A Smart Co-Operative Management Framework Based on an EA Concept for Sustainable Development
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Smart Co-Operative Management Concept
2.2. Enterprise Architecture (EA)
2.2.1. The ZACHMAN Framework
2.2.2. The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
2.2.3. The Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF)
2.3. Proposed Framework
2.3.1. Business
2.3.2. Application
2.3.3. Data and Information
2.3.4. Infrastructure and Technology
2.3.5. Governance
3. Methodology
3.1. Smart Co-Operative Management Conceptual Framework
3.2. Evidence-Based Review
3.3. Analysis and Mapping
3.4. Framework Design and Development
3.5. Conceptual Framework Validation
3.5.1. Data Collection
3.5.2. Content Validity Index (CVI)
4. Results
4.1. Business
4.2. Application
4.3. Data and Information
4.4. Infrastructure and Technology
4.5. Governance
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- International Cooperative Alliance. What Is a Cooperative? Available online: https://www.ica.coop/en/cooperatives/ (accessed on 25 November 2022).
- Types of Cooperatives. Available online: https://www.gov.mb.ca/jec/busdev/coop/types.html (accessed on 4 December 2022).
- Becchetti, L.; Ciciretti, R.; Paolantonio, A. The cooperative bank difference before and after the global financial crisis. J. Int. Money Financ. 2016, 69, 224–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ji, C.; Jia, F.; Xu, X. Agricultural co-operative sustainability: Evidence from four Chinese pig production co-operatives. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 197, 1095–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nelson, T.; Nelson, D.; Huybrechts, B.; Dufays, F.; O’Shea, N.; Trasciani, G. Emergent identity formation and the co-operative: Theory building in relation to alternative organizational forms. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2016, 28, 286–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benson, T. Building good management practices in Ethiopian agricultural cooperatives through regular financial audits. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2014, 2, 72–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, J.; Guo, H.; Jia, F. Technological innovation in agricultural co-operatives in China: Implications for agro-food innovation policies. Food Policy 2017, 73, 19–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruostesaari, M.-L.; Troberg, E. Differences in social responsibility toward youth—A case study based comparison of cooperatives and corporations. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2016, 4, 42–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guzmán, C.; Santos, F.J.; Barroso, M.D.L.O. Analysing the links between cooperative principles, entrepreneurial orientation and performance. Small Bus. Econ. 2019, 55, 1075–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alves, W.; Ferreira, P.; Araújo, M. Mining co-operatives: A model to establish a network for sustainability. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2019, 7, 51–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iliopoulos, C.; Värnik, R.; Filippi, M.; Võlli, L.; Laaneväli-Vinokurov, K. Organizational design in Estonian agricultural cooperatives. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2019, 7, 100093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borgström, M. Effective co-operative governance: A practitioner’s perspective. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2013, 1, 49–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, C. The co-operative model as a ‘living experiment in democracy’. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2014, 2, 98–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hooks, T.; McCarthy, O.; Power, C.; Macken-Walsh, Á. A co-operative business approach in a values-based supply chain: A case study of a beef co-operative. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2017, 5, 65–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pokharel, K.P.; Archer, D.W.; Featherstone, A.M. The Impact of Size and Specialization on the Financial Performance of Agricultural Cooperatives. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2020, 8, 100108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Juga, J.; Juntunen, J. Antecedents of retail patronage in cooperative retail context. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2018, 6, 94–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKillop, D.; French, D.; Quinn, B.; Sobiech, A.L.; Wilson, J.O.S. Cooperative financial institutions: A review of the literature. Int. Rev. Financ. Anal. 2020, 71, 101520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kurimoto. Cooperative Law Japan; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Chareonwongsak, K. Enhancing board motivation for competitive performance of Thailand’s co-operatives. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2017, 5, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pereira, G.V.; Parycek, P.; Falco, E.; Kleinhans, R. Smart governance in the context of smart cities: A literature review. Inf. Polity 2018, 23, 143–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia Alonso, L.-D.C. Technology Helps, People Make: A Smart City Governance Framework Grounded in Deliberative Democracy. Public Adm. Inf. Technol. 2016, 11, 333–347. [Google Scholar]
- Bolívar, M.P.R. Governance Models and Outcomes to Foster Public Value Creation in Smart Cities. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, Staten Island, NY, USA, 7–9 June 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Oliveira, T.A.; Oliver, M.; Ramalhinho, H. Challenges for Connecting Citizens and Smart Cities: ICT, E-Governance and Blockchain. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rose, J.; Persson, J.S.; Heeager, L.T. How e-Government managers prioritise rival value positions: The efficiency imperative. Inf. Polity 2015, 20, 35–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koltay, T. Data governance, data literacy and the management of data quality. IFLA J. 2016, 42, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nachrowi, E.; Nurhadryani, Y.; Sukoco, H. Evaluation of Governance and Management of Information Technology Services Using Cobit 2019 and ITIL 4. Resti J. (Syst. Eng. Inf. Technol.) 2020, 4, 734–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reis, L.C.D.; Ferreira, S.B.L.; Bernardini, F.C.; Cappelli, C. Towards a COBIT5 approach to ICT governance requirements in smart cities. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, Athens, Greece, 23–25 September 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Falconer, M. Smart City Framework A Systematic Process for Enabling Smart+Connected Communities. Cisco Internet Bus. Solut. Group (IBSG) 2012, 12, 2–10. [Google Scholar]
- Hon, W.K.; Millard, C. Banking in the cloud: Part 3—Contractual issues. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 2018, 34, 595–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnold, V.; Benford, T.; Canada, J.; Sutton, S.G. Leveraging integrated information systems to enhance strategic flexibility and performance: The enabling role of enterprise risk management. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 2015, 19, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meijer, A.; Bolívar, M.P.R. Governing the smart city: A review of the literature on smart urban governance. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2015, 82, 392–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stratu-Strelet, D.; Gil-Gómez, H.; Oltra-Badenes, R.; Oltra-Gutierrez, J.V. Critical factors in the institutionalization of e-participation in e-government in Europe: Technology or leadership? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 164, 120489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chawviang, A.; Kiattisin, S. Sustainable Development: Smart Co-Operative Management Framework. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reed, M.S.; Vella, S.; Challies, E.; De Vente, J.; Frewer, L.; Hohenwallner-Ries, D.; Huber, T.; Neumann, R.K.; Oughton, E.A.; Del Ceno, J.S.; et al. A theory of participation: What makes stakeholder and public engagement in environmental management work? Restor. Ecol. 2018, 26, S7–S17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yobe, C.L.; Ferrer, S.R.D.; Mudhara, M. Measuring the financial efficiency of agricultural cooperatives in South Africa: An application of the Simar–Wilson methodology. Agrekon 2020, 59, 269–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thirasakthana, M.; Kiattisin, S. Sustainable Government Enterprise Architecture Framework. Sustainability 2021, 13, 879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, Q.; Hendrikse, G.; Huang, Z.; Xu, X. Governance Structure of Chinese Farmer Cooperatives: Evidence From Zhejiang Province. Agribusiness 2015, 31, 198–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anggraeni, M.; Gupta, J.; Verrest, H.J.L.M. Cost and value of stakeholders participation: A systematic literature review. Environ. Sci. Policy 2019, 101, 364–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neirotti, P.; De Marco, A.; Cagliano, A.C.; Mangano, G.; Scorrano, F. Current trends in Smart City initiatives: Some stylised facts. Cities 2014, 38, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verdegay, J.L.; Rodríguez, Z. A new decision support system for knowledge management in archaeological activities. Knowl. Based Syst. 2020, 187, 104843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, H.; Geertman, S.; Witte, P. Avoiding the planning support system pitfalls? What smart governance can learn from the planning support system implementation gap. Environ. Plan. B Urban Anal. City Sci. 2020, 47, 1343–1360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pérez González, D.; Díaz Díaz, R. Public services provided with ICT in the smart city environment: The case of Spanish cities. J. Univers. Comput. Sci. 2015, 21, 248–267. [Google Scholar]
- Payne, A.; Frow, P.; Eggert, A. The customer value proposition: Evolution, development, and application in marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2017, 45, 467–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bocken, N.; Short, S.; Rana, P.; Evans, S. A value mapping tool for sustainable business modelling. Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2013, 13, 482–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldassarre, B.; Calabretta, G.; Bocken, N.M.P.; Jaskiewicz, T. Bridging sustainable business model innovation and user-driven innovation: A process for sustainable value proposition design. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 147, 175–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carvalho, J.M.S.; Jonker, J. Creating a Balanced Value Proposition: Exploring the Advanced Business Creation Model. J. Appl. Manag. Entrep. 