in the previous post on the notion of business capabilities, I looked at what I called the property-likeness of a acapability – so that an object is said to have a capability, or to be capable of…

I also suggested that in an Aristotelian sense, such a notion was derived from instances through a process of abstraction. one of the problems with this approach is the modal character of capability because it IS grounded in something that is not yet real and so cannot really be considered an instance because the being of an instance does seem to include the notion of existence.

So being a property, cannot really be grounded in a process of abstraction, at least not if abstraction must begin with the real. So my approach is more conceptual, which suggest that it has to be a bit more platonic.but then who wants to traffic in universals…

phenomenology to the rescue…

presuppose intelligible content, just because it IS intelligible.

Anyway, there is a relationship between function / capability / structure / process / activity / service / task / action / and a string of other terms and teasing this out is probably the immediate goal.

this is effectively the organisational metamodel or some part of it – and having this would take me quite a way towards resolving a number of problems that seem to repeat themselves endlessly in the enterprise architecture space.

Anyway, just a short post