Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate Knowledge Discovery and Organizational Learning: The Role, Importance, and Application of Semantic Business Process Management—The ProKEX Case

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Knowledge Discovery and Organizational Learning

Part of the book series: Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning ((IAKM,volume 2))

Abstract

One of the consequences of the changing regulatory social and economic environment is the growing demand to efficiently manage intellectual capital as corporate assets. Intellectual capital is closely coupled to knowledge that is embedded in business processes. The book provides an overview in a nutshell of ProKEX research. The goal of the ProKEX solution is to extract, organize, share and preserve knowledge embedded in organizational processes in order to (1) enrich organizational knowledge bases in a systematic and controlled way (2) support employees to be better able to acquire their job role specific knowledge, (3) and to help govern and plan human capital investment. The chapters provides deeper understanding the components, as semantic business process management, text mining, knowledge representation and transfer, adaptive testing, compliance checking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    El Sawy, Omar A., and Robert A. Josefek Jr. “Business process as nexus of knowledge.” in Holsapple, Clyde, ed Handbook on Knowledge Management 1: Knowledge matters. Vol. 1, pp. 425–436. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.

  2. 2.

    Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a method to support process improvement initiatives.

  3. 3.

    Detailed description of knowledge representation, namely domain ontology will be given in Chapter “STUDIO: ontology-centric knowledge-based system”.

  4. 4.

    See Chapter “Ontology tailoring for job role knowledge” for details.

  5. 5.

    STUDIO—e-learning platform developed by Corvinno Technology Transfer will be explained in detail in Chapter “STUDIO: ontology-centric knowledge-based system”.

  6. 6.

    ProMine will be explained in details in Chapter “ProMine: a text mining solution for concept extraction and filtering”.

  7. 7.

    See Sect. 5.4.2.

  8. 8.

    The EIT Governing Board defines the percentage of competitive funding yearly.

  9. 9.

    The business case took the 2014 Allocation of funding implemented in 2013 into consideration.

References

  • Alexopoulos, P., & Gómez-Pérez, J. M. (2012, May 27–31). Dealing with vagueness in semantic business process management through fuzzy ontologies. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Semantic Business Process Management, Heraclion, Greece. http://sbpm2012.fzi.de/images/SBPMp4.pdf

  • Alves de Medeiros, A. K., & van der Aalst, W. M. P. (2009). Process mining towards semantics. In T. S. Dillon, E. Chang, R. Meersman, & K. Sycara (Eds.), Advances in web semantics I (Lecture notes in computer science, Vol. 4891, pp. 35–80). Berlin: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89784-2_3.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous. (2005, June). ARIS value engineering-concept. Whitepaper. IDS Scheer AG. http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/eae8e311-0b01-0010-0f9c-8d26e2714a91?QuickLink=index&overridelayout=true&5003637725232

  • Argyris, C. (1992). On organisational learning. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organisation learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., Faulkner, D., & Tallman, S. (2005). Cooperative strategy—Managing alliances (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., Markóczy, L., & Cheung, T. (1994). Managerial adaptation in Chinese and Hungarian strategic alliances with culturally distinct foreign partners’. Advances in Chinese Industrial Studies, 4, 211–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, J. F., Grobelnik, M., & Mladenic, D. (Eds.). (2009). Semantic knowledge management. Integrating ontology management, knowledge discovery, and human language technologies. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, N. (2000). Common knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith, M. (1997). Disciplines of organizational learning: Contributions and critiques. Human Relations, 50(9), 1085–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith, M., & Lyles, M. A. (2011). Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge management (2nd ed.). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • El Sawy, O. A., & Josefek, R. A., Jr. (2013). Business process as nexus of knowledge. In C. Holsapple (Ed.), Handbook on knowledge management 1: Knowledge matters (Vol. 1, pp. 425–436). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 803–813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gábor, A., Kő, A., Szabó, I., Ternai, K., & Varga, K. (2013). Compliance check in semantic business process management. In Y. T. Demey & H. Panetto (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 8186, pp. 353–362). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gábor, A., & Szabó, Z. (2013). Semantic technologies in business process management. In M. Fathi (szerk.), Integration of practice-oriented knowledge technology: Trends and prospectives (pp. 17–28, 368 p.) Berlin: Springer. ISBN: 978-3-642-34470-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, March, 109–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, A. H., & Arvind Malhotra, A. H. S. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedlund, G. (1994). A model of knowledge management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 73–90. Special issue: Strategy: Search for new paradigms.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J. C., & Venkatraman, N. (1993). Strategic alignment: Leveraging information technology for transforming organisations. IBM Systems Journal, 32(1), 4–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepp, M., Leymann, F., Domingue, J., Wahler, A., & Fensel, D. (2005, October 12–18). Semantic business process management: A vision towards using semantic Web services for business process management. ICEBE 2005. IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering, pp. 535, 540. doi: 10.1109/ICEBE.2005.110.

  • Hepp, M., & Roman, D. (2007). An ontology framework for semantic business process management. In Wirtschaftsinformatik Proceedings 2007 (Paper 27).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, I., & Sabherwal, R. (2012). Relationship between intellectual capital and knowledge management: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences, 43(3), 489–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jain, A. K., & Moreno, A. (2015). Organizational learning, knowledge management practices and firm’s performance. The Learning Organization, 22(1), 14–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamasheva, A. V., Valeev, E. R., Yagudin, R. K., & Maksimova, K. R. (2015). Usage of gamification theory for increase motivation of employees. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(1S3), 77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1992). The balanced scorecard measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, January–February, 71–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action. Boston: Harvard Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Measuring the strategic readiness of intangible assets. Harvard Business Review, 82(2), 52–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karastoyanova, D., Lessen, T., Leymann, F., Ma, Z., Nitzsche, J., Wetzstein, B., Bhiri, S., Hauswirth, M., & Zaremba, M. (2008). A reference architecture for semantic business process management systems. Multi konferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik, GITO-Verlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: An integrative view and empirical examination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 179–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y., & Krogstie, J. (2010). Semantic annotation of process models for facilitating process knowledge management. International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design (IJISMD), 1(3), 45–67. doi:10.4018/jismd.2010070103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maddern, H., Smart, P. A., Maull, R. S., & Childe, S. (2014). End-to-end process management: Implications for theory and practice. Production Planning and Control: The Management of Operations, 25(16), 1303–1321. doi:10.1080/09537287.2013.832821. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2013.832821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marr, B., Schiuma, G., & Neely, A. (2004). Intellectual capital—Defining key performance indicators for organizational knowledge assets. Business Process Management Journal, 10(5), 551–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Namiri, K., & Stojanovic, N. (2007). A formal approach for internal controls compliance in business processes. 8th Workshop on Business Process Modeling, Development, and Support (BPMDS07), Trondheim, Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford university press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Örtenblad, A. (2015). Towards increased relevance: Context-adapted models of the learning organization. The Learning Organization, 22(3), 163–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowsky, P. (1992). Betriebliche Qualifikationsstrategien und Organisationales Lernen’. In W. H. Staehle & P. Conrad (Eds.), Managementforschung 2 (pp. 177–237). Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pemberton, J. D., & Stonehouse, G. H. (2000). Organisational learning and knowledge assets—An essential partnership. The Learning Organization, 7(4), 184–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrash, G. (1996). Dow’s journey to a knowledge value management culture. European Management Journal, 14(4), 365–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, L., Mansingh, G., & Osei-Bryson, K. M. (2012). Building ontology based knowledge maps to assist business process re-engineering. Decision Support Systems, 52(3), 577–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Records, L. R. (2005, September). The fusion of process and knowledge management. BPTrends. Accessed July, 2015, from http://www.bptrends.com/publicationfiles/09-05%20WP%20Fusion%20Process%20KM%20-%20Records.pdf

  • Scheer, A.-W., Abolhassan, F., Jost, W., & Kirchmer, M. (2002). Business process excellence—ARIS in practice. Berlin: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24705-0.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schiele, F., Laux, F., & Connolly, T. M. (2014). Applying a layered model for knowledge transfer to Business Process Modelling (BPM). International Journal on Advances in Intelligent Systems, 7(1 and 2), 156–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. (1992). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organisation. London: Century Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skyrme, D. J. (1999). From measurement myopia to knowledge leadership. Access Conference, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, T. A. (1997). Intellectual capital: The new wealth of organizations. New York: Doubleday/Currency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sveiby, K. E. (1989). The invisible balance sheet. Stockholm: Affarfgarblen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sydler, R., Haefliger, S., & Pruksa, R. (2014). Measuring intellectual capital with financial figures: Can we predict firm profitability? European Management Journal, 32(2), 244–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanriverdi, H. (2005). Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms. MIS Quarterly, 29(2), 311–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ternai, K., Szabó, I., & Varga, K. (2013). Ontology-based compliance checking on higher education processes. In A. Kő et al. (Eds.), EGOVIS/EDEM 2013 (LNCS, Vol. 8061, pp. 58–71). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ternai, K., & Török, M. (2011, September 8–11). Semantic modeling for automated workflow software generation—An open model. 5th International Conference on Software, Knowledge Information, Industrial Management and Applications (SKIMA 2011), Benevento, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, J. (1969). A general equilibrium approach to monetary theory. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 1(1), 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volberda, H. W. (1996). Toward the flexible form: How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments. Organization science, 7(4), 359–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, P., Davies, J., & Simperl, E. (Eds.). (2011). Context and semantics for knowledge management. Technologies for personal productivity. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, I., & Chen, J. (2014). Knowledge management driven firm performance: The roles of business process capabilities and organizational learning. Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(6), 1141–1164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Corvinno Technology Transfer Centre, Budapest, Hungary

    András Gábor

  2. Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

    Andrea Kő, Zoltán Szabó & Péter Fehér

Authors
  1. András Gábor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea Kő
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zoltán Szabó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Péter Fehér
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to András Gábor .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Corvinno Ltd., Budapest, Hungary

    András Gábor

  2. Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

    Andrea Kő

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gábor, A., Kő, A., Szabó, Z., Fehér, P. (2016). Corporate Knowledge Discovery and Organizational Learning: The Role, Importance, and Application of Semantic Business Process Management—The ProKEX Case. In: Gábor, A., Kő, A. (eds) Corporate Knowledge Discovery and Organizational Learning. Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28917-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation