Companies throughout the world use Enterprise Architecture (EA) because of benefits such as the alignment of business to Information Technology (IT), centralisation of decision making and cost reductions due to standardisation of business processes and business systems. Even though EA offers organisational benefits, EA projects are reported as being costly, time consuming and require tremendous effort. Companies therefore seek to ascertain ways to measure the effectiveness of EA implementation because of the money and time being spent on EA projects. EA Effectiveness refers to the degree in which EA helps to achieve the collective goals of the organisation and its measurement depends on a list of constructs that can be used to measure the effectiveness of EA implementation. Currently, there exist no comprehensive list of constructs that are suitable to measure the effectiveness of EA implementation. The paper reports on the results of a study that explored the development of a compreh ensive list of constructs suitable for measuring the effectiveness of EA implementation. The artefact developed in this research study is called Enterprise Architecture Effectiveness Constructs (EAEC). The EAEC consists of 6 constructs namely: - alignment
As the most enterprises are relying on relations to other enterprises, it is relevant to consider enterprise architecture for inter-organisational relations particularly those relations involving technology. This has been conceptualised as Extended Enterprise Architecture, and a systematic review of this discipline is the topic of this paper. This paper is taking a point of departure in general theories of business-to-business relationships along with inter-organisational information systems, interoperability and business ecosystems. The general theories are applied to the Extended Enterprise Architecture to emphasize paradoxes, problems and potentials in extending EA across organisational boundaries. The purpose of this paper is to review the concept of Extended Enterprise Architecture (EEA) theoretically and empirically to identify viability of Enterprise Architecture (EA) initiatives spanning across organisational boundaries. A case is presented of an enterprise engaging in technology-based business process integration that in turn is explicated as enterprise architecture initiatives with both more and less powerful partners. This paper underlines the necessity to be able to have EA spanning initiatives across multiple enterprises, but a range of problems is illuminated related to (lack of) precision, imbalance, heterogeneity, transformation, temporality, and (operational) maturity. The concept of EEA is seemingly vague, however this paper calls for a strengthen emphasis on redefining general architectural frameworks to embrace EEA in order to handle typical and modern forms of organisational designs relying on virtual and cross-company as cornerstones.
Analysis is an essential part in the Enterprise Architecture Management lifecycle. An in-depth consideration of the architecture obtains its strengths and weaknesses. This provides a sound foundation for the future evolution of the architecture as well as for decision-making regarding new projects. Current literature provides a large number of different analysis approaches, targeting different goals and utilizing different techniques. To provide a common interface to analysis activities we studied the corresponding literature in previous research. Based on these results we develop a language for the definition of EA analyses as well as an execution environment for their evaluation. To cope with the high variety of meta models in the EA domain, the framework provides a uniform and tool independent access to analysis activities. Additionally it can be used to provide an EA analysis library, where the architect is able to select predefined analyses according to his specific requirements.
Enterprise architecture originates from the 1980’s. It emerged among ICT practitioners to solve complex problems related to information systems. Currently EA is also utilised to solve business problems, although the focus is still in ICT and its alignment with business. EA can be defined as a description of the current and future states of the enterprise, and as a change between these states to meet stakeholder’s goals. Despite its popularity and 30 years of age, the literature review conducted on top information and management science journals revealed that EA is still lacking the sound theoretical foundation. In this conceptual paper, we propose General Systems Theory (GST) for underpinning theory of EA. GST allows us to see enterprises as systems of systems consisting of, for instance, social organisations, humans, information systems and computers. This explains why EA can be used to describe the enterprise and its components, and how to control them to execute the managed change. Implications to science and practice, and some directions for future research are also provided.
National Enterprise Architecture (EA) is regarded as a catalyst for achieving e-government goals and many countries have given priority to it in developing their e-government plans. Designing a national EA framework which fits the government’s specific needs facilitates EA planning and implementation for public agencies and boosts the chance of EA success. In this paper, we introduce Iran’s national EA framework (INEAF). The INEAF is designed in order to improve interoperability and deal with EA challenges in Iranian agencies.
An AHP-based approach toward enterprise architecture analysis based on enterprise architecture quality attributes
Enterprise Architecture (EA) as a discipline that manages large amount of models and information about different aspects of the enterprise, can support decision making on enterprise-wide issues. In order to provide such support, EA information should be amenable to analysis of various utilities and quality attributes. In this regard, we have proposed the idea of characterizing and using enterprise architecture quality attributes. And this paper provides a quantitative AHP-based method toward expert-based EA analysis. Our method proposes a step-by-step process of assessing quality attribute achievement of different scenarios using AHP. By this method, most suitable EA scenarios are selected according to prioritized enterprise utilities and this selection has an important affect on decision making in enterprises. The proposed method also introduces a data structure that contains required information about quality attribute achievement of different EA scenarios in enterprises. The stored asset can be used for further decision making and progress assessment in future. Sensitivity analysis is also part of the process to identify sensitive points in the decision process. The applicability of the proposed method is demonstrated using a practical case study.
The Zachman framework is considered to be the most referenced framework for the purpose of enterprise architecture. It is commonplace to compare other frameworks with this basic one in order to show correctness and usability of those frameworks. However, this is more than a fashion, the Zachman framework is actually the best one. Despite of its popularity, the Zachman framework could be a challengeable one in practical situations because there are not enough well-known methods and tools covering all of its aspects. Three major challenges in using this framework, are discussed in this article. These challenges are lack of a methodology, a well-defined repository and a popular modeling notation. Focus of this article is on solving the last problem with the help of notations in UML (Unified Modeling Language) and UML Business Profile. At the first glance the topic seems to be already researched by others, but there are some major distinctions between this work and the others', which make it a unique one. Most of the other work tried to cover the framework using multiple class diagrams stereotyped in different ways. This work tries to cover the Zachman framework using all of the UML features, especially those, which are convenient in common modeling tools as well as ignoring unfamiliar symobls as it is used by some authors. A case study is used upon which we show how to apply the selected notation on a sample enterprise to develop cells in second and third rows of the framework. Models are tested to consider if they are supporting Zachman rules governing the framework. Furthermore, in order to see if they could be convincing enough, a statistical study is employed. Although results of these tests are relatively acceptable, the problem of inventing new modeling notations is mentioned as an open problem.
Benefits and challenges with Enterprise Architecture: a case study of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration
Enterprise Architecture is seen as instrumental to drive the digital transformation in enterprises. It is also important to achieve the benefits from innovative new business models and technologies. Many organisations have therefore undertaken extensive efforts to implement Enterprise Architecture (EA). It is, however, a challenging task to implement enterprise architecture in an organisation. There is also very limited research on this issue related to the public sector. This study explores the implementation of enterprise architecture (EA) in the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration - NAV. While the study revealed that NAV had not defined any clear benefits, we found 12 perceived potential benefits. We also uncovered 16 challenges that impeded the EA implementation.
Revisiting the Impact of Information Systems Architecture Complexity: A Complex Adaptive Systems Perspective
Organizations constantly adapt their Information Systems (IS) architecture to reflect changes in their environment. In general, such adaptations steadily increase the complexity of their IS architecture, thereby negatively impacting IS efficiency and IS flexibility. Based on a Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) perspective, we present a more differentiated analysis of the impact of IS architecture complexity. We hypothesize the relation between IS architecture complexity on the one hand, and IS efficiency and IS flexibility on the other hand to be mediated by evolutionary and revolutionary IS change. Subsequently, we test our hypotheses through a partial least squares (PLS) approach to structural equation modelling (SEM) based on survey data from 185 respondents. We find that the direct negative impact of IS architecture complexity on IS efficiency and IS flexibility is no longer statistically relevant when also considering the mediating effects of revolutionary and evolutionary IS change.
Your business is solving the wrong problems. The nuclear triad of People, Process and Technology has been foundational to solving business problems for decades. Entire frameworks and methodologies have grown up around the simple concept that getting each of these three areas correct and functioning in concert will ensure smooth business operations and cross-enterprise alignment. Billions of dollars have been spent on people in the management consulting industry who have 'mastered' the art of alignment and offered definitive solutions to the biggest, wickedest business challenges out there. And yet... our businesses continue to encounter the same well-known and seemingly well-solved problems, spending massive sums to fix them. How can this be? It is said that modern business is one part innovation and one part marketing. Innovation is often mistakenly equated with technology and marketing with ‘digital’. Success in business therefore becomes a chase for digital capabilities and the latest technology to enable them. And yet… the latest technology continues to give us problems, create headaches and doesn’t always give our businesses the edge they need to compete, despite costing us huge amounts of money. How can this be? The reality, of course, is that businesses are chasing the wrong buzzwords, buying the wrong solutions, solving the wrong problems. The People Problem tackles this topic from the perspective of Enterprise Architecture. For newcomers and open-minded old-timers who practice EA, architecting the enterprise is all about asking the fundamental question ‘what business problem are we trying to solve?’ When practitioners pay close attention, they’ll recognize that business problems are infrequently solved by a new tool. That is, Technology isn’t the answer to the problem. They’ll also notice that the most efficient process in the world, made popular by the flashiest buzzwords in the industry, is insufficient to answer the fundamental question. In other words, Process is not the answer to the problem. Human beings are at the root and core of our businesses. They define the processes and operate the technology. Only by recognizing that solving business problems requires solving problems with (and caused by) people will we get close to the right solutions. The People Problem aims to help new entrants to the field of enterprise architecture (and anyone interested in solving difficult business problems) navigate in an era of particularly rapid business and technological change. Based on over 17 years of experience consulting with companies large and small, Fortune 500 to local startups, The People Problem is a collection of accumulated knowledge presented in easily digestible vignettes.
The wave of the fourth industrial revolution (Industry 4.0) is bringing a new vision of the manufacturing industry. In manufacturing, one of the buzzwords of the moment is "Smart production". Smart production involves manufacturing equipment with many sensors that can generate and transmit large amounts of data. These data and information from manufacturing operations are however not shared in the organization. Therefore the organization is not using them to learn and improve their operations. To address this problem, the authors implemented in an Industry 4.0 laboratory an instance of an emerging technical standard specific for the manufacturing industry. Global manufacturing experts consider the Reference Architecture Model Industry 4.0 (RAMI4.0) as one of the corner stones for the implementation of Industry 4.0. The instantiation contributed to organizational learning in the laboratory by collecting and sharing up-to-date information concerning manufacturing equipment. This article discusses and generalizes the experience and outlines future research directions.
Thanks to cloud, lines of business are increasingly engaging in technical activity. But without deep architectural expertise, things could get very messy -- and expensive.
EA planning helps link IT with business users, especially for digital transformation projects, according to a recent CompTIA survey.
The concept of an open enterprise architecture that links plant floor operations with business operations across an entire corporate entity has been around for a while in many industrial sectors. But making this concept a reality remains challenging. This is particularly true for those companies that lack huge IT staffs or budgets. IIoT, with its compelling promise of accessing, aggregating, and analyzing data from previously stranded assets and systems to improve decision support and thus business performance, represents a further disruption.
The developers vs enterprise architects showdown: You shall know us by our trail of diagrams Old McDonald had a server farm, EA, EA, Oh!
Three years ago, demand for enterprise architects — those who focus on building a holistic view of an organization's strategy, processes, information, and IT assets in order to support the most efficient and secure IT environment — was declining. Some were whispering that the days of the architects were over. But this unique skillset has recently staged a major comeback: According to the Harvey Nash/KPMG 2017 CIO Survey, enterprise architecture (EA) has become the fastest-growing, in-demand skillset in technology, up 26% from last year’s report.
The challenges of aligning IT with business triggered the attention towards Enterprise Architecture (EA). Despite the increase interest of academic scholars in EA, there is scarcity of studies that provide an up to date comprehensive research perspective view. The purpose of this study is to examine the research methodologies and theories utilized in EA studies from 2010 to 2016. The study employed Systematic Literature Review (SLR) as method to explore and analyze the literature of EA. The study revealed the research approaches and data collection methods utilized in EA. It shows that case study approach and interviews are the highly used compared to other research approaches and data collection instruments. Furthermore, it pointed out the low employment of theories in EA studies. The study is contributing to the body of knowledge by providing a foundation for novice researchers in the area of EA through detailed discussions of research methodologies and theories which are expected to support them in designing future studies.
Sustainability through Innovations Of Enterprise Architecture (EA) in Public Sector’s Management: Issues and Challenges
Innovations through Enterprise Architecture (EA) require a transformation in public sector’s management. EA has been identified as one of the prime initiatives towards public sector transformation. EA implementation is highly recommended to execute efficient and effective public service delivery. However, building upon several public sector agencies that had implemented these initiatives, EA implementation in Malaysian Public Sector (MPS) was reported as unfavourable. This study aims to identify related issues and challenges towards sustainability of EA implementation. A qualitative research approach was employed in this study. Semi structured interview was held involving five EA experts. From the analysis, six related issues such as (i) absence of the mandate from government to implement EA initiatives (ii) improper EA governance leading to difficulty in managing EA implementation; (iii) absence of EA tool to maintain EA document; (iv) lack of EA awareness (v) lack of EA readiness and (vi) limited knowledge and skills on EA among the team were discerned in sustaining EA practices. With regard to the practical implication, this paper can serve as reference in EA implementation in the public sector.
Enterprise architecture (EA) offers ways to steer and guide the design and evolution of the enterprise including its information technology (IT). One of the outputs of EA is improved decision-making about IT. Objective: This study aims to provide EA researchers and practitioners with insights into how IT decision-making actually takes place and what that means for them. Method: A systematic literature review was conducted in order to find and analyze primary studies about IT decision-making. Results: We found that IT investment and prioritization is by far the largest decision category. Money seems much more important than content. The IT decision-making process itself is subject to different variables and factors making every IT decision unique. We also found that both rational and bounded rational approaches are used in IT decision-making. EA has not a prominent role in IT decision-making. Conclusions: IT decision-making is a messy and complex process where money plays a prominent role. We argue that, if enterprise architects want to influence IT decision-making, they should follow the money by combining content with investment planning and prioritization. Further research is required into what distinguishes enterprise architects that are successful in IT decision-making, from those that are less successful.
Enterprise architecture management (EAM) has long been propagated in research and practice as an approach for keeping local information systems projects in line with enterprise-wide, long-term objectives. EAM literature predominantly promotes strictly governed and centralized coordination mechanisms to achieve the promised alignment contributions. Notwithstanding the increasing maturity levels in practice, organizations still struggle with the successful establishment of EAM, mainly due to the inherent challenges of a firmly centralized approach in complex organizational settings. This study opts for cooperative learning as a theoretical lens to afford a distinctive, non-centralized conceptualization of EAM. We empirically demonstrate EAM as a stage-wise learning process in which knowledge acquisition and cooperative interactions among individuals contribute to project performance on the local level. Projects that benefit from this particular learning process, in turn, are found to significantly leverage enterprise-wide performance.
The role of organizational culture for grounding, management, guidance and effectiveness of enterprise architecture principles
Enterprise architecture management (EAM) has become a widely acknowledged approach for guiding the continuous change of increasingly complex organizations. While methods and models for describing and analyzing enterprise architectures (EA) have been extensively discussed, principles guiding an EA’s design and evolution are hardly covered in existing research. The paper at hand therefore analyzes the mechanisms of EA principles (EAP), that is EAP grounding, EAP management, and EAP guidance and their effects on EA consistency and EAM utility. Specifically we aim at understanding the role of organizational culture for the mechanisms and effects of EAP. Based on empirical data we find that all relations describing EAP mechanisms and their effects are significantly moderated by organizational culture. Based on our findings we give recommendations on how to deal with selected design decisions when introducing and developing EA principles in an organization.
Next Generation Enterprise Reference Architecture For Connected Government: Enterprise Architecture in Government
The objective of the book is to provide practical guidelines to an Architect/consultant who is the part of the Enterprise Architecture Definition Team for Government Transformation initiatives. The consultant need to follow the steps described in the book and adopt them fairly to achieve the EA enablement of Government. It emphasis on the interpersonal skills and techniques for organizing and directing the EA definition, buy-in from management commitment, leading the transition from planning to implementation. It also showcases the steps to be followed for performing the Government Reference Enterprise Architecture. This book defines the methodology to be adopted for EA Reference Architecture for various domains and also provides the value through the practical advice on how to make the Governments to achieve EA adoption and establish a connected Government. We documented our own methodology without excluding other methodological possibilities. This book helps any Enterprise Architecture Planning Team to shorten the time of planning and execution, since most of the time is utilized in agreeing the common approach and work towards the goal. This book demonstrates practical views of an enterprise architect in improving the success rate of EA across the Governments. There is no hard and fast rule that Governments should adopt to one particular framework or standard or approach. They can choose to adopt any industry specific framework, however it can be customised as per the needs of the Government. The book takes a holistic view of the Government Enterprise Architecture, while also giving specific guidelines on how to establish and roll out future-state Government Enterprise Architecture based on the methodology and approach documented in this book. The book aims to: • Demonstrate importance of enterprise architecture in elevating the effectiveness of Government transformation programmes • Disseminate current advancements and thought leadership in the area of government enterprise architecture in the context of Connected Government • Provide initiatives with evidence-based, credible, field tested and practical guidance in crafting their respective architectures (Business, Application, Data, Technology etc) • Showcase innovative use of Enterprise Architecture in enhancing Government transformation initiatives
Those who design and steer the development of the technology landscape can mitigate risk by setting operating standards and promoting cross-functional collaboration. Most CEOs understand the potential upside of a digital transformation. If they can get it right, their companies can be more efficient, more agile, and better able to deliver innovative products and services to customers and partners through multiple channels. About 70 percent of executives say that over the next three years, they expect digital trends and initiatives to create greater top-line revenues for their businesses, as well as increased profitability.
Companies that commit to continually updating their enterprise architectures can deliver goods and services as fast as Internet-born competitors do. Internet retailers can make crucial changes to their e-commerce websites within hours, while it takes brick-and-mortar retailers three months or more to do the same. Cloud-based enterprise software suppliers can update their products in days or weeks. By contrast, traditional enterprise software companies need months. Why can’t established companies move as quickly as their Internet-born competitors? In part, because they are limited by their enterprise architecture, which is the underlying design and management of the technology platforms and capabilities that support a company’s business strategies.
In this article, we explain what an enterprise architecture of Perpetual Evolution™ is, how it contrasts with the architecture approaches of the past, and why it has become necessary. We then explore what companies must do to shift their enterprise architecture from the old to the new and the benefits they can get in doing so. Finally, we discuss what it takes to operate with this new architecture.
There is little agreement among companies about which management approaches are most effective; more empirical evidence is required. Most companies have a dedicated enterprise-architecture (EA) department that oversees the entire systems architecture, including business processes and IT infrastructure, and helps establish technology-enabled processes across business units so companies can deliver goods and services effectively. But not all companies agree on what constitutes best practice in EA management. Some are focused on continually measuring IT performance and adjusting business processes and systems as needed. Others tout the importance of aligning the overall IT architecture with those of the individual business units. And some companies say good governance can happen only if they have empowered EA leaders who promote collaboration and accountability among teams in IT and business functions. In our work with large global organizations and in our conversations with senior IT leaders across multiple industries, we’ve heard anecdotal evidence supporting all those beliefs and more. So which approach is right? What makes for world-class organization and governance of corporate IT systems?
In recent years, enterprise architecture (EA) has captured growing attention as a means to systematically consolidate and interrelate diverse IT artefacts in order to provide holistic decision support. Since the emergence of Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA), many attempts have been made to incorporate SOA artefacts in existing EA frameworks. Yet the approaches taken to achieve this goal differ substantially for the most commonly used EA frameworks to date. This paper investigates and compares five widely used EA frameworks in the way they embrace the SOA paradigm. It identifies what SOA artefacts are considered to be in the respective EA frameworks and their relative position in the overall structure. The results show that services and related artefacts are far from being well-integrated constructs in current EA frameworks. The comparison presented in this paper will support practitioners in identifying an EA framework that provides SOA support in a way that matches their requirements and will hopefully inspire the academic EA and SOA communities to work on a closer integration of these architectures.
The Internet of Things (IoT) requires strong executive sponsorship, but the will of the organization isn’t sufficient to make IoT a reality. Gartner analyst says.
Enterprise Architecture (EA) management seeks to align business and IT while realizing cost saving potentials, improving availability and fault tolerance, and increasing flexibility of an organization. Regarding these objectives, decision makers need to be supported with solid and relevant models about the organization’s architecture to guide the future development of the EA. In practice, many EA initiatives struggle with inflexible models not meeting the information demand of stakeholders. In this paper, we propose a solution that empowers stakeholders to reveal their information demand collaboratively to facilitate EA models that evolve with changing information demands at runtime. We present core concepts of our approach and insights of an implementation thereof as foundation to achieve our long-term goal of evolving EA models. In our implementation we extend a collaboration platform with capabilities to monitor the actual information demand and to maintain the EA model referring to this demand at runtime. Indexed as A Tool for Collaborative Evolution of Enterprise Architecture Models at Runtime.
Enterprise architecture (EA) is widely employed to reduce complexity and to improve business–information technology (IT) alignment. Despite the efforts by practitioners and academics in proposing approaches to smoothen EA development, it is not easy to find a fully successful EA. Because EA development is a complex endeavour, it is important to understand the obstacles that practitioners face during EA development. With the grounded theory, we studied how obstacles during EA development emerged from practitioners’ point of view in 15 large enterprises. The study identifies lack of communication and collaboration as the core obstacle that can explain many other obstacles. Communication and collaboration were also harmed by other perceived EA development obstacles, including lack of knowledge and support inside organization and issues imposed by external parties, hesitation in training personnel, setting too ambitious goals, constant change of management, (lack of) clarity in EA development process, lack of budget, forcing personnel to adopt EA, lack of motivation, organizational culture, and organizational structure deficiencies. The lack of communication and collaboration caused several undesired effects to organizations, such as being unable to set common goals and achieve a shared understanding, personnel’s distrust, endangered EA governance, lack of innovation capability, lost competitive edge, and ineffective EA outputs. The study highlights that organisations should improve their communication and collaboration before embarking on EA to encounter fewer obstacles. We provide four recommendations for practitioners to improve communication and collaboration in EA development.
