Applying DEMO to model and automate a process in a workflow system: a case study in a city hall

Organizations are Complex systems. A conceptual model of the enterprise is needed that is: coherent the distinguished aspect models constitute a logical and truly integral comprehensive all relevant issues are covered consistent the aspect models are free from contradictions or irregularities concise no superfluous matters are contained in it essential it shows only the essence of the enterprise, i.e., the model abstracts from all realization and implementation issues. The world is in great need for transparency about the operation of all the systems we daily work with, ranging from the domestic appliances to the big societal institutions. In this context the field of enterprise ontology has emerged with the aim to create models that help to understand the essence of the construction and operation of complete systems; more specifically, of enterprises. Enterprise ontology arises in the way to look through the distracting and confusing appearance of an enterprise right into its deep kernel. This, from the perspective of the system designer gives him the tools needed to design a successful system in a way that’s reflects the desires and needs of the workers of the enterprise. This project’s context is the use of DEMO (Design and Engineering Methodology for Organizations) for (re)designing or (re)engineering of an enterprise, namely a process of the construction department of a city hall, the lack of a well-founded theory about the construction and operation of this processes that was the motivation behind this work. The purpose of studying applying the DEMO theory and method was to optimize the process, automating it as much as possible, while reducing paper and time spent between tasks and provide a better service to the citizens.

Anatomy of relationship significance: a critical realist exploration

Markets-as-networks (MAN) theorists contend, at least tacitly, the significance of business relationships to the firm – that is, business relationships contribute somewhat to corporate survival or growth. One does not deny the existence of significant business relationships but sustain, in contrast to the consensus within the MAN theory, that relationship significance should not be a self-evident assumption. For significance cannot be a taken-for-granted property of each and every one of the firm’s business relationships. The authors adopt explicitly a critical realist metatheoretical position in this conceptual paper and claim that relationship significance is an event of the business world, whose causes remain yet largely unidentified. Where the powers and liabilities of business relationships (i.e., relationship functions and dysfunctions) are put to work, inevitably under certain contingencies (namely the surrounding networks and markets), relationship effects ensue for the firm (often benefits in excess of sacrifices, i.e., relationship value) and as a consequence relationship significance is likely to be brought about. In addition, relationship significance can result from the dual impact that business relationships may have on the structure and powers and liabilities of the firm, that is, on corporate nature and scope, respectively.