Electronic Business: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (4-Volumes) P18 docx

104
Business Networking
Hermes B2B messaging server provides
enterprises a standardized, reliable and secure
infrastructure to exchange business data over
the Internet. It supports secure messaging func-
tions through security technologies such as XML
signature, secure socket layer (SSL), and secure
multipurpose internet mail extensions (S/MIME).
Aiming at supporting different requirements from
enterprises of all sizes, it implements reliable
messaging, message packaging, message order-
ing, error handling, security, synchronous reply,
message status service, and supports transport
protocols, such as HTTP and SMTP. Hermes
DOVRVXSSRUWVWKHFRQFHSWRI³TXDOLW\RIVHUYLFH´
by respecting in-force agreements, which are
expressed as CPA.
ebMail is a GUI system. It makes use of open
standards (ebXML), underlying GUI, in order to
communicate with business partners. Business
messages are composed and read in GUI form, so
that enterprises do not need back-end integration.
The project is platform-neutral; it is developed by
using Java, and the GUI part is using Java Swing.
For ebXML Messaging Service, ebMail makes
use of Hermes project.
RosettaNet
RosettaNet () is a
VHOIIXQGHG QRQSUR¿W RUJDQL]DWLRQ DURXQG D
consortium of major IT, electronic components,

and semiconductor manufacturing companies
aiming at aligning business processes between
partners in a given supply chain: Partners agree
on partner interface processes (PIPs) to use,
and are then ready to start a business scenario.
RosettaNet implementation framework (RNIF)
S U RYLGHVH[F K D Q J H S URWR F ROVIR U T X L FND Q G HI ¿ FLH QW 
LPSOHPHQWDWLRQRI3,3V51,)GH¿QHVWKHRYHUDOO
RosettaNet business message format for business
documents exchange, with elements to support
authentication, authorization, encryption, and
non-repudiation; details of the bindings for the
W U DQVIH USURW RFRO VHJ+773DQ GW KHVSH FL ¿FD-
tion for a reliable exchange of messages between
business partners.
RosettaNet aims at aligning business processes
of supply chain partners, a goal which is achieved
E\WKHFUHDWLRQRI3,3V(DFK 3,3 GH¿QHVKRZ
WZRVSHFL¿FSURFHVVHVUXQQLQJLQWZRGLIIHUHQW
partner organizations) will be standardized and
interfaced across the entire supply chain. PIPs
LQFOXGH DOO EXVLQHVV ORJLF PHVVDJH ÀRZ DQG
message contents to enable alignment of the two
processes. The purpose of each PIP is to provide
common business/data models and documents
enabling system developers to implement Roset-
taNet eBusiness interfaces. Each PIP includes:
partner role descriptions (individuals/organiza-
tions); business data involved (and corresponding
XML documents); and business process activi-

ties, a validation tool and implementation guide
().
RosettaNet’s standardization efforts refer to:
•
PIPs:GH¿QLQJEXVLQHVVSURFHVVHVEHWZHHQ
trading partners
•
PIP directory: providing faster access to
PIPs’ information
•
Dictionaries: which provide a common
set of properties for PIPs. (e.g., RosettaNet
Business Dictionary: designates the prop-
erties used in basic business activities, and
Technical Dictionary provides proprieties
IRUGH¿QLQJSURGXFWV
•
RNIF:SURYLGLQJVSHFL¿FDWLRQVIRUSDFNDJ-
ing, routing, and transport of all PIP mes-
sages and business signals
•
Product and partner code: which expedites
the alignment of business processes between
trading partners
RosettaNet does not provide a model for sup-
ply chain arrangements as a whole, but a model
for linking supply chain members’ information
ÀRZVLQDXQLIRUPPDQQHUZLWKLQVSHFL¿FEXVL-
ness processes. The RosettaNet model describes
several business activities that can be mapped to

