By

Göran Goldkuhl

ACTION and MEDIA in

INTERORGANIZATIONAL

INTERACTION

T

Coordinating the role of IT with business processes.

he language-action perspective (LAP) has contributed to several models of coordination of work. In the seminal work of Winograd and Flores [12] the conversation-foraction (cfa) scheme was introduced. This scheme describes, as a kind of generic construct, how two actors come to an agreement about what is to be done. There is someone who asks for the work and someone to perform the work. There are several approaches to business modeling following the cfa scheme. The two most famous approaches seem to be Action Workflow [9] and DEMO [1]; see the article by Dietz in this section for more on the DEMO methodology. The general idea is to get a business model of how people, through conversation, coordinate their work. Such a business model, focusing on coordination, should be seen as foundational for the development of supporting software. The LAP spirit is to consider software as a tool for coordination.

COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM May 2006/Vol. 49, No. 5

53

Action Workflow and DEMO are general business imply. BAT is a generic model for describing busimodeling methods based on LAP. They can be used ness interaction between a customer and supplier for modeling coordination within one organization (see Figure 2). It describes business interaction in
(intraorganizational coordination) and can also be terms of four phases of a business transaction: proused for modeling coordination between several orga- posal phase, commitment phase, fulfillment phase, nizations (interorganizational coordination). The and assessment phase. In each phase there may be models describe two general roles; a customer (who exchanges. In the proposal phase there may be requests work to be done) and a performer (who exchange of proposals. There may be offers from the offers, promises, and performs the requested work). supplier and questions from the customer, bids, and
The models describe the coordination as consisting of counterbids. In the commitments phase the two
Figure 1. the Action business Loop may four generic phases; Figure 1 illustrates The Action Workflowparties [9]. come to an agreement. Orders and promises are exchanged. Through a delivery
Workflow loop.
Each phase of the Action Workflow loop consists promise, the supplier makes a commitment for future delivery. The cusof communicative actions tomer order is not just a and not only information 1.
"Could you
2.
"Yes, I'll do it" please do?" request for a delivery. In a transfer. Following the Customer
Performer
agrees to do it normal business it also foundational idea of LAP, asks for an action
(preparation phase)
(negotiation phase) means a commitment for communication messages future payment. In this are both performative and phase the business parties informative. Performative may, through a negotiameans a certain commu- 4.
3.
Customer
Performer
tion, come to an agreenicative intent is expressed accepts report and "O.K., thank you"
"It is done" fullfils the work and declares satisfaction reports it done ment about a business that includes the establish- (acceptance phase)
(performance phase) deal. A business contract ment of certain interperis established in this sonal relations between phase; either as a formal and written contract or as sender and receiver. A
Figure 1. The Action
Workflow loop [9]. an informal one. In the third phase—the fulfillment work request is not just a work description. To
Goldkuhl fig 1phase—there will be an exchange of value. There is
(5/06)
express a request means an introduction of certain an exchange of products versus money. The supplier social expectations between the two communicators. delivers a product (goods and/or services), and the
The sender wishes the receiver to perform something. customer usually pays for the delivery. In this phase
Different communicative actions (in different phases the business parties fulfill their earlier commitments. of a conversation) mean establishment of different The fourth phase is an assessment phase. Each busiinterpersonal relations and expectations. The infor- ness party assesses the business interaction. Did it mative part (often called propositional or referential) reach expectations? If not, this may be expressed as a is what is talked about in the message, for example, complaint. Not all discontents may be expressed. actions performed or actions to be performed. Com- There exists the choice of voice versus exit. This munication is through these performative and infor- means negative assessments may not be communimative features the way to coordinate actions. LAP cated. Positive assessments are not so often commuemphasizes coordination in business processes: such nicated, but sometimes there may be an expression processes cannot be reduced to mere transformation of commendation. of objects or information. In addition, LAP allows
BAT is a generic model of business interaction. It interaction between different actors in the business can be used in different settings, business-to-business
(B2B) as well as business-to-consumer (B2C). It can process to be visible. also be used for different types products (goods or serFROM INTRAORGANIZATIONAL TO INTERORGANIZATIONAL vices; standardized or customized products). In the
BAT model, business interaction is structured in four
COORDINATION
A third LAP-based approach to business modeling is generic phases. This follows one core idea of Action
BAT [3, 6], which stands for Business interAction Workflow and DEMO. The action character of what and Transaction model. This approach is dedicated is done in each phase is emphasized. The passage of a to interorganizational interaction. It will be used in business transaction continuously changes the business the following as an example of a LAP-approach in relations between the business parties. Interactions creorder to show and clarify what a LAP-based frame- ate obligations, authorizations, fulfillments of obligawork for interorganizational coordination would tions and BAT helps to direct attention to these issues.
54