The three-year IT roadmap has long been a hallmark of IT planning, but it's outlived its usefulness. Here's how to keep up with the speed of tech innovations.
In addition to the potential impact on businesses, these trends provide a significant opportunity for enterprise architecture leaders to help senior business and IT leaders respond to the digital business opportunities and threats by creating signature-ready actionable and diagnostic deliverables that guide investment decisions.
To succeed, CIOs need to focus more resources in communicating and building business architecture change maps that will involve business executives, business architects and obviously the CIO.
Many enterprises are still in the early stage of research and exploration into the concrete practice of enterprise architecture. Under the milieu of globalization, it is increasingly necessary for an enterprise to improve cognition and practices of informatization construction. Also crucial for enterprises is the ability to exploit and develop a myriad of architecture frameworks in order to remain creative and dynamic in this field in order to determine which EAF suits them best. Enterprises should do so based on the understanding of not only business strategy and process, but also on the meanings of EA frameworks. This paper defines a classification system which is used to analyze 55 different EA frameworks.
A number of approaches towards Enterprise Architecture (EA) management is proposed in literature, differing in the underlying understanding of the EA as well as in the description of the function for performing EA management. These plurality of methods and models should be interpreted as an indicator of the low maturity of the research area. In contrast, some researchers see it as inevitable consequence of the diversity of the enterprises under consideration. Staying to this interpretation, we approach the topic of EA management from a cybernetic point of view. Thereby, we elicit constituents, which should be considered in every EA management function based on a viable system perspective on the topic. From this perspective, we further revisit selected EA management approaches and show to which extent they allude to the viable system nature of the EA.
Agile development practices focus on developing and delivering working software systems in small iterations with minimal documentation. However, locally project focused agile practices overlook the need for holistic enterprise architecture. Lack of enterprise architecture in agile, especially in the large agile environments, may lead to a number of problems such as technical debt, unnecessary re-work, inconsistent communication, locally focused isolated architecture, design and implementation. There is a missing link between the enterprise architecture and agile development. Enterprise architecture is a strategic capability that should enable and enhance agility of agile development. However, organisations are not sure how best to approach strategic enterprise architecture capability for supporting agile development. This paper proposes and demonstrate the applicability of an integrated adaptive enterprise architecture driven agile development approach for large agile environments.
In the past decade, agile methodologies have become widespread, and the many organizations that employ it have proved successful. To deal with the volatility of the market and to meet dynamic business needs, agile methods seem to be a pragmatic approach. Organizations are keen to scale agile methods across the enterprise to reap the benefits seen in agile teams. Agile Enterprise Architecture can be defined as a process for handling Enterprise Architecture (EA) by applying agile development principles and methods. However, there is a research gap in the adoption of agile Enterprise Architecture. In this paper, I analyze the factors that influence agile EA adoption in large organizations using a grounded theory approach. The evolution of the Enterprise Architect role during the agile EA adoption is presented based on the complex adaptive system theory. A case study is conducted in a leading transportation company which transitioned to agile Enterprise Architecture from traditional methods. This paper focuses on agile Enterprise Architecture adoption from the Enterprise Architects’ viewpoint. My analysis shows that various significant factors influence agile Enterprise Architecture adoption in a large organization. Enterprise Architects are the key personnel in the Governance of Enterprise Architecture and deliver essential business value to an organization. My findings show the changing role of Enterprise Architects when agile Enterprise Architecture is adopted in a large organization. Furthermore, complex adaptive system theory assists in explaining this phenomenon.
Agile enterprise architecture: a case of a cloud technology-enabled government enterprise transformation
Australian government enterprises have shown a significant interest in the cloud technology-enabled enterprise transformation. Australian government suggests the whole-of-a-government strategy to cloud adoption. The challenge is how best to realise this cloud adoption strategy for the cloud technology-enabled enterprise transformation? The cloud adoption strategy realisation requires concrete guidelines and a comprehensive practical framework. This paper proposes the use of an agile enterprise architecture framework to developing and implementing the adaptive cloud technology-enabled enterprise architecture in the Australian government context. The results of this paper indicate that a holistic strategic agile enterprise architecture approach seems appropriate to support the strategic whole-of-a-government approach to cloud technology-enabled government enterprise transformation.
Much existing research on IS and enterprise architecture focuses on suggesting different representa-tions describing a ‘target architecture’ for processes, information and information systems at different levels across the organization. Less emphasis has been put on the actual evolution of the current en-terprise architecture towards this envisioned ‘target architecture’. In this paper we look at enterprise architecture from a process perspective and explore how actual practices of architecting enfold and how they are mutually shaped by context. In doing so, we offer two contributions. First, we contribute empirically showing how enterprise architecting in practice is an ambidextrous activity focusing on both fixing the limitations of historically entrenched architectures and establishing new architecture by betting on what needs are going to give the most flexibility and value in the future. Secondly, we contribute by conceptualizing how enterprise architecture evolves over time, and propose the concepts of ‘architectural path-dependency’ and ‘enterprise architecting’. Architectural path-dependencies is the effect of existing architectures that become economically, technically and organizationally hard to change – at least in a radical manner. Enterprise architecting, on the other hand, is the intentional acts to circumvent path-dependencies and evolve towards an envisioned architecture. Henceforth, we argue that enterprise architecture transition is shaped by multiple architectural path-dependencies as well as various acts of enterprise architecting to establish new paths. The paper discusses theses con-cepts in relation to existing literature on software and enterprise architecture.
Enterprise architecture (EA) model analysis can be defined as the application of property assessment criteria to EA models. Ontologies can be used to represent conceptual models, allowing the application of computational inference to derive logical conclusions from the facts present in the models. As the actual common EA modelling languages are conceptual, advantage can be taken of representing such conceptual models using ontologies. Several techniques for this purpose are widely available as part of the semantic web standards and frameworks. This paper explores the use of the aforementioned techniques in the analysis of enterprise architecture models. Namely, two techniques are used to this end: computational inference and the use of SPARQL. The aim is to demonstrate the possibilities brought by the use of these techniques in EA model analysis.
Management of the enterprise architecture has become increasingly recognized as a crucial part of both business and IT management. Still, a common understanding and methodological consistency seems far from being developed. Acknowledging the significant role of research in moving the development process along, this article employs different bibliometric methods, complemented by an extensive qualitative interpretation of the research field, to provide a unique overview of the enterprise architecture literature. After answering our research questions about the collaboration via co-authorships, the intellectual structure of the research field and its most influential works, and the principal themes of research, we propose an agenda for future research based on the findings from the above analyses and their comparison to empirical insights from the literature. In particular, our study finds a considerable degree of co-authorship clustering and a positive impact of the extent of co-authorship on the diffusion of works on enterprise architecture. In addition, this article identifies three major research streams and shows that research to date has revolved around specific themes, while some of high practical relevance receive minor attention. Hence, the contribution of our study is manifold and offers support for researchers and practitioners alike.
This paper presents a number of principles related to the construction and use of enterprise architecture frameworks. These principles are intended to guide the development of a formal foundation for frameworks but also serve as guidance for efforts to enable the interoperability of enterprise models and model components. The principles are drawn from analyses of a number of existing frameworks and from observation of and participation in framework development.
Government agencies need to transform the way in which they are organized in order to be able to provide better services to their constituents and adapt to changes in legislation. Whereas much e-government research has a technology focus, our goal is to investigate whether business architectures can help governments to recreate agencies to make them robust in dealing with political preferences, and further, whether their adoption can guide the realization of IT-oriented enterprise architectures. In this article the concept of business architecture and its implications are analyzed by investigating the case study of the Dutch Immigration and Naturalization Services. The case demonstrates the mediating role business architectures can play between policy and strategy on the one hand, and enterprise IT architecture on the other. Business architectures help: (1) to define business domains and the events connecting them, and (2) to use principles to integrate the domains and ensure synergies. Business domains can be designed and operated independently, which enable higher levels of adaptability. Our case analyses show that the pluriformity of the political visions, public values, and actors involved and the division of responsibilities complicate the creation of a business architecture.
Cloud computing is emerging as a promising enabler of some aspects of the ‘agile’ and ‘lean’ features that businesses need to display in today’s hyper-competitive and disruptive global economic ecosystem. However, it is increasingly obvious that there are essential prerequisites and caveats to cloudification that businesses need to be aware of in order to avoid pitfalls. This paper aims to present a novel, Enterprise Architecture-based approach towards analysing the cloudification endeavour, adopting a holistic paradigm that takes into account the mutual influences of the entities and artefacts involved, in the context of their life cycles. As shown in the paper, this approach enables a richer insight into the ‘readiness’ of a business considering embarking on a cloudification endeavour and therefore empowers management to evaluate consequences of- and take cognisant decisions on the cloudification extent, type, provider etc. based on prompt information of appropriate quality and deta
Enterprise architecture is concerned with the fundamental organization of the operating environment of an enterprise. The enterprise architecture is used to plan and control the construction of the systems that populate the operating environment. As the scope covered can be considerable in large enterprises, introducing domain architectures to partition and detail the enterprise architecture is a plausible approach. We formulate prescriptive criteria that consistent domain architectures must meet. By integrating the creation of domain architectures into an extended strategic alignment model we develop a theory that accounts for both the creation, scope-setting and detailing. Based on the creation viewpoint we derive a multi-level classification taxonomy. The primary differentiator is that between domains that are created from business usage viewpoints and those that are created from solution construction viewpoints. Four cases of domain architectures from actual practice are described that illustrate the variety encountered. Domain classifications in all cases conform to the theoretical model. The criteria, the developed theory and the cases have both academic relevance as well as significance for practitioners.
The purpose of this research is to examine why organizations with similar objectives and environments at the beginning obtain different outcomes when implementing enterprise architecture (EA) projects and how EA institutionalization process occurs. We conduct a qualitative multiple-case study using the lens of institutional theory through the analysis of intra-organization relations. The results show that the institutional logic of stakeholders can drive EA projects in different directions during the process of EA institutionalization, and thus organizations obtain different project outcomes ultimately. We contribute by extending the knowledge on EA institutionalization from a micro-level perspective, understanding and explaining how the organizational structure was shaped and influenced by stakeholders’ relations, as well as providing insight into stakeholders’ behaviors and activities during the process of EA institutionalization so that practitioners may improve the success rate of EA projects, particularly in the public sector.
Enterprise architecture management (EAM) has become an increasingly important topic in practice due to the growing complexity of organizations and their underlying IT. While there is a strong interest in Enterprise Architecture (EA) modeling, evaluation, and frameworks, a lack of knowledge remains in the research field of EA planning. We conducted a series of expert interviews on the topic of EA planning. From these interviews we were able to extract requirements for EA planning from practice as the foundation of our analyses. Additionally, we conducted a structured literature review to elicit requirements for EA planning from a research perspective. This paper combines the results of both the practitioner interviews and the literature review to emphasize the gaps between the two worlds. As a result, we identified that current research does not adequately address the pressing problems of EA planning in practice.
