# Business Intelligence Architecture Informed by Organisational Semiotics

John Effah, Prince Kwame Senyo, Stephen Opoku-Anokye

► To cite this version:

John Effah, Prince Kwame Senyo, Stephen Opoku-Anokye. Business Intelligence Architecture Informed by Organisational Semiotics. 18th International Conference on Informatics and Semiotics in Organisations (ICISO), Jul 2018, Reading, United Kingdom. pp.268-277, 10.1007/978-3-319-94541-5_27. hal-01920720

HAL Id: hal-01920720

https://inria.hal.science/hal-01920720

Submitted on 13 Nov 2018

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Business Intelligence Architecture Informed by
Organisational Semiotics

John Effah¹, Prince Kwame Senyo¹,² [0000-0001-7126-3826] and Stephen Opoku-Anokye²

¹ Department of Operations and Management Information Systems, University of Ghana
Business School, Ghana,

² Informatics Research Centre, Henley Business School, University of Reading, Reading,
United Kingdom

jeffah,pksenyo{@ug.edu.gh},stephen.opoku-anokye@henley.ac.uk

**Abstract.** This study draws on organisational semiotics and design science meth-
odology informed by abductive reasoning to develop a business intelligence (BI)
architecture. Organisational semiotics research has so far paid limited attention
to BI in general and its architecture in particular. Moreover, BI research in infor-
mation systems (IS) focuses largely on either technical or social activities. Or-
ganisational semiotics offers frameworks and model which can be used to de-
velop a BI architecture with combined technical and social views. This study
therefore develops a BI architecture based on knowledge hierarchy, semiotic
framework, and semiotic activity hierarchy. The paper uses a manufacturing
company's BI experience as a case study to inform and evaluate the proposed
architecture. The study's contribution stems from its development of the organi-
sational semiotics informed BI architecture and its implications for research and
practice.

**Keywords:** Organisational Semiotics, Business Intelligence, Knowledge Hier-archy, Forma-Informa-Performa, Semiotic Framework First Section

# 1 Introduction

Following technological advancement in data infrastructure as well as tools and tech-
niques for analytics and data mining, business intelligence (BI) has increasingly at-
tracted research attention in information systems [5]. Recent conceptualizations view
BI as the ability to acquire and apply actionable knowledge to make decisions [8]. As
a multidisciplinary concept, BI lacks a consensual definition [7, 16]. However, in in-
formation systems, BI refers to the use of information and communication technologies
(ICTs) for data gathering and storage to generate actionable knowledge for decision
making [15, 17]. BI has generally been viewed as a process [15]. However, this study
argues that beyond being a process, BI can also be an output as actionable knowledge.

Thus far, organisational semiotics research on BI remains limited. The few studies
on the subject have focused largely on data visualization [11, 13], which is only a com-
ponent of the final stage of the BI process. As a result, not much is known about BI
process in organisational semiotics. A recent study on information architecture [21]
makes a case for increasing the scope of BI research in organisational semiotics. The
current study responds to such a call by developing a semiotic informed BI architecture.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 reviews related works on knowledge hierarchy and BI systems. Section 3 presents semiotic framework and semiotic activity hierarchy as the study's theoretical foundation. Section 4 presents BI experience of a manufacturing firm's human resource intelligence system as a case for developing and evaluating the BI architecture. Section 5 develops the BI architecture based on the related works, the theoretical foundation and the case study through an iterative process. Section 6 discusses the results of the study. Finally, Section 7 provides the conclusion with suggestions for future research.

2 Related Works

2.1 The Knowledge Hierarchy

Knowledge hierarchy [1, 18], also called information hierarchy or wisdom hierarchy, represents the structural and functional relationships between data, information, knowledge and sometimes wisdom [4, 18]. Figure 1 shows the knowledge hierarchy and its layers.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. Knowledge Hierarchy [18]</figcaption></figure>

Like knowledge itself, concepts within the hierarchy lack consensual definitions across disciplines. Table 1 however offers generic definitions as used in information systems [e.g., 4, 18]. Data refers to symbolic facts captured and stored in media; information constitutes statements with meanings; knowledge refers to true statements that are socially believed and verified; while wisdom refers to applied knowledge judged to be right and socially acceptable.

The functional perspective shows the hierarchy as dynamic interactions between the
elements. Thus, data undergoes processing to derive information, which is analyzed to
generate knowledge, which is judged or assessed to get wisdom. Knowledge hierarchy
has been applied with semiotic framework in organisational semiotics research [e.g.,
2]. However, its relationship with BI remains limited. The current study therefore
adapts the knowledge hierarchy to derive an intelligence hierarchy as part of the process for developing the BI architecture.

<table><caption>**Table 1.** Definitions of knowledge hierarchy concepts</caption><thead><tr><td>Element</td><td>Meaning</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Wisdom</td><td>judgements that are socially desirable</td></tr><tr><td>Knowledge</td><td>beliefs that have been socially verified to be true</td></tr><tr><td>Information</td><td>meanings derived from processed data</td></tr><tr><td>Data</td><td>Symbolic facts that have been captured</td></tr></tbody></table>

## 2.2 Business Intelligence Systems

Business intelligence systems [17] refer to a collection of technologies and techniques for capturing, preparing and transforming data into knowledge for decisions. Figure 2 shows a framework for BI system and related components.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2.** Business intelligence system [17]</figcaption></figure>

Figure 2 presents four stages of the BI system and an embedded three-layer model. The stages comprise data, information, knowledge and decisions. Each stage has underlying techniques supported by relevant tools. Thus, first data collection and consolidation techniques use ETL, data warehouse and database tools to generate data. Second, data analyses and reporting techniques depend on OLAP and query tools to generate information. Finally, data drilling uses data mining tools to generate knowledge to support decisions for improved business processes and competitiveness.

A key limitation of the intelligence system is the failure to conceptualise and incorporate intelligence as a fundamental component of the model. Thus, the model uses BI only as a process and not as an output that emerges at some point of the intelligence
process. In simple terms, not all knowledge may be useful for decision making. To address this limitation, this study draws on the BI system to develop the organisational semiotics informed BI architecture in Section 4.2.

# 3 Organisational Semiotics

Organisational semiotics draws on signs to study information and communication systems in organisational context [10, 12]. A sign refers to whatever that stands to someone for something [9]. The current study draws on the semiotic frameworks and semiotic activity hierarchy as a combined theoretical foundation for the BI architecture.

## 3.1 Semiotic Framework

The semiotic framework (also called semiotic ladder) hierarchically structures sign systems into technical and social layers as shown in Figure 3.

<table><caption>Fig. 3. Generic semiotic framework: Adapted from [14]</caption><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">SOCIAL LEVEL</td><td>Social Effects (commitments and functions) behavioural and social effects of sign use in real world</td></tr><tr><td>Pragmatic (use and effects in communication) intentions and effects of social communication of signs</td></tr><tr><td>Semantic (meaning) Sense making of signs in relation to interpretant and referents</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">TECHNICAL LEVEL</td><td>Syntactical (rules for composition) Required rules, grammar and standards sign composition</td></tr><tr><td>Empirical (transmission) technical communication and transmission of signs as signals</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">Physical (material nature) embodiment, format and storage medium of physical and digital signs</td></tr></tbody></table>

The technical layers comprise the physical, empirical and syntactic. First, the physical constitutes the material and digital components of signs. Second, the empirical concerns observable properties of signals as signs in transmission through a communication medium such as speed, capacity, efficiency and errors. Third, the syntactic concerns rules and standards regarding the physical composition and structure of a sign.

The social layers comprise the semantic, pragmatic and social effects. The semantic deals with meanings that signs convey. The pragmatic relates to the intentions as well as use and effects of signs in communication [10]. The social concerns change that communication and use of signs effect in the real world. Such effects include changes in the status quo that results from social activities such as agreements, norms and decisions. The next section presents semiotic activity hierarchy based on the semiotic framework.
## 3.2 Semiotic Activity Hierarchy

The notion of semiotic activity is introduced in this study as layers of formative, in- formative and performative activities based on the semiotic framework as shown in Figure 3. The formative activity involves the physical, empirical and syntactic layers for composition and transmission of signs as data; informative activity relates to inter- pretation and communication of signs as information; finally, performative activity in- forms the use of actionable knowledge to make a decision that effect changes in the real world.