May 2006/Vol. 49, No. 5 COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM

What is specific about the BAT model? Why are business transaction.
The BAT model can shape our understanding of not the original LAP approaches (Action Workflow,
DEMO) sufficient? The BAT model is an exchange complex business interaction. It can be used for several model. In every phase there may be an exchange of purposes. BAT is used as a conceptual instrument actions between the business parties, not only actions when evaluating existing business interaction. It guides going in one direction. Figure 2. Business interaction, within a business focus different important aspects of
The BAT model acknowledges the evaluators to transaction, between only of commu- the business interaction. Such that business interaction consists nota customer and a supplier (the BAT model). an evaluation functions nication, but also of an exchange of value. The third as a basis for redesign. The BAT framework has been phase comprises physical delivery and payment. The used in several cases for modeling and designing different business interaction
BAT model is not a genpatterns. One example is eral coordination model.
Business relation that is has been used to
It acknowledges that
(Pre-Transactional)
identify hidden business interorganizational coordiCapability
Capability
and and opportunities when modnation and interaction
Needs
Needs eling and comparing difbetween independent Supplier
Customer
Proposals ferent business processes of business parties will have
Commitments
a supplier [8]. partially another character
Sales and
Procurement
Delivery
Fullfillments
LAP and the BAT than coordination within
Provision
Usage
Assessments
model are pragmatic one single organization. frameworks in two The exchange character respects. They both of business interaction is emphasize action, directemphasized in the BAT
Business relation
(Post-Transactional)
ing our attention toward model. Such an emphasis
Possibly recurrent the action character of on exchange also entails a business transactions coordination and organisymmetric view of cuszational performance; tomer and supplier. This view means that both Figure 2. Business interaction, what people do when engaging in business transacwithin a business transaction, tions. These frameworks not only direct our attention business parties should be between a customer and a supplier (the BAT model). fig 2 (5/06)
Goldkuhl toward pragmatic features of business interaction, but acknowledged as active should be used as pragmatic instruments to change business parties. All their relevant business actions should be taken into coordination and business interaction. LAP and BAT account. This does of course not entail that the power are not just philosophical reflections about the world. balance between the business parties is symmetric or They should be directly useful in creation and recreation of a business world. that they perform the same type of actions.
This symmetric view on suppliers and customers may be a contrasted to the one-sighted view in many IT AS MEDIA FOR COMMUNICATIVE ACTIONS marketing models. In such models the supplier is con- The BAT model should thus be a support mechasidered the active party and the customer is a passive nism for a co-design of business interaction and softparty that should be influenced through different ware. This means it should be an integrated design means. of business processes and supporting software. However, the description of the BAT model so far (see
Figure 2) does not say anything about the use of
AN INSTRUMENT FOR CO-DESIGN OF BUSINESS information technology in the business interaction.
INTERACTION AND SOFTWARE
The BAT model is to be used for analysis and design How can IT shape the business interaction? The of interorganizational interaction. BAT is a reference answer to this question will go through an explomodel for business interaction. This means it can be ration of the role of software in organizational coorused as a template for investigating interaction dination and action.
According to LAP, IT is an instrument for perforbetween customers and suppliers. It also helps inquirers direct their attention toward important mance of communicative actions [4, 12]. IT makes aspects, such as how proposals are made, how cus- people communicate and thereby coordinate their tomers and suppliers come to agreements through actions. Communicative actions can be expressed negotiation and contracting, how agreements are through IT, which means IT has expressive powers. fulfilled in delivery and payment processes, how An IT application has a capability for enabling certain both customers and suppliers get satisfied through a communicative actions, for example placing orders.
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM May 2006/Vol. 49, No. 5