2015, 20, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voorberg, W.H.; Bekkers, V.J.J.M.; Tummers, L.G. A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Manag. Rev. 2014, 17, 1333–1357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osborne, S.P.; Radnor, Z.; Strokosch, K. Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A suitable case for treatment? Public Manag. Rev. 2016, 18, 639–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamidi, F.; Gharneh, N.S.; Khajeheian, D. A Conceptual Framework for Value Co-Creation in Service Enterprises (Case of Tourism Agencies). Sustainability 2019, 12, 213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sebhatu, K.T.; Gezahegn, T.W.; Berhanu, T.; Maertens, M.; Van Passel, S.; D’Haese, M. Conflict, fraud, and distrust in Ethiopian agricultural cooperatives. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2020, 8, 100106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walravens, N. Mobile Business and the Smart City: Developing a Business Model Framework to Include Public Design Parameters for Mobile City Services. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2012, 7, 21–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolívar, M.P.R.; Meijer, A.J. Smart Governance: Using a Literature Review and Empirical Analysis to Build a Research Model. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 2016, 34, 673–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cronemberger, F.; Gil-Garcia, J.R. Big Data and Analytics as Strategies to Generate Public Value in Smart Cities: Proposing an Integrative Framework. In Setting Foundations for the Creation of Public Value in Smart Cities (Public Administration and Information Technology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 247–267. [Google Scholar]
- Barns, S. Smart cities and urban data platforms: Designing interfaces for smart governance. City Cult. Soc. 2018, 12, 5–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kozłowski, Ł. Cooperative banks, the internet and market discipline. J. Co-Oper. Organ. Manag. 2016, 4, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manita, R.; Elommal, N.; Baudier, P.; Hikkerova, L. The digital transformation of external audit and its impact on corporate governance. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019, 150, 119751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barrett, M.; Davidson, E.; Prabhu, J.; Vargo, S.L. Service innovation in the digital age: Key contributions and future directions. MIS Q. 2015, 39, 135–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Díaz-Díaz, R.; Pérez-González, D. Implementation of Social Media Concepts for e-Government. J. Organ. End User Comput. 2016, 28, 104–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gervasi, O.; Murgante, B.; Misra, S.; Stankova, E.; Torre, C.M.; Rocha, A.M.A.; Taniar, D.; Apduhan, B.O.; Tarantino, E.; Ryu, Y. (Eds.) Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2018. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 2–5 July 2018. Part III. [Google Scholar]
- Ben Yahia, N.; Eljaoued, W.; Ben Saoud, N.B.; Colomo-Palacios, R. Towards sustainable collaborative networks for smart cities co-governance. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 56, 102037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reddick, C.G.; Chatfield, A.T.; Jaramillo, P.A. Public opinion on National Security Agency surveillance programs: A multi-method approach. Gov. Inf. Q. 2015, 32, 129–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abraham, R.; Schneider, J.; vom Brocke, J. Data governance: A conceptual framework, structured review, and research agenda. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 49, 424–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merino, J.; Caballero, I.; Rivas, B.; Serrano, M.; Piattini, M. A Data Quality in Use model for Big Data. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2016, 63, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotusev, S. TOGAF-based Enterprise Architecture Practice: An Exploratory Case Study. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2018, 43, 321–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayakul, T.; Kiattisin, S.; Prasad, R. A Sustainable Medical Tourism FrameworkBased on the Enterprise ArchitectureDesign: The Case in Thailand. J. Green Eng. 2018, 8, 359–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niemi, E.; Pekkola, S. The Benefits of Enterprise Architecture in Organizational Transformation. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2019, 62, 585–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, Y.; Janssen, M. Roles and Capabilities of Enterprise Architecture in Big Data Analytics Technology Adoption and Implementation. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021, 16, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ilin, I.V.; Levina, A.I.; Dubgorn, A.S.; Abran, A. Investment Models for Enterprise Architecture (EA) and IT Architecture Projects within the Open Innovation Concept. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alex Pavlak, P. Enterprise Architecture: Lessoins from classical architecture. J. Enterp. Archit. 2006, 2, 20–27. [Google Scholar]
- Rachmaniah, M.; Suroso, A.I.; Syukur, M.; Hermadi, I. Enterprise Architecture for Smart Enterprise System. Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 2022, 13, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zachman, J.A. The Concise Definition of the Zachman Framework by: John A. Zachman. Available online: https://www.zachman.com/16-zachman/the-zachman-framework/35-the-concise-definition (accessed on 25 November 2008).
