## 6 Pilot Demonstrator
### Partner Selection during Networked Organizations Formation  
In the starting phase of a new solar plant, a detailed specification of the complex product has to be entered in the GloNet System through a specific module [47]. Based on this specification, a VO creation subsystem matches the requirements with the competences existing in the VBE to identify  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Stakeholder** & **Area** \\ \hline KI & Project developer \\ LT & EPC Contractor \\ EF & Embedded systems \\ AD & Software development \\ AJ & Service Company (security) \\ HS & Manufacture of electrical power installation \\ IW & Embedded hardware, FPGA and software \\ ES & Solar energy consultant \\ RE & Electricals and panel cleaning services \\ ST & Consultant for PV engineering in Germany \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Partial List of Stakeholders of the Charanka Plant Case Study.  
members that can be suitable candidates for the new VO. All possible VO combinations that can satisfy the specified goals are then automatically generated (see Figure 6).  
To select from the list of potential consortia the most appropriate one, the VO Planner assesses the network Value System alignment level with the involved partners in each potential consortium. Table 5 shows the list of the potential consortia ranked by the _Network Value System Alignment Level_. In this case, we can notice that consortium 1 has the lowest value and consortium 4 the highest. Consortium 4 is formed by Organizations KI, AJ, HS, IW, and STS, as shown in Figure 6.  
Using V-Align it is also possible to get a report of the value system alignment assessment for each consortium (see Table 6, for the case of Consortium 4). In this example organization ST has a potential of conflicts with organizations KI, IW, and HS.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Member 1** & **Member 2** & **Shared Level** & **Potential for Conflicts Level** & **Synergy Level** \\ \hline Organization KI & Organization IW & 33 & 0 & 60 \\ Organization KI & Organization AJ & 65 & 0 & 22 \\ Organization KI & Organization HS & 54 & 0 & 19 \\ Organization KI & Organization ST & 78 & 16 & 12 \\ Organization IW & Organization AJ & 76 & 0 & 98 \\ Organization IW & Organization HS & 0 & 0 & 31 \\ Organization IW & Organization ST & 54 & 33 & 98 \\ Organization AJ & Organization HS & 54 & 0 & 34 \\ Organization AJ & Organization ST & 100 & 0 & 67 \\ Organization HS & Organization ST & 54 & 33 & 57 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 6: Detailed Results for Potential Consortium 4.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**VO—Charanka Park**} \\ \hline
**Goals/Competences** & **Potential Consortium** & **Network Value System** & **Ranked Network Value** \\
**Required** & & **Alignment Level** & **System Alignment Level** \\ \hline Optical & Potential Consortium 4 & 96 & 100 \\ String Box & Potential Consortium 3 & 83 & 86 \\ Power Plant & Potential Consortium 6 & 75 & 78 \\ Transformer & Potential Consortium 2 & 71 & 74 \\ String & Potential Consortium 5 & 68 & 71 \\ Cleaning Solution & Potential Consortium 1 & 67 & 70 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 5: VO’s Goals and Potential Consortia.  
Figure 6: Potential Consortium Analysis.  
This potential misalignment is caused by the negative influence between the _agility_ and _reliability_ core-values, as evidenced in the core-values members' map of Figure 7. However, from a global perspective, it can be noticed that the five members of this consortium are well aligned in terms of values, having high scores in the synergy level and shared values level.  
In any case, the final decision regarding the consortium to be chosen will be made by the VO planner. As such, V-Align can be considered as a decision-support tool.