In the time of Industry 4.0, also called the the Second Machine Age, the scientific knowledge about creation of a managerial model of the economy of the enterprise for machines should be considered as the most important part of the knowledge that is developed and disseminated by the modern economic science.The latest such knowledge is defined as business model ontology.But the business model ontology, like all its predecessors created as a result of research based on a philological approach, has two significant flaws.First major flaw:The business model ontology does not provide a comprehensive and clear view of the principal of operation of the enterprise for machines as a systemic object. Just as medieval medicine could not provide a systemic explanation of the human anatomy and physiology, so is the modern Economic science incapable of providing a systemic explanation of the “anatomy” and “physiology” of the enterprise for machinesSecond major flaw:The business model ontology does not provide any understanding of the principal of operation of the enterprise for machines as a systemic subject. In other words, the Economic science does not provide any systemic knowledge of the nature and meaning of collective and therefore of individual professional responsibility for sustaining the operation of an enterprise for machinesThese two major flaws block the development of the global scientific and educational system (mostly that of the European nations) in its role of a leading mean for the cultivation of highly effective human capital in the industry for machines.This current research proves that the two major flaws in the scientific knowledge for the creation of a managerial model of the economy of the enterprise for machines can be eliminated through a "new business model ontology" – a model created as a result of research based on a laboratory approach.

In the time of Industry 4.0, also called the the Second Machine Age, the scientific knowledge about creation of a managerial model of the economy of the enterprise for machines should be considered as the most important part of the knowledge that is developed and disseminated by the modern economic science.The latest such knowledge is defined as business model ontology.But the business model ontology, like all its predecessors created as a result of research based on a philological approach, has two significant flaws.First major flaw:The business model ontology does not provide a comprehensive and clear view of the principal of operation of the enterprise for machines as a systemic object. Just as medieval medicine could not provide a systemic explanation of the human anatomy and physiology, so is the modern Economic science incapable of providing a systemic explanation of the “anatomy” and “physiology” of the enterprise for machinesSecond major flaw:The business model ontology does not provide any understanding of the principal of operation of the enterprise for machines as a systemic subject. In other words, the Economic science does not provide any systemic knowledge of the nature and meaning of collective and therefore of individual professional responsibility for sustaining the operation of an enterprise for machinesThese two major flaws block the development of the global scientific and educational system (mostly that of the European nations) in its role of a leading mean for the cultivation of highly effective human capital in the industry for machines.This current research proves that the two major flaws in the scientific knowledge for the creation of a managerial model of the economy of the enterprise for machines can be eliminated through a "new business model ontology" – a model created as a result of research based on a laboratory approach.