- The Open Group. The TOGAF® Standard, Version 9.2 Overview. 2022. Available online: https://www.opengroup.org/togaf-standard-version-92-overview (accessed on 1 February 2023).
- Blanc, D.L. E-Participation: A Quick Overview of Recent Qualitative Trends; Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2020; Volume 163, pp. 1–22. [Google Scholar]
- Alam, M.M.; Ahmad, N.; Naveed, Q.N.; Patel, A.; Abohashrh, M.; Khaleel, M.A. E-Learning Services to Achieve Sustainable Learning and Academic Performance: An Empirical Study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaimaa, B.; Najib, E.; Rachid, H. E-banking Overview: Concepts, Challenges and Solutions. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2020, 117, 1059–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lnenicka, M.; Komarkova, J. Developing a government enterprise architecture framework to support the requirements of big and open linked data with the use of cloud computing. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 46, 124–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bradford, M.; Henderson, D.; Baxter, R.J.; Navarro, P. Using generalized audit software to detect material misstatements, control deficiencies and fraud. Manag. Audit. J. 2020, 35, 521–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jak, D. Implementation of Computer Assisted Audit Techniques in Application Controls Testing. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2009, 4, 9–12. [Google Scholar]
- Alhassan, I.; Sammon, D.; Daly, M. Data governance activities: An analysis of the literature. J. Decis. Syst. 2016, 25, 64–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morgan, E.L. Implementing TCP/IP Communications with HyperCard. Inf. Technol. Libr. 1992, 11, 12. [Google Scholar]
- Shen, Y.; Huang, L.; Lu, X.; Yang, W. A novel comprehensive steganalysis of transmission control protocol/Internet protocol covert channels based on protocol behaviors and support vector machine. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2015, 8, 1279–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Botta, A.; de Donato, W.; Persico, V.; Pescapé, A. Integration of Cloud computing and Internet of Things: A survey. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2016, 56, 684–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Patel, S.B.; Bhattacharya, P.; Tanwar, S.; Kumar, N. KiRTi: A Blockchain-Based Credit Recommender System for Financial Institutions. IEEE Trans. Netw. Sci. Eng. 2021, 8, 1044–1054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polas, M.R.H.; Jahanshahi, A.A.; Kabir, A.I.; Sohel-Uz-Zaman, A.S.M.; Osman, A.R.; Karim, R. Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain Technology, and Risk-Taking Behavior in the 4.0IR Metaverse Era: Evidence from Bangladesh-Based SMEs. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shamim, S.; Zeng, J.; Shariq, S.M.; Khan, Z. Role of big data management in enhancing big data decision-making capability and quality among Chinese firms: A dynamic capabilities view. Inf. Manag. 2019, 56, 103135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ofoeda, J.; Boateng, R.; Effah, J. Application Programming Interface (API) Research. Int. J. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 2019, 15, 76–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aguirre, S.; Rodriguez, A. Automation of a Business Process Using Robotic Process Automation (RPA): A Case Study. In Applied Computer Sciences in Engineering; Communications in Computer and Information Science; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 65–71. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, F.; Vasarhelyi, M.A. Applying robotic process automation (RPA) in auditing: A framework. Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst. 2019, 35, 100433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janssen, M.; Brous, P.; Estevez, E.; Barbosa, L.S.; Janowski, T. Data governance: Organizing data for trustworthy Artificial Intelligence. Gov. Inf. Q. 2020, 37, 101493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, W.; Chen, W.; Zhang, W.; Pei, J.; Gao, W.; Wang, G. Digital signature scheme for information non-repudiation in blockchain: A state of the art review. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2020, 2020, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Torres, J.A.; Canada, F.-J.A.; Sandoval, A.V.; Alzate, J.-A.S. E-banking in Colombia: Factors favouring its acceptance, online trust and government support. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2018, 36, 170–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, M.; Duan, J.; Zhu, L.; Zhang, J.; Du, X.; Guizani, M. Blockchain-Based Incentives for Secure and Collaborative Data Sharing in Multiple Clouds. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 2020, 38, 1229–1241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mutimukwe, C.; Kolkowska, E.; Grönlund, Å. Information privacy in e-service: Effect of organizational privacy assurances on individual privacy concerns, perceptions, trust and self-disclosure behavior. Gov. Inf. Q. 2020, 37, 101413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilbert, G.E.; Prion, S. Making Sense of Methods and Measurement Lawshe’s Content Validity Index. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2016, 12, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, R.; Xie, Z.; Hao, Y.; Wang, J. Improving high-tech enterprise innovation in big data environment: A combinative view of internal and external governance. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 50, 575–585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scholl, H.J.; AlAwadhi, S. Creating Smart Governance: The key to radical ICT overhaul at the City of Munich. Inf. Polity 2016, 21, 21–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Surbakti, F.P.S.; Wang, W.; Indulska, M.; Sadiq, S. Factors influencing effective use of big data: A research framework. Inf. Manag. 2020, 57, 103146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angelidou, M.; Psaltoglou, A.; Komninos, N.; Kakderi, C.; Tsarchopoulos, P.; Panori, A. Enhancing sustainable urban development through smart city applications. J. Sci. Technol. Policy Manag. 2017, 9, 146–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dwivedi, Y.K.; Janssen, M.; Slade, E.L.; Rana, N.P.; Weerakkody, V.; Millard, J.; Hidders, J.; Snijders, D. Driving innovation through big open linked data (BOLD): Exploring antecedents using interpretive structural modelling. Inf. Syst. Front. 2016, 19, 197–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pan, Y.; Tian, Y.; Liu, X.; Gu, D.; Hua, G. Urban Big Data and the Development of City Intelligence. Engineering 2016, 2, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lynn, M.R. Determination and Quantification Of Content Validity. Nurs. Res. 1986, 35, 382–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almanasreh, E.; Moles, R.; Chen, T.F. Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Res. Soc. Adm. Pharm. 2019, 15, 214–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pookkaman, W.; Samanchuen, T. An Innovation Framework of Medical Organic Cannabis Traceability in Digital Supply Chain. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holey, E.A.; Feeley, J.L.; Dixon, J.; Whittaker, V.J. An exploration of the use of simple statistics to measure consensus and stability in Delphi studies. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2007, 7, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wynd, C.A.; Schmidt, B.; Schaefer, M.A. Two quantitative approaches for estimating content validity. West. J. Nurs. Res. 2003, 25, 508–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Subahi, A.; Theodorakopoulos, G. Detecting IoT User Behavior and Sensitive Information in Encrypted IoT-App Traffic. Sensors 2019, 19, 4777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Layers | References |
---|---|