Enterprise Architecture Reimagined: A Concise Guide to Constructing an Artificially Intelligent Enterprise
Since the early 1990s, it has become convenient and customary to divide enterprise architecture into four architectural domains: business, applications, data and technology. However, a mere combination of these four domains does not form a coherent enterprise architecture. "Dividing an elephant in half does not produce two small elephants," Peter Senge’s tenth law of systems thinking explains why enterprise architects keep losing credibility in the eyes of business partners.
This paper from The MITRE Corporation presents a summary of the range of potential uses of enterprise architectures (EAs), some of the challenges facing the users of EAs, and practical approaches for developing them incrementally over time to provide “just in time” utility to decision makers.
The article provides an overview of the challenges and the state of the art of the discipline of Enterprise Architecture (EA), with emphasis on the challenges and future development opportunities of the underlying Information System (IS), and its IT implementation, the Enterprise Information System (EIS). The first challenge is to overcome the narrowness of scope of present practice in IS and EA, and re-gain the coverage of the entire business on all levels of management, and a holistic and systemic coverage of the enterprise as an economic entity in its social and ecological environment. The second challenge is how to face the problems caused by complexity that limit the controllability and manageability of the enterprise as a system. The third challenge is connected with the complexity problem, and describes fundamental issues of sustainability and viability. Following from the third, the fourth challenge is to identify modes of survival for systems, and dynamic system architectures that evolve and are resilient to changes of the environment in which they live. The state of the art section provides pointers to possible radical changes to models, methodologies, theories and tools in EIS design and implementation, with the potential to solve these grand challenges.
Today, and for the foreseeable future, organizations will face ever-increasing levels of complexity and uncertainty. Many believe that enterprise architecture (EA) will help organizations address such difficult terrain by guiding the design of adaptive and resilient enterprises and their information systems. This paper presents the Grand Challenges that we believe will challenge organizations in the future and need to be addressed by enterprise architecture. As a first step in using enterprise architecture as a solution for overcoming identified challenges, the Zachman Enterprise Architecture Framework is used to guide and structure the discussion. The paper presents the Grand Challenges and discusses promising theories and models for addressing them. In addition, current advances in the field of enterprise architecture that have begun to address the challenges will be presented. In conclusion, final thoughts on the future of enterprise architecture as a research field and a profession are offered.
Exploring ‘People’ as the key element in enterprise architecture implementation: A Critical Realist Perspective
TOGAF (2009) describes the purpose of Enterprise Architecture (EA) is to optimise enterprisewide systems - the often-fragmented legacy of data processes (both manual and automated) - into an integrated environment that is responsive to change and supports the delivery of the business strategy (The Open Group Architecture Framework [TOGAF], 2009). However, for a number of reasons organisations still have difficulties establishing an effective EA (Raadt & Vliet, 2008; Gartner, 2009; and Janssen & Klievink, 2012, among others) and various reports suggest up to two thirds of implementations do not fulfil expectations (Roeleven, 2010). Being organisation wide with a strong governance element EA has significant social implications and social dependence, yet many implementations wrongly treat EA as solely a technical program. This thesis argues that the lack of focus on the ‘people’ element of EA could be the reason why many organisations still struggle with EA implementation. Recognising the importance of people in EA implementation requires acceptance of implementation as a social program, heavily influenced by the structural and cultural systems surrounding the architecture. In order to address the need for greater recognition of the role of people and the social aspects of EA implementation, this thesis adopts critical realism (CR) and its most recognised methodology, the morphogenetic approach (MA). Realism emphasises ontology and strongly argues that ontology, methodology and epistemology are closely linked – as Fleetwood (2005, p. 197) suggests, ontology matters: “The way we think the world is (ontology) influences: what we think can be known about it (epistemology); how we think it can be investigated (methodology and research techniques); the kinds of theories we think can be constructed about it; and the political and policy stances we are prepared to take”. In order to examine the social implications of technology implementation it makes sense to adopt a wellrecognized social theory like critical realism. This social realist approach proposes an analytical separation between structure, culture and agency (people) in order to examine their interactions over time. The MA suggests three important cycles – structural conditioning, social interaction and structural elaboration that provide a platform for examining possible change. Archer also importantly suggests that the emergent properties of collectivities and individuals differ. Such a model has clear value for examining the “people” acceptance of the new impositions and opportunities provided by the EA implementation. It acknowledges the sociocultural consequences of interactions between the structure and the culture to provide particular situational logics that direct, but do not determine the actions of people. The MA emphasises strongly the role of time in situation examination suggesting that structure and culture predate subsequent actions by involved agents. The thesis describes particular situational logics or mechanisms emanating from the interaction between structural and cultural systems that encourage particular behaviours in response to the EA program. These actions are then further examined in the sequence of MA cycles. Since mechanisms are only effective if people adopt them or not, another important element in this study is the part played by “reflexivity”. Reflexivity highlights the linkage between people concerns, projects and practices as people act in order to promote their concerns, and form projects to advance or to protect what they care about most. Reflexivity is an important mechanism for explaining how people’s ultimate concerns impact on their approach to the impositions of EA. An Australian university implementing EA (termed UX for anonymity) has been used as a case study in this research – this fortuitous timing allowed a careful and detailed examination of implementation over a 3-year period from initial rollout to ultimate acceptance. The study describes the challenging environment of university implementation where “academic freedom” is paramount and individual and group autonomies are threatened by EA – the study presents the important mechanisms and situational logics that direct people’s actions within the complex social context of a university. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were used as the primary method of data collection across UX stakeholders. A range of interviews were held throughout the study period with the university IT Governance Committee, the University Architecture Board, the CIO, and the Enterprise Business Group, as well as individual end-users such as teaching staff, researchers, students, and administrative staff of the faculties, schools and service centres. The MA provided a basic structure for unravelling the social complexity and helped guide the interview questions to identify the generative mechanisms hidden in the real domain, and to highlight the conditions that encourage individual and collective acceptance of EA practices. The reflexivity indicator developed by Archer –ICONI– is used throughout to explain how personal projects are formed and how they mediate the exercise of structural/cultural constraints and enablement within EA implementation. Passive participation in regular EA implementation meetings at UX was also important and useful to unearth possible perceived causal possibilities emanating from within the program itself and evident within the social context of implementation. Underpinned by a critical realist perspective, the thesis demonstrates that the MA is a powerful analytical tool to uncover the hidden mechanisms (the situational logics of structures and cultures) and social responses that enable success of EA implementation. The research examines the particular situational logics evident within the University under study and how these provide opportunities and constraints to the acceptance of EA over time. Equally important was reflexivity theory in attaining knowledge and understanding about what it is about people’s internal relations that makes EA implementation succeed. This thesis offers organisations a means to focus on the deeper issues of EA implementation programs by understanding the social complexity surrounding the architecture. The recognition of people as a key element in EA implementation provides a useful explanation of how the key stakeholders (and their power, influence and interests) may constrain and enable EA implementation. By including reflexivity as an important mechanism, organisations will be in a better position to understand the role of people and their interactions with preexisting structures and cultures operating over different time periods – reflexivity suggesting that “people” always have the possibility to do otherwise than expected, largely dependent on their personal history and their current personal projects and ultimate concerns.
Factors Influencing the Engagement Between Enterprise Architects and Stakeholders in Enterprise Architecture Development
The development of Enterprise Architecture (EA) is facing several challenges. The highly referenced challenges in literature are related to enterprise architects and stakeholders. The enterprise architects and the stakeholders are the main actors in EA development. However, there are limited studies that cover the relationship of the enterprise architects and the stakeholders. The purpose of this paper is to identify the factors characterizing the engagement of enterprise architects and the stakeholders in EA development. The study used a systematic literature review (SLR) as a method to identify the factors and proposing an initial engagement model. The SLR revealed 12 factors that influence the engagement between the enterprise architect and the stakeholders. These factors are organized using the multiple perspective theory under three perspectives namely; technical, organizational and personal that comprise the initial engagement model. The study is contributing by shedding the light on the key aspects of engagement factors between the enterprise architects and the stakeholders in the development of EA. Furthermore, it is an initial step towards developing the engagement framework by comprehending these key aspects.
Institutionalization of Contested Practices: A Case of Enterprise Architecture Implementation in a US State Government
Information Systems (IS) practices are often ‘institutionally contested’ when introduced into organizations. They run counter to the status quo and disrupt organizational stability. Furthermore, they contravene the normative, regulatory, and cultural-cognitive legitimacy in existing institutionalized processes. This research explores contested practices, examining the struggles and techniques IS organizations use to legitimize and institutionalize them. Using an institutional change and translation perspective, we investigate a case of Enterprise Architecture (EA) implementations in a US state government, highlighting the struggles in translating new practices to connect to potential users and in connecting new practices to existing norms, regulations, and cultural values. We elucidate two key techniques to overcome these struggles: inductive communication to make new practices relatable to users, and the deployment of experts to local contexts to facilitate knowledge transfer. The research shows how institutional change unfolds and informs practitioners of how to legitimize EA practices.
The ability of organizations to innovate is acknowledged as an essential capability to compete in a competitive market. This paper proposes to use enterprise architecture management as a systematic approach to innovate the enterprise. The enterprise architecture approach is based on a comprehensive architecture framework which aligns the domains of business -, application - and infrastructure architecture. The framework addresses all dimensions relevant for enterprise innovation like business mod-el, organization, processes, and technology and provides appro-priate design techniques. A comprehensive architecture development process is introduced which integrates innovation as a central element for the enter-prise architecture design. The process encompasses all activities from business vision
Investigation of the Lack of Common Understanding in the Discipline of Enterprise Architecture : A Systematic Mapping Study
The number of publications, along with the organization of new conferences are a couple of the relevant elements that usually indicate the progress of an area of study over the years. This is definitely true in the case of the Enterprise Architecture (EA) discipline, which went from having its first journal article published in 1989 to over two hundred published articles by 2015. But in spite of this evolution, EA is still suffering from a considerable lack of common understanding. It has become very important to investigate the current state of affairs concerning the EA discipline through its relevant publications in order to shed some light on this challenge. 171 journal papers published between 1990 and 2015 were systematically selected and examined in order to accomplish this investigation. The quantitative and qualitative findings of this examination show that EA is a young discipline which raises a growing interest in recent years. This examination also confirms the lack of common understanding in EA, which can be observed in the different descriptions of the term "enterprise architecture," and in the diversity of perspective with regards to the whole discipline. Several issues related to this lack has been reported, such as multidisciplinary issue, language issue, structure of research and mode of observation issues. The major issue concerns the absence of enough research to shed some light on this challenge. In addition to this investigation, helpful directions for future research in this area was proposed.
Organizational Subcultures and Enterprise Architecture Effectiveness: Findings from a Case Study at a European Airport Company
This paper studies how organizational subcultures influence the effectiveness of the enterprise architecture (EA) function. It provides findings from a case study in a European airport company. We find specific subcultural differences that can lower EA effectiveness. In addition, we discover that not only subcultural differences but also subcultural similarity can reduce EA effectiveness. For instance, the preference for working isolated of some business departments results in a lack of communication between those departments, which lowers EA effectiveness. Also, our data suggest that the subcultural influence is indirect. We identify, amongst others, communication defects as an important intermediary variable.
Enterprise Architecture has been developed in order to optimize the alignment between business needs and the (rapidly changing) possibilities of information technology. But do organizations indeed benefit from the application of Enterprise Architecture according to those who are in any way involved in architecture? To answer this question, a model has been developed (the Enterprise Architecture Value Framework) to organize the benefits of Enterprise Architecture. Based on this model, a survey has been conducted among the various types of stakeholders of Enterprise Architecture, such as architects, project managers, developers and business or IT managers. In the survey the respondents were asked to what extent they perceive various benefits of Enterprise Architecture in their organization. The results of this survey (with 287 fully completed responses) are analyzed and presented in this paper. In all categories of the framework benefits are perceived, though to different extent. Very few benefits are perceived in relation to the external orientation of the organization. Few statistically significant correlations were found in relation to the background of the respondents: the overall view on benefits of Enterprise Architecture appeared independent of the role of the respondents, the economic sector and the number of years of experience with architecture
Seeking to Control Enterprise with Architecture: the Limits and Value of an Engineering Approach From the Perspective of an Enterprise Architect
In this (DMan) thesis, I challenge assumptions underlying my discipline of enterprise architecture that led to two choices facing practitioners: either to work with tools and techniques which predict and control changes towards predetermined ends or to accept informal processes that are unpredictable and wasteful. Orthodox enterprise architecture defines an enterprise as an organisation, which is a system, and prescribes methods that seek to provide control over the transformation of an organisation into a desired state of affairs by achieving complete knowledge of the system before initiating the desired transformation. Drawing on complexity sciences, I offer a different perspective on organisation and claim that organising what we do is an aspect of doing what we do. Organising is process. I furthermore claim that the people who are organising what we do can act spontaneously and surprise both themselves and others, but often they act habitually. Habitual ways of acting allow us to anticipate to some extent how others are likely to respond to us and, as we grow up, we learn how to behave ourselves, that is, how to adjust our behaviour to what we judge socially acceptable to increase the likelihood of being able to garner support and collaboration. I posit that social control is exercised in this way as mutual self-adjustment that forms what is normal and valued conduct. In other words, our shared social norms and values thus paradoxically and simultaneously form individuals and their conduct and are formed by individuals and their conduct. I claim that in this way we have partial, but never full, knowledge of how others generally respond to certain behaviour of ours. We can ever have only partial knowledge of that which is—in the words of Mannheim—in the process of becoming. I therefore reject the central assumptions upon which orthodox enterprise architecture is based. In organisations, we engineer and exploit mechanical mechanisms that can conduct certain action more effectively and efficiently than people can. Materiality, objects in the world, can resist attempts to shape them to suit our needs but do so without intentionality or spontaneity. Accommodating material resistance is thus repeatable. Enterprise architecture as a discipline grew out of engineering of physical mechanisms and assumes a similar repeatability and predictability when working with the social, which I find to be an unwarranted assumption. I argue against the claim of orthodox enterprise architecture that we can bring about a pre-determined state in a controlled fashion and against the claim that without such control we have informal processes that are inevitably unpredictable and wasteful. I posit that what emerges is paradoxically stable instabilities of socially enabled and constrained recognisable patterns of behaviour. When devising a mechanism in a physical object, such as a software programme, a repertoire of scripted action is transcribed into it which remains constant until transcription is renewed. Transcription has a tendency to render action less fluid. Some members of an organisation may judge particular scripted action to be awkward or detrimental while others may judge the same scripted action to be efficient and beneficial. Thus, determining which scripted action to transcribe into mechanisms is a highly political decision which attracts the attention of skilful political players. Enterprise architects can have a valuable role to play, since we have a better than average partial knowledge about technology, and since technology is increasingly important for many enterprises. I posit that becoming more aware of power and power plays, developing a feel for the game, and becoming more detached about our involvement will allow us to play into what is emerging socially with more political awareness and expertise.
Enterprise architecture is practiced in different ways, and there are different types of enterprise architects with quite different roles. This paper looks closer at the role of enterprise architects and the importance of the enterprise architects’ understanding of boundary issues in their practice. The paper suggests that enterprise architects must focus on problem-finding more than problem-solving, and should develop not just more dialectic skills, but also dialogic skills. The paper also argues that the enterprise architects must gain a deeper understanding of the enterprise, and need to start working with other enterprise disciplines.
Enterprise Architecture (EA) is a set of concepts and practices based on holistic systems thinking, principles of shared language, and the long-standing disciplines of engineering and architecture. EA represents a change in how we think about and manage information technologies (ITs) and the organizations they serve. Many existing organizational activities are EA-type activities, but done in isolation, by different groups, using different tools, models, and vernaculars. EA is about bridging the chasms among these activities, from strategy to operations, and better aligning, integrating, optimizing, and synergizing the whole organization. This article: (1) posits that EA is about the architecture of the entire enterprise including its ITs
Three schools of thought on enterprise architecture exist, each with its own belief system (definitions, concerns, assumptions, and limitations). A novel taxonomy of these schools creates a starting point for resolving terminological challenges to help establish enterprise architecture as a discipline.
In most economic sectors organizations face rapid environmental changes like regulations. Such changes can force them to adjust both their organizational and operational structure. For instance, in the energy utility sector numerous developments moved German Public Utilities (PUs) towards a liberalized market. Nowadays PUs have to stay competitive while managing a heterogeneous information technology (IT) landscape. We address this demand for aligning business and IT by combining the holistic perspective of Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) with the characteristic of reference modeling to reuse knowledge in a problem domain. Therefore, we utilize configurative reference modeling within Design Science Research (DSR). The artefact at hand is a method for developing a Reference Enterprise Architecture (R-EA), which is applied in the problem domain of PUs. Our contributions are the (i) adaptation of Configurative Reference Modelling (CRM) to develop a R-EA and (ii) a procedure how to elicit knowledge for R-EA development method.
Enterprise Architecture (EA) is considered as a solution to reduce IT implementation failure, improve profitability and enhance business-IT alignment within organizations. However, explanations and evidence of EA benefits and success factors in the existing literature are still limited. Therefore, this study aims to explore how EA creates value to organizations through a qualitative study employing interviews with EA experts. This study contributes to the current knowledge of EA by providing a validated list of EA benefits and success factors. The study identified 40 EA benefits that are grouped into five categories (operational, managerial, strategic, IT infrastructure and organizational) and thirty-seven EA success factors categorized into product quality, infrastructure quality, service delivery quality and organizational anchoring. This study offers a number of implications for research and practice.
This paper provides a summary of enterprise architecture, outlining what it is, what the benefits are, and a few pointers towards best practice. This paper also touches on the subject of enablers such as architecture frameworks and meta-models for those readers who want to delve deeper.
While world-wide Mergers and Acquisitions (M&As) activity continues to accelerate, a substantial proportion of deals fails to yield the expected value. The inability to plan and implement post-merger integration of information technology contributes substantially to these failure rates. This paper advances the argument that a company’s pre-existing Enterprise Architecture decisively shapes the capability to implement post-merger IT integration and subsequently realize benefits from M&A. Our multiple-case study investigates three acquisition cases and develops an explanatory theory of how Enterprise Architecture maturity enables the implementation of distinct integration strategies. The results do not only enrich the academic literature on M&A, but also show the strategic value of Enterprise Architecture maturity.
This book constitutes the proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Perspectives in Business Informatics Research, BIR 2017, held in Copenhagen, Denmark, in August 2017.
Assessment of Enterprise Architecture Implementation Capability and Priority in Public Sector Agency
The objective of this study is to assess the capability and priority for Enterprise Architecture (EA) implementation in the context of Malaysian public sector agency. This study uses the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) based on the judgments and opinions of EA team members from three different agencies at federal level. There are 27 assessment criteria which are grouped into six categories, Internal Process, Learning and Growth, Authority Support, Cost, Technology and Talent Management. The top capability of all cases is Internal Process and the top criteria for priority assessment is Authority Support. From the findings it can be concluded that AHP is a useful and cost effective method to assess, priorities and plan for EA implementation. Addressing the capability and priority criteria will ensure the optimum EA is implemented thus it shall reduce the risk of EA implementation failure.
Growing complexity of the enterprise ecosystem along with the existence of legacy approaches in the organization can result in a number of challenges when maintaining the solid baseline of its information assets. The digital industry has, over past two decades, passed through rapid evolution triggered both by availability of new technologies, and business as well as operating and funding models. These enablers have direct impact on the way that organizations design and execute their business processes in order to maintain the alignment between their capabilities and targets. This trend implies that enterprises and organizations need to remain flexible by maintaining the alignment of their business and their infrastructure in a dynamically changing and integrated ecosystem. It has been widely recognized that the enterprise architecture as well as the process driven approaches provide tools used by organizations to explain how business, resources and other elements within the organization are related to each other. This article discusses the role, and associated value, that the enterprise architecture and process driven approach have when describing what constitutes the enterprise. At the same time it elaborates on principles and constructs of the model of the holistic layer of the enterprise architecture on the basis of process driven approach. The proposed model aims to combine a unified view on infrastructure and behavior of the enterprise with lean principles in order to identify and focus on key elements of the enterprise.
Don't get caught out! Ah, the Key Performance Indicator. It’s one of those management innovations that causes a fair amount of pushback in most people, partly because they have such a potential to go wrong. As a person who has been on the receiving end of a manager who’s been obsessed with metrics and nothing else, I can understand those who resists the whole idea of KPIs. But they can be useful, as long as they’re used properly.
A sound IT architecture keeps your company’s technology strategy humming. From kludges to manual re-keying to redundant apps, these are the telltale indicators of an IT environment on the brink of collapse.
Large organizations are increasingly turning to enterprise architects to help bridge the divide between IT and the business and drive digital transformation.
Despite the growing interest in enterprise architecture management, researchers and practitioners lack a shared understanding of its applications in organizations. Building on findings from a literature review and eight case studies, we develop a taxonomy that categorizes applications of enterprise architecture management based on three classes of enterprise architecture scope. Organizations may adopt enterprise architecture management to help form, plan, and implement IT strategies; help plan and implement business strategies; or to further complement the business strategy-formation process. The findings challenge the traditional IT-centric view of enterprise architecture management application and suggest enterprise architecture management as an approach that could support the consistent design and evolution of an organization as a whole.
Enterprise architecture (EA) frameworks offer principles, models, and guidance to help one develop an EA program. Due to EA’s flexible and abstract nature, there is a proliferation of EA frameworks in practice. Yet, comparison studies to make sense of them are far from satisfactory in that they lack a theoretical foundation for comparison criteria and do not meaningfully interpret the differences. In this paper, I propose a comparison approach using EA essential elements—the underlying key features of EA programs—to distinguish EA frameworks. Based on the extant literature, I identify eight elements, each with its own theoretical justification and empirical evidence. I illustrate how to use these elements to evaluate eight popular EA frameworks. The results show three ideal types of EA frameworks: technical, operational, and strategic EA. Each type has a different focus, set of assumptions, and historical context. The essential elements offer a more systematic way to evaluate EA frameworks. In addition, they shift attention from the maturity models often used in EA development to focus on particular EA elements being implemented by organizations.
