Corporate Portals for Supply Chain Collaboration

Corporate Portals for Supply Chain Collaboration Presented at the Second Annual Symposium on Supply Chain Management, September 30th, 2004 Toronto, Canada Scott Paquette, University of Toronto Faculty of Information Studies 140 St. George Street Toronto, ON M5S 3G6 [email protected] Scott Paquette is a Ph.D. candidate in the Faculty of Information Studies at the University of Toronto. Scott’s research interests are in the area of knowledge management and transfer, focusing on how technology assists companies share knowledge with their partners to support innovation and new product development. Prior to his doctoral studies, he has taught various information system courses and seminars at McGill University, University of Western Ontario Ivey School of Business and the University of Toronto. Scott completed his Masters of Information Studies at the University of Toronto, and also holds a Bachelor of Business Administration from Wilfrid Laurier University. Recently, Scott was the Manager of Domestic Business Information Systems for a Canadian bank. Scott also has extensive project management and consulting experience with a telecommunications company, and technology risk management & security experience with a major accounting firm.

Linda Moffat, McMaster University DeGroote School of Business 1280 Main Street Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4M4 [email protected] Professor Moffat researches and teaches in the area of the management of technology and innovation. Her specific research interests include the management of new product development, concurrent engineering, virtual enterprise integration and the strategic technology management. Dr. Moffat's research on new product development and virtual enterprise joint ventures has been published in Management Science and the Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. In the course of her academic career she has held teaching and/or research appointments at Carleton University, Harvard University, Boston University and the University of Western Ontario. She has been a consultant to high technology companies and to Federal departments and agencies, on issues related to science and technology policy and on new product development methodologies and joint technology development ventures.

July 31st, 2004

Abstract This paper reviews the technological capabilities offered by the portal industry’s key software vendors to support inter-firm design collaboration and supply chain integration. An analysis of the technology coverage and gaps will be presented, with a focus on the opportunities available for portal software improvement. Challenges for collaboration and supply chain software, including security, external access and capabilities, bandwidth and communication standards will be discussed, particularly in context with the demands of portal software users. As well, a picture of the current and future state of the marketplace is developed from an analysis of the market position and product direction of a selection of enterprise portal vendors.

Keywords Supply Chain Management, Corporate Portals, New Product Design and Development, Knowledge Management, Internet Technology, Collaboration

1.0 Introduction The role of corporate portals has been constantly changing throughout their short lifetime as tools for managing organizational knowledge. An important recent advancement in the functionality of portals is their ability to connect networked companies together, joining internal and external knowledge sources to assist in the creation of new and valuable knowledge. Nowhere is this increased functionality and utility more evident than in the use of portals to manage the supply chain. Many firms have refocused on their core competencies, and increased their reliance on strategic alliances and the outsourcing of much of the supply chain. This new ‘externalized value chain’ structure requires a company to work more intimately with its partners and, particularly, to develop efficient means of information and knowledge sharing with these partners. Although allowing for greater flexibility and the improved ability to compete [22], this externalized value chain organization also places new demands on information technology and knowledge creation processes. This paper will examine how portal applications are being used to support inter-firm design collaboration and supply chain management. An analysis of the technology coverage and gaps will be presented, with a focus on the requirements of users and the opportunities available for portal software vendors. The methodology used to perform this analysis of portals supporting supply chain management includes a literature review of portal and supply chain management research, discussions with senior executives of portal software firms and users of portals in various industries, and a review of documentation provided by various portal companies and technology market survey firms. The paper provides an overview of the portal application landscape detailing the current offerings by major technology vendors, and identifying future trends and opportunities for the use of portal software to support product design and supply chain collaboration. The contribution to the field of supply chain management provided by this paper is an examination of the role that portals have in supporting supply chain collaboration and identifying trends emerging in portal technology which will contribute to collaboration between suppliers and customers.

2.0 The Internet and Inter-Firm Collaborations The internet, intranets and extranets have emerged as vital tools in outsourcing and alliance strategies, offering increased distributed access to supply chain partners through standard technology applications and processes. Before use of the internet became widespread in the mid 1990’s many larger organizations adopted electronic data interchange (EDI), an electronic messaging standard defining the data formats for the exchange of key business documents across private networks or the public internet. Although it was relatively expensive to implement, difficult to integrate with existing systems and capable

of supporting only batch and static transaction processing, EDI was the first ‘eBusiness’ application. With the eventual integration of EDI with an company’s ERP (enterprise resource planning) system, the basis for an interorganizational system supporting a distributed supply chain was developed [21]. The internet became more user friendly during the mid 1990’s, with the emergence of the World Wide Web (the web), and the adoption of HTML, standard URLs and the first browser. Companies began to convert their EDI information exchange technologies to HTML and later to XML formats in order to take advantage of low adoption costs, greater selection of business applications and the increased availability to all partners offered by the World Wide Web. In recent surveys, 90% of companies indicated they use the internet in coordinating with some part of their supply chain [27]. Most organizations use the internet as a tool for gathering purchasing information and placing routine orders [23] and many still use the restricted EDI document formats for these exchanges. But for many organizations, the web connection has become a strategic tool that strengthens the buyer-supplier relationship through establishing broad information connections that have a major impact on the overall supply strategy [42].

