{"title":"The Evolution of IETF Standards and their Production","authors":"M. Gençer","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2012010102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2012010102","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports the results of an exploratory study on the Internet Engineering Task Force IETF specifications corpus in relation to the changes in volume, structure, and production of Internet standards. Using data spanning three decades, the authors examine changes in the production volume and type composition of IETF documents, their interdependency, and the level of collaboration involved in their production. Longitudinal changes in the standards corpus exhibit an increasing trend in interdependency, number of refinement steps, and number of authors, and additionally reveal that standards production is of an episodic nature with regular peaks in output volume. Complementary analysis on the network structure of dependencies highlights a trend toward compartmentalization of the system over the years involving the emergence of relatively isolated subsystems of related standards. The authors suggest that a perspective which considers a system like IETF as an organization itself, rather than a constellation of extra-organizational activities, is needed to understand and manage standardization processes like this one.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127799803","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Role of Technology Standardization in RFID Adoption: The Pharmaceutical Context","authors":"May Tajima","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2012010104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2012010104","url":null,"abstract":"In the United States U.S. retail industry, endorsement from an industry key figure spurred the adoption of radio frequency identification RFID, but this did not turn out to be the case within the pharmaceutical industry. In order to provide insight into adoption drivers that are specific to the pharmaceutical industry, this research develops a theoretical model of RFID adoption factors, in which: i technology standardization is the main driver; ii three aspects of RFID technology that need to be standardized are specified; iii special attention is given to the adoption behavior of late adopters, rather than the existing early adopters; and iv a specific context for the pharmaceutical industry is provided by taking into account the key industry characteristics. The model provides practical insight for dealing with some of the adoption challenges faced by the U.S. pharmaceutical industry.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121191067","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"When Is Standarization Slow?","authors":"M. Sherif","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2003010102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2003010102","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents an analysis of the political, marketing, and technical aspects associated with the perception that standarization is slow. A framework is defined to evaluate the rate of standarization in terms of meeting users’ needs.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"227 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122462265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Standardization and Competing Consortia: The Trade-Off Between Speed and Compatibility","authors":"M. V. Wegberg","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2004070102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2004070102","url":null,"abstract":"The consortia movement in the standardization world has led to a fragmentation of standardization processes. This fragmentation is partly of a competitive nature, where rival coalitions support competing technologies. A critique on this movement is that it fragments technologies and multiplies the number of standards. The aim of supporting competing technologies may reflect experimentation with different technological paths. It may also, however, reflect differences in intellectual property rights of firms. From a user’s perspective, the competing technologies may represent spurious differences that increase uncertainty, and create transaction costs. The consortia do have a function for end users: Established industry-wide standard development organizations (SDOs) may be slow to act, bureaucratic, and inflexible to changes in users’ needs and new opportunities; consortia speed up the process of standardization. This paper argues that consortia do indeed tend to correct these coordination failures of the official SDOs. They do so at a cost, however, and because of this, industry-wide SDOs still have a role to play.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130664209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Significance of Government's Role in Technology Standardization: Two Cases in the Wireless Communications Industry","authors":"D. Seo","doi":"10.4018/jcit.2010010105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jcit.2010010105","url":null,"abstract":"For first generation 1G wireless communications technology standards, the Japanese government's early decision provided an opportunity for its national manufacturers to be first movers in the global market, while the late development of wireless communications in Korea made the Korean market dependent on foreign manufacturers by adopting the U.S. standard AMPS. Moving toward the 2G wireless technology market, both countries decided to develop standards instead of adopting a technology from outside their regions. Japan developed its own standard, PDC, while Korea developed CDMA systems with Qualcomm, the U.S. technology provider. Although these governments' decisions on technologies looked only slightly different, the socio-economic consequences were greatly distinctive. The Korean success brought not only the rapid development of its domestic market but also opportunities for its manufacturers to become global leaders, while the PDC standard only provided the fast growth of the Japanese domestic market without any opportunities for the Japanese manufacturers to grow further internationally in the 1990s. By the end of 1990s, two nations again had to decide a 3G technology standard with vast challenges and pressures.