105
Business Networking
RosettaNet XML-framework. These activities
are collected inside PIPs.
Web Services and BPEL4WS
Web services ( aim
at achieving universal interoperability among
applications by using Web standards. They use
ORRVHO\FRXSOHGLQWHJUDWLRQPRGHOWRDOORZÀH[LEOH
integration of heterogeneous systems in a variety
of domains, including B2B, B2C, and enterprise
LQWHJUDWLRQ DQG LQWHURSHUDELOLW\ 6SHFL¿FDWLRQV
derived from Web services include: SOAP,
WSDL, and UDDI. SOAP (
/>TR/soap
GH¿QHVDQ;0/PHVVDJLQJSURWRFROIRU
basic service interoperability. WSDL (
http://www.
w3.org/TR/wsdl) introduces a common grammar
for describing services, and UDDI (
http://www.
uddi.org
) provides the infrastructure required
to publish and discover services in a systematic
ZD\$OOWKHVHVSHFL¿FDWLRQVDOORZDSSOLFDWLRQVWR
¿QGHDFKRWKHUDQGLQWHUDFWIROORZLQJDORRVHO\
coupled platform-independent model. However,
system integration requires much more than
the ability to conduct simple interactions by us-
ing standard protocols. According to Andrews,

Curbea, Dholakia, Goland, Klein, Leymann, Liu,
Roller, Smith, and Thatte (2003), the full potential
of Web services as an integrated platform will be
achieved only when applications and business
processes will be able to integrate their complex
interactions by making use of a standard process
integration model.
Business Process Execution Language for
Web Services (BPEL4WS,
erpages.
org/bpel4ws.html) provides an XML-based pro-
FHVVGH¿QLWLRQODQJXDJHWKDWHQDEOHVWKHIRUPDO
description of business processes and interaction
protocols (Andrews, et al., 2003). BPEL4WS
GH¿QHVDQLQWHURSHUDEOHLQWHJUDWLRQPRGHOWKDW
facilitates the expansion of automated process
integration in both intra-enterprise and B2B
integration.
BPEL4WS is meant to model the behavior
of executable business processes (which are
modeling the actual behavior of a participant
in a business interaction), and abstract business
processes (which are process descriptions for
b u s i n e s s p r o t o c o l s) . I n t h i s w a y, B P E L 4 W e x t e n d s
Web services’ interaction model and enables it to
support business transactions.
BPEL4WS depends on the following XML-
EDVHGVSHFL¿FDWLRQV:6'/;0/6FKHPD
1.0, XPath 1.0, and WS-Addressing. Among these,
:6'/K DVW KHP RV WLQÀXHQFHRQ%3(/:63 3

interaction between services, described in WSDL,
is at the core of BPEL4WS process model, and both
the process and its partners are modeled as WSDL
VHUYLFHV7KHGH¿QLWLRQRIEXVLQHVVSURFHVVHVDOVR
follows the WSDL model of separation between
the abstract message contents used by the business
process and deployment information.
CONCLUSION AND FURTHER
RESEARCH
Current market conditions and information and
communication technology (ICT) developments
determined enterprises to adopt new ways of un-
dertaking business. As a consequence, new forms
of collaboration emerged, such as collaborative
networked organizations (CNO). In this context,
the need to support enterprise integration and
interoperability is increasing. Several conceptual
frameworks, integration standards, technologies,
and supporting infrastructures are being devel-
oped. Despite the relevant developments in the
area of enterprise integration and interoperability,
DQGWKHQXPHURXVVFLHQWL¿FUHVXOWVLQWKHEXVLQHVV
networking area, it is generally accepted that more
work needs to be done, mainly concerning CNO
creation or setting-up, support, and implementa-
tions (Camarinha-Matos & Afsarmanesh, 2003).
Most of the technologies and infrastructures
supporting CNO currently available are at their
beginnings, and require considerable implementa-
106