2.1 Portals and Supply Chain Integration Until recently, the term ‘portal’ conveyed images of a search engine that linked a user to various information sources either within a company or on the internet. But new labels for internal corporate systems have now emerged in an attempt to more properly describe and promote these systems to the common user. Terms such as ‘Intranet,’ ‘Corporate Portal’, ‘Enterprise Portal’, and ‘Business Portal’ definitions have emerged to more aptly depict the private networks which operate at the level of the company, as enterprise-level information facilitators and repositories. An ‘Intranet’ is the internal web-enabled corporate network “… upon which a portal resides” [8] (p.9). Intranets are corporate information and knowledge sharing systems that connect employees to information applications and other employees in order to efficiently disseminate job-related information. They are closed off from the external public Internet by a firewall which keeps external viewers from accessing the intranet’s content. Extranets are private networks which can be accessed by authorized viewers who are located outside the corporate firewall. A corporate extranet is often referred to as operating outside of the intranet in the DMZ or ‘demilitarized zone’, reflecting it origins in the defense contracting sector. Portals are different from an intranet or an extranet. Portals are user interface applications residing on an intranet or extranet infrastructure and provide a path via a web interface to a wide range of content, directories and services through one electronic access point. Employees view portals as a tool to provide secure, customizable and personalized access to organizational information residing in various systems across the company. They serve as a gateway or user interface to various information services and information systems, whether the information originates internally or externally.

Dias [9] identifies six major components of a portal, required for supporting supply chain collaboration. A business information directory provides a complete guide to the organization’s information, search engines assist users in locating relevant information and information sources, a publishing facility loads and indexes information, import and export interfaces connect with other internal and external systems to bridge various knowledge sources, a subscription facility notifies user groups of new information sources, and an information assistant tailors the web interface in a manner conducive to the individual’s preferences. Portals should not be confused with the actual business applications they connect with. Rather they are a common access point or interface for employees to receive and integrate data from ERP and other critical business systems. An example in a supply chain setting is a portal on a corporate extranet that allows external partners to access information that is resident in a shared logistics application such as Manugistics, that can be combined with other production data from an applications such as I2, both of which are based on data sent out through the corporate firewall from the corporate ERP. Overall, a portal becomes an important tool for creating, organizing, and disseminating organizational knowledge across a company’s internal and external information infrastructure [8]. Organizational knowledge is increasingly being recognized as an important resource capable of creating competitive advantage. Knowledge is defined as contextual information, or information that has strategic significance and applicability [35]. Knowledge can be created, transferred, recombined, codified and inputted into information systems [5]. Two forms of knowledge exist, explicit and tacit knowledge [36]. Explicit knowledge is knowledge that can be easily shared through codification and transfer. It may be found in documentation and can be stored and transferred electronically in digital formats. Tacit knowledge is experiential, personal knowledge which is derived from action and requires a great deal of effort to share, such as personal communication, apprenticeships or ‘learning by doing’. Portals have the ability to facilitate the sharing of both tacit and explicit knowledge through their support for searching and retrieving multiform and multi-format information types, including those that attempt to codify tacit knowledge sources and locations. By combining the ability to distribute knowledge across various locations and technological platforms using web browser technology and the knowledge focused architecture of a portal, these inter-firm or supply chain-wide systems create the opportunity to overcome barriers in the transfer of tacit knowledge. These barriers faced by systems attempting to transfer tacit knowledge include making the user aware of its existence, creating processes that making tacit knowledge sharing valuable, keeping sources of tacit knowledge up to date, and bringing similar knowledge workers together to share knowledge [30, 39]. Communication-based knowledge systems support and enhance knowledge creation, storage and transfer [5]. This paper takes the view that some portals have become

knowledge systems. The latest versions of these applications go beyond the role of information dissemination tools and now provide a forum for information creation, transfer and utilization. Grammer [15] also acknowledges the progression of portals into knowledge systems, commenting that their evolution now includes goals usually associated with knowledge management activities. This facilitation of joint interaction between individuals for the purpose of the collection of insight, values, and experience increases the ability of the portal to facilitate experiential learning particularly in the area of product design and development [8]. Supply chain portals were the first inter-firm portals to be commercialized and they are the area where the challenges of inter-firm portals are first being addressed. From providing customer and product information in the sales process, sharing production schedules and inventory levels in the manufacturing stage, to tracking shipment and delivery schedules in the distribution stage, supply chain portals extend the capability of supply chain members to share information and plan activities based on each other’s activities. As production supply chains become more integrated as a result of increased information flows, the initial stage in the production chain, the product design and development stage is increasing its level of inter-firm information and recently knowledge sharing. Both formal and informal sources of knowledge contribute to the successful design and development of new products and processes, and much of this information must come from sources external to the organization such as customers and supply chain partners. Therefore this functional area of the supply chain will be of focus in this paper. This paper also reviews the functionality necessary for a portal to support collaboration in integrated supply chains, including the unique needs of joint product development initiatives. Features that allow organizations to easily and securely exchange information and facilitate individuals to share their knowledge must be included to augment the standard set of features expected in portal technology. Besides the standard functionality mentioned above, portals need to provide enhanced security for exchanging information across public networks, the ability to handle large and complex data files, interoperability features to allow integration with varying portal and business system products, and encourage communication modes that allow for tacit knowledge exchange.

3.0 Literature Review on Use of Portals 3.1 Why Supply Chains Share Information In an alliance or collaboration between two companies the goals may include a reduction in transaction costs, the maximization of profit or increased learning and knowledge transfer [24]. Chen and Li [6] identify knowledge is gained as either content knowledge or process knowledge. Content knowledge is the capabilities and skills resident in the different functional areas and can include technology, manufacturing capabilities, marketing skills, and other functional knowledge. Process knowledge, or the know-how

required to facilitate efficient knowledge creation and sharing, can be derived from the actual management of the collaboration agreement between the firms, or though new product development experience. Both content knowledge and process knowledge sharing can contribute towards the effective management of supply chain relationships, especially within the new product design and development process. Integration based on knowledge sharing among firms in a supply chain leads to a superior supply chain performance [18]. This knowledge sharing allows for supplier knowledge and engineering and manufacturer capabilities to be an input into the product design process, which impacts new product development performance [17]. Supply chain integration requires integrating the flow of data and information between various members of the supply chain to allow for the correct balancing of supply and demand [14]. Without proper coordination between partners many coordination problems are inevitable, leading to the bullwhip effect [28], excess inventory and stock-outs [34]. Knowledge transfer between a supplier and customer has been enhanced through technologies such as the internet, as well as joint decision processes such as product design as efforts that are better coordinated despite temporal or geographic distances [40].

3.2 Two Models of Knowledge Sharing in Supply Chains Two different models of supply chain management are currently practiced in most industries, and even within individual producer companies. In traditional commoditybased supply chain management as practiced by most North American firms for at least some of their parts requirements, suppliers are kept at arms-length in order to minimize commitments and dependence on specific suppliers and to maximize bargaining power. This approach operates in contrast to the ‘close collaboration’ supply chain model, which is based on the Japanese practice of creating strong partnerships through close collaboration with long-term supply partners. In the collaboration model, supply partners share more information and coordinate more tasks, use relation-specific assets to maintain lower costs, improve quality and increase speed, and rely on trust to govern the longer-term relationship [10]. This was illustrated by Echeverri-Carroll [12] who questioned why Japanese firms exchange more information with their main suppliers and customers through different inter-organizational systems than their North American counterparts. A key factor in the success of the collaboration approach is the close task integration between supply partners, which is enabled by the transfer of information and knowledge. The commodities supply chain model is widely used with the goal of achieving cost savings under competitive pressures. In this model, supplier relationships are very limited, to minimize switching costs. The collaboration supply chain model is widely used in Japanese business culture to develop strong, long-term relationships that create strategic value for the organization. Key success factors for this model are information sharing, collaboration, and strong communication channels.

In the commodities supply chain model, networking technologies are used to overcome the barriers of supply cost and complexity [41]. Networking tools for commodity focused supply chains, while structurally based on technology-enabled relationships, make decisions based upon efficiency benefits. IT solutions are used to provide low cost, simplified and standardized communications solutions that at a minimum need only a standard computer, connection to the public internet, and standardized browser software. In the commodity supply chain, electronic file sharing is used to keep switching costs low and allow supply chain to be reconfigurable, in response to changing trends, consumer preferences, and competitive pressures. The result is more short-term relationships within the supply chain that search for overall long-term cost benefits. The business objective is meeting supply goals, not nurturing long-term relationships [41]. In this model, portal technology is mainly used act as an interface between supplier systems in order to share information in support of cost savings activities such as just-in-time inventory management. Mostly supply chain information and data is shared, with little product and market knowledge exchanged between partners. In the collaboration model, closely integrated and strategically developed supply networks with intimately connected relationships at the core of the supply structure can be used to produce a strategic advantage for a group of partner firms [41]. In this model the same inter-firm networking tools, EDI, electronic file sharing, shared applications and supply chain portals are becoming the key enablers of supply chain integration. Here knowledge considered a valuable asset, and is shared through the use of these technologies along with critical supply chain information. A key result of the information integration and supplier knowledge sharing in the collaboration supply chain is increased inter-organizational learning. As a result, participating companies gain new capabilities to reduce costs, increase quality and safety, and link employees with similar roles by learning from within the organization and externally. This learning may lead to advantages in new product design and development functions through the market and technological insights gained from suppliers and customers. A well cited example is Toyota, who has established supplier knowledge networks that create shared goals, promote knowledge sharing activities, and exchange best practices. Not only is valuable knowledge created, but relationships within the supply chain are strengthened. The results have been output per worked increasing 14%, inventories reduced by 25%, and defect rates 50% lower than operations that supply Toyota’s rivals [11]. Kulp et. al [26] found similar quantitative benefits to information integration in the collaborative supply chain. Their study conducted within the retail industry determined that when companies collaborated on new product development, they move from average profit margins to well above average. Manufacturers receive an initial gain from information sharing, yet they must work closely together to continue to receive benefits.

3.3 Examples of Knowledge Sharing in Product Development In a commodity-based supply chain, the knowledge exchange emphasis is on the sharing of well-defined operational information such as cycle-time, service level, and availableto-promise. But in increasingly collaborative supply chains, companies face the challenge of linking with their customers to exchange product requirements information [32]. Software applications supporting production chain collaboration should allow for the acquisition, sharing, optimization, and utilization of these requirements between customers and partners to detect any discrepancies or gaps within the requirements [31]. Concurrent engineering [33] is a product design process that makes use of multifunctional teams comprised of design and manufacturing employees and customers and suppliers. Internet technology linked to supply chain applications can play a major role in supporting such concurrent engineering. This has been successfully accomplished in the large equipment manufacturer Caterpillar, where open standards with partners provide the ability to access spreadsheets, charts, documentation, schedules, databases, and engineering documents that enable multi-firm teams to collaborate on new product design. The collaborative work application implemented by all partners across the supply chain has been instrumental in the development of specifications, creation of interchangeable parts, part standardization or simplification, and part exclusion, all of which contribute towards cost reduction. Huang and Mak [19] describe such a system consisting of ‘virtual consultants’ in ‘virtual teams’ organized within a ‘virtual office’ equipped with ‘virtual design board’, available to all participants no matter where they are located, whether internal or external to Caterpillar. This phenomenon of ‘virtual’ or internet-supported teams has also been observed by Eng [13], who examined the role of the internet in knowledge creation in high-tech collaborations. The results of his study determined that open systems, virtual channels, multi-user engagement, and extended customizability all changed business practices of firms using the internet for knowledge creation. It was a key factor in promoting business relationships, creating local competence, and increasing knowledge dissemination between partner firms in the production network. A current example of the use of the internet to facilitate knowledge creation within the supply chain is General Motors, who redesigned their vehicle development process to include closer networking ties with their suppliers [16]. Their initial analysis indicated too many batch process existed that should have been interactive, such as CAD files being exchanged with suppliers via physical media such as tapes and paper files. The solution was to move towards a common IT infrastructure across the supply chain with EDS’s ‘Unigraphics NX’ as a common CAD/CAM design tool implemented with the suppliers. The application was internet-based to allow easy access for its thousands of suppliers, yet did not entail the high costs of a private network or the rigidity of a simple EDI solution. A second challenge was finding the correct balance between information security and partner accessibility. GM wanted to allow their partners access to internal systems to

