An Exploratory Study on Collaboratively Conceptualizing Knowledge Intensive Processes

  • Juliana Baptista dos Santos França
  • Joanne Manhães Netto
  • Juliana do E.S. Carvalho
  • Flávia Maria Santoro
  • Fernanda Araujo Baião
  • Mariano Pimentel
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 113)


The relevance of the knowledge involved in organizational activities has already been addressed since earliest management theories. In this context, several works in the literature discuss how a so-called Knowledge Intensive Process (KIP) may be better understood and managed. The first step towards these goals is the identification of its elements. This is not a trivial task, since KIP involve many subjective and complex concepts that are typically tacit to stakeholders, and thus subject to different interpretations. However, a common interpretation of a KIP among all its participants is essential to prevent communication and comprehension problems. This paper presents an ontology that defines concepts and relationships of a KIP. We discuss the results of an exploratory study where a KIP was described by its participants in a collaborative manner, using a storytelling technique. The goal was to explore the use of the ontology as a basis for identifying the elements within the process description.


Knowledge Intensive Process Knowledge Intensive Process Ontology Process Representation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abecker, A.: DECOR Consortium: DECOR – Delivery of context-sensitive organizational knowledge. In: E-Work and E-Commerce. IOS Press (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cabral, L., Norton, B., Domingue, J.: The Business Process Modelling Ontology. In: 4th International Workshop on Semantic Business Process Management (SBPM 2009), Workshop at ESWC 2009, Crete (June 2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Donadel, A.C.: A method for representing knowledge-intensive processes. 2007. MSc Dissertation. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Engenharia e Gestão do Conhecimento, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brazil (2007) (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Easterbrook, S.M., Singer, J., Storey, M., e Damian, D.: Selecting Empirical Methods for Software Engineering Research. In: Shull, F., Singer, J. (eds.) Guide to Advanced Empirical Software Engineering. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    França, J.S.F., Santoro, F.M., Baião, F.A.: Towards Characterizing Knowledge Intensive Processes. In: International Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD 2012), China (accepted for publication, 2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gonçalves, J.C., Santoro, F.M., Baião, F.A.: Business Process Mining from Group Stories. In: 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, Santiago, Chile, pp. 161–166 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guarino, N.: Formal Ontology, Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation. International Journal of Human and Computer Studies 43(5/6), 625–640 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guizzardi, G.: Ontological Foundations for Structural Conceptual Models. Universal Press, The Netherlands (2005) ISBN 90-75176-81-3Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gronau, N., Weber, E.: Management of Knowledge Intensive Business Processes. In: Desel, J., Pernici, B., Weske, M. (eds.) BPM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3080, pp. 163–178. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gronau, N., Muller, C., Korf, R.: KMDL – Capturing, analyzing and improving Knowledge-intensive business process. Journal of Universal Computer Science 11(4), 452–472 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Korherr, B., List, B.: A UML 2 Profile for Event Driven Process Chains. In: Tjoa, A.M., Xu, L., Chaudhry, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st IFIP International Conference on Research and Practical Issues of Enterprise Information Systems. IFIP, vol. 205, pp. 161–172. Springer, Boston (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lopes, M., Baião, F., Siqueira, S.: Expressing Business Rules in a Foundational-based Domain Ontology: Towards Higher-quality Conceptual Models. In: International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services, Paris (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Noy, N.F., Mcguinness, D.L.: Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology. Knowledge Systems Laboratoty (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oliveira, F.F.: Ontology Collaboration and its Applications. MSc Dissertation. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Informática, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Brazil (2009) (in Portuguese)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    OMG: Business Process Modeling and Notation (BPMN). Version 2.0 (2011), (accessed in: June 26, 2011)
  16. 16.
    Papavassiliou, G., Ntioudis, S., Abecker, A., Mentzas, G.: Managing knowledge in weakly-structured administrative processes. In: 3rd European Conference on Organizational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities, 3, Atenas, Grécia, Abr. 5-6 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pereira, A., Santoro, F.: Cognitive Decision Making Process as Context Information. In: The 15th IFIP WG8.3 International Conference on Decision Support Systems (DSS 2010), Lisboa, Portugal (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Richter-Von Hagen, C., Ratz, D., Povalej, R.: Towards self-organizing Knowledge-intensive Processes. Journal of Universal Knowledge Management (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nurcan, S., Rolland, C.: Meta-modelling for cooperative processes. In: The 7th European-Japanese Conference on Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases, Toulouse, May 27-30, pp. 361–377 (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nurcan, S., Edme, M.-H.: Intention Driven Modelling for Flexible Workflow Applications. Special issue of the Software Process: Improvement and Practice Journal on Business Process Management, Development and Support 10(4) (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schlenoff, C., Gruninger, M., Tissot, F., Valois, J., Lubell, J., Lee, J.: The Process Specification Language (PSL) Overview and Version 1.0 Specification (2000), (accessed in June 27, 2011)
  22. 22.
    Schreiber, G., Akkermans, H., Anjewierden, A., Hoog, R., Shadbolt, N., De Velde, W.V., Wielinga, B.: Knowledge Engineering and Management: The CommonKADS Methedology. MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strohmaier, M., Yu, E., Horkoff, J., Aranda, J., Easterbook, S.: Analyzing Knowledge Transfer Effectiveness – An Agent-Oriented Modeling Approach. In: Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yin, R.K.: Case study research: design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications Inc. (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juliana Baptista dos Santos França
    • 1
  • Joanne Manhães Netto
    • 1
  • Juliana do E.S. Carvalho
    • 1
  • Flávia Maria Santoro
    • 1
  • Fernanda Araujo Baião
    • 1
  • Mariano Pimentel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied InformaticsFederal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UNIRIO)Brazil

Personalised recommendations