Auke J J Van Breemen
email: a.vanbreemen@science.ru.nl

Quality of service in the long tail: narratives and the exploitation of soft metadata

Keywords: Narrative method, Hard metadata, Soft metadata, Information architecture, Knowledge in Formation (KiF)-model, Education

The fuzzier domains of social life come into the scope of information science. Below a method is presented that deals with exception handling or also the long tail. It is based upon the Peirce inspired KiF-model. But this time the goal is not to describe procedures or to model elicitation processes, the goal is to develop meaningful sensors that at the same time structure the analysis of the problem and facilitates the access of a database filled with stories. The domain of application is the Dutch educational system.

Introduction

Henry Ford felt the urge to state that any customer can have his Ford model T painted any color that he wants so long as it is black. He wanted to build a car for the great multitude: "large enough for the family, but also small enough for the individual." Within a century Anderson felt confident enough to state "Forget squeezing millions from a few megahits from the top of the charts. The future of entertainment is in the millions of niche markets at the swallow end of the bitstream." 1 Subsequently, within a decade, he extends his view from the long tail of the bit-market to the long tail of the thing-market [1, p.63] and resigns from his post as editor in chief of Wired Magazine in order to exploit the long tail in the realm of things himself. The concept of the long tail is not only applicable to the market. Also with regard to services in the public sphere we meet the phenomenon that about 20% of the cases generates 80% of the classes. In health care the incidence of the more than 14.000 2 coded diseases diminishes rapidly if we go from the more to the less frequent. In educational and child care services, 3 were diagnostics and classification are perused in a far less serious manner, we must assume a long tail, but only some niches are well defined, the majority is crudely defined, if defined at all. A major contributor to the complexity is the circumstance that like personal traits, lead to different results due to the effect of circumstances and experiences on the developing personal character. This tail is besides long, very messy. Oftentimes the stakeholders disagree about the policy that ought to be effectuated. This is a result of not defined or only vaguely defined niches in combination with differences in goal orientation.

Whereas Ford could, in principle, specify every detail of the model T production process in sufficient detail, in the long tail of services a less directive approach is called for. The most we can aim at is that in the long run the classes get sorted out better and adequate policies are suggested. The solution I present below aims at just that. It consists in a narrative approach that utilizes hard (facts) and soft (perceptions) metadata for retrieval purposes. The soft metadata are part of an information architecture that helps the user to find relevant information in other stories told and, according to Kalbach an important requirement for information systems that cover niches, it makes sense by providing context [START_REF] Kalbach | Navigating the Long Tail[END_REF]. Interestingly, the model together with the soft metadata proved very useful in the actual handling of long tail cases, see section 2. This offers the possibility to integrate the construction and utilization of domain specific information systems in regular workflow processes, see the conclusions section 4. For the sake of efficiency, in section 3 after the introduction of the proposed approach, I will indicate some differences with affiliated research.

A case study: narrative research in the educational system

A disadvantage of strictly quantitative research in the services sector is that although one gets informed about the numbers op people that occupy the different categories distinguished, and about numerical changes through the years, one doesn't learn anything about the diverse dynamics that did lead to the membership of particular categories, nor is there any information about class hopping of particular individuals throughout their careers. As a result this kind of research is of little use for interventions in individual cases. If we want to improve on quality of service we are better off using dedicated information bases filled with Geertz' thick descriptions [START_REF] Geertz | Thick description. In: The interpretation of cultures[END_REF], Ginzburg's micro stories with clues [START_REF] Ginzburg | Clues: Morelli, Freud and Sherlock Holmes[END_REF] or Schank's scenario's and scripts [START_REF] Schank | Virtual learning; a revolutionary approach to building a highly skilled workforce[END_REF], dealing with individual cases that are (partly) similar, than with quantitative population survey results. Although of course the combination of both is most fruitful and necessary for policy making in the system under scrutiny.

In 2012 Van Garderen of Top Innosense b.v. and I set off collecting stories with hard metadata about pupils that fell out of the educational system. 4 After some twenty five stories we organized, in cooperation with Gedragswerk, 5 a meeting with the respondents and key professionals in the problem area. Our main objective was the development of a signifier set for soft metadata. Van Garderen working with the Cynefin model and the SenseMaking Triads in the tradition of Snowden [START_REF] Kurtz | The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated World[END_REF], I attending with our 6 Knowledge in Formation model (KiF-model) [START_REF] Sarbo | Knowledge in Formation: A computational theory of interpretation[END_REF] and Richmond's Trikons [START_REF] Richmond | Conceptual Structures: Common Semantics for Sharing Knowledge[END_REF] in my mind, see section 3 for differences between both approaches.

After fifty stories it proved possible to sketch the four most relevant processes in a KiF-model and to develop a trikonic signifier set for the focal process. In 2013 I had the opportunity to follow two cases in detail. This offered the possibility to collect the scores of all stakeholders involved in one and the same model. In the first case it proved not possible to organize a meeting of all stakeholders. The negotiation process between parent and school remained a zero-sum game. Father and son recently voted with their feet in order to avoid a second criminal prosecution procedure. In the second case it proved possible to organize two such meetings and a win-win solution is realized: 7 After more than three years this son receives education again. It is worthwhile to note that the same solution would also be agreeable to the parent and child of the first case. In 2.1 I briefly describe the initial narrative environment and the hard metadata. In 2.2 I present the educational KiF-schema and the attached soft metadata. This is not the place to delve into the content of the stories gathered in order to find some patterns. The interested reader, who mastered Dutch is referred to De Dunne lijn; tussen naar school en thuiszitten (The thin line between going to school and sitting at home), De dunne lijn; perspectieven verbinden (The thin line, connecting perspectives). 8 And, for one of the case descriptions Terug naar af Wouter! (Back to the start Wouter!).9

Stories and hard metadata

The visitor of our narrative environment first got a short introduction in the subject of interest and our goals. In the narration environment the first, and only obligatory, question we asked is: Tell your story. There are no restrictions to length in the accompanying text field. The idea is that people who go to the internet and tell their story because they experience(d) some frustrating problems are inclined to concentrate on what they deem most relevant for the state they find themselves in.

Immediately after this question we asked for a title and keywords. This can be regarded as inviting user generated metadata that suffer heavily from inconsistencies, as is pointed out by Kalbach [2]. This however was not the intention. Primarily we wanted the respondent to take a somewhat distanced look at the story and at the same time prepare the respondent for a final open question: Do you have suggestions based on your experiences? Secondarily we tried to enhance the number of clues for judging the measure of credibility of the story told. The invitation to provide suggestions was put after the hard metadata questions that, besides being questions, may set off some association patterns, related to important feats of the problem area in the mind of the respondent.

Next we asked for facts (In order to give the reader at least some insight in the domain, responses are provided after a number of closed questions. N=58):  What was the duration of the absence? Some days 9%, some weeks 10%, two months< 16%, 6 months< 49%, was never absent 19%.



What was the age of the pupil? The main gain of this question is that by now we know we have to append the question 'duration of absence' with '1 year' and '2 years'. We got answers like from 5 to 10 years of age and 12 to 16 years of age. In general problems surface around 5 (entering primary school), around 10 (entering second part primary school), around 12 (entering secondary school) and around 15 years of age.



Did the pupil attend a school for special education? Yes 52%, no 48% (special education takes about 10% of all pupils).  What kind of school did the pupil attend? Kindergarten 12%, primary education 40%, secondary professional basic (vmbo) 27% professional follow up (mbo) 19%, general theoretical (havo) 8%, preparatory for university (vwo) 6%. Our evidence shows the occurrence of a downgrading of level, before a drop out.  I am …. Pupil 3%, parent 79 %, grandparent 2%, friend 3%, teacher 2%, ambulant begeleider (mentors of the extra funding for pupils in regular education) 9%.  (Open question) What were the consequences of the experiences?  How long did those consequences last? Some weeks 9%, 3 months 5%, 6 months 9%, a year or longer 64%, there were no consequences 0%.  Does the pupil attend school currently? Yes 53%, No 47%.



If there has been or is a drop out, has it been reported to the officials? Yes 58%, no 36 %, not applicable 5%, I don't know 12%.  Do you have suggestions based on your experiences? (lots of suggestions)  May we know who you are, if so please provide contact details? 7 respondents did not leave contact details.

The basic idea behind the set up thus far is that with the help of (a selection of) the hard metadata and eventual some text search (for instance autism and related terms) in the stories, a user of the database can retrieve all stories that fulfill the conditions. Thus (s)he is enabled to consult the stories or scenario's and decide which scripts may be promising and which scripts aren't for the problem (s)he is facing.

2.2

The KiF-model This is not the place to go into the depths of the KiF-model regarded as a model that provides a general description of interpretation processes as a procedure. In Fig. 1 the processing schema is given. The interested reader may consult [START_REF] Sarbo | Knowledge in Formation: A computational theory of interpretation[END_REF] for details. Here it is enough to stick to the main line. If in analyze mode we look at an interpretation process bottom up, 10 we set off with an interpreting system in a certain state q1 that experiences an effect q2, 11 but at this point both are indiscriminately present, which is represented by the square brackets in 1.b. Since the very same effect may in different interpretation processes yield different results (q1,C)-(q2,C), the C represents the context and the goals, operative in the interpretive system, that determine the inclination towards the result that is going to be worked with in the stages to come. 12 From a top down perspective: at this point nothing follows, so q1 and q2 are both still regarded false, which can be regarded as an expression of doubt, see figure 2 bottom. Fig. 2. The truth values of two variables distributed over the four compartments of the KiFmodel. 13First the state and effect are sorted out, but just that, next they must be abstracted, or 'recognized' (expressed in terms of fig. 1 b) [q1 (in the 'negation' of) q2] yields [q1] and [q2 (in the ''negation' of) q1] yields [q2]). 14 In terms of Fig. 2 the interpreting system must manage to make the state true for itself independent from but in light of (or in the universe co-determined by) the effect and the effect independent from but in light of the state. When 'recognized', to this end the memory [C] is addressed by q1 and q2 for complementation in the light of the goal that is operative. If as well q1 as q2 can be complemented by C -expressed by (q1,C), (q2,C) -and (q1,C) can be unified with (q2,C) (predication stage), a response can be given to the original input. Put in terms of Fig. 2: the original doubt (FF) proved to be resolvable into belief (TT). This of course does not mean that the belief is true; it only means that this interpreting system managed to arrive at a result on this input.

2.3

The KiF-model in the educational domain

Learning problems experienced by pupils in class, which cannot be met in class, enter school level. Thus we have a process that has as its goal the learning activity of a pupil: Pupil(S), Class(E) ->Learning(R). If this process fails because either the S or the E cannot be made true to a satisfactory degree or both cannot be unified, a new process sets off -Pupil, School->Learning result -of which the former process is a sub-process, see Fig. 3a). If the discussion arrives at this level a serious question is regularly raised: is the class responsible for the failure or is it due to the parents? See for instance Stoutjesdijk [START_REF] Stoutjesdijk | Children with emotional and behavioral disorders in special education: Placement, progress, and family functioning[END_REF], but also our stories give ample evidence for this move. So, as a parallel process we have Pupil, Parents->Interest in school, Fig. 3b) Fig. 3. After a pupil is inscribed at a school process, it enters the class sub processes. These processes are defined by their goal a). If problems arise that cannot be met in class, the discussion is transferred to the super process, but then a parallel process may be deemed relevant and questions arise about the contribution of the parent to the problem b). Both processes have society as their root. Besides that auxiliary processes may be started, indicated by the empty space c). The goal of the root process ought to pose restrictions on what can be argued about the sub processes.

Via the pupil the three processes are related and a variety of subsidiary processes may arise. Being tested by a psychologist15 and being prosecuted by law 16 are only two of them. In Fig. 3c) Society is the agent that has its Effect on the State of the Pupil. The perspective from which this interaction must be looked at, is its goal 'Socialization'. This root process has two sub-processes of which one has a subprocess. Besides that, other parallel processes might be involved, indicated by the empty space. We must not assume the law of excluded middle holds, in our attempt to find a solution for a pupil.

In this exposition the focus will be on the process Pupil, School->Learn result. We do not want to model this process; we want to be able to inspect it with regard to the question what the hindrances are for the achievement of a satisfactorily learning result. Since the pupil will have to do the interpretation, needed for the kernel process learning, we want to know whether there is a (negative) bias in the propensity to sort, abstract and complement. Next we want to know which characteristics of the child or/and of the school contribute to the problem. Finally we want to know something about propensities in the predication or unification stage. Cf. Fig. s 1a) and 5.

2.4

Soft metadata and Trikons [START_REF] Richmond | Conceptual Structures: Common Semantics for Sharing Knowledge[END_REF], following Peirce, introduces trichotomy as "the art of making threefold distinctions". "this new applied science", he continues, "rests upon Peirce's triadic categorical distinctions". Sarbo and Farkas [START_REF] Sarbo | Towards Meaningful Information Processing: A unifying representation for Peirce's sign types[END_REF] offer a way to illuminate17 the difference between triadic and trichotomic distinctions. Interpretation processes yield signs as results. On Peircean principles a sign is something that (1) can be regarded in itself, ( 2) can be regarded as to its relation with its object and ( 3) can be regarded in the way in which it addresses its interpretant thought. If one of those relations is missing we do not have something that functions as a sign. In terms of Fig. 4 a) out of each of the bold lines a sign takes one position with the restriction that the position on a higher category cannot have a higher value than the position occupied in lower categories. As a consequence ten different sign types can be distinguished. So, in terms of Fig. 1c), a Rhematic, iconic legisign is a sign type, a symbolic, dicent legisign another. This means that for each of the triadic sign relations there is a rule restricted choice out of three, again categorically ordered, possibilities, the 1, 2 and 3 on each bold line. These are each trichotomic distinctions and not triadic relations. So, what do we want to know about the Pupil? In the first Trikon we want to know something about the sign in itself, the Pupil in this case. Especially we want to know its inclination in the sorting, abstraction and complementation phases. A shy withdrawn or fearful attitude (1)1 leads to different response patterns than an angry or too assertive externally oriented inclination (1)2, which again differs in its results from a reasoned response that takes the situation into account (1)3.