Governance | Meijer and Bolívar 2015 [31], Reddick, Chatfield et al. 2015 [84], Al-Ruithe, Benkhelifa et al. 2016 [3], Bolívar and Meijer 2016 [52], Merino, Caballero et al. 2016 [63], Botta, de Donato et al. 2016 [82], Díaz-Díaz and Pérez-González 2016 [58], Koltay 2016 [25], Bolívar 2017 [22], Barns 2018 [54], Pereira, Parycek et al. 2018 [20], Sánchez-Torres, Canada et al. 2018 [91], Reed, Vella et al. 2018 [34], Abraham, Schneider et al. 2019 [62], Blanc 2020 [73], Fang, Chen et al. 2020 [90], Jiang, Geertman et al. 2020 [41], Manita, Elommal et al. 2020 [56], Mutimukwe, Kolkowska et al. 2020 [93], Reis, Ferreira et al. 2020 [27], Shen, Duan et al. 2020 [92], Alam, Ahmad et al. 2021 [74], Ben Yahia, Eljaoued et al. 2021 [60], Stratu-Strelet, Gil-Gómez et al. 2021 [32], Chawviang and Kiattisin 2022 [33], Malaivongs, Kiattisin et al. 2022 [97] |
Business | Borgström 2013 [12], Benson 2014 [6], Voorberg, Bekkers et al. 2014 [47], Rose, Persson et al. 2015 [24], Garcia Alonso 2016 [21], Kozłowski 2016 [55], Nelson, Nelson et al. 2016 [5], Osborne, Radnor et al. 2016 [48], Baldassarre, Calabretta et al. 2017 [45], Chareonwongsak 2017 [19], Payne, Frow et al. 2017 [43], Hooks, McCarthy et al. 2017 [14], Shamim, Zeng et al. 2019 [85], McKillop, French et al. 2020 [17], Mutimukwe, Kolkowska et al. 2020 [93], Sebhatu, Gezahegn et al. 2020 [50], Alam, Ahmad et al. 2021 [74], Chawviang and Kiattisin 2022 [33] |
Application | Arnold, Benford et al. 2015 [30], Rose, Persson et al. 2015 [24], Díaz-Díaz and Pérez-González 2016 [58], Angelidou, Psaltoglou et al. 2017 [98], Blanc 2020 [73], Manita, Elommal et al. 2020 [56], Mutimukwe, Kolkowska et al. 2020 [93], Alam, Ahmad et al. 2021 [74], Patel, Bhattacharya et al. 2021 [83], Chawviang and Kiattisin 2022 [33] |
Data and Information | Elizabeth Davidson 2015 [57], Díaz-Díaz and Pérez-González 2016 [58], Merino, Caballero et al. 2016 [63], Koltay 2016 [25], Bolívar 2017 [22], Osvaldo Gervasi 2018 [59], Shamim, Zeng et al. 2019 [85], Shen, Bradford, Henderson et al. 2020 [81], Shen, Duan et al. 2020 [92], Chawviang and Kiattisin 2022 [33] |
Infrastructure and Technology | Morgan 1992 [80], Hon, Rose, Persson et al. 2015 [24], Shen, Huang et al. 2015 [81], Hon, Garcia Alonso 2016 [21], Millard et al. 2016 [99], Pan, Tian et al. 2016 [100], Aguirre and Rodriguez 2017 [87], Hon and Millard 2018 [29], Huang and Vasarhelyi 2019 [88], Ofoeda, Boateng et al. 2019 [86], Shamim, Zeng et al. 2019 [85], Janssen, Brous et al. 2020 [89], Lin, Xie et al. 2020 [95], Manita, Elommal et al. 2020 [56], Oliveira, Oliver et al. 2020 [23], Shen, Duan et al. 2020 [92], Wang, Fang, Chen et al. 2020 [90], Gong and Janssen 2021 [67], Patel, Bhattacharya et al. 2021 [83], Stratu-Strelet, Gil-Gómez et al. 2021 [32], Afshar Jahanshahi et al. 2022 [84], Chawviang and Kiattisin 2022 [33], Polas, Afshar Jahanshahi et al. 2022 [84] |
Layer | Definition | Components |
---|---|---|
Business | The business layer had core and support functions. Membership, trading, lending, and depositing were crucial. Promoting, controlling, and supporting decision-making. To ensure that members and management could access products and services, an electronic platform would be established. This framework changed the channel. | The business of the co-operative was separated into two sessions. To begin, the core function was the provision of goods and services, which included membership, lending, depositing, and trading. Finally, the support function was divided into three components: administration, knowledge and information, and participation. |
Application | Smart co-operative management applied modern technology to core and support tasks to improve member service and management. Administration, knowledge and information, and involvement assist the co-operative core business. | Core functions are e-member, e-lending, e-deposit, and e-commerce, and the support functions are as follows: 1. These apps aided human resource development and co-operative communication. 2. E-voting, e-referenda, e-meetings, and e-collaboration comprised the participation app. 3. All support services included administration, communication, and government |
Data and Information | The collaboration of the third component of the smart co-operative management framework, which was enabled by a co-operative information architecture, required data standards. | The co-operative information system contained data regarding members, loans, deposits, trading, human resources, assets, finances, and accounting. |