Business Networking
WLRQDQGFRQ ¿J X UDW LRQHIIRU WV, QJHQHU DOW KHUHLV
a lack of an effective approach to interoperability
(mainly concerning software inter-operation and
information exchange integration), and a lack of
VWDQGDUGGH¿QLWLRQVDQGPHFKDQLVPV
6LQFH LWLVYHU\ GLI¿FXOW QRWWR VD\LPSRV-
VLEOHWR¿QGDVWDQGDUGZKLFKLVYDOLGRUHDVLO\
FRQ¿JXUDEOHVXSSRUWLQJDZLGHUDQJHRIVHUYLFHV
and operations concerning enterprise integration
and interoperability, a convenient approach is
WRGHYHORSVWDQGDUGVIRUVSHFL¿FLQGXVWU\VHF-
tors (e.g., papiNet for paper and forest industry),
considering also the fact that a single process and
document standard for communicating business
transactions is critical to companies buying and
selling products from the same industry. Roset-
taNet and papiNET are examples of successful
standards developments supporting integra-
WLRQDQGLQWHURSHUDELOLW\IRUDVSHFL¿FLQGXVWU\
sector: high-tech industry and paper industry,
respectively.
Although several standards (e.g., ebXML)
provide support for different requirements regard-
ing enterprise integration and interoperability, in
a networked environment, it would be naïve to
c o n si d e r t h at it i s p os s i ble to convert everybody to
a single platform (e.g., ebXML). Each technology
or standard has its advantages and disadvantages.
No true technology or standard can work as an

isolated island; different technologies are com-
ELQHGRUDGDSWHGWRVSHFL¿FQHHGV,WLVWKHUHIRUH
challenging to observe the rapid evolution of dif-
ferent technologies, standards, frameworks, and
the development of emerging projects aiming at
combining these standards and technologies (e.g.,
the development of research projects combining
both ebXML and RosettaNet frameworks).
The questions that guided this work were
DQVZHUHG0DMRUEHQH¿WVIRUHQWHUSULVHLQWHJUD-
W LR QZH UHLGH QWL ¿HG 7 KHPRV WUHOH YD QWV W D QGD U G V
frameworks, technologies, and supporting in-
frastructures aiming at enterprise integration
and interoperability were analyzed, and relevant
research projects in the area of enterprise net-
ZRUNLQJZHUHEULHÀ\SUHVHQWHG)XUWKHUUHVHDUFK
ZLOOEHSXUVXHGWRGH¿QHFULWHULDWREHXVHGWR
compare the available standards and frameworks.
However, in the context of CNO, as mentioned by
Bussler (2003), the grander challenge will be: how
to achieve self-forming collaborative networked
organizations (SFCNO)—that is CNO where
the detection of service provider, as well as their
contracting, is automated.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author, Claudia-Melania Chituc, would like
to acknowledge Fundação para a Ciencia e a Tec-
nologia for PhD grant SFRH/BD/19751/2004.
REFERENCES
Andrews, T., Cubera, F., Dholakia, H., Goland,

Y., Klein, J., Leymann, F., Liu, K., Roller, D.,
Smith, D., & Thatte, S. (2003). Business Process
Execution Language for Web Services—Version
1.1. White paper. Retrieved September 10, 2005,
from />1%20May%205%202003%20Final.pdf
BPEL4WS. (2005). Business Process Execution
Language for Web Services Version 1.1. Retrieved
September 10, 2005, from .
FRPGHYHORSHUZRUNVOLEUDU\VSHFL¿FDWLRQZV
bpel/
Bussler, C. (2003). B2B integration—concepts
and architectures. Springer.
Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2003). New collabora-
tive organizations and their research needs in
process and foundations for virtual organizations.
Kluwer Academy Publishers.
Camarinha-Matos, L. M., & Afsarmanesh, H.
(2003). Elements of a base VE infrastructure.
Computers in Industry, 51(2) 139-163.
107
Business Networking
Campbell, S. (2001). ebXML—the global standard
for electronic business. Retrieved March 17, 2006,
from />papers/pdf/s03-2.pdf
Chituc, C. M., & Azevedo, A. L. (2005a) (in press).
Enablers and technologies supporting self-form-
ing networked organizations. International Work-
shop on Enterprise Integration, Interoperability
and Networking (EI2N), Geneva, Switzerland.
Hermes Publishing.