In the second Trikon we want to know about the Pupils relation with its objects. Is it just the interaction with informational content that is going to make school difficult? (2)1. Is it Pupils interaction with the physical world? (2)2. Or, is it Pupils interaction with other individuals that also process information and interact with the physical world? (2)3.

Finally, we want to know how the unification process runs in the interactions between Pupil (and Pupils caretakers) and School. Are there plans without execution, but nobody makes a point of it? (3)1. Is there hostile disagreement about the action that ought to be taken? (3)2 or are all working towards a solution? (3)3. See Fig. 5. If we were interested in the way School interacts with Pupils in general, then we had to make a KiF-instance with school in the state position. But we are not, we only want to know how School (E) deals with this niche Pupil. This belongs on categorical level [START_REF] Kalbach | Navigating the Long Tail[END_REF]. School may order all kinds of tests, but leave the problem as it is in the everyday affairs (2)1, it may have protocols that are applied blindly (2)2 or it may decide its course in interaction with Pupil (and Pupils caretakers) (2)3. See Fig. 5.

Since the points in the Trikons can be calculated, it is possible to use them as pointers to stories. And, they do what Kalbach asked for. They do, together with the kiF-model, put data in a meaningful information architecture. The combination is even able to direct the negotiation process in an effective way. On top of that the educational model can be extended with embedded and parallel processes dressed with Trikons.

There is a serious objection that can be raised. It proves to be the case that even in one case different roles diverge in the scores they make. So, what is the value of a story base? Well, yes anyone taking the stories told uncritically for truth is ill advised.

But, as you see in the scores in Fig. 5, the score on the top Trikon already shows that opinions strongly diverge and that it is up to the reader to sort out the promising scripts. And, even if all stories could be trusted, it would be ill advised to just do what proved to be successful. For one thing because the people concerned will not be the same, for another because the goals that are set for Pupils by their parents, will differ in terms of ambition. But also, the goal of this system is not to automate responses to problems that do arise, the goal is to empower the user by providing a model that systematically decomposes the problem into a set of questions and to deliver scripts and scenario's that other people met in dealing with similar problems.

Related research

The approach proposed here is akin to cultural anthropological field work in complex societies assisted by ICT. To my knowledge, Kurz and Snowden originated this narrative approach [START_REF] Kurtz | The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated World[END_REF]. It is quite remarkable how close the resemblance is between the Cynefin model and the KiF-model and between Triads and Trikons. There are however some significant differences. Triads are constructed in sessions with stakeholders and the terms at the corners must be in opposition with each other, Trikons are constructed in relation to goal oriented domain specific KiF-processes and the terms must adhere to categorical rules. This architectonic improves the chance that data islands, tagged with Trikons can be more easily related to each other. Richmond's Trichotomic [START_REF] Richmond | Conceptual Structures: Common Semantics for Sharing Knowledge[END_REF] and Keidel's Triangulation [START_REF] Keidel | Seeing Organizational Patterns; a new theory and language of organizational design[END_REF] are very similar. Richmond bases his Trikons on the categorical distinctions of Peirce and he applies them in grand scale philosophical musings, whereas Keidel developed his triangles in organizational science and describes them in organizational terms: autonomy (monadic, first category), hierarchy (dyadic, second category), network (triadic, third category). Anyone interested in the principles behind the Trikons is referred to Richmond, but if the interest goes to the application of Trikons, Keidel has much more to offer, cf. pp 153-167 of [START_REF] Keidel | Seeing Organizational Patterns; a new theory and language of organizational design[END_REF] for lots of orderly arranged triangles. In its result, the main difference between Keidel and Richmond is that Keidel uses points and lines in his Triangles 18 in order to signify situations or the direction of change in time respectively, whereas Richmond utilizes the outline of the Triads in order to indicate directionality. Technically, Trikons as I use them are ternary plots.

An important difference between Keidel and Richmond on the one hand and the proposed method on the other is that the former builds Trikonic or Triangular edifices whereas the latter integrates the Trikons with an information processing model.

Conclusions

The proposed narrative approach, with domain specific Kif-models that ensure a common frame of mind and deliver meaningful information architectures at the same time, and with Trikons, in order to map and retrieve perceptions, can become a sound method for dealing with quality of service in the long tail. One can imagine different ways to proceed. On categorical grounds: 1. Just throw out this conceptual net on the internet and see what the catch will be. 2. Organize for clusters of schools an environment where stories can be delivered by parents or teachers and let the schools and parents deal with it themselves. 3. Organize a specialized group of civil servants that operates on a regional or national scale and give them the task to solve problems that are brought to the fore and to follow the results in order to improve performance in the long run. In the Netherlands the local civil servants that guard the obligation to attend school and/or the national educational consultants are the most obvious candidates, but only if experienced teachers are added to the group: as it is now, the role of the servants is far too formal and their knowledge of education too scant to be able to deal with the content. A yet unanswered, but important research question is whether it is possible to make models on the same principles in other domains, as for instance health care and child care, and in other cultures where the goals differ. The movie 一个都不能少 (Not one less), by Zang Yimou, clearly shows that in a metropolis as Shanghai it may be feasible to shift attention from the head to the tail, but that in predominantly rural areas first things still have to come first. Although, … a lot can be learned from the devotion with which the main character handles the exception she meets.

Fig. 1 .

 1 Fig. 1. a) the four stages that can be discerned in interpretation processes, b) the KiF process model of Sarbo and Farkas with the interaction of two variables q1 and q2 and the context C, c) the Peircean semiotic terms and d) the Peircean categorical values of every position on the corresponding positions.

Fig. 4 .

 4 Fig. 4. Each bold line in a) presents a trichotomic distinction pertaining to signs. We get a triadic sign relation by picking a term out of each of the three trichotomies. There is a restriction: the term of a lower trichotomy may not be of lower value than the term picked in a higher trichotomy. On account of this restriction, the Trikons can be ordered in the KiF-model: Trikon (1) in the bottom square, (2) in the square left and (3) in the top square, see Fig. b). The square right is reserved for the effect processed by the interpreting system.

Fig. 5 .

 5 Fig. 5. The four Trikons in their KiF arrangement. The scores are from case Mithra (unpublished) in which I utilized the model to guide negotiation. 1 is the mother, 2 a teacher, 3 and 4 are pedagogical specialists. 5 is a civil servant of child care.