55

The BAT model acknowledges that business interaction consists NOT ONLY OF
COMMUNICATION, but also of an

EXCHANGE OF VALUE.
Figure 3. The role of media in business

This also means, however, that interaction-four cases:business action is performed. actions are restricted a) supplier control,
b) customer control, c) and constrained. There are usually some predefined combined supplier and customer control, IT AS MEDIA IN BUSINESS INTERACTION communicative actions that can be performedd) third-party control. through a particular IT application. Something can In what ways is IT a mediator in business interacbe said through a piece of software, but not every- tion? What kinds of actions may be afforded and thing. IT applications mediated through IT? enable and constrain
The BAT model can help
a) Supplier Control
b) Customer Control communicative actions us discuss and analyze or to say it in another this. Different business way: IT is a mediator of actions (according to the
Supplier
Customer
Supplier
Customer coordinative actions. different exchange
It is not only a matter phases) can be mediated of what actions can be through some IT applicaperformed through an IT c) Supplier and Customer Control tion. Software applicad) Third-Party Control application. The intended tions are media through types of communicative which business actions actions must also be idenare performed.
Supplier
Customer
Supplier
Customer tifiable by the user. A cusOne key LAP issue tomer interacting through concerns who is responsia Web site must underble for the mediation of stand what actions are business actions. Consider possible to perform. This is a matter of IT affor- Figure 3. The role of media in the following trivial examdances—what the IT application affords to its users. business interaction—four cases: ple: A commercial Web
a) supplier control; b) customer
The concept of affordance, originally developed in per- control; c) combined supplier and site makes it possible for
Goldkuhl customer control; ception psychology [2], has been brought into comput- fig 3 (5/06) d) third-party customers to place their ing [5, 10]. An affordance is an action possibility that is control. orders independent of observable by its potential users. Affordances must time and place. The Web include both executable and informative properties. site is an enabler of order actions. However, the cerThis is an action view on IT applications and it fits tain features of the Web site may also restrict the cuswell into LAP. IT applications should not only be tomer in expressing orders. The customer may desire usable. They should be actable. IT applications ordered products to be delivered to different addresses should support the performance of communicative and this may not be possible according to the Web and informative actions [4]. The IT application, as a site. It is important to acknowledge that IT both designed artifact, involves communication to its enables and constrains communicative actions. The users. The user interface communicates action possi- one in power of the IT application will also have bilities to the users. These action possibilities (affor- power over communication and the coordination dances) of the user interface should be seen as process.
We can use the BAT model to investigate the IT metacommunicative actions from designers to users
[5]. They are metacommunicative actions since they mediation of the business interaction. It is important inform about possible communicative actions. The to raise questions like: Who is in charge of the medibuttons on a Web site (such as “search,” “order,” “con- ating instrument? What purposes are inherent in the firm”) are, as such, communicative actions from IT instruments? What actions are enabled? What condesigners to users. These buttons communicate what straints are put on actions?
In Figure 3, four different cases of IT-mediated business actions a potential user can perform. When the user clicks a button, a particular communicative business interaction have been depicted. We use the
56

May 2006/Vol. 49, No. 5 COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM

principles from the BAT model: two actors (customer and supplier) and four phases of exchange actions.
E-business, especially in B2C settings, usually means a supplier sets up a Web site where customers can search for products and place orders. The supplier is the one who mediates the business actions, both supplier’s actions and customer actions. The Web site is the way, or at least one way, for the supplier to perform certain business actions. Giving offers and order receipts may be performed through the Web site. This is case a in Figure 3, where the supplier, through controlling the IT mediation, has great influence on the business interaction.
It is not common, but there are occasionally cases in which customers have a Web site or some other IT application that serves as a mediator for business interaction with its suppliers. There are situations in B2B or business-to-government (B2G) where such cases exist
(case b in Figure 3). A powerful customer is the one who, through control of the IT mediator, has great influence on the way business interaction is performed.
In B2B settings, where a supplier and a customer have a dense relation with many business transactions, they will perhaps create a specific IT application together, through which they can interact (case c in Figure 3). This was often the case in traditional
EDI, but can also be performed through Web technology. The IT mediation of business interaction will be arranged through a joint design and negotiation process between the two business parties. There will be a combined customer and supplier control.
One of the parties can of course be more active in the design and implementation process.
In some situations, customers and suppliers interact through an electronic marketplace. A separate IT application, run by an independent third party, is used for interaction. In this case, (d in Figure 3), neither the customer nor the supplier will have control of the IT mediation [11].
In Figure 3, the IT media covers all four phases of the business interaction. This will not be the case for all types of transactions. Product delivery
(in the fulfillment phase) will only be possible to be mediated if the product is in a digital format, otherwise there must be a physical distribution.
Invoicing and payment will, however, often be performed through IT-mediated services. The BAT model can support an analysis of the coverage of
IT media in the business interaction. Which actions, in what business phases, should be supported by which media? (See [7].) The positioning of the IT media, illustrated through the four cases in Figure 3, is thus critical. The BAT model gives support for this kind of analysis.
COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM May 2006/Vol. 49, No. 5

© 2006 ACM 0001-0782/06/0500 $5.00

systems development at Linköping University and Jönköping
International Business School, Sweden.

57

Göran Goldkuhl (ggo@ida.liu.se) is a professor of information

1. Dietz, J.L.G. Understanding and modeling business processes with
DEMO. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER ‘99), Paris, 1999.
2. Gibson, J.J. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton
Mifflin, Boston, 1979.
3. Goldkuhl, G. Generic business frameworks and action modeling. In
Proceedings of the Conference on Communication Modeling—Language/Action Perspective ‘96, Springer Verlag, 1996.
4. Goldkuhl, G. and Ågerfalk, P.J. Actability: A way to understand information systems pragmatics. In K. Liu et al., Eds., Coordination and
Communication Using Signs: Studies in Organisational Semiotics–2,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2002.
5. Goldkuhl, G., Cronholm, S., and Sjöström, J. User interfaces as organisational action media. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Organisational Semiotics (Setúbal, Portugal, 2004).
6. Goldkuhl, G. and Lind, M. Developing e-interactions—A framework for business capabilities and exchanges. In Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2004) (Turku, 2004).
7. Johansson, B-M. and Axelsson, K. Analysing communication media and actions—Extending and evaluating the business action matrix. In
Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems
(Regensburg, 2005).
8. Lind, M. and Goldkuhl, G. Designing business process variants: Using the BAT framework as a pragmatic lens. In C. Bussler, et al. Eds., BPM
2005 Workshops, LNCS 3812, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2006.
9. Medina-Mora, R., Winograd, T., Flores, R., and Flores, F. The action workflow approach to workflow management technology. In J. Turner and R. Kraut, Eds., Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, (CSCW’92), ACM Press, New York, 1992.
10. Norman, D.A. The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books, New
York, 1988.
11. Petersson, J. and Lind, M. Towards the concept of business action media: Frameworks for business interaction in an electronic market place setting. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Action in Language, Organisations, and Information Systems (ALOIS) (University of Limerick, 2005).
12. Winograd, T. and Flores, F. Understanding Computers and Cognition: A
New Foundation for Design. Ablex, Norwood, 1986.

References

CONCLUSION
The actions in coordination are emphasized in LAP, encouraging investigators to focus on intentions, expectations, and commitments in communication.
This is crucial in designing software to support both intraorganizational and interorganizational coordination. LAP has contributed to several models for investigating, modeling, and designing organizational coordination. In order to be useful, such an approach should give guidance to a co-design of business interaction and its supportive software. The
BAT model gives assistance in positioning the IT media in relation to business parties and in different business phases. The BAT model has been applied in many studies since the mid-1990s and has proven to be useful [8]. Existing business processes have been evaluated, while new ways and modes of interaction have been co-designed. c

58

May 2006/Vol. 49, No. 5 COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM