Ontologia przedsiębiorstwa według teorii przedmiotu Romana Ingardena

• Autorzy: Jan Andreasik

Warianty tytułu

Enterprise Ontology According to Roman Ingarden's Theory of Objects

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

W artykule zdefiniowano oryginalną ontologię przedsiębiorstwa. Ontologia ta oparta jest na aparacie pojęciowym teorii przedmiotu polskiego filozofa Romana Ingardena. W rozdziale drugim autor przedstawił definicję przedmiotu indywidualnego wg tej teorii. W definicji ujęto pojęcia: istota, forma, materia, sposób istnienia, konstytutywna natura, podmiot własności, uposażenie własności, własności, stan rzeczy, stosunek. W analogii do tych pojęć autor definiuje własne pojęcia ontologii przedsiębiorstwa: istota przedsiębiorstwa, forma systemu kompetencyjnego przedsiębiorstwa, zawartość ocen, wizja przedsiębiorstwa, system kompetencyjny przedsiębiorstwa, oceny kompetencji, kryteria oceny, trajektorie wyników, gramatyka trajektorii, stan przedsiębiorstwa, stan potencjału kompetencyjnego, stan luki kompetencyjnej, akt wyjaśniania. Wg przedstawionej ontologii przedsiębiorstwa tworzone są opisy przypadków w inteligentnym systemie rozpoznawania stanu przedsiębiorstwa projektowanego zgodnie z metodologią CBR (Case-Based Reasoning). (abstrakt oryginalny)

EN

In the paper, original ontology is defined. This ontology is based on the concept apparatus of theory of object proposed by Roman Ingarden - a Polish philosopher. In Section 2, the author presents a definition of individual object according to this theory. In this definition, the following concepts are included: essence, form, way of existence, constitutive nature, subject of properties, endowment of properties, properties, state of thing, relation. By analogy, the author defines one's own concepts of the enterprise ontology: enterprise essence, form of competence system, content of assessments, enterprise vision, enterprise competence system, competence assessment, assessment criteria, score trajectories, grammar of trajectories, enterprise condition, competence potential condition, competence gap condition, act of explanation. According to the presented enterprise ontology, there are created descriptions of cases in the intelligent system for recognition of enterprise condition designed on the basis of the CBR (Case-Based Reasoning) methodology. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Ontologia; Informacja o przedsiębiorstwie; Systemy z bazą wiedzy

EN

Ontology; Company information; Knowledge based systems

• Czasopismo: Barometr Regionalny
• Rocznik: 2009
• Numer: nr 1(15)
• Strony: 7--16

Twórcy

autor

Jan Andreasik

• Wyższa Szkoła Zarządzania i Administracji w Zamościu

Bibliografia

• ALTMAN E.I. (1993): Corporate Financial Distress and Bankruptcy, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York.
• ANDREASIK J. (2007): A Case Base Reasoning System for Predicting the Economic Situation on Enterprises - Tacit Knowledge Capture Process (Externalization), [w:] Computer Recognition Systems 2, red. M. Kurzynski et al., ASC 45, Berlin Heidelbery, s. 718-730.
• ANDREASIK J. (2008a): Enterprise Ontology - Diagnostic Approach. Proceedings of the Conference on Human System Interaction (HIS`2008), Kraków, s. 497-503, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/search.
• ANDREASIK J. (2008b): Inteligent System for Predicting Economic Situation of SME, 14th International Congress of Cybernetics and Systems of WOSC, Proceedings 14 th ICCS, red. J. Józefczyk, W. Thomas, M. Turowska, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej, Wrocław.
• ANDREASIK J. (2009): Decision Support System for Assessment of Enterprise Competence. CORES`09 6th International Conference on Computer recognition Systems (w druku).
• ARGENTI J. (1976): Corporate Collapse. The Causes and Symptoms, Mc Graw-Hill, London.
• BOCHEŃSKI J.M. (1993): Przyczynek do filozofii przedsiębiorstwa przemysłowego. Logika i filozofia. Wybór pism, PWN, Warszawa, s. 162-186.
• CARLUCCI D., SCHIUMA G. (2007): Knowledge Assets Value Creation Map Assessing Knowledge Assets Value Drivers Using AHP, Expert Systems with Applications 32, s. 814-821.
• CHOO C.W., BONTIS N. (2002): The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge, Oxford University Press.
• DIETZ J.L.G. (2006): Enterprise Ontology, Springer, Berlin Heidelbery.
• DUNN C., CHERRINGTON J.O., HOLLANDER A.S. (2003): Enterprise Information Systems. A Pattern-Based Approach, Mc Graw-Hill, Boston.
• ERTUGRUL I., KARAKASOGLU N. (2009): Performance Evaluation of Turkisch Cement Firms with Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process and TOPSIS Methods, Expert Systems with Applications 36, s. 702-715.
• GRUNINGER M., ATEFI K., FOX M.S. (2000): Ontologies to Support Process Integration in Enterprise Engineering, Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory 6, s. 381-394.
• HAMEL G., PRAHALAD C.K. (1994): Competing for the Future, Harvard Business School Press.
• HARZALLAH M., BERIO G., VERNADAT F. (2006): Analysis and Modeling of Individual Competencies: Toward Better Management of Human Resources, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, vol. 36, no. 1, s. 187-207.
• HUANG H.C. (2009): Designing a knowledge-based system for strategic planning: A balanced scorecard perspective, Expert Systems with Applications 36, s. 209-218.
• INGARDEN R. (1987): Spór o istnienie świata, t. II: Ontologia formalna, cz. I: Forma i istota, PWN, Warszawa.
• JUSSUPOVA-MARIETHOZ Y., PROBST A.R. (2007): Business Concepts Ontology for an Enterprise Performance and Competences Monitoring, Computers in Industry 58, s. 118-129.
• LEE A.H., CHEN W.C., CHANG C.J. (2008): A Fuzzy AHP and BSC Approach for Evaluating Performance of IT Department in Manufacturing Industry in Taiwan, Expert Systems with Applications 34, s. 96-107.
• LI H., SUN J. (2008): Ranking-Order Case-Based Reasoning for Financial Distress Prediction, Knowledge-Based Systems 21, s. 868-878.
• LIN M.C., WANG C.C., CHEN M.S., CHANG C.A. (2008): Using AHP and TOPSIS Approaches in Customer-Driven Product Design Process, Computers in Industry 59, s. 17-31.
• ŁOBODA K., KRUPA M., WARGACKI M., DŁUGOSZ D. (2007): E-barometr. Manual - How To Use It, http://www.wszia.edu.pl/eng/files/e-barometr-manual.pdf.
• PAL S.K., SHIU S.C.K. (2004): Foundations of Soft Case-Based Reasoning, Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken New Jersey.
• PEPIOT G., CHEIKHROUHOU N., FURBRINGER J.M., GLARDON R. (2007): UECML: Unified Enterprise Competence Modeling Language, Computers in Industry 58, s. 130-142.
• RICHARDSON B., NWANKWO S., RICHARDSON S. (1994): Understanding the Causes of Business Failure Crises: Generic Failure Types: Boiled Frogs, Drowned Frogs, Bullfrogs And Tadpoles, Management Decision, vol. 32, no. 4, s. 9-22.
• RITTGEN P. (2008): Handbook of Ontologies for Business Interaction, Information Science Reference, Hershey, New York.
• SAATY T.L. (2001): Decision Making for Leaders, RWS Publications, University of Pittsburg.
• THOMAIDIS F., MAVRAKIS D. (2006): Optimum Route of South Transcontinental Gas Pipeline in SE Europe Using AHP, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 14, s. 77-88.
• WEN W., CHEN Y.H., CHEN I.C. (2008): A Knowledge-Based Decision Support System for Measuring Enterprises Performance, Knowledge-Based Systems 21, s. 148-163.
• WOJTYSIAK J. (2007): Filozofia i życie, Znak, Kraków.
• ZOPOUNIDIS C., DIMITRAS A.I. (1998): Multicriteria Decision Aid Methods for the Prediction of Business Failure, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.

Identyfikatory

DOI

doi.org/10.56583/br.1419