See http://changethis.com/manifesto/10.LongTail/pdf/10.LongTail.pdf, C. Anderson, The long tail, 13 December

[START_REF] Kalbach | Navigating the Long Tail[END_REF] For the count see the International Classification of Diseases, ICD-10, 1990.[START_REF] Geertz | Thick description. In: The interpretation of cultures[END_REF] My background is the Dutch educational system, child care and health are overlapping domains . The government decided to introduce Passend Onderwijs (Fitting or Inclusive Education). If this program is taken seriously, we are in dire need to get a hold on the long tail in education.

In the Dutch system this is regarded a criminal offence that instigates the officials to start prosecution regardless of the reasons to drop out, which explains why predominantly parents told their stories.

Gedragswerk is an initiative of the ministry of education. If asked by parents, the organization delivers 'sparring partners' if the parents have conflicts with school regarding the teaching of their children.

Sarbo, Farkas and Van Breemen.

I don't claim that the domain specific KiF-model forces a win-win strategy. At the most it invites one by sorting out the diverse processes and arguments.

Retrievable from http://www.koesch.nl/onderzoek/.

Retrievable from http://www.koesch.nl/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/casuswouterdl1.pdf.

This does not mean we defend the bottom up stance in the old discussion about reading (bottom up vs top down). It is a mixed affair and some people are more inclined to the one or the other strategy. A person overdoing constantly in one of the directions will end up in a niche in the educational system.

Notice that this is in line with Stampers actualism.

What is taken as input and what as noise in the receptive field depends on C, later on we will see that also emotional predispositions bear on the outcome of interpretation processes.

This is an application of Peirce's X-box which he used to derive the 16 Boolean operators.

This triadic relation underlies the dependency structure of the KiF-model, cf. q1,[C]->(q1,C), This also is the relation between State, Effect->Response, that summarizes the lot. The KiFmodel aims at a description of the argument in semiotic terms, cf 1c.

Psychologist (S), Pupil (E) -> Testreport (R) or Pupil(S), Psychologist(E)->Remediation(R).

A full account would demand a treatment of Peirce's extended sign system and of the differences between the static figure of semiotic terms, 1c), and the actualist, dynamical KiFmodel 1b). This falls far out of the scope of this paper.


Shixiong Liu
email: shixiong.liu@pgr.reading.ac.uk

Weizi Li
email: weizi.li@henley.ac.uk

Kecheng Liu
email: k.liu@henley.ac.uk

Assessing Pragmatic Interoperability of Information Systems from a Semiotic Perspective

Keywords: Pragmatics, Pragmatic Interoperability, Semiotic Interoperability, Systems Integration

Most of studies on interoperability of systems integration focus on technical and semantic levels, but hardly extend investigations on pragmatic level. Our past work has addressed pragmatic interoperability, which is concerned with the relationship between signs and the potential behaviour and intention of responsible agents. We also define the pragmatic interoperability as a level concerning with the aggregation and optimisation of various business processes for achieving intended purposes of different information systems. This paper, as the extension of our previous research, is to propose an assessment method for measuring pragmatic interoperability of information systems. We firstly propose interoperability analysis framework, which is based on the concept of semiosis. We then develop pragmatic interoperability assessment process from two dimensions including six aspects (informal, formal, technical, substantive, communication, and control). We finally illustrate the assessment process in an example.

Introduction

In the study of the interoperability, most of the work focuses on discussion at a technical level. Although some of them have extended to deal with semantics, a very limited number of publications elaborate the interoperability at the pragmatic level [START_REF] Liu | Evaluation frameworks for information systems integration: from a semiotic lens[END_REF]. Undoubtedly the research on technical and semantic interoperability can help establish a better understanding of data exchange and data interpretation, as well as leading to the development of supporting technologies and standards. However, the integration requires assessment of pragmatic interoperability that ensures supported process can act upon the semantic information in order to deal with the complexity. The pragmatic interoperability is concerned with the relationship between signs and the potential behaviour and intention of responsible agents. Our past work defines the pragmatic interoperability as a level concerning with the aggregation and optimisation of various business processes for achieving intended purposes of different information systems. This paper, as the extension of our previous research [START_REF] Liu | Evaluation frameworks for information systems integration: from a semiotic lens[END_REF], [START_REF] Li | Semiotic interoperability -a critical step towards systems integration[END_REF], is to propose an assessment method for measuring pragmatic interoperability of information systems. We firstly propose interoperability analysis framework, which is based on the concept of semiosis. We then develop pragmatic interoperability assessment process from two dimensions including six aspects (informal, formal, technical, substantive, communication, and control). We finally illustrate the assessment process in an example. The next section briefs the concept of semiotic interoperability and pragmatic interoperability. Section 3 proposes the pragmatic interoperability analysis framework, and section 4 elaborates the assessment model for measuring pragmatic interoperability. The paper ends with a discussion of future work.

Background

Before defining pragmatic interoperability, our previous work has discussed the concept of semiotic interoperability [START_REF] Li | Semiotic interoperability -a critical step towards systems integration[END_REF], applied the concept of pragmatic interoperability in healthcare domain for analysing interoperability of systems integration at radiology department. The semiotic framework [START_REF] Filipe | Normative Organisational Modelling using Intelligent Multi-Agent Systems[END_REF]- [START_REF] Stamper | Information in business and administrative systems[END_REF] that explains all aspects of how signs can be used and communicated for successful communication, determines the level of interoperability of information systems integration. Therefore we say systems are integrated at a certain interoperability level if signs among systems are successfully communicated at a certain semiotic framework level. Our previous works [START_REF] Liu | Evaluation frameworks for information systems integration: from a semiotic lens[END_REF], [START_REF] Li | Semiotic interoperability -a critical step towards systems integration[END_REF] have proposed the concept of semiotic interoperability. The semiotic interoperability allows information systems to work together through communication with insight into six levels: physical, empirical, syntactical, semantic, pragmatic, and social. In addition to our definition of pragmatic interoperability, other researchers have contributed in pragmatic interoperability. Benson [7] defines it as coordination of work processes across different people to enabling work collaboration. Sadeghi et al. [START_REF] Sadeghi | A mashup based framework for multi level healthcare interoperability[END_REF] state the pragmatic interoperability in healthcare is the ability among healthcare processes and various actors (i.e. healthcare providers and patients) that interact with information systems. We address systems interaction from the perspective of semiotic interoperability, especially at pragmatic level, which is concerned with the relationship between signs and the potential behaviour and intention of responsible agents. We define the pragmatic interoperability as a level concerning with the aggregation and optimisation of various business processes, in order to achieve intended purposes of different information systems. It is also concerned with the relationship between signs and the potential behaviour/intention of responsible agents, in a social context. Within a social community, there exist common knowledge and shared assumptions. These basic assumptions serve as a minimum basis for communication. Therefore, successful communication at this level is achieved if the hearer understands the speaker's intentions, which goes beyond the semantic interpretation of the communicative act. Interoperability is achieved at this level when processes serving different purposes under different contexts by different information systems can be composed to jointly support a common intention. The emphasis is the context awareness for processes integration. The following elements can be considered in the context: information system itself, intention, purpose, theme, time, location etc.

Pragmatic Interoperability Analysis Framework

Before assessing the pragmatic interoperability, our past work has developed an interoperability analysis process that pre-investigates the key factors (e.g. requirement, integration approach, interoperability measurement, knowledge foundation) of pragmatic interoperability. Based on findings of the investigation, we combine them with the semiosis concept [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF] to develop an pragmatic interoperability analysis framework as shown below.

Fig. 1 Pragmatic Interoperability Analysis Framework

The development of the interoperability analysis framework is based on the concept of semiosis. Semiosis is the central concept of semiotics [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF], it is a process of understanding involving transformation of signs. As a sign-mediated process, it gives meanings for understanding an object or actuality. It is also applicable to any type of sign-processing activities e.g. information systems integration. The interpretation is subjective and depending on the viewpoints of the interpretant or context. In the context of information systems integration, the context itself and its information systems are complex, artificial, and purposefully designed. They require integrated features as well as alignments between the business processes and the system functions. In order to assess and measure the pragmatic interoperability, our developed pragmatic interoperability analysis framework starts with articulating requirements in context such as interoperability environment, stakeholders, motivations, constraints, and locations. Secondly, the interpretation process assesses interoperability from two dimensions including six aspects (informal, formal, technical, substantive, communication, and control), which will be elaborated in next chapter. Thirdly, the interpretation process will help to indicate whether the requirements have been met to achieved the intentions e.g. business goals, responsibilities, and constraints.

Requirements articulation defines the problem space in which the requirements for interoperability are contextualised. Specifically it includes the identification of goals, tasks, problems, and opportunities that defines interoperation requirement in the context of organisation [START_REF] Simon | The Sciences of the Artificial[END_REF], [START_REF] Silver | The Information Technology Interaction Model: A Foundation for the MBA Core Course[END_REF]. Barriers at the informal level e.g. resources reallocation, political issue, privacy and security, people issues, culture change, and behavioural patterns are most widely highlighted in relevant researches [START_REF] Allen | Information sharing and interoperability: the case of major incident management[END_REF]- [START_REF] Turban | Integrating expert systems and decision support systems[END_REF]. Issues at formal level such as information flow, cross-functional integration are also discussed [START_REF] Allen | Information sharing and interoperability: the case of major incident management[END_REF], [START_REF] Amrani | The effects of enterprise resource planning implementation strategy on cross-functionality[END_REF]- [START_REF] Rai | Firm Performance Impacts Of Digitally Enabled Supply Chain Integration Capabilities[END_REF]. Most interoperability requirements are articulated to overcome the interoperability barriers and realise the opportunities in organisations. Panetto and Molina [START_REF] Panetto | Enterprise integration and interoperability in manufacturing systems: Trends and issues[END_REF] analyse and characterise several research challenges for Enterprise Integration and Interoperability. Their results are elaborated by a more intensive summary and contributions highlighted [START_REF] Panetto | Enterprise Integration and Networking: theory and practice[END_REF]. The challenges are classified from four dimensions (business, knowledge, applications and communications) where challenges of interoperability in enterprise are identified to include model interoperability, process interoperability and business information integration, etc. Therefore interoperability requirement can also be identified by combining conceptual, organisational and technological barriers with business, process and data concerns [START_REF] Daclin | Methodology for enterprise interoperability[END_REF]. The integration can be also also seen as a methodological process to measuring the gap between desired interoperability goal and actual status of the system, and to adjust both the goal and interoperation actions if necessary. The step of assessment and measurement process are elaborated in next section.

Pragmatic Interoperability Assessment Process

The nature of information systems interoperation relies on successful signs communication [START_REF] Li | Semiotic interoperability -a critical step towards systems integration[END_REF], and each information system analysis and design must start with understanding and modelling the organisation where information system exists [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF]. The organisation onion [START_REF] Stamper | Information in business and administrative systems[END_REF] stresses the distinctions as well as the interdependent links between the business process and IT systems. The organisation morphology provides a useful modelling method for understandings the norm structure of information system. Each information system can be characterised as a structure of norms that allow functions can be coordinated for certain purposes [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering[END_REF], and pragmatic interoperability, is to enable the purposes of each information system can be understood and perceived during interoperation, so the business processes can be aggregated accordingly. Therefore, measuring pragmatic interoperability between information systems is to measure the interoperability of norms that drive the business processes. Hence, we develop a measurement model that assesses the pragmatic interoperability from two dimensions (i.e. organisational onion, organisational morphology). The measurement model is the core of the whole assessment process. Before elaborating the model, the whole assessment process illustrates different stages and steps for measuring pragmatic interoperability as shown below:

The pragmatic interoperability assessment process starts with problem articulation. This stage defines the problem spaces of pragmatic interoperability and articulates relevant integration requirements in specific context. Various pragmatic interoperability definitions are reviewed for identifying problems. After identifying the problems, the next stage is pragmatic interoperability analysis. It identifies pragmatic interoperability requirements, and reviews various integration approaches and interoperability measurements at pragmatic level. The next stage is pragmatic interoperability measurement model, which is the core of the whole process. The model aims to measure the pragmatic interoperability from two dimensions including six aspects (formal, informal, technical, substantive, communication, and control). The last stage is to evaluate the measurement model by applying it to case study.

Pragmatic Interoperability Measurement Model

The measurement model has two dimensions. Each dimension has three perspectives as displayed in the Figure below: 1) informal layer, 2) formal layer, and 3) technical layer for organisational onion; and 1) substantive area, 2) communication area, and 3) control area for organisation morphology.

Fig. 3 Pragmatic Interoperability Measurement Model

In system integration, the organisational onion illustrates on how an integrated system works, and the organisation morphology helps classify different norms that drive business processes. In pragmatic manner, the norms are regularities of perception,

Figure

 Control

The control norms are execution-related. They aim at reinforcing the whole business system running properly, particular the substantive and communication norms.

Monitoring and evaluating are the main techniques of control norms. Typical examples are inter-firm agreements or contacts between organizations. The pragmatic interoperability is to ensure that the control norms function as required but consumes less, so the power of reinforcement will remain but the cost will not be increased. For example, in healthcare environment, the control norms should be regulations that reinforce the substantive and communication norms perform correctly.

Dimension II  Informal

In informal level, culture aspect plays an important role. This aspect can be expanded as beliefs, habits and behaviour patterns of individuals. In this manner, the pragmatic interoperability is to align different culture aspects and solve conflicts of cohesiveness. An integrated information system would support perceiving of personal beliefs and organisational ground rules, whereas an un-integrated information system may be considerable conflicts between the organisational level and personal level. Issues like restriction to staff behaviour (more significant benefits from systems integration), information collaboration (information channels alignment), varieties of purchased information systems (different venders and services providers), and privacy and security concerns should be solved in this level. For example, in healthcare environment, the informal level is to concern with the understanding of the healthcare, regulatory, legislative and enterprise environment in which information systems need to be deployed to support healthcare delivery. It requires agreement on key organisational concepts such as policies, processes and roles; it also captures relevant patterns such as compliance, governance, legislative and change management.

