TOWARDS ESTABLISHING TRUST ... - Semantic Scholar

TOWARDS ESTABLISHING TRUST RELATIONSHIPS AMONG ORGANIZATIONS IN VBEs Simon Samwel Msanjila Hamideh Afsarmanesh University of Amsterdam

ECOLEAD

2007

UvA

PRESENTATION PLAN

1. Base concepts of Virtual organization breeding environments 2. Definition and perception of trust 3. Framework for establishing trust relationships 4. Conclusion

© Msanjila, S. S. and Afsarmanesh, H. 2007

CONCEPTS OF VIRTUAL ORGANIZATION BREEDING ENVIRONMENT

DEFINITION OF VIRTUAL ORGANIZATION BREEDING ENVIRONMENT

Long term strategic alliance to facilitate brokerage of dynamic VOs - fluid matching of opportunities against the collection of existing competencies - Industry District - Industry Cluster - SME Network

VBE is an association or alliance of organizations and related supporting institutions, that adhere to a base long term cooperation agreement, and adoption of common operating principles and infrastructures, with the main goal of increasing both their chances and their preparedness towards collaboration in potential future Virtual Organizations (VOs)

- Club - Association -…

One key aspect of preparedness is creating trust among member organizations

DEFINITION OF TRUST

There is no consensus on the definition of trust in both practice and research

Some popular definitions Trust is the subjective probability by which an individual “A” expects another individual “B” to perform a given action on which A’s welfare depends [Gambetta, D. 1988]. 

Trust is the willingness of a trustor to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectations that the trustee will perform a particular action important to the trustor regardless of its ability to monitor or control the trustee [Mayer, R. C. et al 1995].



E[ x] = ! Pi * xi "i

-

What does such probability value mean for a specific business objective? Can we reason about these probability values for different objectives? - Are these probabilities backed up by facts?


CHALLENGES RELATED TO DEFINITION OF TRUST

Putting the definition into business practices    

How to reason on different trust levels resulted from the assessment? How to compare the trust level and reason on the relativity? How to support organizations realize trust with different preferences? ………

We must now address trust rationally in order to support all trust objectives emerging in daily practices that are characterized with different preferences, interpretations and perceptions on trust We define trust as: Trust of an organization is the objective-specific confidence of a trustor in a trustee based on the results of rational assessment of trust level of the trustee.


INTERPRETATIONS AND PERCEPTION OF TRUST - 1 

Trust means different things to different trustors, also depending on their objective for trust establishment with other trustee organizations



Therefore, the interpretation and perception of the trust level also differ, depending on trustor’s preference when selecting the trust criteria

To configure a VO for delivering costly products into the market, the VO planner (Trustor1) may primarily prefer to assess the “Economical” trustworthiness of the trustee organizations, and thus trying to establish trust based on their financial stability

•

Financial stability – – – – --–

Trust in this case is interpreted and perceived in relation to economical view © Msanjila, S. S. and Afsarmanesh, H. 2007

Capital Operational cost Investment capacity Income-customer dependency …

INTERPRETATIONS AND PERCEPTION OF TRUST - 2 Trust means different things to different trustors

To configure a VO to provide supports (shelter, food, school, etc.) to street children, a VO planner (trustor2) may primarily prefer to assess the “Social” trustworthiness of the trustee organizations, and thus trying to establish trust based on their social reputation •

Social reputations – – – –

Child labor Community standards compliance (e.g. Environmental protection) Community participation (e.g. support for disabled students) …

And secondarily assess the their “Economical and structural” trustworthiness •

Financial stability – – –

•

Operational cost Capital Investment capacity


Organizational strength – Workload allocation (e.g. working hours) –…

Trust in this case is interpreted and perceived in relation to first social view and second economical and structural views

INTERPRETATIONS AND PERCEPTION OF TRUST - 2 Trust means different things to different trustors

To configure a VO to provide supports (shelter, food, school, etc.) to street children, a VO planner (trustor2) may primarily prefer to assess the “Social” trustworthiness of the trustee organizations, and thus trying to establish trust based on their social reputation •

Social reputations – – – –

Child labor Community standards compliance (e.g. Environmental protection) Community participation (e.g. support for disabled students) …

And secondarily assess the their “Economical and structural” trustworthiness •

Financial stability – – –

•

Operational cost Capital Investment capacity


Organizational strength – Workload allocation (e.g. working hours) –…

Trust in this case is interpreted and perceived in relation to first social view and second economical and structural views

INTERPRETATIONS AND PERCEPTION OF TRUST - 3

To configure a VO for constructing a secure and modern parliament house (trustor3) may primarily to assess “managerial and technological” trustworthiness of the trustee organizations, and thus trying to establish trust based on their managerial history and technological capabilities •

•

Managerial aspects – –

Technology issues – –

Management experience Previous management behavior

Experience (e.g. VO or projects applied) Security and confidentiality assurance

And secondarily assess their “social and structural” trustworthiness • Social reputations – Community standards (e.g. environmental std) – Social acceptance

•

Organizational strength – Availability of experts – Competencies – Workload allocation (e.g. Working hours)

And lastly, assess their “economical” trustworthiness •

Financial stability – – – –

Operational cost Capital Investment capacity Income-customer dependency

© Msanjila, © Msanjila, S. S. S. and S. and Afsarmanesh, Afsarmanesh, H. H. 2007 2007

Trust in this case is interpreted and perceived in relation to first managerial and technological views, and second social and structural views, and lastly economical view

INTERPRETATIONS AND PERCEPTION OF TRUST - 3

To configure a VO for constructing a secure and modern parliament house (trustor3) may primarily to assess “managerial and technological” trustworthiness of the trustee organizations, and thus trying to establish trust based on their managerial history and technological capabilities •

•

Managerial aspects – –

Technology issues – –

Management experience Previous management behavior

Experience (e.g. VO or projects applied) Security and confidentiality assurance

And secondarily assess their “social and structural” trustworthiness • Social reputations – Community standards (e.g. environmental std) – Social acceptance

•

Organizational strength – Availability of experts – Competencies – Workload allocation (e.g. Working hours)

And lastly, assess their “economical” trustworthiness •

Financial stability – – – –

Operational cost Capital Investment capacity Income-customer dependency


Trust in this case is interpreted and perceived in relation to first managerial and technological views, and second social and structural views, and lastly economical view

COMPLEXITY ON VARIATIONS OF PREFERENCES ON TRUST CRITERIA

Trust level is not an absolute value  Trust level of an organization is relative/comparative:  The trust level of each trustee organization is measured in comparison to the other organizations  Rating the trust level of each organization varies in time, depending on: - the set of selected trust criteria (by trustor) that is used for rating and comparing the organization - the current fact-based values for selected criteria related to this organization

How can we support the trustors select their preferred trust criteria:  Considering variations on objectives for the trust establishment

 Considering differences in interpretation and perception of the trust level for each set of selected trust criteria

MEASUREMENTS AND ASSESSMENT OF TRUST LEVEL

From our definition:

Trust of an organization is the objective-specific confidence of a trustor in a trustee based on the results of rational assessment of trust level of the trustee. - Can trustworthiness (the trust level) of an organization be measured?

We must be address the measurement of trust level

- How complex is the trustworthiness? - Does it have a quantitative value? what is the metric for it? - Is it one number? A set of numbers?

- Does it have a qualitative value? - Good or bad, high or low?

- What trust criteria, and how many, can be used to measure the trustworthiness of an organization?

1. How to identify the trust criteria that will be cover all the preferences for all trust actors? 2. How to include the trust criteria in the mechanisms for assessing trust levels of organizations? 3. How to apply the assessment results into establishing trust relationships


This is the base aspect for a successful process of establishing trust relationship

MEASUREMENTS AND ASSESSMENT OF TRUST LEVEL From our definition:

Trust of an organization is the objective-specific confidence of a trustor in a trustee based on the results of rational assessment of trust level of the trustee.

We must be address the measurement of trust level

-

Can trustworthiness (the trust level) of an organization be measured?

-

How complex is the trustworthiness? - Does it have a quantitative value? what is the metric for it? - Is it one number? A set of numbers?

- Does it have a qualitative value? - Good or bad, high or low?

-

What trust criteria, and how many, can be used to measure the trustworthiness of an organization?

This is the base aspect for a successful process of establishing trust relationship

1. How to identify the trust criteria that will be cover all the preferences for all trust actors? 2. How to include the trust criteria in the mechanisms for assessing trust levels of organizations? 3. How to apply the assessment results into establishing trust relationships © Msanjila, S. S. and Afsarmanesh, H. 2007

TRUST ELEMENTS FOR ORGANIZATIONS: OVERVIEW Objectives

Creating trust among member organizations

Creating trust between a member and VBE administration Creating trust between external stakeholder and VBE © Msanjila, S. S. and Afsarmanesh, H. 2007


Perspectives

Structural Creating trust among member organizations

Technological Economical Managerial Social



Perspectives


Technological Economical Managerial Social


Requirements

Structural Strength Business Strength


Perspectives


Technological Economical

Requirements

Structural Strength Business Strength

Criteria

Size Competencies Personnel experts

Managerial Social

Creating trust between a member and VBE administration Creating trust between external stakeholder and VBE

S.S. Msanjila, H. Afsarmanesh. HICI: An approach for identifying trust elements – The case of technological perspective in VBEs. In proceedings of International conference on availability, reliability and security (ARES-2007), Vienna. 2007. S.S. Msanjila, H. Afsarmanesh. Trust Analysis and Assessment in Virtual Organizations Breeding Environments. In the International Journal of Production Research; Special issue: Enhancing performance in collaborative networked industries. April 2007


FETR: FRAMEWORK FOR TRUST RELATIONSHIP ESTABLISHMENT Start

Preparation phase

Assessment

Launching phase

Validation

Membership analysis

Presentation

Evidence availability

Available?

Data analysis

Creation Announce actors

Present trust level

Provide information

No

Yes Use authorized

Trust level assessment

Valid?

Trust level analysis

Analyze trust among them

Support understanding

Yes

No

Use witness

Acceptable trust level?

Yes

No

Valid?

Trust exists? Yes

Yes

No

Understood?

Yes

Launch relationships

No


End

ASSESSING TRUST LEVEL OF ORGANIZATIONS Kinds of assessment of trust level: • Assessing base trust level • Evaluation of specific trustworthiness

Involved organizations: • Trustor, e.g. VBE admin • Trustee, e.g. VBE members

Assessment mechanisms:  

The mechanisms developed for the manipulation of organization’s values for trust criteria are based on mathematical equations. The equations are derived based on results from the analysis of causal relations among trust criteria, known factors and intermediate factors

TL = Avg[(WTech * STech ), (WSoc * S Soc ), (WStr * S Str ), (WMan * S Man ), (WEco * S Eco )] S per

1 n = ! WIFi * S IFi n i

And

S IF = f [trust _ criteria, known _ factors ]

Input data: Performance of organizations ORG -4

Output: Trust level of organizations expressed qualitatively in Trust-Meter scale © Msanjila, S. S. and Afsarmanesh, H. 2007

ORG-3 ORG -2 ORG -1 Ideal organization with score of

Strongly less trustworthy

Less trustworthy

Average Trustworthy

5.0

More trustworthy

Strongly more trustworthy


Preparation phase

Assessment

Launching phase

Validation

Membership analysis

Presentation


Available?

Data analysis


Present trust level

Provide information

No

Yes Use authorized


Valid?




Yes

No

Use witness


Yes

No

Valid?

Trust exists? Yes

Yes

No

Understood?

Yes


No


End

VALIDATION OF ORGANIZATION’S TRUST LEVEL Purpose of validation To ensure that all the trust related data applied as input for the assessment of trust level are valid and has reliable source

Approach of validation Organization must provide some validity evidences about their trust related data

Primary sources of validity evidence Authorized evidence: • These are evidences that are provided by authorized organizations • Apply well legalized or agreed standards, e.g.  Accreditation Secondary sources of validity evidence  Financial rating  Patent Witnessed evidence:  License Based on documents provided by third party  Certificate and awards showing some proofs of the validity of the data as known to that party only, e.g.  Public channels News papers, magazines  Private channels Recommendations © Msanjila, S. S. and Afsarmanesh, H. 2007


Preparation phase

Assessment

Launching phase

Validation

Membership analysis

Presentation


Available?

Data analysis


Present trust level

Provide information

No

Yes Use authorized


Valid?




Yes

No

Use witness


Yes

No

Valid?

Trust exists? Yes

Yes

No

Understood?

Yes


No


End

PRESENTATION OF TRUST CONCEPTS AND TRUST LEVEL TO ACTORS Purpose: To support the involved organizations to understand the fundamental concepts of trust and thus properly understand and accept trust level from the assessment

Approach: Support for understanding is achieved through provision of trust and trust relationship models

Class Technological Perspective

subClassOf

Developed models:

subClassOf

Class

Class

Social Perspective

subClassOf

subClassOf

Class VBE Components related Perspective

subClassOf subClassOf

Class

Class

Transparency and fairness related perspective

subClassOf

Class Managerial / Behavior Perspective

subClassOf

-Ontology based models -Record based models -Object based models

Class Organizational Perspective

Class Financial / Economical Perspective

Class VBE (self ) related Perspective

Profile -related Perspective

Class VBE polices related Perspective

Class VBE advertisement subClassOf related Perspective Class

subClassOf

subClassOf

Client Service related Perspective

Class

Trust Perspective for trust relationships among Members

Trust Perspective for trust relationship between Member and VBE

subClassOf

subClassOf

Class subClassOf

Trust Perspective for trust relationship between Client and VBE

subClassOf Class

Class ObjectProperty

Trust Perspective

range

hasTrustPerspective

Trust System domain

(T)

ORG -4 ORG-3 ORG -2 ORG -1

Trust level presentation Ideal organization with score of

Strongly less trustworthy

Less trustworthy

Average Trustworthy


5.0

More trustworthy

Strongly more trustworthy

Only relative trust level are presented based on Trust-Meter scales


Preparation phase

Assessment

Launching phase

Validation

Membership analysis

Presentation


Available?

Data analysis


Present trust level

Provide information

No

Yes Use authorized


Valid?




Yes

No

Use witness


Yes

No

Valid?

Trust exists? Yes

Yes

No

Understood?

Yes


No


End

CREATING TRUST AND LAUNCHING TRUST RELATIONSHIPS Creating trust among involved actors: Based on providing information describing how trustworthy the other participating organizations are

Factors used to decide on information: Who: The role of the actor Why: The specific purpose When: The time for collection and provision What: The kind and content How : The sources and mechanisms


Analysis of risks: Possible risks for the trust relationships if not properly analyzed and addressed can hinder organizations committing themselves in the trust relationship

Launching trust relationships Organizations committing themselves to collaborate with others including sharing resources, information, etc.

CONCLUSION

Trust among organizations must be addressed considering the variation of their interpretations, perceptions and preferences: - Thus trust is a multi-objective, multi-perspective and multi-criteria subject

Definition of trust must meet the current needs and practices on trust: - It must address and incorporate all the aspects needed and considered

A framework for establishing trust relationship must address all necessary aspects to make the relationships as comprehensive and sustainable as possible: - Trust level of organizations must properly be assessed - Applied trust related data must be validated - Organizations must be supported to understand trust considering their perceptions - Organizations must trust each other


THANK YOU


TRUST LEVEL, TRUST CRITERIA AND THE RELATED MANIPULATIONS Relations between trust level and trust criteria: Impact analysis

Manipulation mechanisms development – Causal influence analysis Start System control service

Access right service

Base trust level service

User validation



User validation

System architecture

No Valid user ?

-

Protocol supported Software standards Hardware standards Security standards

Send response

Etc. © Msanjila, S. S. and Afsarmanesh, H. 2007

Data check service

Data check

ss se e As i l urNo fa

Data retrieve service

Yes Complete ?

Data retrieve

s s es e As i l ur fa

End

se As

Request Response

ss

Data TrustMan Database

Data retrieve

Mathematical equations

Enhances

Trust level

Such as

Technological standards

Data check

Yes

Registered ?

Provide service

Performance

- High interoperability - Low learning curve - Reuse of technical solution - High involvement in VOs - Fast customer response

- Network speed - Interoperability - Availability

No

Deny service

ImprovesOrganizational

Common communication context Communication connections Technological -based acceptance Creates ICT-infrastructure

Reg check

Assessment

Yes

Query data



Performance of organization must be expressed in terms of trust criteria Analyzes for the impacts on trust level due to changes of values of trust criteria must be performed Some intermediate factors are identified

Assessment



Registration check service Reg check

TC = NS * PD * SC d d d d TC = (PD * SC ) NS + (PD * NS ) SC + (SC * NS ) PD dt dt dt dt t2

'd

$

t2

'

d

$

t2

d

'

$

t2

d

'

$

! %& dt TC "# = ! %& (PD * SC ) dt NS "# + ! %& (PD * NS ) dt SC "# + ! %& (SC * NS ) dt PD "#

t1

t1

t1

t1

Parallel downloading (No.)

Causal modeling System dynamics

+ Out of order (No.)

Number of servers (No.) Network speed (No.)

+

+ +

Server capacity (MB/second)

Trafficking capacity (MB/second)

+ +

Request rate (MB/second)

Downloading time (seconds/MB)

-

Queing time (seconds/MB)

-

Completion time (seconds/MB )

+

Network availability (failures/hour)

+





User validation



User validation

System architecture

No Valid user ?

-


Send response


Data check service

Data check



Yes Complete ?

Data retrieve


End

se As

Request Response

ss


Data retrieve


Enhances

Trust level

Such as


Data check

Yes

Registered ?

Provide service

Performance



No

Deny service



Reg check

Assessment

Yes

Query data




Assessment





'd

$

t2

'

d

$

t2

d

'

$

t2

d

'

$


t1

t1

t1

t1





+

+ +



+ +



-


-


+


+





User validation



User validation

System architecture

No Valid user ?

-


Send response


Data check service

Data check



Yes Complete ?

Data retrieve


End

se As

Request Response

ss


Data retrieve


Enhances

Trust level

Such as


Data check

Yes

Registered ?

Provide service

Performance



No

Deny service



Reg check

Assessment

Yes

Query data




Assessment





'd

$

t2

'

d

$

t2

d

'

$

t2

d

'

$


t1

t1

t1

t1





+

+ +



+ +



-


-


+


+