IB  Vol.2 No.4 , December 2010
Using the Notion of ‘Information Flow’ to Investigate Why a Signal May Stand Differently for Individuals
ABSTRACT
Studies over past century show that the organisations profoundly rely on signs (signals in general) and norms to operate. Information systems may be seen as systems of signs. Signs are indispensible part of norms, which people follow in order to act in an organisation. A signal or sign may convey different messages to different agents. If we eliminate merely subjective interpretations, which could be wrong from the receiver’s perspective, it must be the case that for such a phenomenon to happen the signal does carry different information for different individuals in the sense of actually informing them. We explore how this is possible in this paper. We observe that information theory and semiotics are strongly related. Therefore, rationally linking organisational semiotics and information theory in some way would be beneficial and highly desirable. Our approach is based upon semantic information and information flow theories put forward by Dretske, Barwise and Seligman along with basic notions of Stamper’s organisational semiotics, i.e. sign and norms and Devlin’s constraints. We exploit an S-B-R (information source (S) - information bearer (B) - information receiver(R)) framework, which incorporate the above mentioned theories to examine information creation, flow and receiving. We put forward the phenomena of information nesting, norms with which a signal or sign is involved and co-existing multiple S-B-R structures to elucidate this fact.

Cite this paper
nullR. Mantri and J. Feng, "Using the Notion of ‘Information Flow’ to Investigate Why a Signal May Stand Differently for Individuals," iBusiness, Vol. 2 No. 4, 2010, pp. 317-325. doi: 10.4236/ib.2010.24041.
References
[1]   R. Stamper, “Organizational Semiotics: Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline?” McGraw-Hill, London, 1997.

[2]   C. Shannon and W. Weaver, “The Mathematical Theory of Communication,” University of Illinois Press, Illinois, 1949.

[3]   F. I. Dretske, “Knowledge and the Flow of Information,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999.

[4]   J. Barwise and J. Perry, “Situations and Attitudes,” MIT Press, 1983.

[5]   J. Barwise and J. Seligman, “Information Flow: The Logic of Distributed Systems,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.

[6]   L. Floridi, “Is Semantic Information Meaningful Data?” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 70, 2005, pp. 351-370.

[7]   W. Hammerstingl, “The Basics of Semiotics.” http:// www.olinda.com/edu/CinemaStudies/Semiotics/semiotics. htm

[8]   K. Liu, “Semiotics in Information Systems Engineering,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.

[9]   D. Keith, “Logic and Information,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.

[10]   J. J. Carr, “Digital Interfacing with an Analogue World,” TAB Books, 1979.

[11]   A. Wilden, “System & Structure: Essays in Communication and Exchange,” Tavistock, London, 1977.

[12]   J. C. Mingers, “Information and Meaning: Foundations for an Intersubjective Account,” Information Systems Journal, Vol. 5, 1995, pp. 285-306.

[13]   “Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy,” 2nd Edition, Definition of Information, 1999.

[14]   C. Shannon, “A Mathematical Theory of Communication,” The Bell System Technical Journal, Vol. 27, 1948, pp. 379-423, 623-656.

[15]   G. B. Davis and M. H. Olson, “Management Information Systems: Conceptual Foundations, Structure and Development,” McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, 1984.

[16]   G. A. Silver and M. Silver, “Systems Analysis and Design,” Addison Wesley, Massachusetts, 1989.

[17]   P. Checkland and J. Scholes, “Soft Systems Methodology in Action,” John Wiley & Sons Ltd (Import), New York, 1990.

[18]   A. Sáenz-Ludlow, “Signs and the Process of Interpretation: Sign as an Object and as a Process,” Studies in Philosophy and Education, Vol. 26, No. 3, May 2007, pp. 205-223.

[19]   “The Free Dictionary by Farlex. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/

[20]   R. Stamper, “Information in Business and Administra- tive Systems,” John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1973.

[21]   W. Hu and J. Feng, “Considering Norms and Signs within an Information Source-Bearer-Receiver (S-B-R) Fra- mework,” Virtual, Distributed and Flexible Organisations, 2005, pp. 183-184.

[22]   K. Liu, R. J. Clarke and P. B. Andersen, “Information, Organisation, and Technology: Studies in Organisational Semiotics,” Springer, Berlin, 2001.

[23]   D. Falkenberg, W. Hesse, R. K. Stamper, C. Rolland, J. L. H. Oei, P. Lindgreen and B. E. Nilsson, “Framework of Information System Concepts - The FRISCO Report,” 1998.

[24]   J. Feng and Y. Wang, “‘No Representation without Information Flow’: Measuring Efficacy and Efficiency of Representation: An Information Theoretic Approach,” W. Trans. on Comp., Vol. 8, 2009, pp. 494-505.

[25]   J. Mingers, “Cognising Systems: Information and Meaning,” Realising Systems Thinking: Knowledge and Action in Management Science, Vol. 25, No. 2, 2006, pp. 103- 131.

[26]   S. Schiffer, “Propositional Content,” Forthcoming in E. Lepore and B. Smith, Eds., Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language.

[27]   P. Cang and S. Wang, “The Analysis of Uncertain Know- ledge Based on Meaning of Information,” WSEAS Tran- sactions on Information Science and Application, Vol. 6, 2009, pp. 136-145.

[28]   R. Stamper, K. Liu, M. Hafkamp and Y. Ades, “Understanding the Roles of Signs and Norms in Organizations - A Semiotic Approach to Information Systems Design,” Behaviour & Information Technology, Vol. 19, 2000, p. 15.

 
 
Top