Business Process Integration, 3rd learning diary, DL Monday 8th of October at 9 am.

• Look up at least one possible reference to your project topic using scientific databases or scholar google.
• Pick a potential research method (literature, case, constructive/design research). Summarise the paper.
• Form a question on research methodologies that you want an answer to.

Topic: Financial ontology

1. Financial processes & messages in different standards (RosettaNet,UBL, ACORD, SEPA,..) and their analyses
   
2. Creating a universal data model (ontology) for this domain
3. Partly guidance from financial company
4. There was interested group of 4 people: Jukka, Kaisa, Tuomo, Tao
   

Mr. Paavo Kotinurmi gives us the following instruction:

For some background information on standards relevant to bank/insurance
companies.

Maksuliikealue (payments/invoices):
- Finvoice, http://www.pankkiyhdistys.fi/finvoice/
- EU:n maksupalveludirektiivi
- ISO20022-sanomastandardi
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/docs/studies/eei-3.2-e
-invoicing_final_report.pdf
Bo Haralds blog also source for information: http://boharald.blogspot.com/

Financial reporting:
- XBRL, http://www.xbrl.org/Home/

Insurances:
- acord, http://www.acord.org/

E-government message standards:
- NES, Northern European Subset of UBL

Other standards
- e.g RosettaNet, UBL (invoice)
- For RosettaNEt PIPs, see e.g.
http://www.soberit.hut.fi/T-86/T-86.300/2004/nordea_S_Toivonen.pdf

Ontologia-reference framework:
- REA (possible formal upper level ontology), see e.g.
http://www.msu.edu/user/mccarth4/rea-ontology/
- Sumo (another possible formal upper level ontology),
http://suo.ieee.org/SUO/SUMO/index.html

I can provide some references on how e.g. RosettaNet contents can be mapped
to SUMO.

Basic assumptions behind this project:

• You can shed light to how these different standards and ontologies relateto each other.
• Are they competing/complementary
• Currently its very brobably that these different standards specify the same thing in slightly different way
  

• The integration challenge for a bank is to support such wide variety of standards

• Is there a merged data model that can represent this information needed in different standards?

• Ideal information is to have an internal higher level presentation ofthe needed information that can be mapped to specific standards
  

• Banks/insurance companies work with many industries and need tointegrate information not only from other banks, but also companies, publicsector etc. This makes their position very challenging - can this be managed without point-to-point chaos?
  

Its clear that during one fall, such a financial ontology will not be ready. But this assignment should pave a way towards it. Being able to represent this problematics well and have the basic information on these standards is a contribution towards such a data model (ontology).

Probably not all these standards listed are not going to be handled in detail. Starting point would be that this work is to do constructive/design research based on this case requirements towards a common ontology.

Steps could be:

1. Small analyses of the big picture with all these standards
2. Selecting standards for which the group concentrates - course &

Osuuspankki can help this

• Going deeper to selected specifications - seeing semantic similarities/differences & working towards a common view on information
  

• Presenting analyses results for comments for expert opinion

• Recommendations for future - how this should be continued.

Comments on some potential research methods: ANALYZING THE PAST TO PREPARE FOR THE FUTURE: WRITING A LITERATURE REVIEW

I think I will use the "literature view" research method in our paper.

According to "Literature review "From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, which gives following explanation.

"A Literature review is a body of text that aims to review the critical points of current knowledge on a particular topic.

Most often associated with science-oriented literature, such as a thesis, the literature review usually precedes a research proposal, methodology and results section. Its ultimate goal is to bring the reader up to date with current literature on a topic and forms the basis for another goal, such as the justification for future research in the area.

A good literature review is characterized by: a logical flow of ideas; current and relevant references with consistent, appropriate referencing style; proper use of terminology; and an unbiased and comprehensive view of the previous research on the topic.

According to Cooper (1988) "a literature review uses as its database reports of primary or original scholarship, and does not report new primary scholarship itself. The primary reports used in the literature may be verbal, but in the vast majority of cases reports are written documents. The types of scholarship may be empirical, theoretical, critical/analytic, or methodological in nature. Second a literature review seeks to describe, summarise, evaluate, clarify and/or integrate the content of primary reports". "

Based on the summary of "ANALYZING THE PAST TO PREPARE FOR THE FUTURE: WRITING A LITERATURE REVIEW", An ideal article should have:

• motivates the research topic and explains the reviews contributions

• describes the key concepts

• delineates the boundaries of the research

• reviews relevant prior literature in IS and related areas

• develops a model to guide future research

• justifies propositions by presenting theoretical explanations, past empirical findings, and practical examples

• presents concluding implications for researchers and managers.

Form a question on research methodologies that you want an answer to.

How to find suitable articles related to your research topics? how to combine the literature review and case study to write a good paper?