Applied Intelligence

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 49–66 | Cite as

A framework for formal modeling and analysis of organizations

  • Catholijn M. Jonker
  • Alexei SharpanskykhEmail author
  • Jan Treur
  • PInar Yolum
Open Access


A new, formal, role-based, framework for modeling and analyzing both real world and artificial organizations is introduced. It exploits static and dynamic properties of the organizational model and includes the (frequently ignored) environment. The transition is described from a generic framework of an organization to its deployed model and to the actual agent allocation. For verification and validation of the proposed model, a set of dedicated techniques is introduced. Moreover, where most computational models can handle only two or three layered organizational structures, our framework can handle any arbitrary number of organizational layers. Henceforth, real-world organizations can be modeled and analyzed, as illustrated by a case study, within the DEAL project line


Computational Modeling Analysis Organization model Logic-based Simulation Verification 


  1. 1.
    Amiguet M, Mueller J-P, Baez-Barranco J-A, Nagy A (2002) The MOCA Platform. In: Proceeding of MABS, pp 70–88Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bosse T, Jonker CM, Meij L, Treur J (2005) LEADSTO: a language and environment for analysis of dynamics by simulaTiOn. In: Eymann T, Kluegl F, Lamersdorf W, Klusch M, and Huhns MN (eds) Proceedings of the third german conference on multi-agent system technologies, MATES’05. Lecture notes in Artificial intelligence, vol. 3550, pp 165–178. Springer VerlagGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bresciani P, Giorgini P, Giunchiglia F, Mylopoulos J, Perini A (2004) Tropos: an agent-oriented software development methodology. J Autonom Agent Multi-Agent Syst 8(3):203–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burton RM, Obel B (2004) Strategic organizational diagnosis and design: developing theory for application. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carley K, Lee J-S (1998) Dynamic organizations: organizational adaptation in a changing environment. Discip Roots Strateg Manage Res 15:267–295Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clarke EM, Grumberg O, Peled DA (2000) Model checking. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dastani M, Hulstijn J, Dignum F, Meyer J-J (2004) Issues in multiagent system development. In: Proceedings of the third international joint conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems. AAMAS’04, pp 922–929Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    David R, Alla H (2005) Discrete, Continuous, and Hybrid Petri Nets. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Esteva M, Cruz D, Sierra C (2002) ISLANDER: an electronic institutions editor. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, pp 1045–1052Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferber J, Gutknecht O (1998) A meta-model for the analysis and design of organizations in multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of third international conference on multi-agent systems (ICMAS’98), IEEE Computer Society, pp 128–135.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ferber J, Gutknecht O, Michel F (2003) From agents to organizations: an organizational view of multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of 4th International Workshop AOSE, pp 214–230Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Forrester JW (1961) Industrial dynamics. Pegasus Communications, Waltham, MAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fox M, Barbuceanu M, Gruninger M, Lin J (1997) An organization ontology for enterprise modelling. In: Prietula M, Carley K, Gasser L (eds) Simulating organizations: Computational models of institutions and groups. Menlo Park CA: AAAI/MIT Press, pp 131–152Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Galton A (2003) Temporal Logic. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, URL:
  15. 15.
    Galton A (2006) Operators vs arguments: the ins and outs of reification. Synthese 150:415–441zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hannoun M, Sichman JS, Boissier O, Sayettat C (1998) Dependence relations between roles in a multi-agent system: towards the detection of inconsistencies in organization. In Proceedings of MABS, pp 169–182Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hodgson A, Roennquist R, Busetta P, Howden N (2000) Team oriented programming with simpleteam. In: Proceedings of SimTecT 2000, Sydney, Australia, pp 115–122.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hoogendoorn M, Jonker CM, Schut M, Treur J (2004) Modelling the organisation of organisational change. In: Proceedins of the sixth international workshop on agent-oriented information systems. pp. 29–46. Extended version: Jounal of Computational and Mathematical Organisation Theory. In press, 2006Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Horling B, Lesser V (2005) A survey of multi-agent organizational paradigms. Knowl Eng Rev 19(4):281–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hubner JF, Sichman JS, Boissier O (2002) A model for the structural, functional and deontic specification of organizations in multiagent systems. In: Proceedings of SBIA, pp 118–128Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jonker CM, Sharpanskykh A, Treur J, Yolum P (2006) Verifying interlevel relations within organizational models. Technical Report #TR-061909AI, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, URL:
  22. 22.
    Jonker CM, Treur J (2003) A temporal-interactivist perspective on the dynamics of mental states. Cogn Syst Res J 4(3):137–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jonker CM, Treur J, Wijngaards WCA (2003) A temporal-modelling environment for internally grounded beliefs, desires, and intentions. Cogn Syst Res J 4(3):191–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kowalski R, Sergot M (1986) A logic-based calculus of events. N Gen Comput 4:67–95Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lomi A, Larsen ER (2001) Dynamics of organizations: computational modeling and organization theories. AAAI Press, Menlo ParkGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lopez y Lopez F, Luck M, d’Inverno M (2005) A normative framework for agent-based systems. Comput Math Organ Theory 12(2–3):227–250Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Manzano M (1996) Extensions of first order logic. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mintzberg H (1979) The structuring of organizations. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Miles RE, Snow CC, Mathews JA, Coleman HJ (1997) Organizing in the knowledge age: anticipating the cellular form. Acad Manage Exec 11(4):7–20Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Morgan G (1996) Images of organizations. SAGE Publications. Thousand Oaks London New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Odell J, Parunak HVD, Bauer B (2000) Extending UML for agents. In: Proceedings of agent-oriented information systems workshop at the 17th national conference on artificial intelligence, pp 3–17Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Omicini A (2000) SODA: Societies and infrastructures in the analysis and design of agent-based systems. In: Proceedings of AOSE, pp 185–193Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Parunak HVD, Odell J (2002) Representing Social Structures in UML. In: Wooldridge M, Weiss G, Ciancarini P (eds) Proceedings of agent-oriented software engineering II workshop. Lecture notes on computer science, vol. 2222, pp 1–16. Springer-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Prietula M, Gasser L, Carley K (1997) Simulating organizations. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Reiter R (2001) Knowledge in action: logical foundations for specifying and implementing dynamical system. MIT Press, Cambridge MAGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schillo M (2003) Self-organization and adjustable autonomy: two sides of the same coin? Connect Sci 14(4):345–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schillo M, Spresny D (2005) Organization: The central concept for qualitative and quantitative scalability. In: Fischer K, Florian M (eds) Socionics: Contributions to the scalability of complex social systems, vol. 3413. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer, Berlin, pp 84–103Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Scott J (2000) Social network analysis: a handbook (2nd edn). Sage, Newberry Park, CAGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Scott WR (2001) Institutions and organizations, SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks London New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sharpanskykh A, Treur J (2006) Verifying interlevel relations within multi-agent systems. In: Proceedings of the 17th european conference on artificial intelligence, ECAI’06. IOS Press, pp 290–294Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    V.zquez-Salceda J, Aldewereld HM, Dignum FPM (2005) Norms in multiagent systems: from theory to practice. Int J Comput Syst Sci Eng 20(4):225–236Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zambonelli F, Jennings NR, Wooldridge M (2003) Developing multiagent systems: the gaia methodology. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 12(3):317–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catholijn M. Jonker
    • 1
  • Alexei Sharpanskykh
    • 2
    Email author
  • Jan Treur
    • 2
  • PInar Yolum
    • 3
  1. 1.NICIRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Artificial IntelligenceVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Computer EngineeringBogazici UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations