the standard for this criterion or is viewed as

a superior implementation.

Adequate Satisfies the criterion sufficiently.

Slightly inadequate

Criterion is almost satisfied. By making a slight change to the condition or practice addressed by the criterion, a rating of adequate could be achieved.

Very inadequate The condition or practice is addressed by the

organization but in an inadequate way.

Completely missing

The condition or practice does not exist based on examination of the M & A artefact.

Doesn’t apply The particular criterion does not apply to the

organizational context.

Table 6-10: MAID criterion rating scale (c.f. (Kasunic 2010b))

MAID team members now can rate relevant MAID criteria of the artefacts while the MAID team lead monitors progress and enables communication between team members wherever needed. A single view of results is prepared by the team lead after the assessment in the form of the MAID criteria form – Phase 2 results. For this part of the evaluation, we employ a Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet.

6.5.6.3. Perform Quality Audit of Results

The objective of this activity is for the team lead to review the compiled results in terms of completeness and overall quality. As product, we have the Quality-audited MAID criteria form – Phase 2 results. Notably, we tailor this activity into the actual evaluation since the team lead in our case also acts as SME for criteria ratings. In other words, quality reviews happen right after rating before they are accepted for the next stage. This marks an important step in order to deliver trustworthy evaluation results (cf. Sec. 6.6).

6.5.6.4. Prepare for On-site Evaluation

As the name suggests, this activity consists of preparations for the upcoming on-site evaluation. Firstly, we must prepare the on-site evaluation agenda for which we necessitate the M & A artefact inventory, the approved MAID plan, and the quality-audited MAID criteria form – phase 2 results. Thereby, we set the agenda in the form of a series of workshops. The resulting product is the approved agenda for on-site evaluation.

Secondly, we prepare the materials, namely the M & A artefact inventory, the approved MAID plan, the approved agenda for on-site evaluation, and the quality-audited MAID criteria form – phase 2 results. With regard to intent, this preparation mostly consists of how to get qualitative information from stakeholders. Consequently, the MAID team lead formulates interview questions organized by interviewee, a contact list for the questionnaire target audience, a self- administered questionnaire, and an orientation presentation from phase 3 – On-site evaluation. Notably, due to the close working relationship between MAID team members, we omit the self- administered questionnaire. Nevertheless, we plan to include it after passing the EABV AM construction phase and completing an EABV operation cycle for inter-organizational projects.

Thirdly, we administer the MAID questionnaire for which we require all products from the previous activity. Basically, this is an additional way of collecting M & A practices information from all impacted stakeholders. As products, we receive questionnaire results, revised interview questions organized by interviewee and questionnaire results organized for reporting purposes. Finally, we manage logistics where we negotiate and document all logistical details for the on- site evaluation. Here, we require the approved MAID plan and the approved agenda for on-site evaluation. As product, we create an action item list containing task information such as the description, responsibility, due date, and a completion date. All stakeholders responsible should receive this list. This activity has in practice a very organizational character and is not relevant for our research since it comprises tasks as organizing meeting rooms, drinks and food, and accommodation. Nevertheless, we have executed this activity in a simplified form.