 Formal In formal level, business functions and procedures play dominant role that specifies on how functions should be carried out and how tasks should be performed. The pragmatic interoperability is to align procedures and rules in order to achieve higher efficiency. It defines business goals, model business processes and brings the collaboration of administrations what aim to exchange information and have different internal structures and processes. Besides, it also addresses the requirements of the user community by making services available, accessible, identifiable and useroriented. Issues like policy (integration cuts across political boundaries), and procedure (integration causes process and operation changes) should be solved in this level. It supports seamless sharing of information, which is universal interpretation of information through data processing based on cooperating applications. For example, in healthcare environment, it is concerned with representations and interpretations of clinical, administrative and statistical information. It requires agreement on a core set of information concepts, such as information system itself and the relationships between information systems, as well as its clinical functions; it also captures relevant patterns such as quality of information and application scope.

 Technical

The technical level mostly refers to the technical computer systems and their technical functions. The systems and functions can be programmed according to norms and procedures. The pragmatic interoperability is to align technical functions and business processes in order to achieve higher system productivity. It supports seamless sharing of data, which is automated sharing of data between information systems based on a common exchange model. It also covers the technical issues of linking computer systems and services. A few key aspects are included such as interconnection services, data integration, open interface, data presentation and exchange, and accessibility will be dealt with in this level. For example, in healthcare environment, it is concerned with the understanding of technical functionality for supporting information systems. It requires agreement on a core set of technical concepts, such as technical components and devices, the interactions between components, interface and technical services; it also captures relevant patterns such as technical architecture styles and styles of component interactions.

Agent-Based Process Decomposition and Aggregation

Our developed model measuring pragmatic interoperability from 2 dimensions. Dimension 1 contains 3 aspects (substantive, communication, control), and dimension 2 contains 3 levels (informal, formal, and technical). The example of agent-based process decomposition and aggregation illustrated in figure below provides a picture of how processes are integrated in pragmatic level. The concept of Pragmatic Frame is adopted for storing pragmatic information, mainly the purpose and context of each process abstract [START_REF] Liu | Pragmatic Computing -A Semiotic Perspective to Web Services[END_REF]. The process can be decomposed into several sub-processes and each sub-process has its own context, purpose and semantic definition. Each process is also a set of activities, and the activity abstract contains the basic functions and pragmatic information of the process.

Fig. 4 Pragmatic process decomposition

After the process has been captured, it will be parsed into semantic terms that represent the meaning of the process. Each sub-process has been annotated with the semantic description and the goal to describe the detail of a list of expected activity candidates. The decomposition stage is to identify purposes for their aggregation in the next stage. The pragmatic agent uses the abstract to search the relevant activity candidates. The abstract contains semantic information, which can be searched by the agent. Finally only one candidate will succeed and be selected.

Fig. 5 Candidate selection by pragmatic distance

Each sub-process and its activities have various contexts for different purposes, and those contexts and purposes are defined based on policy designed. The activity works perfectly with its own context, but not all the activities works within their own contexts. The pragmatic ranking mechanism matches the related context (expected activity candidates) and find out the closest solution by calculating their pragmatic distance [START_REF] Liu | Pragmatic Computing -A Semiotic Perspective to Web Services[END_REF]. The ranking list is produced for each activity abstract and its candidates (displayed in Fig. 5).

Conclusion and Future Work

This paper is the extension of our previous research. It proposed an assessment method for measuring pragmatic interoperability of information systems. The developed interoperability analysis framework is based on the concept of semiosis, and contains three phrases (requirement in context, assessment model, and intentions).

The developed assessment model measures pragmatic interoperability from two dimensions including six aspects (informal, formal, technical, substantive, communication, and control). The pragmatic interoperability at informal level is to align different culture aspects and solve conflicts of cohesiveness; to define business goals, model business process, and align procedures and rules in order to achieve higher efficiency at formal level; to align technical functions and business process in order to achieve higher system productivity at technical level. The substantive norms are productivity-related and directly contribute to the aim and objectives; the communication norms are interaction-related and coordinate relevant people, procedures, business functions, and supported systems for undertaking substantive norms; the control norms are execution-related and aim at reinforcing the whole business system running properly, particular the substantive and communication norms. The future work will focus on validations of the proposed assessment process.

2

  Pragmatic Interoperability Assessment Process Substantive Business process and technical functions as well as cultural aspects are driven by norms in information system integration. The substantive norms are productivityrelated and directly contribute to the aim and objectives. The pragmatic interoperability in this manner is to aggregate different substantive norms in order to achieve intended goal(s). For example, in healthcare environment, the substantive norms are direct actions and orders among different information systems. Key actions such as order entry, and patient report generation, are typical substantive norms. Those could be aggregated based on the intended goals. CommunicationThe communication norms are interaction-related. They coordinate relevant people, procedures, business functions, and supported systems for undertaking substantive norms. Those communications are required to coordinate the temporal and spatial use of resources for substantive activities. Typical examples are communications by sending memoranda, announcements of meeting and events, telephones and emails. The pragmatic interoperability is to integrate different communication norms in order to eliminate the redundancy and improve communication efficiency. For example, in healthcare environment, message sending and receiving, communications between clinicians and nurses, and emergency interactions are where communication norms exist, and can be integrated for intended coordination.

	behaviour, belief and value that are exhibited as customs, habits, patterns of behaviour
	and other cultural artefacts. The developed measurement model combines both and
	provides coherent guideline for indicating key perspectives of measuring
	interoperability.
	Dimension I
	


John Effah
email: jeffah@ug.edu.gh

Kecheng Liu
email: k.liu@henley.ac.uk

Virtual Process Modelling Informed by Organisational Semiotics: A Case of Higher Education Admission

Keywords: Process virtualization, Virtual process modelling, Web application modelling, Higher education, Organisational semiotics, WebML

The purpose of this study is to explore virtual process modelling based on organisational semiotics and WebML. The Internet and the Web afford opportunities to virtualize physical processes. Research on process virtualization has so far focused on theorizing or testing which activities can or cannot be virtualized. However, studies on virtual process modelling remains limited. This study therefore uses a university's admission process as a case to explore virtual process modelling in a higher education environment.

Introduction

Drawing from organisational semiotics and WebML, this study explores virtual process and web application modelling. Physical processes have traditionally been conducted through direct human-to-human contacts. However, the Internet and the Web afford the opportunity to virtualize such processes [START_REF] Overby | Migrating Processes from Physical to Virtual Environments: Process Virtualization Theory[END_REF]. Process virtualization has begun to attract research attention [e.g. [START_REF] Overby | The Design, Use, and Consequences of Virtual Processes[END_REF][START_REF] Barth | Which Processes Do Users Not Want Online? Extending Process Virtualization Theory[END_REF][START_REF] Balci | Why People Reject or Use Virtual Processes: A Test of Process Virtualization Theory[END_REF]. However, the focus so far has been on theorizing or testing which activities can or cannot be virtualized. Research on virtual process modelling thus remains limited. This study therefore focuses on virtual process modelling to extend the existing limited research focus.

The study employs organisational semiotics [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in information systems engineering[END_REF][START_REF] Liu | Organizational Semiotics: evolving a science of information systems[END_REF] as the theoretical foundation and WebML [START_REF] Ceri | Web Modeling Language (WebML): a modeling language for designing Web sites[END_REF][START_REF] Ceri | Designing Data-Intensive Web Applications[END_REF] as the web interface modelling language to explore virtual admission process modelling in a higher education context. Organisational semiotics was selected for its useful information systems modelling and specification techniques [START_REF] Jacobs | Organisational Semiotics Methods to Assess Organisational Readiness for Internal Use of Social Media[END_REF], while WebML was chosen for its useful hypertext notations for web interface modelling [START_REF] Ceri | Designing Data-Intensive Web Applications[END_REF][START_REF] Brambilla | Web Engineering: Modelling and Implementing Web Applications[END_REF].

The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 reviews related works on organisational processes, higher education admission and WebML. Section 3 presents organisational semiotics as the theoretical foundation of the study. Section 4 illustrates the modelling of a virtualized postgraduate admission process. Section 6 concludes the paper and offers direction for future research.

2

Related Works

Physical versus Virtualized Processes

Organisational processes comprise network of activities and their dependencies [START_REF] Liu | Workflow modeling for virtual processes: an order-preserving process-view approach[END_REF].

Processes can be physical or virtual. Physical processes occur through direct humanto-human contacts. Conversely, virtual processes are conducted via the Internet and the Web. Physical processes can therefore be virtualized by making them Internet and Web enabled [START_REF] Overby | Process Virtualization Theory and the Impact of Information Technology[END_REF]. Fig. 1 illustrates a generic process with activities and dependencies.

Fig. 1. Basic structure of a process [START_REF] Liu | Workflow modeling for virtual processes: an order-preserving process-view approach[END_REF] The dependencies, which can be sequential, loop, split or joint [START_REF] Liu | Workflow modeling for virtual processes: an order-preserving process-view approach[END_REF], determine the directions between activities.

Higher Education Admission Process

A fundamental challenge for higher education admission is how to provide quality processes based on effective information systems [START_REF] Semeon | The Success of Student Information Management System: The Case of Higher Education Institution in Ethiopia[END_REF] in order to attract highly qualified applicants. Following Harman [START_REF] Harman | Student selection and admission to higher education: Policies and practices in the Asian region[END_REF] as well as McClea and Yen [START_REF] Mcclea | A framework for the utilization of information technology in higher education admission department[END_REF], this study views the admission process a composition of five main activities as shown in Fig. 2, namely, programmes advertisement, application, selection of qualified applicants, admission offer, and finally offer acceptance by satisfied applicants.

Advertisement

Selection Application

Offer Acceptance

Fig. 2. Higher education admission process

The admission process is one of the major areas in need of computerization [START_REF] Semeon | The Success of Student Information Management System: The Case of Higher Education Institution in Ethiopia[END_REF]. Computerizing the admission process can help to reduce printing and postage costs, improve efficiency and effectiveness, and provide real-time information access to stakeholders [START_REF] Mcclea | A framework for the utilization of information technology in higher education admission department[END_REF][START_REF] Hossler | Using the internet in college admission: strategic choices[END_REF]. Moreover, the Internet and the Web offer opportunities to virtualize admission processes [START_REF] Aggarwal | Continuous Improvement Process in Web-Based Education at a Public University[END_REF]. However, such virtualization would require appropriate modelling techniques.

2.3

WebML WebML [START_REF] Ceri | Web Modeling Language (WebML): a modeling language for designing Web sites[END_REF][START_REF] Ceri | Designing Data-Intensive Web Applications[END_REF] is a visual web modelling language that is considered usefulness for designing data-, service-, and process-intensive web applications [START_REF] Acerbis | Web Applications Design and Development with WebML and WebRatio 5.0[END_REF][START_REF] Brambilla | Process modeling in Web applications[END_REF][START_REF] Brambilla | Large-scale Model-Driven Engineering of web user interaction: The WebML and WebRatio experience[END_REF]. WebML supports both data and hypertext modelling. Its data model is used for designing backend data structures, while the hypertext model is for web interface design. This study focuses on the hypertext model for the virtual admission web interface. Table 1 presents the relevant hypertext notations used in this study under their respective categories. In Section 4.3, the relevant hypertext notations are used to model the virtual admission web interface. The complete list of WebML notations with detailed explanations can be found in Ceri et al. [START_REF] Ceri | Web Modeling Language (WebML): a modeling language for designing Web sites[END_REF][START_REF] Ceri | Designing Data-Intensive Web Applications[END_REF] as well as on the model's website: http://www.webml.org.

Organisational Semiotics

Organisational semiotics theorizes information systems as a collection of signs and symbols [START_REF] Liu | Requirements Reengineering from Legacy Information Systems Using Semiotic Techniques[END_REF] created and consumed by actions and interactions of agents [START_REF] Gazendam | Organizational Semiotics: a state of the art report[END_REF]. This study draws on two of its frameworks, organisational morphology and norm specification, as the theoretical foundation for the virtual admission modelling.

Organisational Morphology

Organisational morphology [START_REF] Ali | A conceptual framework for role-based knowledge profiling using semiotics approach[END_REF], also called organisational onion [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in information systems engineering[END_REF], views activities as norms and classifies them into three layers: informal, formal and technical, as shown in Fig. 3. Organisational norms are rules that regulate and govern how activities are performed [START_REF] Li | Integrated clinical pathway management for medical quality improvement based on a semiotically inspired systems architecture[END_REF].

Fig. 3. The organisational onion [5]

The informal layer comprises activities that are based on implicit norms such as culture, customs and values that reflect people's beliefs, habits and practices. The formal layer consists of activities that are based explicit norms that define organisational rules and procedures. Finally, the technical layer encompasses activities that are structured and therefore are or can be computerized.

The three layers are however interrelated such that the technical layer is contained in the formal lay, which in turn is contained in the informal layer [START_REF] Li | Integrated clinical pathway management for medical quality improvement based on a semiotically inspired systems architecture[END_REF]. In addition, activities can be transformed from one layer to another. For example, an informal activity can be formalized, while a formal activity can computerised to become part of the technical [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in information systems engineering[END_REF].

In relation to process virtualization, the informal and formal activities constitute physical processes while the technical (computerized) form virtual processes. Virtualization therefore involves transforming physical activities (formal and informal norms) into virtual processes. According to Liu [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in information systems engineering[END_REF], transforming informal and formal

Informal (physical) Formal (physical) Technical (virtual)
activities into technical (computerised) activities require formal norm analysis and specifications. The next section discusses the formal behavioural norm specification.