view certain information and design plans, however providing external access through the company firewall created issues of security through using the public internet. A solution was to adopt the use of an encrypted virtual private network (VPN) to transmit information securely over the public internet to connect GM and its suppliers. This technology helped create a distributed and secure network, while controlling what information each supplier could access to balance security and information overload. The third challenge concerned integrating with supplier information flows without disrupting either party’s existing business processes. Synchronization methods for digital files such as data mirroring and replicating were implemented allowing GM the ability to check on the progress of designs while they are being developed at the suppliers. The above three solutions were delivered through a new product development portal created by EDS to facilitate supplier access to GM’s design processes. It resulted in the design process life cycle being accelerated, and plant facilities and manufacturing processes across suppliers being standardized, which produced consistent products with fewer defects. Overall, the result of the internet based supply chain portal reduced product development time by 70%, during a time where the IT budget was cut by 35%.

4.0 Key Trends and Opportunities 4.1 Addressing Security and External Access The need for supply chain security has increased dramatically in recent history as supply chain applications have moved beyond the security of corporate boundaries and allow information to be carried over the public internet into other firms. Supply chain information and knowledge passing between different partners must be secure and protected in transit and in use, including when the required information is passed on to governmental authorities. “Total supply network visibility” is a strategy that allows for required and urgent information to be easily accessed by those who require it while guaranteeing the protection of confidential information [29]. But portals rely on open network architecture, network-wide browsers and public information directories. Security surrounding a portal must be a priority to ensure confidentiality of proprietary information accessible via the portal technology. The goal of information security is to “reduce the enterprise’s risk of losses caused by intrusion, system misuse, privilege abuse, tampering, fraud, etc.” [25, p. 233]. When using portals as a gateway to corporate information, this is achieved through using security tools that include authentication, encryption, access control, confidentiality, integrity, and auditing [25]. The security design within a portal needs to consider the diverse information forms and the strategic importance of data passed through a supply chain. Information security in a supply chain can be viewed at three levels: the data level, the security at the corporate boundary, and internal application security. Data level security

protects information transferred over public network lines and attempts to minimize the risk of interception or unauthorized access to files being transferred. Firewalls are used at the corporate boundary to act as a gatekeeper to internal systems, allowing only authorized partners from gaining access to the internal network. Once a partner firm has access to a corporate intranet through a portal, internal security at both the portal and business applications level protects confidential information while allowing the partner access only to required authorized internal information. Information at the data level traveling across networks, and in particular the public internet, needs to be protected from unauthorized viewing by unknown parties. Any data leaving the company boundary can be encrypted, so if the data is intercepted it will be unreadable. Public key infrastructures (PKI) create a system where a partner can encrypt data, send it through the internet, and have an other partner receive it safely and only unencrypt the information if authorized by the sender [25]. A virtual private network (VPN) uses encryption and PKI keys to protect supply chain data traveling across a public internet connection. Unlike leased lines or private networks which offer full data security over expensive dedicated connections, a VPN service is relatively inexpensive. VPN’s are offered by internet service providers as a costeffective communication structure with information privacy to private networks but with lower traffic volume potential [4]. These solutions are popular with small and mid-sized businesses with smaller data exchange volumes who cannot afford more expensive options [38]. The portal is a window into the knowledge of the organization. Therefore access to a corporate portal includes access to important proprietary information. Even though portal technology usually allows users limited accesses to the public network, portals are not inherently secure applications. A firewall placed between the public internet and a company’s valuable information acts as a gatekeeper for both incoming and outgoing traffic, managing what individuals or external systems can electronically pass through the corporate boundary and gain access to internal information systems. Companies use a number of methods to protect data and information that can be accessed through the corporate portal including restricting portal access to IP addresses on the corporate side of the firewall, and allowing external access only to authorized fixed IP addresses. External as well as internal user names and passwords can be authenticated by the portal software, sent through strong encryption methods. Also, portals often are set up to use only FTP for external file transfers to limit the number of ports that are opened to the outside network world [20]. Companies need to understand the expected traffic volume of external users who will be accessing the system to allow for scalability in any security solution as number of supply chain partners increase. In many cases, two firewalls are used to create a safe zone (or DMZ) that houses supply chain information intended for outside viewers but keeps it separate from the corporate intranet and databases. The first firewall acts as a filter between the information and the internet, while the second firewall prevents all outside sources from accessing any

information resources located within the organization. A major disadvantage of the DMZ model is that information located in the DMZ must be regularly synchronized with the internal corporate databases. Any delay in passing information into and out of the DMZ may have a substantial impact on the timeliness and effectiveness of inter-firm knowledge sharing. Companies in the process of designing new products must be careful when opening internal systems to outside partners to limit what information is shared outside the firm. As the collaborative model dictates that companies should be open with their internal information and create effective knowledge sharing processes, the issue of confidentiality of corporate information becomes an issue. Allowing a partner to access a logistics or manufacturing module of an ERP system could also provide a path to access confidential finance or human resource information if these modules are part of the same ERP package. Therefore, security at both the portal and the business application level is crucial when allowing outside individuals access to company information.