Chituc, C. M., & Azevedo, A. L. (2005b, Sep-
tember). Multi-perspective challenges on col-
laborative networks business environment. In L.
Camarinha-Matos, H. Afsarmanesh, & A. Ortiz
(Eds.), Collaborative networks and breeding en-
vironments: Proceedings of the 6
th
IFIP Working
Conference on Virtual Enterprises, Spain (Vol.
186, pp. 25-32). Boston: Springer.
CORDIS. (2005). Building grids for Europe—a
crucial technology for science and industry. Re-
trieved September 10, 2005, from http://www.
cordis.lu/ist/grids
C r a r g i l , C . F. (19 8 9) . Information technology stan-
dardization: Theory, process, and organization.
Bedford: Digital Press.
Dournaee, B. (2004). Introduction to ebXML.
White paper. Retrieved September 10, 2005, from
/>html
ebXML. (2003). ebXML adoptation update. Re-
trieved from
European Commission. (2005). Strengthening
competitiveness through production networks—a
perspective from European ICT research projects
LQWKH¿HOGRIHQWHUSULVHQHWZRUNLQJ
IEEE. (1990). IEEE standard computer diction-
ary: A compilation of IEEE standard computer
glossaries. New York: Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers.

IFAC/IFIP. (2000). GERAM: Generalized en-
terprise reference architecture and methodol-
ogy. IFAC/IFIP Task Force on Architectures for
Enterprise Integration.
Li, H., & Williams, T. J. (2000). The interconnected
chain of enterprises as presented by the Purdue
enterprise reference architecture. Computers in
Industry, 42, 265-274.
Li, H., & Williams, T. J. (2003). Interface design
for the Purdue enterprise reference architecture
(PERA) and methodology in e-work. Production
Planning & Control, 14(8), 704-719.
Nurmilaakso, J. M., & Kotinurmi, P. (2004). A
review of XML-based supply-chain integration.
Production Planning & Control, 15(6), 608-621
papiNet. (2004). papiNet from top to bottom—an
introduction to papiNet. Retrieved September
10, 2005, from />tions.asp
Pusnik, M., Juric, M. B., Rozman, I., & Sumak, B.
(2000). A comparison of ebXML and RosettaNet.
White paper. Retrieved September 10, 2005, from
/>SCOR—Supply Chain Operations Reference
Model. (n.d.). Retrieved from -
ply-chain.org
SWWS—Semantic Web-Enabled Web Services.
(2003). Analysis of B2B Standards and Systems:
Deliverable D1.1 SWWS Project. Retrieved from

Vernadat, F. (1996). Enterprise modeling and
integration—principles and applications. Chap-

man & Hall.
:HEEHU'7KHEHQH¿WVRIHE;0/IRU
e-business. In XML 2004 Conference. Retrieved
September 10, 2005, from alliance.
org/proceedings/xml04/papers/44/webber.pdf
:RUNÀRZ 0DQDJHPHQW &RDOLWLRQ  The
ZRUNÀRZPDQDJHPHQWFRDOLWLRQVSHFL¿FDWLRQV
108
Business Networking
Terminology and glossary. Retrieved from http://
www.wfmc.org
Zachman, J. A. (1987). A framework for informa-
tion systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal,
26(3), 276-292.
Zarli, A, & Poyet, P. (2001). A framework for
distributed information management in the
virtual enterprise: The VEGA project. In L. M.
Camarinha-Matos & H. Afsarmanesh (Eds.),
Infrastructures for virtual enterprises—network-
ing industrial enterprises (1
st
ed.), (pp. 293-306).
Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
This work was previously published in Knowledge and Technology Management in Virtual Organizations: Issues, Trends,
Opportunities and Solutions, edited by G. Putnik; M. Cunha, pp. 334-353, copyright 2007 by IGI Publishing (an imprint of
IGI Global).
109
Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Chapter 1.8
A Knowledge Management