Behavioural Norm Specification

Behavioural norms constitute rules that define conditions under which organisational activities should or may be performed by responsible agents [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in information systems engineering[END_REF]. Behavioural norm analysis investigates norm-based activities and specifies them in a formal structure [START_REF] Gazendam | The Evolution of Organisational Semiotics[END_REF]. Fig. 4 presents the generic structure for behavioural norm specification in the form of condition, state trigger, responsible agent, deontic operator and action [START_REF] Liu | Semiotics in information systems engineering[END_REF].

Fig. 4. Basic behavioural norm specification [23]

The WHENEVER <condition> and the IF <state> together define the necessary pre-conditions before an activity can start. The <agent> specifies the responsible actor for the activity. In general, an agent is an individual, a group, an organisation, a software or a physical artefact [START_REF] Ali | A conceptual framework for role-based knowledge profiling using semiotics approach[END_REF]. In relation to virtual processes, the agent is either physical (human or object) or virtual (internet service or web function). Deontic operator specifies whether an action is obligatory (should), optional (may) or prohibited (should not) [START_REF] Gazendam | The Evolution of Organisational Semiotics[END_REF].

Behavioural norms are classified into substantive, communication and control activities [START_REF] Ali | A conceptual framework for role-based knowledge profiling using semiotics approach[END_REF]. Substantive activities are direct operational activities; communication activities generate messages to support substantive activities; while control activities enforce rules and regulations to maintain standards for substantive and communication activities. As this study is at the exploratory stage, the current focus is on substantive norm specification.

To specify dependencies in substantive activities, the basic behavioural norm specification in Table 1 is extended to include predecessor and successor activities, as shown in Table 2. This structure is used to define the norm specifications for the virtual admission process in Section 4.2.

Virtual Admission Process Modelling

The study used the postgraduate admission process of University of Ghana as a case to explore virtual admission process modelling. Established in 1948, University of Ghana is one of the oldest and leading universities in Africa. In addition to undergraduate programmes, the university offers postgraduate programmes for the award of masters and doctoral degrees to both local and international students. In 2011, the first author initiated an action case research project involving himself, the university's ICT unit and the postgraduate admission office to virtualize the admission process. Action research has a dual purpose to address an immediate practical problem in an organisation and contribute to research at the same time [START_REF] Baskerville | Special issue on action research in information systems: making IS research relevant to practice -foreword[END_REF]. The study therefore aimed to improve the university's postgraduate admission by reducing processing time, data errors and data loss as well as increase online access to information for various stakeholders. It also aimed to contribute to research on virtual process modelling and organisational semiotics. Data for the study emerged from the first author's participant observation and interviews with project members and users, project and corporate documents, prototyping as well as focus group discussions with users and development team members.

Virtual Admission Process

In general, the study identified substantive, communication and control norm-based activities. However, as noted earlier, the current paper's focus is on the substantive norms. Communication norms such as advertisement, inquiries and message communication as well as control procedures are therefore not included in the current virtual process specification. This limited focus was adopted so as to first establish the substantive model before communication and control norms can be added at a later stage.

From the norm analysis involving informal and formal norms, five substantive activities were identified in the university's postgraduate admission process as shown in Fig. 5.

Application

Selection Transfer

Admission Acceptance

Fig. 5. Admission Process

The application process involves applicants completing online forms and uploading supporting documents. The web application then transfers the online data to the responsible teaching department for assessment and selection. The department reviews the application data and documents such as transcripts, certificates, research proposal, referees' reports, and selects qualified applicants. The admission office officially admits the selected applicants and those satisfied complete an online acceptance form.

Substantive Norm Specification for Virtual Admission Process

Following the norm analysis, the substantive activities were presented in a formal the extended behavioural norms specification for processes to enable their virtualization into technical norms in the university's organisational onion. As shown in Table 3, the predecessor and successor activities were added to the norm specification to account for activity dependences.

Table 3. Substantive norm specification for virtual admission process

In order to maintain dependencies, each activity has a predecessor and a successor. The emergent problem was how to get a predecessor and successor for the first and the last activity respectively. The issue was addressed by ensuring that the preceding and successive processes respectively served as the predecessor and successor for the first and last activities as shown in Table 3 with <open admission> and <enrolment>.

Hypertext Model

Following the formal substantive norm specification, WebML was used to design the hypertext architecture as the web interface to help virtualize the process activities. Fig. 6 shows a high level web interface model for the virtual admission application. The process begins with the applicant accessing the admission website and proceeding to the application page to view information on available programmes. If the applicant identifies a programme he/she likes, the applicant completes and Following the implementation of the virtual admission process of the university, the post-graduate admission process has become more efficient. Reported benefits by the admission office include reduction in time, costs, human resource requirements, data errors and data losses. Other benefits include increased access to online information for all stakeholders as well as a virtual tracking facility for the applicants. Reported challenges however include frequent power failures and slow internet access during peak periods when admission is open.

Conclusion

This study employed organisational semiotics and WebML to explore virtual process and web application modelling with a university's postgraduate admission process as a case study. The study contributes to both organisational semiotics and process virtualization research. Based on the notion that processes consist of activities and dependencies, the study contributes to organisational semiotics research by extending the basic behavioural norm specification to include predecessor and successor activities.

The study also demonstrates the applicability of WebML to extend behavioural norm specification into Web interface modelling. By this, process modelling under organisational semiotics can be extended with WebML hypertext for web interface design. In terms of process virtualization, the study extends the existing limited research focus on theorization and testing of process to virtual process modelling and web interface design. In terms of contribution to practice, the findings demonstrate improved efficiency and reduction in time, effort, human resource, cost as well as data errors and losses as potential benefits from virtualized processes.

The limitation of the study stems from its exploratory nature and high level focus on substantive activities without communicative and control activities. Future research can therefore benefit from extending the virtual process model and the web interface design to include communication and control norms.

  Modify operation: functionality for modifying or updating data in an entity instance.

Fig. 6 .

 6 Fig. 6. Hypertext model for virtual admission

Table 1 .

 1 Relevant WebML hypertext notations

	Category	Notation	Name and description
	Content units: components	Siteview	Site view: container for web
	for entering and publishing		pages, links, and operation units.
	content.
			Web page: container for
			published data, input forms and
			other components.
		Data unit	Data units: entity instance for
			published data.
		Entity
		[conditions]
		Entry unit	Entry unit: web form for
			entering and accepting data.
	Link units: links between		Normal link: user activated
	web pages and other		hypertext link between web
	components.		pages and other components
			Automatic link: system
		A	activated hypertext link between
			pages and other components.
	Operation units:	Create	Create operation: functionality
	functionalities for data		for creating new instance of an
	creation and manipulation		entity in a base table.
	subject to constraints.
		Entity
		<param := value>

Table 2 .

 2 Substantive behavioural norm specification for a processes

	Activity ID	<activity name>
	Specification	WHENEVER <condition>
		IF <state>
		THEN <agent>
		IS <may>
		TO <online action >
	Predecessor	<predecessor activity>
	Successor	<successor activity>