Business Ontologies

The business domain has many facets and there is no single approach that can claim general validity in the whole domain. Instead a number of approaches that are rooted in different fields of research, e.g. agent systems, language action, socio-instrumental action etc., compete for an appropriate conceptualization We give an overview of them and provide some deeper insight into two of them, socio-instrumental pragmatism and enterprise ontology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 117.69 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 158.24 Price includes VAT (France)

Hardcover Book EUR 158.24 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Similar content being viewed by others

Operations Research Ontology for the Integration of Analytic Methods and Transactional Data

Digging into Business Process Meta-models: A First Ontological Analysis

A Formal Description of a Mapping from Business Processes to Agents

References

• Anderson, P. 1999. Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science 10(3):216–232. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Austin, J.L. 1975. How to do things with words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
• Bertolazzi, P., C. Krusich, M. Missikoff. 2001. An approach to the definition of a core enterprise ontology: CEO. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Open Enterprise Solutions: Systems, Experiences, and Organizations (OES-SEO 2001), Rome, 14–15 Sep 2001. Google Scholar
• Bugaite, D., and O. Vasilecas. 2005. Framework on application domain ontology transformation into set of business rules. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies – CompSysTech 2005. Google Scholar
• Bunge, M. 1977. Ontology I: The Furniture of the World. Dordrecht: Reidel. Google Scholar
• Carmichael, D.J., J. Kay, and B. Kummerfeld. 2004. Personal ontologies for feature selection in intelligent environment visualisations. In Artificial intelligence in mobile systems2004, eds. J. Baus, C. Kray, and R. Porzel, 44–51. Saarbrücken, Germany: Universität des Saarlandes. Google Scholar
• Corbett, D. 2003. Comparing and merging ontologies: A concept type hierarchy approach. In Foundations of intelligent systems, eds. N. Zhong, Z.W. Ras, S. Tsumoto, and E. Suzuki. Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium, ISMIS 2003. Maebashi City, Japan, 28–31 Oct 2003, 75–82. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
• Davern, M. 1997. Social networks and economic sociology. A proposed research agenda for a more complete social science. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 56(3):287–301. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dieng, R., and S. Hug. 1998. Comparison of > represented through conceptual graphs. In ECAI 98. 13th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, ed. H. Prade, 341–345. New York, NY: Wiley. Google Scholar
• Dietz, J.L.G. 2006. Enterprise ontology: Theory and methodology. Heidelberg: Springer. BookGoogle Scholar
• Dietz, J.L.G., and N. Habing. 2004. A meta ontology for organizations. In On the move to meaningful internet systems 2004: OTM 2004 workshops, eds. R. Meersman, Z. Tari, A. Corsaro, P. Herrero, M. S. Pérez, M. Radenkovic, V. Robles, C. Santoro, A. Albani, K. Turowski, M. Jarrar, A. Gangemi, E. Duval, P. Spyns, and A. Palinginis, Proceedings of the OTM Confederated International Workshops and Posters, GADA, JTRES, MIOS, WORM, WOSE, PhDS, and INTEROP 2004, Agia Napa, Cyprus, 25–29 Oct 2004, vol. 3292, 533–543. Berlin: Springer. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Domingue, J. 1998. Tadzebao and WebOnto: Discussing, browsing, and editing on the web. In eds. B. Gaines, and M. Musen. Proceedings of the 11th Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop, 18–23 Apr, Canada: Banff. Google Scholar
• Embley, D., B. Kurtz, and S. Woodfield. 1992. Object oriented system analysis: A model-driven approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Yourdon Press. Google Scholar
• Farquhar, A., R. Fikes, and J. Rice. 1997. The Ontolingua server: Tools for collaborative ontology construction. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 46:707–728. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Flood, R.L. 2005. Unleashing the “open system” metaphor. Systemic Practice and Action Research 1(3):313–318. Google Scholar
• Fox, M.S., and M. Gruninger. 1998. Enterprise modeling. AI Magazine 19(3):109–121. Google Scholar
• Gareth, M. 1997. Images of organization. London: Sage. Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. 1986. The constitution of society. Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Google Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G. 2001. Communicative vs material actions: Instrumentality, sociality and comprehensibility. Paper presented at the 6th International Workshop on the Language Action Perspective (LAP2001), Montreal. Google Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G. 2002. Anchoring scientific abstractions – Ontological and linguistic determination following socio-instrumental pragmatism. Paper presented at the European Conference on Research Methods in Business and Management (ECRM 2002), Reading, 29–30 Apr 2002. Google Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G. 2005. Socio-instrumental pragmatism: A theoretical synthesis for pragmatic conceptualisation in information systems. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Action in Language, Organisations and Information Systems (ALOIS), University of Limerick. Google Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G., and P. Ågerfalk. 2000. Actability: A way to understand information systems pragmatics. Paper presented at the 3rd International Workshop on Organisational Semiotics, Stafford, 4 July 2000. Google Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G., and P. Ågerfalk. 2005. IT artefacts as socio-pragmatic instruments: Reconciling the pragmatic, semiotic, and technical. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction 1(3):29–43. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G., and M. Lind. 2004. Developing e-interactions – A framework for business capabilities and exchanges. Paper presented at the 12th European Conference on Information Systems, Turku, Finland, 14–16 June 2004. Google Scholar
• Goldkuhl, G., A. Röstlinger, and E. Braf. 2001. Organisations as practice systems – integrating knowledge, signs, artefacts and action. Paper presented at the Organisational Semiotics, IFIP 8.1 Conference, Montreal. Google Scholar
• Gordijn, J. 2004. E-business value modelling using the e3-value ontology. In Value creation form e-business models, ed. W.L. Curry, 98–127, Chapter 5. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Guarino, N. 1998. Formal ontology and information systems. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS’98), 3–15. Amsterdam: IOS Press. Google Scholar
• Guizzardi, G., G. Wagner, N. Guarino, and M.V. Sinderen. 2004. An ontologically well-founded profile for UML conceptual models. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, CAiSE 2004, vol. 3084, 112–126, Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
• Haase, P., A. Hotho, L. Schmidt-Thieme, and Y. Sure. 2005. Collaborative and usage-driven evolution of personal ontologies. In eds. A. Gómez-Pérez, and J. Euzenat. Proceedings of the 2nd European Semantic Web Conference, Heraklion, Greece, 2005 Vol. 3532, 486–499, Heidelberg: Springer. Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action 1 – reason and the rationalization of society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Google Scholar
• Halpin, T.A. 2001. Information modeling and relational databases. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann. Google Scholar
• Heflin, J., and J. Hendler. 2000. Dynamic ontologies on the web. In Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), 443–449, Menlo Park, CA: AAAI/MIT Press. Google Scholar
• Huhns, M.N., and L.M. Stephens. 1999. Personal ontologies. IEEE Internet Computing 3(5):85–87. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Jensen, M.C., and W.H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3:305–360. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kendall, J.E., and K.E. Kendall. 1993. Metaphors and methodologies: Living beyond the systems machine. MIS Quarterly 17(2):149–171. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Klein, B., R. Crawford, and A. Alchian. 1978. Vertical integration, appropriable rents, and the competitive contracting process. Journal of Law and Economics 21:297–326. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Law, J. 1992. Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy and heterogeneity. Systemic Practice and Action Research 5(4):379–393. Google Scholar
• Luhmann, N. 1990. The autopoiesis of social systems. In Essays on self-reference, ed. N. Luhmann, 1–21. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Google Scholar
• OMG. 2005. Unified modeling language: Superstructure. Version 2.0, August 2005, Needham, MA: OMG. Retrieved, June 20 2006, from http://www.uml.org/. Google Scholar
• OMG. 2006. Unified modeling language: Infrastructure. Version 2.0, March 2006, Needham, MA: OMG. Retrieved, June 20 2006, from http://www.uml.org/. Google Scholar
• Osterwalder, A. 2004. The business model ontology – a proposition in a design science approach. Ph.D. thesis, University of Lausanne, Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales HEC: 173. Google Scholar
• Rose, J., and M. Jones. 2004. The double dance of agency: A socio-theoretic account of how machines and humans interact. Paper presented at the ALOIS Workshop: Action in Language, Organisations and Information Systems, Linköping. Google Scholar
• Ross, S. 1973. The economic theory of agency: The principal’s problem. American Economic Review 63(2):134–139. Google Scholar
• Scott, A. 1997. Modernity’s machine metaphor. The British Journal Of Sociology 48(4):561–575. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Searle, J.R. 1997. Speech acts – An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
• Searle, J.R. 1999. Expression and meaning. Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
• Senge, P.M. 1990. The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday. Google Scholar
• Uschold, M., M. King, S. Moralee, and Y. Zorgios. 1998. The enterprise ontology. Knowledge Engineering Review 13(1):31–89. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Verharen, E. 1997. A language-action perspective on the design of cooperative information agents. Tilburg: Katholieke Universiteit Brabant. Google Scholar
• Walsham, G. 1997. Actor-network theory: Current status and future prospects. In Information systems and qualitative research, eds. A.S. Lee, J.Liebenau, and J.I. Degross. London: Chapman & Hall. Google Scholar
• Williamson, O.E. 1981. The modern corporation: Origins, evolution, attributes. Journal of Economic Literature 19:1537–1568. Google Scholar
• Williamson, O.E. 1983. Markets and hierarchies. New York, NY: Free Press. Google Scholar
• Williamson, O.E. 1998. The economic institutions of capitalism. New York, NY: Free Press. Google Scholar
• Wittgenstein, L. 2001. Tractatus logico-philosophicus. London: Routledge. Google Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School, Leuven, Belgium Peter Rittgen
2. University of Borås, Borås, Sweden Peter Rittgen

1. Peter Rittgen

Corresponding author

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

1. Dipto. Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale, Universita di Trento, Via Verdi 26, Trento, 38100, Italy Roberto Poli
2. 23rd Place NE., 13544, Seattle, 98125-3325, Washington, USA Michael Healy
3. Computer Technology Institute, Hellenic Open University &, N. Kazantzaki Str., Patras, 265 00, Greece Achilles Kameas

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Netherlands

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rittgen, P. (2010). Business Ontologies. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds) Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8847-5_18

Download citation

• .RIS
• .ENW
• .BIB

• DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8847-5_18
• Published : 12 August 2010
• Publisher Name : Springer, Dordrecht
• Print ISBN : 978-90-481-8846-8
• Online ISBN : 978-90-481-8847-5
• eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Get shareable link

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Copy to clipboard

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative