Proceedings of the International Conference on

Electrical Engineering and Informatics

Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia June 17-19, 2007

G-14

Resource-Event-Agent (REA) Modeling using Agent Approach

Low Loi Ming1*, Abdul Razak Hamdan2, Mohd. Faidzul bin Nasruddin3, Mohd. Zakree Ahmad Nazri4
1,2,3,4

Department of Science and System Management,

Faculty of Technology and Information Science,
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
43600, Bangi, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.

REA methodology is a modeling technique, which designed specially to model business processes. A completed REA model
can be used to generate a relational database. Normally, conventional REA modeling technique designed by McCarthy uses event
approach in order to detect all related entity nodes in a business flow. This research proposes a new REA modeling methodology
based upon agent approach to capture all related entity nodes in a business flow. Then, these two approaches will be compared
quantitative and qualitatively. Quantitative comparison involves the generation of mathematic equations, which plays a vital rule
in determining the total amount of entity nodes captured through both approaches. Where as qualitative comparison involves
analysis towards system prototypes usability from users perspective. Respondents will be asked to test both system prototypes
translated from event approach and agent approach. Respondents feedbacks will then be analyzed by using SPSS in order to
determine which approach fulfils users requirements the most. As a conclusion, writer hopes that the results from research
analysis will provide guidance and new ideas in REA modeling besides acting as a pioneer for those who are not familiar with
REA modeling so that they can master and conquer REA modeling technique more effectively and efficiently in future.

1.0 Introduction
For the past few years, accounting has been developed
from its basic concept, which is Recording all the business
process in sequences according to book-keeping principles
into a tool for organizations planning and controlling.
Since the revolution of Information Technology has
changed an organizations operating maaner, whereby
computer knowledges has been integrated into business
process, especially in the field of accounting, therefore
Accounting Information System (AIS) has been developed
in order to generate business transactions more accurately (1).
Nowadays, management department always equipped
with all sorts of data from the whole organizations;
environment. But, its very hard for them to retrieve
appropriate data type which are truly needed (2). Besides
that, (3) have criticized that conventional AISs usability is
very limited as the AISs developers were not being
exposed to the correct concept of information sharing and
system modeling technique, which then caused the design
and development of AIS doesnt fullfil the users
requirements. For the past fifty years, researchers and
professionals have detected the weakness of AIS in the
process of supporting non-financial decisions (4),(5),(6). In
additon, this problem has exploded crisis situation in AIS
world (7), (8), (9), (10).
Entity relationship (ER) model which based upon (11)
methodology has been developed in order to solve the
above problems.
*Low Loi Ming. E-mail: lowloiming@yahoo.com

However, current ER model still facing some

constraints where by the process of normalization needed to
be executed first before it is allowed to be mapped into the
real database. Realizing the occuring constraints,

ISBN 978-979-16338-0-2

McCarthy proposed Resource-Event-Agent (REA)

model in the year of 1982. The conventional REA model
which based upon event approach, applies the integration of
ER model and semantic theory towards economical
phenomenas in an organizations business process (12).
However, a few weaknesses have been detected in the
conventional REA model. Among the apparent constraints
are the complaints from the AIS users, where by they
couldnt model their organizations business flow
appropriately by applying the conventional REA modeling
technique which focus on event approach as they couldnt
differentiate well between the terms of Event and Task
(13)
. This situation has effected the AIS users ability while
determining all the relevant event entities in their
organizations business flow, besides effecting the
accurancy of the REA model output generated as well.
Besides that, (14) has detected another constraints in the
conventional REA modeling technique whereby he found
that the event entities actually consists of three main class,
which are, operational event, informational event and
decision event. However, conventional REA modeling
technique will only accept operational event as its
authorized event entity. This situation has burdened and
confused the AIS users a lot while detecting event entities
related in their organizations business flow as most of the
users are not prepared with the knowledge to defferentiate
among these three event class accurately.
Since weaknesses mentioned above have affected the
accurancy of the output of REA data model, therefore a new
REA modeling technique is proposed in order to overcome
the constraints listed above besides upgrading the quality of
current conventional REA modeling technique up to a more
accurate and percist level. This new modeling technique is
named as REA modeling by using agent approach.

942

Proceedings of the International Conference on

Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia June 17-19, 2007

G-14

2.0 Research Methodology

First of all, the process of literature reviewing has been
executed in order to obtain a clearer picture towards the
research title. A few methods have been implemented in
order to generate high qualitys research reults, which are:
i.
Researchers observation
ii.
Case study
iii.
Analysis of primer and secondary texts
After the execution of literature reviewing, the pro and
cons in the conventional REA modeling technique will be
detected. Then, both advantages and disadvantages of the
conventional REA modeling technique will be joted down
and supported with relevant literature sources. At the third
phase, a new REA modeling technique by the name of
REA modeing by using agent approach will be proposed in
order to overcome the constraints determined in the
conventional REA modeling technique and this newly
proposed technique will be elaborated in detail later in part
3.0. During the fourth phase, two research tools which are
needed in qualitative analysis will be developed, which are:
i.
Simulation testing system for the purpose of
systems usabilty testing.
ii.
Questionnaire to collect feedback from
respondents regarding systems usability.
In this phase, qualitative analysis intends to determine a
better, more effective and efficient REA modeling
technique between conventional and newly proposed REA
modeling technique, where by both modeling techniques
have been translated into the form of simulation testing
systems. The simulation testing systems will then be
developed by applying the development methodology of
Model Spiral Boehm (15) as this model is very flexible
besides being able to aid in decreasing the hazardous risks
while developing the simulation testing system.
The simulation testing system will then be tested by
twenty respondents whom are being chosen randomly from
the department of Science and System Management, UKM
and they are requested to fill in their feedback in the
questionnaire which has been prepared earlier. The result of
respondents feedback will be analyzed with the software of
SPSS in order to determine which REA modeling technique
proposes better systems usability from users perspectives.
After the execution of qualitative analysis, the fifth
phase of the research methodology will be performed
whereby two derivation diagrams will be generated by
refering to the simulation testing systems algoritma, and
these two derivation diagrams are named as:
i.
Agent Derivation Diagram (ADD), shown as
figure 1
ii.
Event Derivation Diagram (EDD)

ISBN 978-979-16338-0-2

Figure 1 Agent Derivation Diagram

By using these two diagrams, mathematical equations
will then be generated and these mathematical equations
will be tested by another simulation test in order to
determine the mathematical equations logic and accurancy.
After the logic and accurancies are confirmed, these
mathematical equations will then be used to detect which
REA modeling technique is being able to generate the
minimum amount of entity nodes needed in a complete
cycle of business flow.

3.0 REA Modeling using Agent Approach

Based upon the nature of REA model, its very
reasonable to show the unique of agent entity in REA model
for its easily being understanded character. Therefore, a few
relevant researches have been applied into the REA
modeling tehcnique flow by using the concept which enable
the agent entity to show its speciality (16),(17).
Writer would like to take this opportunity to remind all
the readers that Agent illustrated in this paper is not
refering to Intelligent Agent in the field of Artificial
Intelligence. The agent in this context refers to
individuals whom are invloved in an organizations
business flow.
Generally, the newly proposed REA modeling
technique still applying the same terms and concepts of
Entity Event, Entity Resource, Entity Agent, relationship
and cardinality as being used in conventional REA
modeling technique. The main difference between these two
REA modeling technique is that the newly proposed REA
modeling technique by using agent approach starts the
entire modeling process by determining all related internal
and external agents in a business flow. Then, focus will be
given to each detected agent, whereby these agent entities
will be used to determine other related entities in the
business process. Where as, the conventional REA modeing
technique started its modeling technique by determining all
related event entities before it carries on the whole
modeling process.
Basically, REA modeling technique by using agent
approach executes seven tasks in order to complete the
whole cycle of REA modeling and the whole process is
shown accordingly in figure 2 as below.

943

Proceedings of the International Conference on

Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia June 17-19, 2007

Figure 2 Seven tasks in REA modeling by Agent Approach

4.0 Result Discussion

The result discussion consists of two main categories.

4.1 Qualitative Analysis

The keywords of Systems usability plays a vital role
is the process of qualitative analysis. (18) defines usability
as an extension of a special product which can be used by
spesified users in order to achieve the goal which based
upon the the contexts of effectiveness, efficiency and
satisfation.
Since the keyword of usability has its own subjective
measurement standards, therefore, analysis has been carried
off and writer found that only the terms of effective and
efficient fulfil this qualitative analysiss requirement. The
combination of these two words will generate a new term,
defined as efficacy. The term of efficacy usually being
applied in the field of Information Technology especially to
compare the effectiveness between two objects (19).
The criterias related to the term of efficacy which is
qualified to be illustrated in this qualitative analysis are:
(i).Output generating time,
(ii).Users
understanding
level
towards
system,
(iii).Outputs persistancy level,
(iv).Users comfortability,
(v).Users satisfaction,
(vi).Total steps of modeling involved in system and
(vii).The ability if user to gain knowledge towards REA
modeling technique.
All the seven criterias stated above will be translated
into questionnaire in order to capture users feedback
towards systems efficacy in a easier form to be
understanded and analyzed.
From the collection of data which has been processed
by using ther software of SPSS, results show that all
respondents agreed that simulating testing system which
translated from agent approach able to generate final output
faster and more accurate, besides requiring the minimum
modeling steps with the min score of 3.90 out of 5..00 In
addition, agent approach translated system provides the
maximum and optimum level of comfort and satisfaction
for systemss users. Besides that, the min score for the
ability to increase REA modeling know ledges for the
systems users is as high as 4.20 out of 5.00.

4.2 Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative analysis involves the generation of agent
derivation diagram and event derivation diagram. Agent
ISBN 978-979-16338-0-2

G-14

derivation diagram is generated by translating the agent

approach part in simulation testing systems algoritma.
Where as event derivation diagram is generated by
translating the simulation testing systems algoritma of
conventional REA modeling technique.
With the help from both agent derivation diagram and
event derivation diagram, two mathematical equations have
been generated, which are:
(1)
Se = Ee + Ae + Re
Whereby,
Se = amount of entity nodes in EDD
Ee = amount of non-repeated event entity nodes in EDD
Ae = amount of agent entity nodes (repeated agent entity
nodes and non-repeated agent entity nodes) in EDD
Re = amount of resource entity nodes (repeated resource
entity nodes and non-repeated resource entity nodes)
in EDD
(2)
And
Sa = Aa + Ea + Ra
Whereby,
Sa = amount of entity nodes in ADD
Aa = amount of non-repeated agent entity nodes in ADD
Ea = amount of event entity nodes (repeated event entity
nodes and non-repeated event entity nodes) in ADD
Ra = amount of resource entity nodes (repeated reosource
entity nodes and non-repeated resource entity nodes)
in ADD
Found that,
(3)
Ae = Axe + Aue
(4)
Re = Rxe + Rue
Whereby,
Axe = amount of non-repeated agent entity nodes in EDD
Aue= amount of repeated agent entity nodes in EDD
Rxe = amount of non-repeated resource entity nodes in EDD
Rue = amount of repeated resource entity nodes in EDD
By the constraints of:
Axe > 0 ;
Axe 0 ; and
Aue = 0, 1, , Ae 1 ;
Besides that,
Re = Rxe + Rue = Axe + Aue = Ae

(5)

By replacing Eqs.(3) - (4) into Eq.(1),

Therefore
Se = Ee + [Axe + Aue] + [Rxe + Rue]

(6)

By replacing the Eq.(5) into Eq.(6).

Therefore
Se = Ee + [Axe + Aue] + [Axe + Aue]
Se = Ee + 2Axe + 2Aue

(7)

Found that
Ea = Aa = Axe
Ra = Exa =Ee

(8)
(9)

944

Proceedings of the International Conference on

Electrical Engineering and Informatics
Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia June 17-19, 2007

Whereby,
By replacing the Eqs.(8)-(9) into the Eq.(2),
Therefore,
Sa = Axe + Aa + Exa
Sa = Axe + Axe + Ee = 2Axe + Ee

G-14

(10)

Simulation test shows that the value of Se is always greater

than Sa, therefore another mathematical equation by the
name of nodes difference is generated and shown as below.
(11)
Nodes difference = Se - Sa

newly proposed REA modeling technique, Sa (by referring

to 13).
In a nutshell, the newly proposed REA modeling
technique, by the name of REA modeling by using Agent
Approach is much more effective, efficient and usable
compared to the conventional REA modeling technique.

6.0 Reference
(1)
(2)

By replacing Eq.(7) and Eq.(10) into Eq.(11),

Therefore,
Se Sa = [Ee + 2Axe + 2Aue] - [2Axe + Ee ]
(12)
Se Sa = 2Aue
By replacing y as the variable which carries the value of SeSa, therefore another new mathematical equation is
generated.
(13)
y = Se Sa = 2Aue

(3)

(4)
(5)

From the mathematical equations generated above,

simulation test shows that the value of Se will always be
greater than Sa. On the other words, the total amount of
entity nodes generated by using conventional REA
modeling technique which has been represented by event
derivation diagram, Se always higher than the total amount
if entity nodes generated by using the newly proposed REA
modeling technique, Sa (by referring to 13). The condition
of Se Sa = 0 will only occurs when Aue = 0, on the other
words when there is no repeated agent entity in a business
flow. And the percentage for the occurrence of above
condition is equal to zero as every agent in an organization
is multitask, which means each agent does many tasks.
Therefore, the possibility for one agent doing only one task
is almost zero.

(12)

5.0 Conclusion

(13)

Research shows that there are some constraints in the

conventional REA modeling technique. Therefore, a new
modeling technique has been proposed to overcome the
problem, and it has been named as REA modeling by using
Agent Approach. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis
have been executed to determine the most eficient, effective
and usable REA modeling technique among the
conventional REA modeling technique and newly proposed
REA modeling technique.
Qualtiative analysis result shows that all respondents
agreed that simulating testing system which translated from
agent approach able to generate final output faster and more
accurate, besides requiring the minimum modeling steps. In
addition, agent approach translated system provides the
maximum and optimum level of comfort, satisfaction and
ability to increase REA modeling know ledges for the
systems users. Where as quantitative analysis result shows
that the total amount of entity nodes generated by using
conventional REA modeling technique which has been
represented by event derivation diagram, Se always higher
than the total amount if entity nodes generated by using the
ISBN 978-979-16338-0-2

(6)
(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)
(11)

(14)

(15)

(16)
(17)

(18)

(19)

Buck-Emden, R.& Glimow, J. (1996). SAP R/3 System: A Client /

Server Technology. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman.
Hazilah Mohd. Amin, Hairulliza Mohd Judi, Ibrahim Mohamed &
Mohamed Yusoff. (1999). Financial Information Systems in
Malaysian Organizations: A longitudinal analysis. Kertas kerja Tenth
Asian Workshop: IT Impact on home, School & Work Settings
Social Psychological Perspectives. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
25-28 Oktober 1999.
Geerts, P., Ann,M., Frederik,G., Roland,P., (2004). The pragmatic
Quality of Resources-Events-Agents Diagrams: An Experimental
Evaluation. January 2004.
Goetz, B.E. 1939. What's wrong with accounting. Advanced
Management (Fall): 151-57.
Firmin, P.A. 1966. The potential of accounting as a management
information system. Management International Review (February):
45-55.
Fisher, J.S. 1994. What's ahead in accounting: The new finance.
Journal of Accountancy (August): 73-76.
Andros, D.P., J.O. Cherrington, and E.L. Denna. 1992. Reengineer
your accounting, the IBM way. Financial Executive (July/August):
28-31.
Cushing, B.E. 1989. A Kuhnian interpretation of the historical
evolution of accounting. The Accounting Historians Journal
(December): 1-41.
Dunn, C.L. and W.E. McCarthy. 1997. "The REA Accounting Model:
Intellectual Heritage and Prospects for Progress." Journal of
Information Systems. 11 (Spring): 31-51.
Elliott, R.K. 1992. The third wave breaks on the shores of accounting.
Accounting Horizons (June): 1-21.
Chen, P.P. (1976). The Entity-Relationship Model Toward a
unified view of data. ACM Transactions on Database Systems, 1 (1),
9-36.
McCarthy, W.E. 1982. The REA accounting model: A generalized
framework for accounting systems in a shared data environment. The
Accounting Review (July): 554-578.
Geerts G.L. and W.E. McCarthy (1997a) Modeling business
enterprises as value-added process hierarchies with resource-eventagent object templates. In: Sutherland J , Patel D, Casanave C,
Hollowell G, Miller J, editors. Business object design and
implementation. London: Springer-Verlag, pp. 94-113.
Kevin, R.P., Cynthia,L.,Ken,T., (2005). Alternative Instructional
Strategies in an IS Curriculum. Journal of Information Technology
Education. Vol.4, 2005.
Boehm, B.W., and F.C. Belz, (1988) Applying Process
Programming to the Spiral Boehm Model, Proceedings od Fourth
Software Process Workshop, IEEE, May 1988.
Wil van der Aalst and Kees van Hee. Workflow Management:
Models, Methods, and Systems.MIT Press, 2002.
Wil Janssen, Radu Mateescu, Sjouke Mauw, Peter Fennema, and
Petra van der Stappen. Model checking for managers. In SPIN, pages
92107, 1999.
Karat, J. and Karat, C.M. (2003). The Evolution of user-centered
focus in Human-computer Interaction Field. IBM Systems Journal.
Vol 42, No.4, pp.532-541.
Moody, D. L., Shanks, G., (2003). Improving the quality of data
models: empirical Validation of a quality management framework,
Information Systems 28(6) 619-650.

945