4.2 Addressing Performance When designing new products, especially those of a very technical and complex nature, large amounts of information is generated through the use of design simulation, computer assisted design (CAD) drawings, requirements documentation, and testing data. Newer design methodologies require high performance systems to create and view 3-D rendered drawings, and high bandwidth channels to transfer these drawings between different systems and organizations. As well, video conferencing technologies can be used for tacit knowledge sharing and problem solving meetings. In order to share these resources electronically between two organizations, a large bandwidth capability must exist between the two parties in order for the efficient transfer of information to occur without a negative impact on system performance. Portals providing an interface to these systems must also be designed to facilitate large volumes of information transfer without reducing overall system performance. Depending on the networking capabilities and the jurisdictional constraints operating for different supply chain partners, collaborative information sharing often occurs via faxes, e-mails, electronically with simple FTP, as well as via the shared access to common databases. Many larger corporations utilize the most up-to-date networking and connection technology in the marketplace, which allows their internal information exchanges to be very fast and handle extremely large amounts of data. But when they collaborate with smaller firms they experience incompatibility of bandwidth levels and have to adjust what knowledge they are able to share. When choosing suppliers to codesign and develop new products, their level of networking capability should be a major consideration in order to avoid knowledge sharing issues in the design process. Furthermore, consideration to what networking and portal technology should be utilized at the outset of the relationship, as an investment may be required to interface two

separate organizations portals to support collaboration. Companies must be aware of the level of connectivity their portal provides, and its ability to handle large data transfers.

4.3 Addressing Interoperability & Application Integration As collaboration within the supply chain increases, the problem of interoperability of applications and of portals is becoming an issue for many organizations [33]. On average, a company uses five or more different supply chain applications internally, and only 4% of companies use the same vendor for all of their supply chain technologies [37]. Two characteristics of an emerging technology is a lack of standards and wide variations in system functionality, and this is quite true for the portal industry. However, for the collaborative model to be a viable approach for companies, communication interface standards and information formats are required to ease the process. Some standardization is possible in portals because of their reliance on internet technology standards. Unlike EDI which requires the sending and receiving applications to read one common set of data formats, the HTML and XML formatting standards do not require fixed data formats and hence support a much wider range of data and file types. XML allows data to be tagged with information markers enabling applications to retrieve specific formatting information from the XML data file and import it into a different system. This standardization of formatting information exchange facilitates the sharing of data between supply chain applications [21]. Even though internet technology makes wide data exchange standardization possible, it still remains the top recognized deficiency with current portal applications. The standardization problem, at both the level of the portal technology and the level of the business applications and data bases accessed by the portal also becomes relevant as the average number of web enabled applications used in an organization is 121, including on average 3 different content storage repositories, two search engine types, 3 different application servers using four unique development languages [3]. In order to link all these differing applications, databases and servers, portals use what are known as portlets. Portlets are modules of a portal application that manage the interface with other applications and other portals to allow for seamless information and knowledge sharing. Portlets are based on an industry standard, the java specification request JSR-168, and also on web services standards such as WSIA and WSRP (web services for remote portals). Portlets are becoming more commonly integrated with portal applications due to the number of systems which now must interface with these systems, especially those that support supply chain applications. Most companies must integrate at least five applications with their portal, and 40% of companies use at least 50 portlets bundled with their applications. Approximately 65% of these portlets are built in-house, indicating that the level of customization, and hence the cost required to implement a corporate portal remains quite high [2]. However, some

portal companies do offer packaged portlet solutions for common business and networking applications.

4.4 Addressing Multi-Mode Communication Besides the technical problems that can hinder portals, non-technical or human factors present challenges for organizations utilizing this technology to share information in supply chains. The collaborative models demands more than the sharing of codified, digital information between partner systems. Collaboration involves the use of crossfunctional and cross-organizational teams with the goal of sharing tacit and explicit knowledge for complex design and development processes. As with most groupware and computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) systems, it is difficult to transfer sensory information such as feelings, intuition, non-verbal information, and tacit unwritten knowledge important to knowledge sharing [7]. New multi-media technologies that enable users to interact through high-quality video and voice transmission is slowly becoming available, but challenges exist with integrating this information with portal applications interfaced by portal software. Technology will only help knowledge sharing if it incorporates tacit elements of communication and can present this to all individuals. Portals supporting collaboration within a supply chain need the ability to facilitate the sharing of multimedia information, such as video conferencing or 3-D renderings, in order to disseminate tacit knowledge during the design phase. Although this once again raises the questions of bandwidth and performance, it is important to convey non-codified knowledge in order to generate value-added knowledge creation.

5.0 Overview of Product Landscape As the use of portals spreads from industry to industry, the number of software vendors offering portal applications grows. The portal software industry consists of many different products from well known software vendors to niche players. A list of the top ten portal software vendors developed by the Delphi Research Group included familiar names such as Microsoft, IBM, and Computer Associates. Enterprise system vendors SAP and Oracle were also identified, and niche vendors such as Plumtree & Hummingbird [1]. A 2003 report by Line 56 Research [3] which surveyed organizations with enterprise portals, found a similar mix of top vendors (see Figure 1). IBM Websphere Portal, Plumtree Enterprise Web Suite and Microsoft SharePoint were the most often used portal applications.

IBM Websphere Portal, 15.2%

Other, 16.1%

Oracle Portal, 4.4%

Plumtree Enterprise Web Suite, 15.0%

Broadvision Portal Server, 4.8%

Vignette, 8.1%

Microsoft SharePoint, 14.5%

BEA Weblogic Portal, 10.3%

SAP Portal, 11.6%

Figure 1 – Software Used to Deploy Web Applications and Organize Content [3] Many studies have attempted to map the current portal software market based on variables such as sales, market share, and a set of common features. To date, there has not been a study that has looked at the future market requirements or the trends that are appearing in portal functionality. For this review of future portal requirements, eight portal vendors were selected to represent many of the different products based on different categories from the studies referenced above. Two large ERP vendors were chosen (SAP and Oracle), along with two large software companies (IBM and Microsoft), two popular niche portal vendors (Plumtree and Vignette), and two small specialist portal vendors (Merge & BEA Systems). These eight firms, representing 70% of portal applications in use globally, all offer a broad set of products targeting many industries. All have the capability to support inter-firm collaboration and supply chains at some level. Two sets of criteria were used to rate the position of a particular vendor within the marketplace. The first set of criteria, derived from previous portal industry reports [1-3], represent the most common portal functionalities. These attributes are listed in Table 1, with detailed descriptions of each in Appendix A.

Standard Portal Functions Business Directories Built-in Search Engine Import / Export Facility Subscription Facility Syndication of Content Workflow Capable Browser-Based Publishing Template Driven Design Flexible User Interface Distributed Authorship Content Separate from Presentation Reporting and Tracking Document Libraries Table 1 – Standard Portal Functionality The second set of criteria was derived from the key emerging collaboration requirements discussed in the previous sections of this paper, and a corresponding set of important functions that are becoming more in demand to meet these requirements. Table 2 below summarizes these emerging issues.

Emerging Supply Chain Collaboration Issues Security and external access

Supporting Portal Functionality

Bandwidth

Accepts data transmissions from various methods, and of varying size.

Communication standards

Interfaces with similar portal systems. Shares data located on other portal systems. Uses portlets to increase connectivity with other systems.

Communication challenges

Shares tacit knowledge and noncodified information. Allows for the communication of nonverbal information Supports multimedia or mixed media.

Can facilitate access from outside company boundaries. Allows only pre-determined supplier partners to access data. Controls what specific data is being accessed by different partners.

Table 2 – Future Portal Functionality Based on Emerging Issues

For each listed standard and emerging function, the vendor’s portal was assigned a ranking of zero to three. Three indicates the feature is present and full functional, two indicates the feature is present with limited functionality, one notes that the feature requires a separate application or module, or the portal support 3rd party integration, and zero denotes the function is not currently present. Totals were calculated separately for the standard and emerging functionality for each vendor. The total for each vendor’s standard functions determined their ranking and place on the x-axis in Figure 3, while the totals for the emerging functionality determined a vendor’s position on the y-axis. All functionality was weighted equally.

Emerging Functionality

As depicted in Figure 3, many of the portals reviewed in this analysis have begun to offer functionality that will begin to address emerging collaboration issues. Interestingly, it is the smaller vendors who are leading the way in creating new collaborative functionalities. These portal innovators are developing the emerging functionalities to differentiate their products in order to compete with the more well known portal vendors. Although larger vendors such as IBM and SAP are strongest in delivering the standard portal functionalities, smaller vendors such as Merge, BEA systems and Vignette have taken leadership in addressing the emerging issues in their products. Leading edge capabilities such as collaboration rooms, personalized communication applications and team design tools such as whiteboarding are creating an advantage for these smaller vendors.

Figure 3 – Portal Industry Map Based on Standard and Emerging Functionality

The popularity of portal products from Microsoft, IBM and SAP stems partly from their prior presence in many organizations and the ease with which their portal products can be integrated into existing systems. However, firms who chose to use a small number of large business applications vendors will limit themselves to the standard functionalities offered by the large established players. But companies that compete on the basis of inter-firm collaboration must look beyond the standard portal capabilities and adopt portal products that address the emerging issues identified above. The most widely addressed emerging issue is security and external access. Due to the recent attention information security has received in practitioner and academic literature it is no surprise that most vendors have incorporated extensive security capabilities to allow for control of information within and outside corporate boundaries. Features allowing document control and access, and distributed access across many geographical locations have become standard on almost all portal software. As emerging security issues arise on the marketplace, it should be expected that most vendors will act quickly to ensure their product contains adequate features to minimize the risk of distributed access. Two of the emerging issues that are related are inter-firm portal performance and multimodal communication capability. As more companies increase their communications infrastructure and bandwidth capability to support frequent large design file transfers, they also gain the capability to incorporate more complex communication features into their portals. Vignette and BEA Systems are current industry leaders in this area, offering portal mediated video conferencing and voice-over IP (VOIP) tools that give employees the opportunity to interact more closely and effectively when collaborating over distance. Either of these applications can require large amounts of bandwidth to support but as large bandwidth capabilities become more common, these communication tools will have to be included in portal systems. The issue of interoperability and application integration between different organizations’ portals is becoming a concern as new vendors enter an already crowded marketplace. Some vendors are supporting the development of industry standards while others lag behind. Oracle and Merge (with Plumtree and IBM not far behind) are leading the way through their acceptance of the JSR-168, WSRP standards and the implementation of standard portlets to interface their products with many other portal and business application packages available. Although smaller vendors appear to be leading the way in developing leading edge solutions, the larger players appear to be using an early follower strategy, allowing the marketplace to become more mature and clear on its future directions before implementing the emerging solutions. Consolidation will occur within the portal industry will once the market requirements begin to stabilize and standardize.

In terms of the design and development function within the supply chain, portal vendors will have to continually improve the functionality that both supports secure high volume inter-firm interaction across large geographical distances and also functionality that supports the exchange of tacit and experiential knowledge to enables learning. New web enabled groupware functionality specifically for collaborative design development and real-time test, during the creation of new products will enhance the ability of portals to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of a company’s new product development and delivery processes. Creating a shared environment that supports whiteboarding, 3-D drawing support, video conferencing, document co-authoring and sharing will be part of a portal’s role in supporting the collaborative supply chain.

6.0 Conclusions As supply chains evolve into complex knowledge sharing networks, technology that supports collaboration within supply chains must also evolve. Information integration and knowledge sharing between firms across the supply chain are becoming critical processes in developing, managing and maintaining supplier relationships in all phases of the product design and development process. Interorganizational systems will allow firms to increase the competitiveness of their supply chains and to develop products that will succeed in the marketplace. The use of a portal when collaborating with supply chain partners allows for effective team based co-design and concurrent engineering between a company and its external supply partners. Most portals currently in the marketplace offer a strong set of standard functions that assist a company’s knowledge sharing activities. However, as the requirements for supply chains are dynamic, the functionality of these portals will continue to grow. Emerging issues such as security and access, bandwidth, communication standards are challenging these vendors. Fortunately, the industry is moving towards portals that are more collaborative in nature, and that can facilitate the exchange of both highly codified information and tacit and experiential knowledge. As smaller vendors and niche players continue to push the technology capabilities of portals they will challenge the larger vendors firms to follow in their direction, and the increasing functionality and usability of supply chain portals will greatly benefit the companies that use them.

Appendix A – Portal Functionality Measures Standard Features Business Directories – Searchable listings of users, departments and functions within the organization. Import / Export Facility – Ability to import data or documents from other business applications or portals, and export documents and information in a variety of formats for uploading into other systems. Syndication of Content – Ability to publish or distribute content on other websites, intranets, systems, or personal desktops using internet technology. Browser-Based Publishing – Ability to post information and documentation via a user’s web browser. Flexible User Interface – The user can manipulate the appearance and details of their system interface, changing the look and appearance of the interface based on personal preferences. Content Separate from Presentation – Content is stored in a generic form, and is not preformatted. This allows all content to have its appearance easily changed based on system or user preferences. Document Libraries – Large storage facilities for corporate or user documentation exists, which allows fore the storage, archiving and retrieval of documents. Built-In Search Engine – The ability to perform detailed and complex full-text searches of the content on the portal is integrated into the portal software. Subscription Facility – Users are able to define interests and be notified when new content matching these interests is added to the system. Workflow Capability – Incorporate established workflow procedures and rules, with the abilities to check out, modify, approve and reject, and receive notification of content changes and actions pending. Template Driven Design – Reusable templates to define similar design specifications are used to expedite the design and implementation process. Distributed Authorship – The authorship of documents is tracked, and originates from a variety of sources and locations. Reporting and Tracking – Portal usage can be tracked, with reports generated detailing usage based on subject area, system feature, content, and user category.

References 1.

"Enterprise Portals: Total Market Perspective". 2002, Delphi Consulting Group: Boston, MA. pp. 11.

2.

"The Corporate Portal Market in 2003". 2003, Plumtree. pp. 27.

3.

"Enterprise Web and Portal Technology Benchmarking: October 2003". 2003, Line 56 Research. pp. 19.

4.

Boutaba, R., W. NG, and A. Leon-Garcia, "Web-Based Customer Management of VPN's", Journal of Network and Systems Management, 2001. Vol. 9, pp. 67-87.

5.

Carlsson, S.A., "Knowledge Managing and Knowledge Management Systems in Inter-Organizational Networks", Knowledge and Process Management, 2003. Vol. 10, pp. 194-206.

6.

Chen, R. and M. Li, "Strategic Alliances and New Product Development: An Empirical Study of the U.S. Semiconductor Start-Up Firms", ACR, 1999. Vol. 7, pp. 35-61.

7.

Cummings, J.L. and B.-S. Teng, "Transferring R&D Knowledge: The Key Success Factors Affecting Knowledge Transfer Success", Journal of Engineering Technology Management, 2003. Vol. 20, pp. 39-68.

8.

Detlor, B., "Towards Knowledge Portals: From Human Issues to Intelligent Agents. 2004, Norwell, MA: Kluer Academic Publishers. 234.

9.

Dias, C., "Corporate Portals: A Literature Review of a New Concept in Information Management", International Journal of Information Management, 2001. Vol., pp. 269-287.

10.

Dyer, J.H., D.S. Cho, and W. Chu, "Strategic Supplier Segmentation: The Next "Best Practice" in Supply Chain Management", California Management Review, 1998. Vol. 40, pp. 57-67.

11.

Dyer, J.H. and N.W. Hatch, "Using Supplier Networks to Learn Faster", Sloan Management Review, 2004. Vol. Spring 2004, pp. 57-63.