Approach to Improving
E-Business Collaboration
Sharon Cox
Birmingham City University, UK
John Perkins
Newman University College, UK
INTRODUCTION
Information and communication technology
(ICT) helps to remove barriers and improve
mechanisms that support e-business. E-busi-
ness involves collaborative systems that enable
trading partners to work together as members of
communities of practice. This article argues that
the ICT components of e-business are necessary
to support communication but in themselves are
RIWHQLQVXI¿FLHQWDVHQDEOHUVRIFROODERUDWLRQ$
knowledge management orientation is taken to
viewing the dyad between human ability, organi-
sational need, and the extent to which electronic
information systems can mediate between them.
Concepts from the social practice literature are
LGHQWL¿HGWKDWPD\FRQWULEXWHWRDGGUHVVLQJWKH
gap between generic technology and situated
business applications, which may inform human
resource strategy.
BACKGROUND
The communication of information is a key factor
DIIHFWLQJWKHHI¿FLHQF\RIEXVLQHVVWUDQVDFWLRQV
ICT provides mechanisms to support the accurate
and timely communication of information across

organisations in the supply chain. E-business
LQYROYHVWKHXVHRILQWHU¿UPFRPSXWHUQHWZRUNV
to exchange information that supports business
applications or processes (Li & Williams, 1999).
It extends beyond e-commerce, the buying and
selling of goods and services on the Internet,
to incorporate the entire supply chain (Martin,
2UJDQLVDWLRQVFDQEHQH¿WIURPFRRSHUDWLQJ
ZLWKLQWKHVXSSO\FKDLQ%HQH¿WVRIFRRSHUDWLRQ
may include improvements in customer service
(Tan, 2001), understanding future product de-
mand (Sahay, 2003), transaction costs, and time
to market (Graham & Hardaker, 2000).
110
A Knowledge Management Approach to Improving E-Business Collaboration
Supply chain management requires collabo-
ration between trading partners (Sahay, 2003)
which can take many forms requiring different
degrees of cooperation and commitment (Cox,
Krasniewicz, Perkins, & Cox, 2006). John-Steiner,
Weber, and Minnis (1998) emphasise the need
IRUPXOWLSOHGH¿QLWLRQVDQGPRGHOVRIFROODERUD-
tive practice. The term ‘collaboration’ can offer
positive connotations meaning ‘to work together,
especially in a joint intellectual effort’ (www.
yourdictionary.com). This view of collaboration is
socially situated, implying that the partners in the
collaborative relationship share agreed goals and
that the balance of power, control, and potential
EHQH¿WVDUHHTXDOLQWKHUHODWLRQVKLS+RZHYHU

the term can also have negative connotations as
in ‘to cooperate treasonably, as with an enemy
occupation force in one’s country.’ The term ‘coop-
HUDWH¶FDQEHGH¿QHGDVµWRZRUNWRJHWKHUWRZDUG
a common purpose’ or ‘to form an association for
FRPPRQXVXDOO\HFRQRPLFEHQH¿W¶7KLVUHODWHV
to the ‘working together’ aspect of collaboration.
+RZH YHU D I X U W K H U GH¿ Q LW LR Q RI F R R S H U DW LRQ L VµWR
acquiesce willingly; be compliant.’ This demon-
strates the key difference between cooperation and
collaboration; cooperation can imply deference
and subservience in the relationship.
Technology provides the means to commu-
nicate data and information and integrate pro-
cesses within the value chain. Value is added to
collaborative relationships in e-business through
the information exchanged which allows knowl-
HGJH WR EH VKDUHG IRU MRLQW EHQH¿W FKDQJLQJ
processes and developing new products (O’Toole,
.QRZOHGJHFDQEHGH¿QHGDVDFRPELQD-
tion of contextual information that is produced
WKURXJKV\QWKHVLVRILQIRUPDWLRQDQGUHÀHFWLRQ
from experience (Davenport, DeLong, & Beers,
1998). Nonaka and Takeuchi’s (1995) model of
knowledge conversion modes established explicit
and tacit dimensions of knowledge into current
knowledge management thinking (Grover & Dav-
enport, 2001). Explicit knowledge is often found
in the form of information; it is the component of
knowledge that can be expressed with textual or