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"143 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132109586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Comparing the Standards Lens with Other Perspectives on IS Innovations: The Case of CPFR","authors":"M. Markus, U. J. Gelinas","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2006010102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2006010102","url":null,"abstract":"Conceptual labels influence researchers’ observations and analytic insights. This article aims to clarify the contributions of standards label by contrasting it with other ways of viewing the same entity and applying it to the IT-enabled supply chain innovation of Collaborative Planning, Forecasting, and Replenishment (CPFR). Proponents have labeled CPFR not only as a standard but also, at different decreasing levels of abstraction, as a business philosophy, methodology, and set of technologies. By comparing the analytic leverage offered by the different labels, we conclude that there is value in combining the standards perspective with other conceptual lenses. The specific case of CPFR also raises an interesting question for future research: Can information systems innovations justifiably be considered standardized in practice, if they are not standardized at all relevant levels of abstraction?","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132559096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"IPR Policy of the DVB Project: Negative Disclosure, FR&ND Arbitration Unless Pool Rules OK Part 1","authors":"Carter Eltzroth","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2008070102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2008070102","url":null,"abstract":"The DVB Project is a European-based standards forum that for close to 15 years has been developing specifications for digital video broadcasting, many now implemented worldwide. Its IPR policy has several novel elements. These include “negative disclosure,” the obligation of each member to license IPRs essential to DVB specifications unless it gives notice of the unavailability of the IPR. This approach contrasts with the more common rule (e.g., within ANSI accredited bodies) calling for IPR disclosure and confirmation of availability on FR&ND terms. Other notable features of the IPR policy of DVB are arbitration and fostering of patent pooling. This article provides a commentary on the DVB’s IPR policy and on its application. It also describes the work of the DVB in resolving IPR “gateway” issues when the perceived dominance of technology contributors, notably through control over IPRs, risked, in the view of some members, distorting new digital markets. In two cases, DVB has created a licensing mechanism to dispel these concerns. In addition to the quality of its technical work, DVB’s success lies in its novel IPR policy and its ability to achieve consensus to resolve gateway issues.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122774455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tapio Levä, Antti Riikonen, Juuso Töyli, H. Hämmäinen
{"title":"A Framework for Measuring the Deployment of Internet Protocols","authors":"Tapio Levä, Antti Riikonen, Juuso Töyli, H. Hämmäinen","doi":"10.4018/ijitsr.2014010103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/ijitsr.2014010103","url":null,"abstract":"Internet protocols spread to potential adopters through several successive phases of implementation, commercialization, acquisition, and adoption of the protocol. This process of protocol deployment involves several stakeholders and varies depending on the deployment environment and the protocol in question. This complexity and the lack of comprehensive measurement studies call for a further conceptualization of measuring protocol diffusion along the whole deployment process. Therefore, this article develops a framework for measuring the deployment of Internet protocols, consisting of deployment steps, deployment models, deployment measures, and data sources. The measures are further linked to each other through deployment gaps and delays. In order to demonstrate the framework, it is used to assess how a set of pre-installed protocols spread in the Finnish mobile market. The framework highlights the differences between the deployment models and the importance to use both the deployment measures and gaps in the analysis of protocol success. Furthermore, the illustrative results indicate that protocol deployment is driven by applications, and show the existence of large deployment gaps between the protocol possession and usage. The results are relevant especially to researchers interested in holistically analyzing protocol deployment and protocol developers for measuring and improving the success of their protocols.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127227844","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Should Buyers Try to Shape IT Markets Through Non-Market (Collective) Action? Antecedents of a Transaction Cost Theory of Network Effects","authors":"K. Reimers, Mingzhi Li","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2005010103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2005010103","url":null,"abstract":"This paper develops a transaction cost theoretic model of network effects and applies it to assessing the chances of users to influence the range of technological choices available on IT markets through collective action. The theoretical basis of the model is formulated by a number of empirically refutable propositions which overcome a number of conceptual and empirical difficulties encountered by the traditional interpretation of network effects as (positive) network externalities. The main difference between our model and modeling network effects as network externalities is that network effects are seen as caused by the costs of purchasing/marketing new technology, that is, transaction costs, rather than by the benefits of using new technology. A preliminary application of the model suggests that users can significantly improve the chances of replacing an established technology by a new, potentially superior one if they set up an organizational structure that serves as a conduit of information exchange and knowledge sharing. This, however, would call for a rather different type of collective user action than exists today in the form of user groups.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128935648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"An Exploratory Analysis of the Relationship Between Organizational and Institutional Factors Shaping the Assimilation of Vertical Standards","authors":"T. Ravichandran, R. Mendoza","doi":"10.4018/jitsr.2011010102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.4018/jitsr.2011010102","url":null,"abstract":"Vertical standards describe products and services, define data formats and structures, and formalize and encode business processes for specific industries. Vertical standards enable end-to-end computing, provide greater visibility of the organization's supply chain, and enable transactional efficiencies by automating routine tasks, reducing errors, and formally defining all parameters used to describe a product, service, or transaction. Research on standards diffusion has explored either firm-level and institutional variables, without integration of the two areas. This study develops scales for 11 constructs based on concepts culled from diffusion of innovations theory, organizational learning theories of technology adoption, institutional theory and network effects theory. The scales are validated with data collected from the membership of OASIS, a leading international standards-developing organization for electronic commerce technologies. Using data cluster analysis, relationship patterns between the 11 constructs are investigated. Results show that low fit between vertical standards and existing organizational business processes and data formats, low levels of anticipated benefits, and inadequate momentum with critical business partners contribute to slower vertical standards assimilation. However, organizational involvement with influential standards-development organizations, and the right set of technologies, skills, and structures to readily benefit from vertical standards spur their assimilation.","PeriodicalId":169063,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. IT Stand. Stand. Res.","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127729624","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}