Organizational Semiotics: A Normative Agent-Based Approach to VE Modelling

  • Joaquim Filipe
  • José Cordeiro
Chapter
Part of the IFIP — The International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 134)

Abstract

Organizational Semiotics is the branch of Semiotics that studies the application of the Theory of Signs in organizational contexts. Organizations are based upon co-coordinated patterns of behavior, including social norms. To achieve the required efficacy, an organization may use both norms and communication to co-ordinate the different agents involved in organizational behavior. The formalization of normative agent behavior can be done using Deontic Agency Logic. The implementation can be done using agent-oriented programming. We propose to combine Ontology Charts, Norm Analysis, Deontic Agency Logic and Agent-Oriented Programming in order to create normative agent-based models of the structure and the dynamics of Virtual Enterprises (VE). This approach seems to be more resistant to organizational change than pure technology-oriented approaches.

Keywords

Modal Logic Virtual Organization Deontic Logic Virtual Enterprise Ontological Dependency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Download to read the full chapter text

References

  1. 1.
    Aqvist, L. Deontic Logic. In D. Gabbay and F. Guenther (Eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic vol. II, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1984, pp. 605–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Austin, J. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford University Press: Oxford, England, 1962.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Belnap, N. Backwards and Forwards in the Modal Logic of Agency. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. II, no. 4, 1991, pp 777–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gibson, J. The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, USA, 1966.Google Scholar
  5. Heidegger, M. Being and Time. Harper * Row, New York, USA, 1962.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu, K. and A. Dix. Norm Governed Agents in CSCW. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Computational Semiotics, Paris, France, 1997.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Meyer, J. A Different Approach to Deontic Logic: Deontic Logic Viewed as a Variant of Dynamic Logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 29 (1), 1988, 109–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morris, C. Signs, Language and Behaviour. Braziller, New York, 1946.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Peirce, C. Collected papers of Ch. S. Peirce (8 vols.), C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss (Eds). Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1931–1958.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Santos F. and J. Carmo. Indirect Action, Influence and Responsibility. In Brown and Carmo (Eds.), Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shannon, C. and W. Weaver. The Mathematical Theory of Communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1949.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stamper, R. Information in Business and Administrative Systems. John Wiley * Sons, 1973.Google Scholar
  13. Stamper, R. Signs, Information, Norms and Systems. In Holmqvist et al. (Eds.), Signs of Work, Semiosis and Information Processing in Organizations, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 1996.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    von Wright, G. Deontic Logic. Mind, 60, 1951, pp. 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joaquim Filipe
    • 1
  • José Cordeiro
    • 1
  1. 1.Polytechnic Institute of SetúbalSchool of Technology of SetúbalPortugal

Personalised recommendations