A Formal Specification for Organizational Adaptation 21

Definition 1. (Agent Capability)

Given formula ϕ in the language and an agent a ∈ AO , agent a is capable of ϕ,
represented by Ca ϕ iff  ϕ and ∃ψ ∈ Σa , such that |= ψ → ϕ.
Intuitively, Ca ϕ means that a can control ϕ, which means that a is able (under certain
conditions) to make it the case that ϕ. Note that, the notion of capability gives only a
static description of an agent’s ability, namely, the necessary condition to realize ϕ. At
any given moment, only the combination of the capability plus the opportunity (e.g.,
preconditions) leads to the agent’s ability, represented by Ga ϕ. The opportunity is rep-
resented in the semantics by a set of all transitions in which a takes part (influences the
result) Taw .
Moreover, while the agent ability (Ga ϕ) allows the agent to achieve ϕ in a next
state, it does not express that the agent will act to achieve ϕ. The latter is named agent
attempt, represented by Ha ϕ. Finally, we introduce the definition of agent activity, stit
(see to it that). Formally,
Definition 2 (Agent Ability, Attempt and Activity). Given an agent a ∈ A, agent
ability, Ga ϕ, agent attempt, Ha ϕ, agent control, ICa ϕ, and agent activity, Ea ϕ, are
defined as:
Ga : w |= Ga ϕ iff w |= Ca ϕ and ∃(w, w ) ∈ Taw : w |= ϕ
Ha : w |= Ha ϕ iff w |= Ga ϕ and ∀(w, w ) ∈ Taw : w |= ϕ
ICa : w |= ICa iff ∀w : (w, w ) ∈ R ⇒ (w, w ) ∈ Taw
Ea : w |= Ea ϕ iff w |= Ha ϕ ∧ ICa
Agent activity is represented by Ea ϕ. Intuitively, Ea ϕ represents the actual action of
bringing ϕ about, namely, agent a can ‘cause’ ϕ to be true in all the next states from the
current one. The formalization of Ea ϕ is based on the stit operator, originally defined
in [16].
Another important aspect to be considered is the way organizations deal with com-
plex objectives (which are often not achievable by any single agent) that require the
coordination of different agents according to their skills and responsibilities. In the def-
inition of organization above, the dependency between two agents (a and b), represented
by a ≤O b, indicates that a is able to delegate some state of affairs to agent b. The de-
pendency relation also allows an agent for delegation of responsibility, as follows.
Definition 3. (Agent Responsibility)
Given an organization O = {AO , ≤O , DO , SO } and an agent a ∈ AO , the responsi-
bility Ra ϕ is defined as: Ra ϕ ≡ ♦Ha ϕ ∨ ♦Ha Rb ϕ, for some b ∈ AO .
Informally, Ra ϕ means that a has to make sure that a certain state of affair is (eventu-
ally) achieved, either by realizing it itself or by delegating that result to others. Notice
that, responsibility does not guarantee the achievement of the underlying state of affair.
From the above considerations, the structural dependency (Ca Rb ϕ) is straightforward:
if (a ≤O b) then Ca Rb ϕ, namely, a is capable to delegate ϕ to b.
Finally, we consider the formal specification of structural changes. Re-organization
activities imply changes within the organizational structure, such as modifications over
objectives, agents, and structural dependencies. Within the formal model, these modifi-
cations are represented as follows [5].
22 H. Aldewereld et al.

Fire_Station
(fs)
 



 

First_Aid_  
(ef) (el)
Station


(fas) (as)
Firefighter_ Emergency
Team _Call_Center
(ft) (ecc)









 



(dt) (dbf)

Firefighting
Police_Station
_Truck
(ps)
(fft)

Fig. 2. Social Structure diagram: Fire Station organization (O) example

Definition 4. In the following reorganization operations in O = {AO , ≤O , DO , SO }

are presented:
– Staffing: Changes on the set of agents: adding new agents, or deleting agents from
the set. Corresponding to personnel activities in human organizations (hiring, firing
and training). Represented by staf f +(O, a) and staf f − (O, a).
– Structuring: Changes on the ordering structure of the organization. Corresponding
to infrastructural changes in human organizations: e.g. changes in composition of
departments or positions. Represented by struct+ (O, a ≤ b) and struct− (O, a ≤
b).
– Strategy: Changes on the objectives of the organization: adding or deleting de-
sired states. Corresponding to strategic (or second-order) changes in human or-
ganizations: modifications on the mission, vision, or charter of the organization.
Represented by strateg + (O, d) and strateg − (O, d).
– Duty: Changes the responsibilities in the organization in correspondence to
duty assignments in human relations. Represented by duty + (Oi , a, ϕ) and
duty − (Oi , a, ϕ)
– Learn: Changes the knowledge (state of affairs) of the organization in correspon-
dence to the change of experiences, knowledge and learning in human organiza-
tions Represented by learn+ (Oi , ϕ) and learn− (Oi , ϕ)

2.3 A Methodological Context

Using an example taken from the Dutch procedures for crisis management, we elaborate
how changes in the environment affect organizations. The modelling phase is conducted
according to the OperA methodology [2] using the OperettA tool [14] for the depicted
diagrams. We describe how, due to the changes in the environment, the organization
is forced to reorganize and what changes to its norms are required. The organizational
and social structure diagram of Figure 2 represents the crisis management organization.
This diagram shows the responsibilities and commitments of each participant, e.g., in
case of an emergency call, the Fire Station is dependent on Emergency Call Center
to be informed about the disaster location. For the sake of simplicity, we consider that
 A Formal Specification for Organizational Adaptation 23

Firefighter Team sets up a strategic intervention (to achieve its primary objective ex-
tinguish fire) on the results of two evaluation criteria: damage evaluation and fire eval-
uation. From the former criterion, Firefighter Team checks how many wounded there
are in order to come up with information about the necessity or not to ask for ambu-
lance service. Moreover, the Firefighter Team checks if the damage involves build-
ing structures that may collapse, causing obstacles and risks for drivers on the roads,
e.g., this may also imply police intervention to deviate traffic in safe directions. From
the fire evaluation criterion, Firefighter Team can decide whether it is the case or not
to ask Fire Station for a Firefighting Truck intervention.

Fig. 3. Interaction Structure diagram: Fire Station example

The social structure in figure 2 describes organizational objectives and social respon-
sibilities between organizational roles, but it gives no indication of how organizational
goals can be achieved and interactions planned. This is represented in the interaction
structure diagrams, which provide a partial order on how to fulfil responsibilities and to
achieve objectives as depicted in Figure 3. The sequence of scenes depicted indicates
how to cope with an emergency call, e.g., the Fire Station’s responsibility to build up
a fire brigade each time an emergency call occurs (scene SetUpFiremanTeam) and
the Firefighter Team’s responsibility of reporting on and taking decisions about the
running accident (scene EvaluateImpact). OperA enables designers to further detail
each scene in terms of involved organizational roles along their objectives and respon-
sibilities, norms that have to be considered to correctly achieve objectives, and expected
results at the end of the scene execution.

3 Forms of Organizational Structure Adaptation

In order to keep effective, organizations must strive to maintain a good fit in a changing
environment. Changes in the environment lead to alterations on the effectiveness of the
organization and therefore to the need to reorganize, or in the least, to the need to con-
sider the consequences of that change to the organization’s effectiveness and efficiency.
On the other hand, organizations are active entities, capable not only of adapting to
the environment but also of changing that environment. This means that organizations
24 H. Aldewereld et al.

are in state of, to a certain degree, altering environment conditions to meet their aims
and requirements, which leads to the question of how and why reorganization decisions
should be reached. The flexibility of an organization is defined as the combination of
the changeability of an organizational characteristic (structure, technology, culture) and
the capabilities of management to change that characteristic [9].
In Organizational Theory, the concept of adaptation can mean different things, rang-
ing from strategic choice to environmental determinism. Strategic choice refers to the
planned pursuit of ends based on a rational assessment of available means and condi-
tions, resulting on a explicit decision to change the organization. Deterministic views on
adaptation, on the other hand, explain organizational change as (involuntary) response
to environmental requirements. In this paper, we treat adaptation as a design issue that
requires an (explicit) action resulting in the modification of some organizational char-
acteristics. Such decisions can be of two kinds: proactive, preparing the organization in
advance for an expected future, and reactive, making adjustments after the environment
has changed [4].
In terms of the formal model of organizations introduced in the following section,
changes are represented as (temporal) transitions between two different worlds. Given a
world w ∈ W , many different events may happen that change some proposition in that
world resulting in a different world (the relation T between two worlds represents this).
Because not all parameters in w are controllable by the organization, the current state
of the organization is not necessarily, and in fact in most cases not, completely con-
trolled by the organization itself. That is, changes are not always an effect of (planned)
organizational activity. We distinguish between exogenous and endogenous change. In
the exogenous situation, changes occur outside the control, and independently of the
actions, of the agents in the organization, whereas that in the endogenous case, changes
that are result of activity explicitly taken by agents in the organization.
Contingency theory [6] states that there is no one best way to organize or structure
the organization, but not all structures are equally effective, that is, organizational struc-
ture is one determinant of organizational performance. Performance of the organization
can be seen as the measure to which its objectives are achieved at a certain moment.
Because environments evolve, performance will vary. Many organizational studies are
therefore concerned with the evaluation of performance, identifying triggers for change
and determine the influence of environment change in the organizational performance
and indicating directions to improve performance.
In summary, reorganization consists basically of two activities. Firstly, the formal
representation and evaluation of current organizational state and its ‘distance’ to de-
sired state, and, secondly, the formalization of reorganization strategies, that is, the pur-
poseful change of organizational constituents (structure, agent population, objectives)
in order to make a path to desired state possible and efficient.

4 Towards a Formal Interpretation

A formal model of adaptation enables the (offline) analysis of organization models in

terms of performance and utility, and can also be used to provide (runtime) decision-
making support. In the following, we describe the main aspects of this formal model.
 A Formal Specification for Organizational Adaptation 25

The section 4.1 the basic organization model is introduced and in section 4.2 this model
is extended to deal with reorganization issues.

4.1 Formal Organization Model

Based on the formal model [3,5], outlined in Section 2.2, we provide a set of formal
ingredients required to define a formal interpretation for the adaptation of organizational
structures, as informally described in previous sections.
For the sake of simplicity, let us consider that each of the roles of the fire station
organization (O), that is, Fire Station (f s), Firefighter Team (f t),
Emergency Call Centre (ecc), Firefighting Truck (f f t), Police Station (ps), and
First Aid Station (f as), is played by a single actor, or role enacting agent. Moreover,
we assume that the organization has the (main) objectives, handle emergency call
(hec), determine emergency location (el), form a brigade (f b), extinguish fire (ef ),
and sub-objectives reach the place (rp), how to react (hr), level of emergency
(le), deal with big fire (dbf ), deal with traffic (dt), and ask for ambulance service
(as). Therefore,
0
O = {AO , ≤O , DO , SO }, where
A = {f s, f t, ecc, f f t, ps, f as}
≤O = {f s ≤O ecc, f s ≤O f t, f t ≤O f f t, f t ≤O ps, f t ≤O f as}
DO = {hec} = {(el ∧ f b ∧ ef )}
The sets AO , and ≤O provide a formal interpretation of the roles and dependencies
depicted in Figure 2.
DO provides the formal representation of the objectives of the organization. We use
the logical connectives ∧ (and) and ∨ (or) to model sub-objective decomposition, de-
scribing possible ways for objective achievement. Informally, DO means that an emer-
gency call is handled (hec) if location has been identified (el), a rescue team has been
formed (f b) and the fire extinguished (ef ). It is important to stress here that objectives
are not actions, but describe desired states of affairs to be achieved. Objectives can
be further decomposed into sub-objectives, e.g. extinguish fire ef = (rp ∧ le ∧ hr),
namely, the fire brigade has to reach the place (rp), establish the accident severity (le)
and then determine the appropriate reaction (hr). Moreover, (sub)objectives can de-
scribe alternative ways of achievement, e.g. hr = {(ef )∨(as∧dbf )∨(as∧dt∧dbf )},
meaning that appropriate ways for a firefighter team to react to a fire are to extinguish it
itself, to ask for ambulance and fire truck assistance, or to ask for ambulance, fire truck
and traffic coordination assistance.
0
The initial set SO describes the capabilities and responsibilities of agents in AO . For
0
clarity of reading, we split SO into two sub-sets S1 and S2 for capabilities and respon-
sibilities, respectively.

0
SO = (S1 ∪ S2), where:
S1 = {Cecc el, Cf s f b, Cf t rp, Cf t ef, Cf t hr, Cf t le, Cf f t dbf, Cps dt, Cf as as}
S2 = {Rf s hec}