symbolic representation. Tacit knowledge is more
VXEMHFWLYH DQG GLI¿FXOW WR H[SUHVV DQG FRGLI\
Communication and cooperation using collab-
orative systems lead to reciprocal dependency
of knowledge sharing which is highly dependant
upon the establishment of trust between trading
partners.
The study of practice within communities of
practitioners is necessary to determine the cultural
rules that underpin routine practice and establish
knowledge requirements. An approach emerging
from the domains of social sciences and organisa-
tion studies is that of social practice theory. This
focuses on the study of organisational culture
through the medium of the work practices that
FRPSULVHDQGUHVXOWIURPLW(QJHVWUĘP
(QJHVWUĘP¶VPRGHORIVRFLDOO\GLVWULEXWHGDFWLYLW\
systems explores the dynamics between the users
of collaborative systems, objects of activity (such
as trading processes), and the community within
which this trading takes place; it then analyses
how these elements are mediated by implicit or
explicit rules, roles, and technology.
E-BUSINESS COLLABORATION
ICT changes the way work is conducted includ-
ing how people work together and the degree to
which they need to (Pearlson & Saunders, 2004).
Internet technologies are the major enabler of
improvements in supply chain management
(Kirchmer, 2004) enabling customers and sup-

pliers to work together towards a common aim to
WKHEHQH¿WRIERWKSDUWLHVIRUH[DPSOHUHGXFLQJ
transaction costs.
:DUG*ULI¿WKVDQG:KLWPRUHLGHQ-
tify four levels of using technology to support
interorganisational cooperation and strengthen
intercompany relationships. At the lowest level
of connectivity, batches of transaction data are
transmitted between partners. This requires
commitment to send accurate and timely data in
111
A Knowledge Management Approach to Improving E-Business Collaboration
a g reed f or m a t s, t r u s t i ng t h a t t h ey w i l l be u s e d ap -
propriately. At the next level, direct access to data
held in each other’s computer systems is given.
This requires additional technical integration but
also requires a shared understanding of the data
(to ensure they are interpreted appropriately) and
trust that the data will not be misused. At levels
three and four, further integration enables part-
ners to automatically initiate business processes
in response to electronic transactions and update
data in both parties’ computer systems. These
levels require increasing degrees of trust and
commitment to the collaboration, changing the
relationship between trading partners.
Information technology can be used to change
procedures (O’Toole, 2003) but a change of culture
is needed in both partner organisations in order to
develop the degree of trust required for collabora-

tion to be successful. E-relationships are a layer of
value-added interaction between trading partners.
Value is determined by the level of commitment
and engagement of the partners in the relationship
(O’Toole, 2003). Value can be added in informa-
tion exchanged; closer relationships result in more
communication with richer content, though this
requires a form of community to be in place to
allow the development of shared understanding
and mutual trust (O’Toole, 2003).
Collaboration is built upon interpersonal
communication and it is trust that differenti-
ates partnerships from traditional relationships
(Handy, 1995). Communities are traditionally
developed through face-to-face interaction which
is often not possible within e-business. The recur-
ring events that form common practice are often
inscribed in a technical infrastructure mediated
by sociocultural rules within a collaborative
system. Such systems depend upon participants
knowing what constitutes appropriate practice in
a particular situation, knowing accepted ways to
carry out that practice and upon a high degree of
knowledge sharing.
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
Knowledge management involves implementa-
tion of tools, processes, systems, structures, and
cultures that promote creation, sharing, and use
of knowledge (DeLong & Fahey, 2000). The
knowledge management philosophy focuses

on knowledge as ‘people-embodied activity’
(Mohamed, Stankosky, & Murray, 2006). Prob-
lems with e-business systems occur when the
development of the system is based on espoused
requirements of practice projected from policy
requirements. The actual practice often results
from practitioners ‘working around’ policy di-
UHFWLYHV WR DFKLHYH ¿QLWH UHVXOWV LQ D VLWXDWLRQ
where time and other operational resources are
rationed; actual practice should form the basis for
determining e-business processes. However, the
nature of the encultured and embodied knowledge
that enables expertise is highly tacit and often
not recognisable in an explicit form even by the
practitioner who employs it.
Lee (2005) emphasises the difference between
process and practice. Process relates to routines
involving explicit knowledge; practice relates to
heuristics and tacit ‘know-how.’ Formal explicit
business processes document the actions and
routine decisions of business activity; business
practices becomes established where there is ambi-
guity or omissions in the documented processes or
exceptional circumstances occur (Wenger, 1998).
This provides a continuum. At one end, routine
decisions which require little human intervention
can be documented in business processes and
DWWKHRWKHUHQGGHFLVLRQVUHTXLULQJVLJQL¿FDQW
judgment are founded in business practice (Lee,
2005).

For e-business collaboration to succeed beyond
the operational level of reducing transaction costs,
a knowledge management approach that more
effectively enables collaborative activity needs
to be situated within the study of practice. The
individuals using the collaborative system adopt
business practices that involve embodied, embed-
112
A Knowledge Management Approach to Improving E-Business Collaboration
ded, and encultured knowledge that is located
not within individuals, but distributed amongst a
community of practitioners (Blackler, 1995).
TRUST AND COMMUNITY
E-business removes the temporal and geographical
boundaries of business transactions, however, it
also impacts the situational context within which
communities are developed and sustained. Shared
understanding and mutual trust need to develop
EHWZHHQZRUNHUVDFURVVWKHLQWHU¿UPSDUWQHUVKLS
Perceptions of trust evolve through the experience
of recurring events to strengthen or weaken the
initial cultural boundaries between the workers
in each organisation.
Individuals relate to a ‘we group’ as opposed
to ‘them,’ that is, those people who are excluded
IURPWKHµZHJURXS¶+RIVWHGHIXO¿OOLQJ
the basic human need to belong. Dingley, Shah,
and Golder (2000) use the metaphor of a tribe to
H[DPLQH WKH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ GLI¿FXOWLHV H[SH-
rienced between groups of workers in different

departments within the same organisation as
they attempt to collaborate. A tribe (Dingley et
al., 2000):
1. Possesses culture.
2. Retains self-awareness.
3. Maintains a sense of boundaries.
4. Enforces a shared pattern of socialisation
to reinforce values.
5. Consists of a complex social structure.
6. Shares problems.
7. Engages in rituals for coming together.
8. Establishes traditions which sustain cohesive
relationships.
 ,QÀXHQFHVSROLWLFVFORVHO\LQYROYHGZLWKWKH
rest of the social organisation.
10. Settles disputes by the next higher order.
They suggest that departments of workers
are ‘tribes’ separated by differences in behavior,
terminology, language, cognition, and values. In-
W H U ¿ U P F ROODERUDW LRQFD Q E H Y L H ZH G D V W ZRµW U L E H V¶ 
needing to work together and develop a shared
culture to enable the collaboration. Differences in
thinking are a key factor of why solutions do not
work or cannot be implemented in organisations
(Hofstede, 1991); this is particularly true in the
context of e-business collaboration. Differences
in the use of language, goals, cognitive views,
frames of reference, and organisational pressures
DOOFRQWULEXWHWRFRPPXQLFDWLRQGLI¿FXOWLHVDQG
lack of trust in collaboration.

SOCIAL ACTIVITY THEORY
Human activity is mediated by the tools and con-
cepts that are used; the situational rules, organi-
sational processes, and shared practice interact
ZLWKLQWKHKXPDQDFWLYLW\V\VWHP(QJHVWUĘP
1987). Collaborative activity between two or
more communities involves the reconciliation of
human activity systems with different ecologies.
Processes of human meaning construction are
mediated not only by technology but also by local
culture, most explicitly represented by the recur-
rent activities that represent practice carried out
by local communities of workers (Lave & Wenger,
1991; Wenger, 1998). The collaborative system
changes the situational context, the artifacts, and
actions of the people in both partner organisations
and therefore impacts the communities of practice.
Oliver and Kandadi (2006) report the prominent
role of formal and informal communities of prac-
tice in the formation of knowledge communities.
They suggest that organisations need to provide an
appropriate communication infrastructure, such
as knowledge portals, to provide virtual interac-
tion and content management. As knowledge is
contextual (Snowdon, 2003), communities of
practice that cross organisational boundaries need
to be developed to establish a collaborative context
within which knowledge can be shared.
113
A Knowledge Management Approach to Improving E-Business Collaboration

TAXONOMIES OF COLLABORATIVE
PRACTICE IN E-BUSINESS
Collaboration changes trading relationships in
the supply chain. Cox et al. (2006) propose that
e-business collaboration can be examined from
three perspectives. First, the strategic perspective
examines the rationale for collaboration, and is-
sues of with whom to collaborate, why, and how
(Barratt, 2004). Second, the integration perspec-
tive considers what is being integrated, the degree
of the collaboration, and the value emerging from
it. Finally, the community perspective explores the
operational issues of collaborative practice.
These levels of collaborative practice provide a
basic taxonomy with which to examine knowledge
management within e-business collaboration.
Once the collaboration has been agreed at the
strategic level, the means for the collaboration
needs to be established. At this integration level,
the contribution of business practice, as opposed
to business process, needs to be used as the basis
for developing the collaborative system, embed-
ding the encultured knowledge from the com-
munities of practice. Collaboration then needs to
be considered at lower levels in the organisation
(Nahapiet, Gratton, & Rocha, 2005). At the com-
munity level, the individuals using the collabora-
tive system provide the key source of knowledge
WRH[SORLWRUUHVWULFWWKHSRWHQWLDOEHQH¿WVRI
the collaboration. The key questions faced by

organisations concerning why, with whom, and
how to collaborate also need to be addressed at
the operational level. This requires issues such as
human motivation to be considered (Nahapiet et
al., 2005) as colleagues ask, ‘With whom should
I collaborate with and why?’ Individuals cannot
be forced to share knowledge, it must be volun-
WHHUHGLQRUGHUWRDYRLGFDPRXÀDJHEHKDYLRU
(where knowledge is shared but in an unusable
manner) or conformance behavior (where only
the minimum requirements are met) (Snowdon,
2003). Coercion leads to negative connotations
of collaboration.
Fahey, Srivastava, Sharon, and Smith (2001)
examine the role of knowledge management in
e-business using the taxonomy of knowledge com-
prising know-why, know-what, and know-how.
Know-what involves the assembly and application
of information, know-how is gained through the
application of knowledge, and know-why is the
result of combining ‘knowing-what’ and ‘know-
ing-how’ through reasoning. The why, what, and
how broadly relate to the previous perspectives
of collaboration (i.e., strategic, integration, com-
munity). This knowledge management framework
provides a means to explore and develop the
human role within e-business systems (Fahey
HWDO7KHSRWHQWLDOVWUDWHJLFEHQH¿WVRI
e-business can only be achieved through the ef-
IHFWLYHFROODERUDWLRQRILQWHU¿UPFRPPXQLWLHVRI

practice. Neglecting the emergent knowledge from
business practice reduces e-business collaboration
to a series of automated business processes and
neglects the powerful and unique contribution of
personnel in the organisation.
FUTURE TRENDS
The challenges and opportunities posed by tech-
nology are increasing at a fast pace. ICT removes
geographical and temporal boundaries providing a
means for communication between organisations,
processes, and people. However sophisticated
technology becomes one factor in communication
remains the same, that is, the human element.
5RXWLQHEXVLQHVVSURFHVVHVVXSSRUWLQJLQWHU¿UP
transactions require minimal human intervention
but the scope of such processes will be limited to
the extent that practice, as opposed to espoused
SURFHGXUH LV FRGL¿HG 3URFHVVHV ZLOO QHHG WR
be established for seeking to capture and codify
business practice. But it is the opportunities for
innovation and organisational learning that remain
¿UPO\JURXQGHGLQWKHKXPDQDELOLW\IRULQVLJKW
reason, and creativity. As technology advances and
continually ‘frees up’ staff (as processes become