12.

Echeverri-Carroll, E.L., "Knowledge Flows in Innovation Networks: A Comparative Analysis of Japanese and US High-Technology Firms", Journal of Knowledge Management, 1999. Vol. 3, pp. 296-303.

13.

Eng, T.-Y., "Implications of the Internet of Knowledge Creation and Dissemination in Clusters of Hi-Tech Firms", European Management Journal, 2004. Vol. 22, pp. 87-98.

14.

Frohlick, M., "e-Integration in the Supply Chain: Barriers and Performance", Decision Sciences, 2002. Vol. 33, pp. 537-556.

15.

Grammer, J., "The Enterprise Knowledge Portal", DM Review, 2000. Vol. 10.

16.

Gutmann, K., "How GM is Accelerating Vehicle Development", Supply Chain Management Review, 2003. Vol. May/June, pp. 34-39.

17.

Hong, P., et al., "Knowledge Sharing in Integrated Product Development", European Journal of Innovation Management, 2004. Vol. 7, pp. 102-112.

18.

Hoopes, D.G. and S. Postrel, "Shared Knowledge, "Glitches", and Product Development Performance", Strategic Management Journal, 1999. Vol. 20, pp. 837-865.

19.

Huang, G.Q. and K.L. Mak, "Web-Based Collaborative Conceptual Design", Journal of Engineering Design, 1999. Vol. 10, pp. 183-194.

20.

James, M., R. Grosvenor, and P. Prickett, "e-Distribution: Internet-Based Management of a Merchandiser Supply Chain", Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 2004. Vol. 9, pp. 7-15.

21.

Kahl, S.J. and T.P. Berquist, "A Primer on the Internet Supply Chain", Supply Chain Management Review, 2000. Vol. Sept/Oct 2000, pp. 40-48.

22.

Kehoe, D.F. and N.J. Boughton, "New Paradigms in Planning and Control Across Manufacturing Supply Chains", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 2001. Vol. 21, pp. 582-593.

23.

Kennedy, K. and D. Deeter-Scmelz, "Descriptive and Predictive Analyses of Industrial Buyer's Use of Online Information for Purchasing", Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 2001. Vol. 21, pp. 279-290.

24.

Kogut, B., "Joint Ventures: Theorectical and Empirical Perspectives", Strategic Management Journal, 1988. Vol. 9, pp. 319-332.

25.

Kolluru, R. and P.H. Meredith, "Security and Trust Management in Supply Chains", Information Management & Computer Security, 2001. Vol. 9, pp. 233236.

26.

Kulp, S.C., H. Lee, and E. Ofek, "Manufacturer Benefits from Information Integration with Retail Customers", Management Science, 2004. Vol. 50, pp. 431444.

27.

Lancioni, R.A., M.F. Smith, and T.A. Oliva, "The Role of the Internet in Supply Chain Management", Industrial Marketing Management, 2000. Vol., pp. 45-56.

28.

Lee, H., V. Padmanabhan, and S. Whang, "Information Distortion in a Supply Chain: The Bullwhip Effect", Management Science, 1997. Vol. 43, pp. 546-558.

29.

Lee, H. and M. Wolfe, "Supply Chain Security Without Tears", Supply Chain Management Review, 2003. Vol. January/February, pp. 12-20.

30.

Leonard, D. and S. Sensiper, "The Role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation", California Management Review, 1998. Vol. 40, pp. 112-132.

31.

Li, D., et al., "A Web-Based Tool and a Heuristic Method for Cooperation of Manufacturing Supply Chain Decisions", Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 2001. Vol. 12, pp. 433-453.

32.

Lin, C., H.-C. Hung, and J.-Y. Wu, "A Knowledge Management Architecture in Collaborative Supply Chain", The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 2002. Vol. 42, pp. 83-94.

33.

McIvor, R., P. Humphreys, and L. McCurry, "Electronic Commerce: Supporting Collaboration in the Supply Chain?" Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2003. Vol., pp. 147-152.

34.

Metters, R., "Quantifying the Bullwhip Effect in Supply Chains", Journal of Operations Management, 1997. Vol. 15, pp. 89-100.

35.

Moffatt, L. and N. Archer, "Knowledge Management in Production Alliances". 2004: Hamilton, ON.

36.

Nonaka, I., "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation", Organization Science, 1994. Vol. 5, pp. 14-37.

37.

O'Brien, D. and G. McNerney, "Supply Chain Application Investments Pay Off", Supply Chain Management Review, 2002. Vol.

38.

Prevelakis, V. and A. Keromytis, "Drop-In Security for Distributed and Portable Computing Elements", Internet Research, 2003. Vol. 13, pp. 107-115.

39.

Stenmark, D., "Leveraging Tacit Organizational Knowledge", Journal of Management Information Systems, 2001. Vol. 17, pp. 9-24.

40.

Stump, R.L., G.A. Athaide, and A.W. Joshi, "Managing Seller-Buyer New Product Development Relationships for Customized Products: A Contingency Model Based on Transaction Cost Analysis and Empirical Test", The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2002. Vol. 19, pp. 439-454.

41.

Williams, L.R., T.L. Esper, and J. Ozment, "The Electronic Supply Chain", International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logisitics Management, 2002. Vol. 32, pp. 703-719.

42.

Zank, G.M. and R.J. Vokurka, "The Internet: Motivations, Deterrents, and Impact on Supply Chain Relationships", SAM Advanced Management Journal, 2003. Vol. 68, pp. 33-40.