The document presents the Ecosystem Architecture Management (TEAM) framework, which provides a modeling approach for ecosystems without centralized governance. The TEAM framework operates at three levels - strategic, commercial, and technical. At the strategic level it models the value network of an ecosystem using the e3value technique. At the commercial level it models coordination mechanisms like pricing. At the technical level it models required IT capabilities. The framework is demonstrated through examples of the bitcoin ecosystem and distributed electricity supply in Norway. Further work is needed to apply the framework to other ecosystems like real estate or the proposed Libra ecosystem.

1. A Business Ecosystem Architecture
Modeling Framework
Roel Wieringa (The Value Engineers) roel@thevalueengineers.nl
Wilco Engelsman (Saxion Univ. of Applied Sciences)
Jaap Gordijn (Free Univ. Amsterdam & The Value Engineers)
Dan Ionita (Univ. of Twente & The Value Engineers)
www.thevalueengineers.nl
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 1

2. • Motivation: EA assumes central governance
• The three levels of TEAM
• Strategic
• Commercial
• Technical
• Examples & further work
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 2

3. Motivation
• Enterprise architecture is needed to manage and align the IT of large enterprises
• Current EA frameworks assume central governance
• This makes them unsuitable for ecosystems without a central governer with final
responsibility
• But we still need alignment in the ecosystem
• The Ecosystem Architecture Management (TEAM) framework
1. Ecosystem members play a game of coopetion
2. Instead of centralized governance we have decentralized coordination
3. A business ecosystem has a business model
4. The ecosystem business model provides requirements for ecosystem IT
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 3

4. Ecosystem of a company
Moore 1996
• Suppliers & customers (and their suppliers & customers)
• Complementors
• Competitors
• Rule makers (govt, regulators, standards organizations
• Associations (trade associatitons, labor ujnions, lobby groups, conferences, trade
shows et.)
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 4

5. EA assumes central governance
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 5

6. EA assumes central governance
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 6

7. The Ecosystem Architecture Management
(TEAM) Framework
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 7

8. TEAM framework
• Architecture
o Stakeholders perform value activities to jointly produce a value proposition
• Governance game
• Goals, power, coordination mechanisms (price, rules, relations), legal framework,
associations
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 8

9. TEAM Framework
• E3value modeling technique
• Perceived fairness of distribution of benefits, costs, risks
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 9

10. The Ecosystem Architecture Management
(TEAM) Framework
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 10
• Data sharing
o Semantics, confidentiality
• Coordination
o Transactions, coordination processes
• IT requirements
o Security, interoperability
• Governance
o Standards, update procedures

11. Examples
• In the paper:
• Distributed electricity supply in Norway
• The Bitcoin ecosystem
• Other
• The music supply & distribution ecosystem
• A market supported by a bank
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 11

12. Future work
• The Libra ecosystem
• Real estate ecosystem
• Tool support
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 12

13. Questions?
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 13

14. Backup
16 July 2019 CBI 2019 14

15. 16 July 2019 CBI 2019 15

16. The ecosystem of bitcoin miners
16
Trust‐
worthi‐
ness
Electricity
Transactions
Bitcoin network
Manufacturers
Electricity suppliers
Mining pools
Bitcoin users
Currency exchanges
Banks
Value proposition:
Anonymous P2P payments
Miner
Account
16 July 2019 CBI 2019

17. The e3value
model of
bitcoin
miners
17
Source: Jona Derks, Jaap Gordijn,
Arjen Siegmann. From Chaining
Blocks to Breaking Even, Electronic
Markets, Forthcoming.
16 July 2019 CBI 2019

18. Bitcoin TEAM diagram; no particular point of view
1812 August 2019
Strategic view of the architecture of the ecosystem
Value model of the state of the architecture
Technology architecture required from participants
Customer needs
• Secure P2P payment
• Anonymity for all
Participants
• Players
1. Client nodes
2. Mining nodes
3. Mining pools
4. Full node validators
5. Hardware suppliers
6. Electricity suppliers
7. Exchanges
8. Banks
• Governments
• Associations: reddit chatgroups
Value activities
1. Perform P2P transactions
2. Validation and finality
3. Risk spreading
4. Validation
5. Exchange against fiat money
6. Payment with fiat money
Reciprocity
• Value transfers?
• Commercial transactions?
• Transaction dependencies?
Cash flows
• Expenses?
• Revenues?
• Investments?
• Net present value?
Risks
• Trust assumptions?
• Market assumptions?
• Fraud vulnerability?
Data sharing
• Semantics?
• Ontologies?
• CIA requirements?
• Privacy?
Coordination
• Software transactions?
• Sequencing and trust?
• Physical dependencies?
• Choreography?
IT requirements
• Network?
• Application interfaces?
• Interoperability?
• Cybersecurity?
Strategy
• Coordination mechanism?
• Legitimate authority?
• Conflict resolution mechanisms?
• Contracts?
• Switching cost?
Value allocation
• Distribution of costs?
• Of benefits?
• Of risks?
Technology requirements
• Standardization?
• Update procedures?
Strategic game play
Value network game play
Technological game play