The complexity of service systems has raised interest in developing ontologies that contribute to the conceptual clarification of value co-creation activities and that eventually serve as knowledge representations for systems exploiting reasoning and inference on those ontologies for various practical purposes. The Resource-Event-Agent (REA) enterprise ontology shares similar aims even though it addresses the more generic domain of economic phenomena as modeled by interchange events between agents. In consequence, the REA ontology appears as a good candidate to serve as a framework for a module dealing with an event based account of service provision that could be part of a broader service system ontology. This paper reports a preliminary analysis of the applicability of the REA enterprise ontology to the service domain, according to its formulation by Geerts and McCarthy [14] [15]. Service provision can be modeled as a kind of REA transfer, and the selling of a service that will be provided in the future can be modeled by associating the selling with the commitment to provide the service associated with the transfer. Different kind of resources can be used to model intangibles that are put into action during the service encounter itself, and a separate event structure can be used to model the service encounter. The paper sketches a preliminary refinement of the REA ontology to explicitly account for these aspects.


services service systems service science ontology REA enterprise ontology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alter, S.: Service system fundamentals: Work system, value chain and life cycle. IBM Systems Journal 47(1), 71–85 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arp, R., Smith, B.: Function, role, and disposition in basic formal ontology. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual BioOntologies Meeting (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barney, J.B.: Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17, 99–120 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burt, R.: The Social Capital of Structural Holes. In: Guillén, M.F. (ed.) The New Economic Sociology: Developments in an Emerging Field, pp. 148–190. Russell Sage Foundation, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buxmann, P., Hess, T., Lehmann, S.: Software as a Service. Wirtschaftsinfor-Matik 50(6), 500–503 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, J., Benjamins, R.: What are ontologies, and why do we need them. IEEE Intelligent Systems 14(1), 20–26 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, J.S., Tsou, H.T.: Information technology adoption for service innovation practices and competitive advantage: the case of financial firms. Information Research 12(3), Paper 314 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chesbrough, H., Spohrer, J.: A research manifesto for services science. Communications of the ACM 49(7), 35–40 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Da Silveira, G., Borenstein, D., Fogliatto, F.S.: Mass customization: Literature review and research directions. International Journal of Production Economics 72(1), 1–13 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dzinkowski, R.: The measurement and management of intellectual capital: An introduction. Management Accounting 78(2), 32–36 (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Feigenbaum, J., Parkes, D.C., Pennock, D.M.: Computational challenges in e-commerce. Communications of the ACM 52(1), 70–74 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferrario, R., Guarino, N.: Towards an Ontological Foundation for Services Science. In: Domingue, J., Fensel, D., Traverso, P. (eds.) FIS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5468, pp. 152–169. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferrario, R., Guarino, N., Fernández Barrera, M.E.: Towards an Ontological Foundation for Services Science: the Legal Perspective. In: Sartor, G., Casanovas, P., Biasiotti, M., Fernández Barrera, M. (eds.) Approaches to Legal Ontologies, Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Geerts, G., McCarthy, W.E.: An Accounting Object Infrastructure For Knowledge-Based Enterprise Models. IEEE Intelligent Systems & Their Applications (July/August 1999), 89–94 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Geerts, G.L., McCarthy, W.E.: The Ontological Foundation of REA Enterprise Information Systems. Paper presented at the American Accounting Association Conference Philadelphia, PA (2000), [retrieved online November 15, 2009]
  16. 16.
    Gruber, T.: The Role of Common Ontology in Achieving Sharable, Reusable Knowledge Bases. In: Allen, J.A., Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 601–602. Morgan Kaufmann, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hepp, M.: Products and Services Ontologies: A Methodology for Deriving OWL Ontologies from Industrial Categorization Standards. International Journal on Semantic Web & Information Systems 2(1), 72–99 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lenat, D.: Cyc: A large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Communications of the ACM 38(11), 33–38 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    McCarthy, W.: The REA Accounting Model: A Generalized Framework for Accounting Systems in a Shared Data Environment. The Accounting Review, 554–578 (1982)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    von Mises, L.: Human Action: A Treatise on Economics, 3rd edn. Henry Regnery, Chicago (1966)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mora, M., Raisinghani, M., Gelman, O., Sicilia, M.A.: Onto-ServSys: a Service System Ontology. In: Demirkan, H., Spohrer, J., Krishna, V. (eds.) The Science of Service Systems/Service Systems Implementation. Service Science: Research and Innova-tions (SSRI) Series. Springer, Heidelberg (to appear)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Teboul, J.: Service is Front Stage: Positioning Services for Value Advantage. Insead Business Press, Palgrave Macmillan (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miguel-Angel Sicilia
    • 1
  • Manuel Mora
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science Dept.University of AlcaláAlcalá de Henares (Madrid)Spain
  2. 2.Department of Information SystemsAutonomous University of AguascalientesAguascalientesMexico

Personalised recommendations