Infrastructure and Technology | Infrastructure, technology, and applications co-operate. These technologies enabled smart co-operative management. | A secure information system was supported by technologies such as TCP/IP, wireless networks, IoT, cloud computing, blockchain, data centers, big data analytics, application programming interface (API), data analytics, AI, RPA, digital signature, virtual private network (VPN), and others. |
Governance | The final important layer of the smart co-operative management framework is governance. It is embedded in every process and function of a smart co-operative, such as business processes: core function, support function, and information management. | Co-operative principles, corporate governance, data governance, IT governance, COBIT, and ITIL are all used in the framework. Using the framework, data security, interoperability, quality, risk management, and service improvement were all improved. |
Experts | Type of Expert | Professional Role | Experience |
---|---|---|---|
Expert 1 | Co-operative management | Co-operative policy and decision-maker | >10 Years |
Expert 2 | Co-operative management | Co-operative policy and decision-maker | >10 Years |
Expert 3 | Enterprise architecture | Co-operative regulator (co-operative auditing department) | >20 Years |
Expert 4 | Co-operative informatics | Co-operative regulator (co-operative auditing department) | >10 Years |
Expert 5 | Co-operative management | Co-operative regulator (co-operative promotion department) | >20 Years |
Expert 6 | Co-operative innovation | Co-operative regulator (co-operative promotion department) | >10 Years |
Expert 7 | IT Auditing | Co-operative regulator (co-operative auditing department) | >20 Years |
Expert 8 | IT management | Co-operative regulator (co-operative auditing department) | >10 Years |
Expert 9 | Data protection officer (DPO) | Enterprise architecture, banking system | >15 Years |
Layers | E 1 | E 2 | E 3 | E 4 | E 5 | E 6 | E 7 | E 8 | E 9 | Agreement Number | I-CVI | Evaluation | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Business (L1) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 | 1.00 | 1.00 | Excellent |
Application (L2) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 | 1.00 | 1.00 | Excellent |
Data and Information (L3) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 | 1.00 | 1.00 | Excellent |
Infrastructure and Technology (L4) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 | 1.00 | 1.00 | Excellent |
Governance (L5) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 | 1.00 | 1.00 | Excellent |
Completeness of Framework (CF) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9 | 1.00 | 1.00 | Excellent |
Agreement number | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | S-CVI/Ave | 1.00 | ||
Agreement proportion | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | S-CVI/UA | 1.00 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chawviang, A.; Kiattisin, S.; Thirasakthana, M.; Mayakul, T. A Smart Co-Operative Management Framework Based on an EA Concept for Sustainable Development. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7328. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097328
Chawviang A, Kiattisin S, Thirasakthana M, Mayakul T. A Smart Co-Operative Management Framework Based on an EA Concept for Sustainable Development. Sustainability. 2023; 15(9):7328. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097328
Chicago/Turabian StyleChawviang, Anassaya, Supaporn Kiattisin, Montree Thirasakthana, and Theeraya Mayakul. 2023. "A Smart Co-Operative Management Framework Based on an EA Concept for Sustainable Development" Sustainability 15, no. 9: 7328. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097328
APA StyleChawviang, A., Kiattisin, S., Thirasakthana, M., & Mayakul, T. (2023). A Smart Co-Operative Management Framework Based on an EA Concept for Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 15(9), 7328. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097328