<table><caption>Fig. 4. Semiotic Activities Hierarchy</caption><tr><td rowspan="3">SEMIOTIC ACTIVITES</td><td>Performative Stage – activities based on action- able knowledge for decision making and generating social effects</td></tr><tr><td>Informative Stage – activities and outputs based on se- mantic and pragmatic layers involving information use in communication</td></tr><tr><td>Formative Stage: activities and outputs physical, empirics and syntactic layers involving data</td></tr></table>

The layers of activities are based on the notions of forma, informa and performa as patterns of signs systems developed by Dietz [6] and related to the semiotic framework by Beynon-Davies [3] as semiotic acts. According to Dietz [6] forma refers to material or physical composition of a sign; informa deals with content and meaning of signs; while performa deals with communication and use of signs for making decisions for social actions.

## 4 Case Study

This section presents the BI experience of a multi-site manufacturing company in the UK, MSMC (pseudonym) involving human resource and diseases data warehousing and mining. In 2010, the company implemented a BI solution with a data warehouse for consolidating and restructuring operational data including that of human resources; metadata layer for providing meaningful data views from the data warehouse and marts; and presentation layer for reporting and analytics, including pre-built reports, ad-hoc queries and analysis as well as BI visualization.

In 2011, the Human Resource (HR) Director had a requirement to know monthly trends of sickness among the workforce across all sites. To do this, the BI team extended the existing data warehouse to include disease outbreak data in areas of the various sites. Subsequent data mining activities established associations between the health data and music festival data. Hence, additional data on music festivals were incorporated into the data warehouse and the HR data mart. The following section shows the semiotic activities that occurred at various stages of the BI architecture.
## 4.1 Formative Activities

The physical implementation of the data store layer of the BI solution included a consolidation and restructuring data warehouse (CRDW). The techniques used at the formative stage involved the use of extract, transform and load (ETL) tools to collect data from operational and external sources including HR data, transforming the data through restructuring and cleaning and loading data into the warehouse.

The HRM system primarily supported the operations of the HR Department. As such, it was developed to capture and store employee related data across the organisation, including data on sickness and sick leave. The organisation's policy on sick leave allows employees to self-certify if the sickness period is not more than 7 days in a single period or 10 days in total for a whole year. Within these periods, self-certified sick leave does not require a note from a medical practitioner or evidence of visit to a medical centre. As part of the formative activities, data were collected by the recording of sick leave taken using the organisation's Human Resource Management (HRM) System. Also, the data were extracted from the HRM System and loaded into an Organisation-wide integrated data warehouse. This was done to consolidate data on sick leave and from other sources, and to prepare the data for reporting and analytics.

Beyond the internal sources, ETL tools were used to capture and load NHS data on disease outbreaks and music festivals related to areas close various sites of the company. In sum, the BI formative activities made data available for the informative and performative activities.

## 4.2 Informative Activity

At the informative stage, a metadata set was setup with a prebuilt report for the monthly sickness trend to meet the information requirements of the HR director. In January 2012, the monthly trends report up to December 2011 highlighted August as the month with over 50% of recorded employee sickness, which had been consistent for the past 6 years. A further analysis of SiteX (pseudonym) of the company highlighted the 3rd week of August as accounting for over 75% of all reported employee sicknesses across the same 6-year period. Moreover, over 85% of all reported sickness in August for the 6-year period were self-certified, of which 90% were from one particular manufacturing site.

## 4.3 Performative Activity

Beyond the employee sickness data, health data from the National Health Service were analysed to identify any possible disease outbreaks in August, especially, the 3rd week. However, none was found. Analysis of data from the two water companies for the residential areas within commutable distance or 2-hour drive from SiteX also revealed no reported contamination in the periods concerned.

However, a search of local activities in the immediate surroundings of SiteX identified a music festival that starts on the 2nd weekend of August. Further investigations showed the festival has been running for over 50 years and has become very popular
over the last 15 years. Further analysis revealed that over 70% of the people who attend
this music festival as between the ages of 20 and 37 years.

Combining this external data from the organisers of the music festival with the in-
ternal HR data. Mining of the combined data revealed a strong correlation between the
festival start date and the sick leave taken over the last 15 years. Also, the data revealed
an exponential increase of sick leave taken during the 3rd week in August from 15 years
ago to 6 years ago where it plateaued. Armed with this information, the senior manage-
ment team decided to change the policy on self-certified sick leave from 7 days to 2
days in any single period.

5 Business Intelligence Architecture

This section presents the organisational semiotic informed BI architecture, which was
developed through design science methodology informed by abductive reasoning [20].
The process began with the third author’s observation of challenges that were associ-
ated with lack of a BI model to support the case organisation’s decision and policy
evaluation on sick leave. Following this, the study drew on the conventional knowledge
hierarchy to develop an intelligence hierarchy as shown in Figure 5.

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 5. Intelligence Hierarchy</figcaption></figure>

As Figure 5 shows, the notion of intelligence replaces knowledge and wisdom. In this
study, intelligence is considered as a form of knowledge that supports decision making
and therefore actionable; hence the decision to use it to substitute knowledge and wis-
dom. In relation to the semiotic activity hierarchy, formative activity generates data,
informative activity generates information while performative activity in the form of
data mining generates intelligence to support decision making.

Subsequently, the study drew on the intelligence hierarchy and the semiotic
framework with activity hierarchy to develop an initial BI architecture, which was val-
idated and refined with the case study. Thus, the BI architecture process followed an
iterative process whereby the BI experience in the case study served as a guide and
evaluation criteria for refinement. Figure 6 shows the final architecture that emerged
from the iterative process.
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 6. Business Intelligence architecture</figcaption></figure>

The architecture shows 4 layers and 3 stages with their output and supporting activities, techniques and tools. The interconnecting lines show how the various components are intertwined to generate the required intelligence to support decision making for organisational activities. The intelligence generation process begins from the formative stage where the platform layer relies on the tool and technique layers to generate data as output. This stage supports the informative stage to generate information as output. Finally, the performative stage generates intelligence as output, in the form of actionable knowledge for organisational decision making

# 6 Discussion

The case study shows the three stages of BI process and output as well as supporting techniques and tools of the proposed architecture. The performative activity corresponds to the data warehouse and ETL as tools, extraction and consolidation of internal as well as external data as techniques and the accumulated data as the output. In relation to the semiotic framework, the performative activity relies on the technical platform: physical, empirics and syntax.

The informative activity relates to metadata and reporting of monthly trend reports on sick leave. The underlying technique was analysis and reporting with OLAP, general query and ad-hoc query tools as supporting technologies. In terms of the semiotic framework, the informative activity relates to semantics and pragmatics in terms of sense-making and communication of information.

Finally, the performative activity involved the use of intelligence knowledge to make a decision by changing the policy on sick leave. The supporting technique involve data
mining and data visualisation while the underlying tools were data mining and visuali-
zation software. In relation to the semiotic ladder, the performative activity relies on
the social world effects.

The three activities show a clear distinction between data, information and intelli-
gence in the architecture. Data is considered as symbolic facts that are accumulated to
support informative and performative activities. Informative activity produces mean-
ingful messages to provide answers to known questions through analytics as in the case
of the HR director. Intelligence however presents actionable knowledge based on un-
known and unexpected patterns, relationships, and associations as was the case with the
sick leave and the music festival period. However, in practice, the three are not inde-
pendent but highly related as demonstrated by the various intersecting line of the archi-
tecture.

Existing BI studies [e.g., 15, 19] largely portray the concept from a technical per-
spective and pays less attention to the social dimension. Also related organisational
semiotic studies discuss some part of the subject in relation to knowledge management
[e.g., 2] but does not link to BI. Our study therefore comes as the first to use organisa-
tional semiotics to develop a BI architecture with clear distinction between data, infor-
mation and intelligence and their relationships at the semiotic, tools, techniques output
and activity levels.

7 Conclusion

The purpose of the study was to develop a BI architecture based on the organisational
semiotics framework. The study therefore presents a BI architecture founded on the
organisational semiotic framework, intelligence hierarchy, semiotic activity framework
based on formative, informative, and performative activity levels. Viewing intelligence
as an actionable knowledge for decision making, the study contributes to organisational
semiotics research by extending it to the domain of BI. It also contributes to BI research
by basing the architecture on semiotic principles and frameworks.

For contribution to practice, the findings present a clearer BI process that intelligence
analysts, developers and users can draw on to identify relevant technologies, techniques
and activities that are required to develop and deploy a BI system in an organisational
setting. In addition, the architecture presents a clearer network between data, infor-
mation and intelligence to inform practices on how to develop such a system.

The limitation of the study stems from its exploratory nature and single case illus-
tration in a human resource intelligence system. Given that BI does not focus on a single
domain or problem area as does decision support systems, future research will evaluate
the architecture in a multi-domain environment such as supply chain and customer re-
lationship management

References

1. Ackoff, R.L.: From data to wisdom. J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 16, 1, 3–9 (1989).
2. Baskarada, S., Koronios, A.: Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom (DIKW): A Semiotic Theoretical and Empirical Exploration of the Hierarchy and its Quality Dimension. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 18, 1, 5–24 (2013).

3. Beynon-Davies, P.: Formatics. In: Americas Conference on Information Systems. , Seattle, Washington, August 9-12, 2012 (2012).

4. Boell, S.K., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D.: What is “Information” Beyond a Definition? In: Thirty Sixth International Conference on Information Systems. pp. 1–20 , Forth Worth (2015).

5. Chen, H., Storey, V.C.: Business Intelligence and Analytics: From Big Data to Big Impact. Mis Q. 36, 4, 1165–1188 (2012).

6. Dietz, J.: The deep structure of business processes. Commun. ACM. 49, 5, 59–64 (2006).

7. Grossmann, W., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Fundamentals of Business Intelligence. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2015).

8. Leismeister, J.: Collective Intelligence. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 4, 2, 245–248 (2010).

9. Liu, K.: Requirements reengineering from legacy information systems using semiotic techniques. Syst Signs Actions Int J Commun Inf Technol Work. 1, 1, 38–61 (2005).

10. Liu, K.: Semiotics In Information Systems Engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000).

11. Liu, K.: Semiotics in visualisation. In: 2014 9th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE). pp. 1–3 (2014).

12. Liu, K., Li, W.: Organisational Semiotics for Business Informatics. Routeledge, London (2015).

13. Liu, K., Tan, C.: Semiotics in Digital Visualisation. 3–13 (2015).

14. Mingers, J.: Guidelines for Conducting Semiotic Research in Information Systems, (2014).

15. Negash, S.: Business intelligence. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 13, 177–195 (2004).

16. Olszak, C.: Toward Better Understanding and Use of Business Intelligence in Organizations. Inf. Syst. Manag. 33, 2, 105–123 (2016).

17. Olszak, C., Ziemba, E.: Approach to building and implementing Business Intelligence systems. Interdiscip. J. Information, Knowledge, Manag. 2, 135–148 (2007).

18. Rowley, J.: The wisdom hierarchy: representations of the DIKW hierarchy. J. Inf. Sci. 33, 2, 163–180 (2007).

19. Sahay, B.S., Ranjan, J.: Real time business intelligence in supply chain analytics. Inf. Manag. Comput. Secur. 16, 1, 28–48 (2008).

20. Tan, C. et al.: Information Architecture for Healthcare Organizations: the case of a NHS Hospital in UK. In: ICIS 2013 Proceedings. pp. 1–11 (2013).

21. Tan, C., Liu, K.: An organisational semiotics inspired information architecture: Pervasive healthcare as a case study. ICISO 2013 - Proc. 14th Int. Conf. Informatics Semiot. Organ. IFIP WG8.1 Work. Conf. 35–44 (2013).