Descriptive Lightweight Learning Organization Ontology

  • Mijalce SantaEmail author
  • Selmin Nurcan
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 275)


The learning organization provides a clear competitive advantage. However, the concept has conceptual and operational imprecision. This paper presents descriptive lightweight learning organization ontology in an attempt to create a shared understanding about the learning organization. The ontology identifies the core concepts and relations. Each concept and relation definitions are given and explained. The classes Entity and Level and the relations embeds_in and transcend_and_include are identified as central for the learning organization ontology.


learning organization lightweight ontology descriptive ontology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gruber, T.R.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowl. Acquis. 5, 199–220 (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gruninger, M., Lee, J.: Ontology. Commun. ACM. 45, 39–41 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Holsapple, C.W., Joshi, K.D.: A formal knowledge management ontology: Conduct, activities, resources, and influences. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 55, 593–612 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Boston Consulting Group: Creating People Advantage 2010: How Companies Can Adapt Their HR Practices for Volatile Times (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    The Boston Consulting Group: Creating People Advantage: How to Address HR Challenges Worldwide Through 2015 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pedler, M., Burgoyne, J., Boydell, T.: The Learning Company: A Strategy for Sustainable Development. McGraw-Hill, London (1991)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garvin, D.A.: Learning in Action: A Guide to Putting the Learning Organization to Work. Harvard Business Press, Boston (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smith, P.A.C., Tosey, P.: Assessing the learning organization: part 1- theoretical foundations. Learn. Organ. 6, 70–75 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tosey, P.: The hunting of the learning organization: A paradoxical journey. Manag. Learn. 36, 335 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ulrich, D., Jick, T., Glinow, M.A.V.: High-impact learning: Building and diffusing learning capability. Organ. Dyn. 22, 52–66 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wacker, J.G.: A theory of formal conceptual definitions: developing theory-building measurement instruments. J. Oper. Manag. 22, 629–650 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jasper, R., Uschold, M.: A framework for understanding and classifying ontology applications. In: Proceedings 12th Int. Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modelling, and Management KAW, pp. 16–21 (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davies, J.: Lightweight Ontologies. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications, pp. 197–229. Springer, Netherlands (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giunchiglia, F., Zaihrayeu, I.: Lightweight ontologies (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guarino, N.: Helping People (and Machines) Understanding Each Other: The Role of Formal Ontology. In: Meersman, R. (ed.) OTM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3290, pp. 599–599. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Obrst, L.: Ontological Architectures. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications, pp. 27–66. Springer, Netherlands (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Giunchiglia, F., Dutta, B., Maltese, V.: Faceted lightweight ontologies. In: Borgida, A.T., Chaudhri, V.K., Giorgini, P., Yu, E.S. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications. LNCS, vol. 5600, pp. 36–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mika, P.: Ontologies Are Us: A Unified Model of Social Networks and Semantics. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 522–536. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grimm, V., Railsback, S.F.: Pattern-oriented modelling: a “multi-scope” for predictive systems ecology. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 367, 298–310 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grimm, V., Revilla, E., Berger, U., Jeltsch, F., Mooij, W.M., Railsback, S.F., Thulke, H.-H., Weiner, J., Wiegand, T., DeAngelis, D.L.: Pattern-Oriented Modeling of Agent-Based Complex Systems: Lessons from Ecology. Science 310, 987–991 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Giesecke, J., McNeil, B.: Transitioning to the Learning Organization. Libr. Trends. 53, 54 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Watkins, K.E., Marsick, V.J.: Sculpting the Learning Organization: Lessons in the Art and Science of Systemic Change. Jossey-Bass (1993)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Argyris, C.: On Organizational Learning. Wiley-Blackwell (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Senge, P.M.: The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Doubleday Business (1990)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Evans, S.: Revisiting the learning organisation. Work Study 47, 201 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Uschold, M., King, M., Moralee, S., Zorgios, Y.: The Enterprise Ontology. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 13, 31–89 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nonaka, I.: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation. Organ. Sci. 5, 14–37 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre de Recherche en InformatiqueUniversité Paris I – Panthéon SorbonneParisFrance
  2. 2.Faculty of Economics – SkopjeSs Cyril and Methodius UniversitySkopjeMacedonia

Personalised recommendations