Software-Defined Networking Adoption Model: Dimensions and Determinants
محورهای موضوعی : IT Strategy
Elham Ziaeipour
1
,
Ali Rajabzadeh Ghotri
2
,
Alireza Taghizadeh
3
1 - Department of Management of Information Technology, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Faculty of Management and Economics, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran. (Visiting Professor at SRb)
3 - Faculty of Computer Science, Parand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
کلید واژه: Adoption, Service provider, Software Defined Network, Technology,
چکیده مقاله :
The recent technical trend in the field of communication networks shows a paradigm change from hardware to software. Software Defined Networking (SDN) as one of the enablers of digital transformation could have prominent role in this paradigm shift and migration to Knowledge-based network. In this regard, telecom operators are interested in deploying SDN to migrate their infrastructure from a static architecture to a dynamic and programmable platform. However, it seems that they do not consider SDN as one of their priorities and still depend on traditional methods to manage their network (especially in some developing countries such as Iran). Since the first step in applying new technologies is to accept them, we have proposed a comprehensive SDN adoption model with the mixed-method research methodology. At first, the theoretical foundations related to the research problem were examined. Then, based on Grounded theory, in-depth interviews were conducted with 12 experts (including university professors and managers of the major telecom operators). In result, more than a thousand initial codes were determined, which in the review stages and based on semantic commonalities, a total of 112 final codes, 14 categories and 6 themes have been extracted using open, axial and selective coding. Next, in order to confirm the indicators extracted from the qualitative part, the fuzzy Delphi method has been used. In the end, SPSS and SmartPLS 3 software were used to analyze the data collected from the questionnaire and to evaluate the fit of the model as well as confirm and reject the hypotheses.
The recent technical trend in the field of communication networks shows a paradigm change from hardware to software. Software Defined Networking (SDN) as one of the enablers of digital transformation could have prominent role in this paradigm shift and migration to Knowledge-based network. In this regard, telecom operators are interested in deploying SDN to migrate their infrastructure from a static architecture to a dynamic and programmable platform. However, it seems that they do not consider SDN as one of their priorities and still depend on traditional methods to manage their network (especially in some developing countries such as Iran). Since the first step in applying new technologies is to accept them, we have proposed a comprehensive SDN adoption model with the mixed-method research methodology. At first, the theoretical foundations related to the research problem were examined. Then, based on Grounded theory, in-depth interviews were conducted with 12 experts (including university professors and managers of the major telecom operators). In result, more than a thousand initial codes were determined, which in the review stages and based on semantic commonalities, a total of 112 final codes, 14 categories and 6 themes have been extracted using open, axial and selective coding. Next, in order to confirm the indicators extracted from the qualitative part, the fuzzy Delphi method has been used. In the end, SPSS and SmartPLS 3 software were used to analyze the data collected from the questionnaire and to evaluate the fit of the model as well as confirm and reject the hypotheses.
[1] R.Jain, “Trends and Issues in Softwarization of Networks: What’s In, What’s Out,” IEEE Conf. Netw. Softwarization, Washingt. Univ. Saint Louis, 2018.
[2] D. Kreutz, F. M. V Ramos, P. E. Verissimo, C. E. Rothenberg, S. Azodolmolky, and S. Uhlig, “Software-defined networking: A comprehensive survey,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 14–76, 2014. [3] R. Gaikwad, V., Rake, “Software defined networking Market Statistics:2027,”2020. https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/software-defined-networking-market.
[4] J. H. Cox et al., “Advancing software-defined networks: A survey,” IEEE Access, vol. 5, pp. 25487–25526, 2017.
[5] N. Bhalani, M. Chavan, “A Survey on Software Defined Network with 5G”, International Journal of scientific & Technology Research, 2020. [6] A. khamseh, M. Lialestani, and reza radfar, “Digital Transformation Model, Based on Grounded Theory,” J. Inf. Syst. Telecomm. , no. 1, pp. 275–284, 2021, doi: 10.52547/jist.9.36.275. [7] S. Brinker, “Martec’s Law: the greatest management challenge of the 21st century,” Chiefmartec. com, 2016.
[8] M. Abdulrab, “Factors Affecting Acceptance and the Use of Technology in Yemeni Telecom Companies,” Int. Trans. J. Eng. Manag. Appl. Sci. Technol., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1–16, 2020.
[9] M. K. Chang and W. Cheung, “Determinants of the intention to use Internet/WWW at work: a confirmatory study,” Inf. Manag., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2001. [10] F. Nouri, R., Hatami, M. and Ebrahimian, “Effective factors on the acceptance of information technology and its impact on human resources,” Hum. Resour. Manag. Res. Imam Hossein Univ., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 27–152, 2018.
[11] P. C. Lai, “The literature review of technology adoption models and theories for the novelty technology,” JISTEM-Journal Inf. Syst. Technol. Manag., vol. 14, pp. 21–38, 2017.
[12] F. B. A. Rahman, M. H. M. Hanafiah, M. Salehuddin, M. Zahari, and L. B. Jipiu, “Systematic Literature Review on The Evolution of Technology Acceptance and Usage Model used in Consumer Behavioural Study,” Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci., vol. 11, no. 13, pp. 272–298, 2021.
[13] A. M. Momani and M. Jamous, “The evolution of technology acceptance theories,” Int. J. Contemp. Comput. Res., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 51–58, 2017.
[14] J. Corbin and A. Strauss, Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage publications, 2014.
[15] A. shirmarz and A. Ghaffari, “An Autonomic Software Defined Network (SDN) Architecture With Performance Improvement Considering,” J. Inf. Syst. Telecomm. , no. 1, pp. 121–129, 2020, doi: 10.29252/jist.8.30.121. [16] A. S. Thyagaturu, A. Mercian, M. P. McGarry, M. Reisslein, and W. Kellerer, “Software defined optical networks (SDONs): A comprehensive survey,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 2738–2786, 2016.
[17] ETSI, “Improved Operator experience through Experiential Networked Intelligence (ENI)”, 2017, 1st Edition, ISBN No. 979-10-92620-16-0.
[18] ONF, “NG-SDN™”, Open Networking Foundation, 2022, Available: https://opennetworking.org/reference-designs/ng-sdn/.
[19] Data Bridge Market, “Global Software-Defined Networking Market – Industry Trends and Forecast to 2028,”2021. https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/reports/global-sdn-market. [20] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS Q., pp. 425–478, 2003.
[21] IGI Global, “What is Technology Adoption Model? https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/technology-acceptance-model/29484
[22] E. M. Rogers and F. F. Shoemaker, “Communication of Innovations; A Cross-Cultural Approach.,” 1971.
[23] F. Masimba and T. Zuva, “Individual Acceptance of Technology: A Critical Review of Technology Adoption Models and Theories,” Indiana J. Humanit. Soc. Sci., vol. 2, no. 9, pp. 37–48, 2021.
[24] W. Russ, “The Relationship between Technology Adoption Determinants and the Intention to Use Software-Defined Networking.” Walden University, 2021.
[25] C. Sayginer and T. Ercan, “Understanding determinants of cloud computing adoption using an integrated diffusion of innovation (doi)-technological, organizational and environmental (toe) model,” Humanit. Soc. Sci. Rev., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 91–102, 2020.
[26] V. Chergarova, J. Bezerra, J. Ibarra, and H. Morgan, “Factors influencing the adoption of Software Defined Networking by Research and Educational Networks,” 2019.
[27] R. Jayaraman, V., Manickam, A., Rajappa, “The Role of SDN in Network Transformation,” 2019. https://www.tataelxsi.com/news-and-events/the-role-of-sdn-in-network-transformation.
[28] N. Shah, P. Giaccone, D. B. Rawat, A. Rayes, and N. Zhao, “Solutions for adopting software defined network in practice,” International Journal of Communication Systems, vol. 32, no. 17. Wiley Online Library, p. e3990, 2019.
[29] S. Bekele, B., Kriger, “SP NFV/SDN Adoption”. STL Partners Research for Cisco,” 2017.
[30] S. S. S. Mokhtar, A. S. B. Mahomed, Y. A. Aziz, and S. A. Rahman, “Industry 4.0: the importance of innovation in adopting cloud computing among SMEs in Malaysia,” Polish J. Manag. Stud., vol. 22, 2020.
[31] P. Maroufkhani, M.-L. Tseng, M. Iranmanesh, W. K. W. Ismail, and H. Khalid, “Big data analytics adoption: Determinants and performances among small to medium-sized enterprises,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 54, p. 102190, 2020.
[32] M. Tsourela and D.-M. Nerantzaki, “An internet of things (IoT) acceptance model. Assessing consumer’s behavior toward IoT products and applications,” Futur. Internet, vol. 12, no. 11, p. 191, 2020.
[33] A. M. Aranda, “Software-defined networking: Current state, adoption factors and future impact on network engineers,” 2016.
[34] S. Mahankali, I. I. T. Cloud Network Engineer, and S. Rungta, “Adopting Software-Defined Networking in the Enterprise,” White Pap. April, 2014.
[35] R. Sahay, W. Meng, and C. D. Jensen, “The application of software defined networking on securing computer networks: A survey,” J. Netw. Comput. Appl., vol. 131, pp. 89–108, 2019.
[36] S. Seshadrinathan and S. Chandra, “Exploring Factors Influencing Adoption of Blockchain in Accounting Applications using Technology–Organization–Environment Framework,” J. Int. Technol. Inf. Manag., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 30–68, 2021.
[37] D. Katsianis, I. Neokosmidis, A. Pastor, L. Jacquin, and G. Gardikis, “Factors influencing market adoption and evolution of NFV/SDN Cybersecurity Solutions. Evidence from SHIELD Project,” in 2018 European Conference on Networks and Communications (EuCNC), 2018, pp. 1–5.
[38] M. S. Alhilal, A. M. Aldammas, and A. Y. Alnasheri, “Investigation of Critical Success Factors for Adopting Software-Defined Networking,” in 2018 1st International Conference on Computer Applications & Information Security (ICCAIS), 2018, pp. 1–6.
[39] B. Gupta, S. Dasgupta, and A. Gupta, “Adoption of ICT in a government organization in a developing country: An empirical study,” J. Strateg. Inf. Syst., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 140–154, 2008.
[40] A. Bazargan, Introduction to qualitative research methods and a combination of common approaches in behavioral sciences. Tehran: Didar, 2009.
[41] J. W. Creswell, Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative. Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002.
[42] E. Ziaeipour, “Explaining the adoption process of software-oriented networks (SDN) using the Grounded Theory and systems approach,” J. Inf. Communication. Technol., vol. 14, no. 52, pp. 172–194, 2022.
[43] C.-H. Cheng and Y. Lin, “Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., vol. 142, no. 1, pp. 174–186, 2002.
[44] C.-H. Wu and W.-C. Fang, “Combining the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and the fuzzy Delphi method for developing critical competences of electronic commerce professional managers,” Qual. Quant., vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 751–768, 2011.
[45] J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and R. R. Sinkovics, “The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing,” in new challenges to international marketing, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2009.
[46] J. F. Hair, D. J. Ortinau, and D. E. Harrison, Essentials of marketing research, vol. 2. McGraw-Hill/Irwin New York, NY, 2010.
[47] C. M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, R. Schlittgen, and C. R. Taylor, “PLS path modeling and evolutionary segmentation,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 1318–1324, 2013.
[48] C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error,” J. Mark. Res., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39–50, 1981.
[49] M. Gall, W. Borg, and J. Gall, “Quantitative and qualitative research methods in educational sciences and psychology,” Vol. I. Transl. by Ahmad Reza Nasr al. Tehran SAMAT Shahid Beheshti Univ. Publ., 2004.
[50] M. Abbaszadeh, “Validity and reliability in qualitative researches,” J. Appl. Sociol., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 19–34, 2012.
[51] K. Charmaz, Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage, 2006.
[52] J. Maxwell, “Understanding and validity in qualitative research,” Harv. Educ. Rev., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 279–301, 1992.
[53] A. Kamanghad, G. Hashemzade, M. A. kazemi, and N. Shadnoosh, “Assessing the Company’s E-Readiness for Implementing Mobile-CRM System,” J. Inf. Syst. Telecomm., no. 1, pp. 65–73, 2019, doi: 10.7508/jist.2019.01.006.