Although IT modernization is top of mind for government IT professionals, many agencies feel too bogged down to deploy innovative technologies. Faced with legacy systems consuming operating budgets and a lack of visibility across enterprise computing and networking assets, it’s increasingly difficult to meet changing organizational demands. But some agencies are taking a practical first step by gaining a clear view of their complete current IT infrastructure -- identifying what’s installed, what’s not, what’s working, what’s not and what’s missing. IT portfolio management provides an essential and unbiased baseline for agencies.
Enterprise Architecture approaches are used to provide rigorous descriptions of the organization-wide environment, manage the alignment of deployed services to the organization's mission, end ensure a clear separation of the concerns addressed in an architecture. Thus, an effective Enterprise Architecture approach assists in the management of relations and dependencies of any components of the organization environment and supports the integration and evolution of the architecture. However, the quality of that approach is strongly influenced by the precision of the architecture context description, a fact which is not always recognized. This paper focuses on the architecture context description and addresses the gap between the stakeholders'concerns and the resulting architecture. Based on a combination of established references and standards, we show how an explicit integration of the architecture context into the architecture model improves the linking of concerns and key elements of the architecture vision. We apply our approach to a subject of increasing concern in the Information Systems area: longevity of information. Digital preservation is an interdisciplinary problem, but existent initiatives address it in a very domain-centric way, making it impossible to integrate documented knowledge into an overall organization architecture. We analyze several references and models and derive a description of the architecture context and a capability model that supports incremental development through an explicit distinction between systems and their capabilities. The presented approach allows not just any organization to assess their current digital preservation awareness and evolve their architectures to address this challenge, but in particular demonstrates the added value of an explicit architecture context model in an Enterprise Architecture approach.
In this report, Gartner analysts Samantha Searle and Marc Kerremans evaluated 11 companies that provide Enterprise Architecture (EA) solutions, and positioned them in four quadrants: leaders, visionaries, challengers, and niche players. The report describes the current state of the market for EA tools and goes into detail about each vendor’s positioning.
Digitization is rapidly changing the role that IT teams play in their companies but certainly isn't diminishing their importance.
Joe McKendrick: From microservices enablement to device communications, architectural approaches will keep IoT aligned with business designs.
Gregor Hohpe: Many large organizations see their IT engine separated by many floors from the executive penthouse, which also separates business and digital strategy from the vital work of carrying it out. The primary role of an architect is to ride the elevators between the penthouse and engine room, stopping wherever is needed to support these digital efforts: automating software manufacturing, minimizing up-front decision making, and influencing the organization alongside technology evolution. 24 May 2017
This is the first book to seriously address the disconnection between nimble Agile teams and other groups in the enterprise, including enterprise architecture, the program management office (PMO), human resources, and even business executives. When an enterprise experiments with practice improvements, software development teams often jump on board with excitement, while other groups are left to wonder how they will fit in. We address how these groups can adapt to Agile teams. More importantly, we show how many Agile teams cause their own problems, damaging scalability and sustainability, by requiring special treatment, and by failing to bridge the gaps between themselves and other groups. We call this phenomenon Agile illth. Adopting a set of best practices is not enough. All of us, Agile teams and the corporate groups, must change our intentions and worldviews to be more compatible with the success of the enterprise. Join us on the journey to enterprise agility. It is a crooked path, fraught with danger, confusion and complexity. It is the only way to reach the pinnacles we hope to experience in the form of better business value delivered faster for less cost.
Understand Your Organisation - Improve Your Business: An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture Modelling
Written by an industry expert with over 20 years of experience, this bite-sized book will quickly introduce you to the concepts, terminology and management of Enterprise Architecture Modelling projects. It describes how to go about documenting processes, systems, people, locations, equipment, controls, risks and opportunities so that you have a reference of what makes the organization tick. There is also a chapter on how not to do it.
As organisations pivot towards digital delivery methods, the best will reimagine Enterprise Architecture. In this way, digital will benefit from the gains in business intimacy, strategic insight and technology reliability which EAs have wrought on all technology delivery models since IT became an indispensable part of business success. Disruption will happen, but talented EAs are still needed – through digital and beyond.
This editorial is concerned with the need for an integrated approach to the design and engineering of organisations and their enterprises. Organisational Design originates from the organisational sciences, while the notion of Enterprise Engineering results from the engineering sciences (most notably information systems engineering, business (process) engineering, business process optimisation, and enterprise architecture). The Organisational Design and Enterprise Engineering journal (ODEE) is built on the premise that there should not be an either-or relation between Organisational Design and Enterprise Engineering, but rather an integrated approach that brings out the best of the two. A driver for the creation of the journal was the observation that the either-or mindset was (and still is) a major obstacle to the development of organisational thinking, and that this artificial divide must be abolished. In achieving more integration between Organisational Design and Enterprise Engineering, we suggest to take a model-enabled approach, where models should act as boundary objects between the social processes involved in organisational design processes, and the more analytical and rational side of enterprise engineering.
The human-made technology that is used by organizations has played a crucial role in enabling humans to accomplish impressive endeavors. Despite the critical importance that organizations (or organizing) have played (and still play) in shaping the modern world, they are a technology that humans know very little about, and are still struggling to design and use adequately. The crux of the problem is that the study of organizations (including their design) does not fit neatly into the boxes that are modern academic disciplines. Another important series of issues concerns conducting multidisciplinary research across the silos of academic discipline. Crossing these silos is especially difficult when trying to cross-pollinate ideas as well as publish because of terminological, political, and social challenges. As such, the ODandEE journal is a necessary and important step in the right direction for addressing these issues by promoting research that is both multidisciplinary as well as oriented towards the proactive stance of design and engineering.
(Enterprise) Architecture has emerged as a key discipline in dealing with continuous change/transformation in which models play a key role. In most current modelling languages (e.g. ArchiMate) there is a clear distinction between business concepts and IT concepts. The question that is addressed in this paper is: is that still justified? It is argued that a more symbiotic relationship between human actors and computer actors, performing essential (business) behaviour side by side is the way to long term success. We also briefly touch upon the impact of such change in (modelling) approach on the way we deal with these transformations from a methodological point of view.
Innovation is becoming increasingly important for Enterprise Architecture (EA) teams. Consequently, it is crucial that tools be developed to assist Enterprise Architecture teams when evaluating how (and how well) they are supporting innovation within the context of their enterprise. To date very little research has been completed that focuses on both EA and innovation. This paper presents an assessment tool to help EA teams evaluate and improve how they support innovation. The tool has been tested in a case study with a hi-tech firm and initial results are presented. In 2015 International Conference on Enterprise Systems (ES).
Enterprise architecture teams often struggle with measuring and communicating the value of their function. We have implemented a set of simple and straight-forward performance indicators to address this problem.
John Zachman blog post on Industry 4.0 challenges for enterprise architects.
Disciplined Agile (DA) is a process decision framework for lean enterprises. The main characteristics of this framework are that it: is a people-first, learning-oriented hybrid agile/lean approach; has a risk-value delivery lifecycle; is goal-driven; is enterprise aware; is tactically scalable at the team level; and strategically scalable across all of the enterprise.
Ken Griesi and Beryl Bellman: The need for enterprises to efficiently and effectively deal with complexity and change has, perhaps, never been more prevalent than now.? Driving relevant and timely solutions for an enterprise demands a thorough understanding of the problem space and skillful bounding of the solution space prior to engineering a solution. Yet even as EAs faces these challenges, there are lessons to be learned from natural systems and an examination of CAS Theory. EA 3.0 stands upon the strong and steady shoulders of well-established principles that have survived the test of time. As John Zachman (2003) states, Seven thousand years of human history would establish that the key to complexity and change is architecture.
This paper suggests a new type of enterprise models called fractal enterprise models (FEM), with accompanying methodological support for their design. FEM shows interconnections between the business processes in an enterprise by connecting them to the assets they use and manage. Assets considered in the model could be tangible (buildings, heavy machinery, etc.) and intangible (employees, business process definitions, etc.). A FEM model is built by using two types of patterns called archetypes: a process-assets archetype that connects a process with assets used in it, and an asset-processes archetype that connects an asset with processes aimed to manage this asset (e.g., hiring people, or servicing machinery). Alternating these patterns creates a fractal structure that makes relationships between various parts of the enterprise explicit. FEM can be used for different purposes, including finding a majority of the processes in an enterprise and planning business change or radical transformation. Besides discussing FEM and areas of its usage, the paper presents results from a completed project in order to test the practical usefulness of FEM and its related methodological support.
This white paper marks the conclusion of the Digital Transformation Research Project, which was jointly conducted by the Vlerick Centre for Excellence in Enterprise Architecture and our partner LoQutus. Through a series of case studies on 13 organisations, both member and non-member organisations of the Vlerick Centre of Excellence in Enterprise Architecture, our aim was to gain insights in an organisation’s digital transformation journey, and, more specifically, in the involvement of Enterprise Architecture (EA) in this process.
Enterprises engage in dynamic environments and do need capabilities that will enable them to (re)configure and integrate existing capabilities or create new capabilities in order to remain viable and competitive in such environments. Enterprise Architecture (EA) by definition has the propensity to contribute to the agility of the enterprise in turbulent environments provided it is managed and guided by a methodic approach in a way that strengthens the capabilities with which the enterprise senses and responds to changes in its environment. However, the agility of the Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) func-tion and its relation with the agility of the enterprise as a whole has been spar-ingly studies in the EA literature. This thesis contributes to the EA literature by designing an agile EAM method that supports the agility of the EAM function and the agility of the enterprise as a whole. A number of steps were taken to this end. First, the factors that influence the agility of the enterprise, namely; agility drivers, agility providers and agility capabilities, were identified. Second, litera-ture on enterprise architecture, lean and agile principles and values, and a set of proposed theories were reviewed to form the theoretical foundation for the method design effort. Third, the lean and agile principles and values were adapted for EAM work. Fourth, the adapted lean and agile principles and values were consolidated into eight essential elements (EEs) that an agile EAM should possess in order to support the agility of the EAM function and the agility of the enterprise. Finally, an agile EAM method (Agile EAMM) was constructed to embody the EEs. The proposed Agile EAMM acts as a dynamic capability that provides the sensing capabilities, the leaning capabilities and the coordinating capabilities needed to effectively carry out enterprise architecting as an integrat-ing capability in transforming as-is architecture (existing operational capabili-ties) into to-be architecture (reconfigured operational capabilities). The compat-ibility of the Agile EAMM with existing methods was demonstrated using TO-GAF%u2019s ADM, and its efficacy was evaluated by means of an illustrative scenario. Conceptually, the Agile EAMM has the propensity to support the agility of the EAM function and the agility of the enterprise as a whole. Aside the Agile EAMM, the thesis contributes lean and agile principles and values applicable to EAM, the eight EEs, and areas for further research to the EA literature.
The practice of Enterprise Architecture (EA) creates one enterprise view of the operating model, synchronizing stakeholders and creating an organizational blueprint that charts the future of the business and drives strategic decision-making around investments, priorities and M&A. As digital proliferation accelerates, EA is now far more valuable to organizations, and more difficult, than ever before. EA approaches need to adapt for a digital economy, and bridge the gap between business strategy and execution. Capabilities Architecture Planning (CAP) is an end-to-end EA framework that bridges the strategy-execution gap for large scale transformation efforts. The framework is particularly well-suited for a digital climate based on its cross-functional approach and agile development processes.
In their haste to deliver software capabilities, developers sometimes engage in less-than-optimal coding practices. If not addressed, these shortcuts can ultimately yield unexpected rework costs that offset the benefits of rapid delivery. Technical debt conceptualizes the tradeoff between the short-term benefits of rapid delivery and long-term value. Taking shortcuts to expedite the delivery of features in the short term incurs technical debt, analogous to financial debt, that must be paid off later to optimize long-term success. Managing technical debt is an increasingly critical aspect of producing cost-effective, timely, and high-quality software products, especially in projects that apply agile methods.
Enterprise Architecture for Healthcare. Norwegian video from Helse Midt Norge.
The Enterprisers Project: I was recently shocked to hear that over 52 percent of companies that were on the Fortune 500 list in the year 2000 no longer exist. The enterprise architect (EA) role has been around for a long time, but in that time companies have never faced this amount of rapidly changing customer expectations and the battle against extinction that they do today. How can they stay relevant and even disrupt rather than being disrupted in this digital era? The new EA is the only practice that can truly give companies hope in navigating change to business models that are highly driven by and with technology.
Svyatoslav Kotusev, a researcher at RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia, questions whether the Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) is the industry standard framework that enterprise architects really deserve.
A new approach to digital strategy reinvents legacy IT by aligning it to a company%u2019s capabilities. The key lies in using the rigor of capabilities architecture planning directly, or adopting some of its tenets into an existing management approach, as a vehicle for collective mastery. Try to move your people, processes, technology, and partners into alignment as you carry out your capabilities architecture plan, making all of them parts of a single capabilities system. Your capabilities are your business, and technology should not be treated as a specialized field, set apart from the rest of your company: It is an inherent, inseparable aspect of what you do better than anyone else.
With articles by Ross, Toppenberg, Tamm and more. MIS Quarterly Executive, Vol 14, No 4 (2015)
The design of digital solutions has become a pressing concern for practitioners faced with a plethora of technology impacting their business. From cloud computing to social networks, mobile computing and big data, to the emerging of Internet of things, all of which are changing how enterprise products, services, rooms and buildings are connected to the wider ecosystem of networks and services. This book defines digital ecosystems with examples from real industry cases and explores how enterprise architecture is evolving to enable physical and virtual, social, and material object collaboration and experience. The key topics covered include: Concepts of digitization Types of technological ecosystems Architecting digital workspaces Principles of architecture design Examples architecting digital business models Examples of digital design patterns Methods of monetization
This book presents a comprehensive overview of enterprise architecture management with a specific focus on the business aspects. While recent approaches to enterprise architecture management have dealt mainly with aspects of information technology, this book covers all areas of business architecture from business motivation and models to business execution. The book provides examples of how architectural thinking can be applied in these areas, thus combining different perspectives into a consistent whole. In-depth experiences from end-user organizations help readers to understand the abstract concepts of business architecture management and to form blueprints for their own professional approach. Business architecture professionals, researchers, and others working in the field of strategic business management will benefit from this comprehensive volume and its hands-on examples of successful business architecture management practices.
Enterprise Architecture (EA) has evolved to become a prominent presence in today’s information systems and technology landscape. The EA discipline is rich in frameworks, methodologies, and the like. However, the question of ‘value’ for business ;professionals remains largely unanswered – that is, how best can Enterprise Architecture and Enterprise Architects deliver value to the enterprise?
Mastering ArchiMate Edition III is the third edition of a much praised book by Gerben Wierda about the ArchiMate® Enterprise Architecture Modeling Language, which is a standard and a Registered Trade Mark of The Open Group. The book gives an introduction to the language, then goes on to show you key aspects of successful modeling, and many different patterns for its use. From Business to Infrastructure, from Risk & Security to Application Exploitation and Maintenance. While the aim of the book is to teach the language, it often also offers necessary background, so that the patterns can make sense to the reader not familiar with a subject. Thus, it also contains introductions to subjects such as virtualization, bitcoin/blockchain, infrastructure as code, processes versus functions, SOA/API, ESB, Terminal Services, etc. It also contains a short introduction to BPMN in order to describe a linking of both major languages.
Transformative Enterprise Architecture: Guiding and Governing the Metamorphosis of Organizations and IT Ecosystems
The age of transformation is upon us. And for corporate IT departments, supporting and sustaining enterprise architecture requires a fundamentally new approach. Transformative Enterprise Architecture has the solution. It presents a new methodology that boldly redefines the characteristics and competencies that every large-scale IT team must develop to function successfully.
Terese Besker and Rolf Olsson MSc Thesis: The present trend shows that Enterprise Architecture (EA) is an essential resource to improve the organizational efficiency, effectiveness, and agility, both in the business and the technology environment. The Enterprise Architect professionals who are working in this area are thus essential for operations in organizational transformation and development, therefore, vital to understand the ambition of this profession. There are several academic studies available concerning EA. However, there are few empirically based studies which in particularly reflect the Enterprise Architect profession. This study, examining the profession of the Enterprise Architect, sheds new light on what these professionals do within their organization on an every-day basis and how this view differs from how the profession is described in existing research. The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare how the Enterprise Architect profession is described both by academics and by empirically collected data. We perceive five topics that are essential to a comprehensive, rich picture of the profession; the role, competence, power, style of acting and main focus. The study is based on an initial literature survey and an empirically based study based on interviews with Enterprise Architects in ten large Swedish organizations. Our interviews show that the architect's work in several aspects is consistent with the literature but in other respects, an evident dissimilarity is revealed. One of the most obvious differences is the architect's mindset in terms of working in a reactive or a proactive way. Our interviews show that architects are working primarily in a reactive approach both in terms of how their roles are described but also in relation to how the EA function is set up. Although it is evidential that most of the architects’ work is based on a reactive basis, the architects claim it would be inappropriate with a purely proactive approach. Nevertheless, the establishment of the EA as a function within the interviewed organizations seems to have been well implemented, where architectural principles are determined as mandatory, while an interesting finding is that major or radical IT investments appears to overrule the architectural principles and is part of top management discretion only.
The voices of the EA community.
In the era of decentralized IT, enterprise architects will find fresh opportunity to help businesses meet their most important objectives.
PhD thesis by Gustav Toppenberg. Resume: This research examines the technology-related integration challenges to acquisitions in digital industries and how these challenges can be managed. Historically, companies seeking to increase markets, products or customers have utilized the strategic growth process of mergers and acquisitions. Their motivation was primarily to utilize economies of scale and operational synergies to integrate acquisition targets that were similar in product, market, and customer demographics. The aim of these acquisitions was to scale the acquisition products to its own markets and customers while potentially gaining new markets and customers in the process. For companies in the digital-technology industry, the path to growth in these fast-paced markets is through the acquisition of innovation-based technologies from new and emerging companies to complement their current R&D strategies. The incumbent enterprises look for emerging technology companies as acquisition targets in order to stay ahead of the increasingly fast technology-development lifecycle. The acquisition and integration process for these types of companies present challenges to practitioners that are very different from what has been experienced in the past and will present new research opportunities for scholars researching the related domains.
Gartner's ITScore maturity assessment for enterprise architecture assesses EA maturity at five levels, based on eight major dimensions of an EA practice. This research examines our five-level framework for enterprise architecture teams to use in determining EA maturity.
The aim of today%u2019s enterprise architect should be to deliver great data %u2013 data that is clean, safe and connected %u2013 by design. Enterprise architects that enable great data demonstrate, by their actions, what it means to be truly data-first. Data-Ready Architects think about data-readiness and all of the implications of delivering it so that it truly creates a business competitive advantage. As such, they help to secure their enterprises continuing right to win.
There are 25 billion points of data ready to overwhelm enterprise systems. An industry expert makes the case for enterprise architecture to provide structure.
Enterprise Architecture, when done well, is a business transformation practice. Transforming a business is not about slogans, mission statements, slick PowerPoints or in-depth strategy documents. It is about execution and actually changing business operations.
By: . In model analysis activities, it is critical to make early statements and diagnosis from a high level of abstraction. Currently, these tasks are difficult to perform, and they require both the involvement of experts and the elaboration of specialized artifacts. Furthermore, the complexity of the tasks increases as models become bigger and more detailed. In other contexts, it has been noticed that total / holistic / unfiltered visualizations may give insight about the models, providing analysts a starting point for exploration and general pattern discovery. In this paper, we evaluate the support that six different Enterprise Architecture (EA) modeling tools offer to EA analysis activities, and assess the strengths and weaknesses of six visualization frameworks, in order to extend the analysis of enterprise models by Visual Analysis. The evaluation is based on a set of 14 requirements which are either visualization-related or specific to EA analysis, and its results were harvested from a) observed characteristics of the diagrams of these tools, and b) visualizations from an enterprise model, generated with the aforementioned visualization frameworks. These results point to several actionable subjects and research opportunities for the field of EA Modeling and Analysis.
Every enterprise evolves continuously, driven by changing needs or new opportunities. Most often this happens gradually, with small adjustments to strategy, organization, processes, or infrastructure. But sometimes enterprises need to go beyond minor fixes and transform themselves, in response to a disruptive event or dramatically changing circumstances -- a merger, for example, or a new competitor. In this book, enterprise architecting experts Deborah Nightingale and Donna Rhodes offer a framework for enterprise transformation. Successful transformation, they believe, starts with a holistic approach, taking into consideration all facets of the enterprise and its environment rather than focusing solely on one factor -- information technology, for example, or organizational structure. This is architecting the future enterprise: creating a blueprint for what the enterprise will look like after the transformation. Nightingale and Rhodes introduce the ARIES (Architecting Innovative Enterprise Strategy) framework, including a ten enterprise element model and an architecting process model, and show how to apply it, from start to finish. They explain how to create a holistic vision for the future enterprise and how to generate concepts and alternative architectures; they describe techniques for evaluating possible architectures, tools for implementation planning, and strategies for communicating with stakeholders. Nightingale and Rhodes offer real-world examples throughout, drawing on their work at MIT, with an extensive case study of enterprise transformation at a medical device manufacturer. An appendix offers two additional architecting projects. Seven Architecting Imperatives* Make architecting the initial activity in transformation. * Develop a comprehensive understanding of the enterprise landscape. * Understand what stakeholders value and how that may change in the future.* Use multiple perspectives to see the whole enterprise.* Create an architecting team suited to the transformation challenges.* Engage all levels of leadership in transformation. * Architect for the enterprise's changing world.
Savvy organizations know their Enterprise Architects enable business outcomes. This formerly tactical IT "job" is today a strategic position. Enterprise architects increasingly report outside of IT to the CFO, CMO or office of the CEO. Why this quiet elevation? Enterprise Architects work at the leading edge of organizations; in the zone where business capabilities are born. This is why today's CEO's collaborate with their Enterprise Architects when evaluating short and long term strategies. Enterprise Architects continuously blend business and technical capabilities to meet the ongoing demand for new capabilities. If it sounds like ninja smoke.... It is... and smart organizations already know it works. Making Enterprise Architecture work involves mutual understanding and trust between EA's and CEO's. This is the first in a planned series of books designed to help maximize investments in Enterprise Architecture. The topics are based on executive's questions and issues addressed in the author's experience teaching enterprise architecture to executives and in delivering EA solutions to large organizations. This first volume begins with basic connecting points between executive and architect and discusses effective techniques for moving architecture to the enterprise level in the organization. The centerpiece in this volume is the ERAM (Enterprise Resource Allocation Management) concept. This volume isn't intended to answer every possible question on Enterprise Architecture. It is intended to start the dialogue in a productive way...
Enterprise Architecture is the discipline of managing the complexities of the Business-IT landscape. It has been around since the 1980's, when for the first time computers were connected in networks, and the already serious (and unsolved) problem of the complexity of computer programs for relatively simple business needs turned into the huge problem of large networks of them in complex business landscapes. In spite of many 'best practices' and 'frameworks' that have been introduced, Enterprise Architecture is not a great success. After thirty years, we still have the same problems. Chaos is still everywhere. Projects still fail far too often. In this book, (hidden) assumptions behind the existing approaches to enterprise architecture are challenged, and a more realistic perspective that helps us battle the complexities and unpredictabilities of today's Business-IT landscapes is described. Practical suggestions about enterprise architecture governance and products, based on real-world experience with the described approach, complete the book. From general management to IT professionals, everyone who is confronted with the problem of managing Business-IT landscapes can profit from the insights this book offers. No specialist prior knowledge is required. Gerben Wierda is author of Mastering ArchiMate, and was, amongst other things, Lead Architect of the Judiciary in The Netherlands, Lead Architect of APG Asset Management, and is now Team Coordinator Architecture and Design at APG.
Enterprise Architecture Made Simple: Using the Ready, Set, Go Approach to Achieving Information Centricity
Learn how to institute and implement enterprise architecture in your organization. You can make a quick start and establish a baseline for your enterprise architecture within ten weeks, then grow and stabilize the architecture over time using the proven Ready, Set, Go Approach. The authors have combined more than three decades of experience in enterprise architecture, business development, and business modeling. They have introduced enterprise architecture to numerous different sectors and areas of operations. Both have been active as consultants and educators; they have also been examiners for a training course that certifies enterprise architects. In these roles, they have established the foundations of the enterprise architecture concept for numerous individuals and businesses. HÃ¥kan Edvinsson is currently the CTO and partner of Informed Decisions and Lottie Aderinne is the owner and partner of Vilante Consulting. Both companies provide consulting services for EA and change management projects.
Pragmatic Enterprise Architecture: Strategies to Transform Information Systems in the Era of Big Data
Pragmatic Enterprise Architecture is a practical hands-on instruction manual for enterprise architects. This book prepares you to better engage IT, management, and business users by equipping you with the tools and knowledge you need to address the most common enterprise architecture challenges. You will come away with a pragmatic understanding of and approach to enterprise architecture and actionable ideas to transform your enterprise. Experienced enterprise architect James V. Luisi generously shares life cycle architectures, transaction path analysis frameworks, and more so you can save time, energy, and resources on your next big project. As an enterprise architect, you must have relatable frameworks and excellent communication skills to do your job. You must actively engage and support a large enterprise involving a hundred architectural disciplines with a modest number of subject matter experts across business, information systems, control systems, and operations architecture. They must achieve their mission using the influence of ideas and business benefits expressed in simple terms so that any audience can understand what to do and why. Pragmatic Enterprise Architecture gives you the tools to accomplish your goals in less time with fewer resources. It expand your Enterprise Architecture skills so you can do more in less time with less money with the priceless tips presented. It understand the cost of creating new Enterprise Architecture disciplines and contrast those costs to letting them go unmanaged. It includes 10 life cycle architectures so that you can properly assess the ROI of performing activities such as outsourcing, insourcing, restructuring, mergers and acquisitions, and more. It complete appendix of eight transaction path analysis frameworks provide DBA guidelines for proper physical database design.
Strategic Enterprise Architecture Management: Challenges, Best Practices, and Future Developments (Management for Professionals)
The discipline of Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) deals with the alignment of business and information systems architectures. While EAM has long been regarded as a discipline for IT managers this book takes a different stance: It explains how top executives can use EAM for leveraging their strategic planning and controlling processes and how EAM can contribute to sustainable competitive advantage. Based on the analysis of best practices from eight leading European companies from various industries the book presents crucial elements of successful EAM. It outlines what executives need to do in terms of governance, processes, methodologies and culture in order to bring their management to the next level. Beyond this, the book points how EAM might develop in the next decade allowing todayâ€™s managers to prepare for the future of architecture management.
Information and communication technologies (ICT) are one of the key vehicles in enabling the reform of public administration. Public organizations have introduced enterprise architecture (EA) methods to manage their ICT assets and to improve the quality, efficiency and interoperability of public services. In Finland, the Act on Information Management Governance in Public Administration, making the use of EA mandatory for the central and local government institutions, was enacted in late 2011. For the present, however, concrete results from EA efforts are moderate. Most of the public organizations are still struggling with the adoption of this new policy. Not many studies of the problems, or the critical success factors (CSF) of EA adoption process can be found, even though this understanding is essential in enabling any later stages of the EA life cycle. The goal of our research was first, to identify the problems that organizations encounter while adopting EA and then, by analyzing these problems, to develop a model of CSFs of EA introduction for public organizations. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected over the span of several years, using different techniques in a triangulation setting. Grounded theory (GT) was used as an approach for the data collection and analysis. GT allowed us to inductively develop an empirically grounded theoretical model about this substantive area that lacks previous studies. The result, the proposed â€œ3Dâ€ model characterizes the critical problems in relation to the classes of CSFs. This raises the argument that the CSFs of EA adoption must be of dynamic nature. The detailed content of the CSF are specific to an organizational environment. They are also interrelated, and a strong CSF can be exploited to reinforce the weaker ones. The research contributes to the theoretical bodies of knowledge of EA and CSFs of organizational change invoked by ICT developments. It also suggests how the current capabilities of an organization can be turned into drivers of successful EA adoption. Therefore, the results are of interest to researchers, as well as practitioners. PhD disseration.
Lucas Onno Meertens PhD disseration. This thesis proposes a methodology for creating business models, evaluating them, and relating them to enterprise architecture. The methodology consists of several steps, leading from an organizationâ€™s current situation to a target situation, via business models and enterprise architecture. Currently, increasing amounts of businesses rely on IT systems to do their business. However, success rates of IT implementations projects are low. Difficulties exist in aligning existing IT systems with business objectives. Individually, business modelling or enterprise architecture does not seem to solve the problem completely. However, each of their weaknesses seems to be countered by the strengths of the other. Our proposed methodology supports bringing an organization from its current situation to a target situation. The developed process steps help to formalize business modelling, and at the same time extend enterprise architecture to be more business focussed and easier to use. This would support our hypothesis that combining enterprise architecture and business modelling leads to better enterprise architecture and business models, and therefore, more successful business-IT innovations.
The Agile Architecture Revolution: How Cloud Computing, REST-based SOA, and Mobile Computing are Changing Enterprise IT
A sneak peek at upâ€“andâ€“coming trends in IT, a multidimensional vision for achieving business agility through agile architectures The Agile Architecture Revolution places IT trends into the context of Enterprise Architecture, reinventing Enterprise Architecture to support continuous business transformation. It focuses on the challenges of large organizations, while placing such organizations into the broader business ecosystem that includes small and midsize organizations as well as startups. Organizes the important trends that are facing technology in businesses and public sector organizations today and over the next several years Presents the five broad organizing principles called Supertrends: location independence, global cubicle, democratization of technology, deep interoperability, and complex systems engineering Provides a new perspective on serviceâ€“oriented architecture in conjunction with architectural approaches to cloud computing and mobile technologies that explain how organizations can achieve better business visibility through IT and enterprise architecture Laying out a multidimensional vision for achieving agile architectures, this book discusses the crisis points that promise sudden, transformative change, unraveling how organizations spending on IT will continue to undergo radical change over the next ten years.
This book endeavours to help further lift the discipline of EA by providing a reference architecture for an EA function and taking an EA approach to its documentation and analysis to help demonstrate, explain and rationalize EA and the EA function. In doing so outlining the key drivers and components of an EA function, including the influences on and objectives of EA, and the business and technology processes and resources required and used to address these. Keeping on point and avoiding being pushed into related but non-EA activities; buying time to do things properly while still being responsive and agile to changes in enterprise drivers; fitting into the organisation's governance structure; building a capability not just delivering a series of non-repeatable, point-sensitive EA services are just some of the many challenges facing Enterprise Architects today. While there are a number of useful and informative EA frameworks and books available guiding organisations on what EA should deliver, organisations and individuals are left without the one thing they espouse for the enterprise at large, a target architecture for the EA function that can be used to best align it to their enterprise and allow them to plan and oversee its formation and change effectively. This leaves many decisions to be made in the absence of sound, communicable, measurable and transparent views as to why and what to strive for in doing EA. As a reference architecture typically describes a complete target architecture, and a complete architecture can take a long time to develop and fine tune, more than can be expected within a single release, project or time frame that initial outcomes are required by EA stakeholders and customers, the book takes a look at the different capabilities or themes that might be focused on to allow for the different needs and expectations enterprises have from EA. To ensure the reference architecture incorporates best practices in EA, it is built on the concepts and principles of EA outlined in Dr Scott Bernard's book, An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture, EA3, and his EA training program and certification courses. Both of which in turn build on the EA experiences and practices of EA practitioners over near to three decades.
Enterprise Architecture practice is growing quickly, accelerating in pace and adoption throughout the world but lacks an authoritative, unbiased place to learn about the wide array of experiences, methods and practices, and experiences. The EA Body of Knowledge is a unique endeavor created by people who believe, first and foremost, that the best way to gather the knowledge about Enterprise Architecture is to ask practitioners and researchers to simply share what they know, what they do, and how well it works. This is practical knowledge. The EABOK is home to terms and concepts, standards and practices, methods and patterns, and perspectives on what works... and what fails to work. We are striving first for breadth and usefulness. Consistency will evolve with maturity. The EABOK Consortium has senior leaders in the Enterprise Architecture community, including representatives from industry, government, and professional associations. But we are not looking only to ourselves for knowledge. On the contrary! While we have seeded the EABOK, we believe it will not be complete, actionable, and balanced, until we have input and insight from practitioners, researchers, and stakeholders. We aspire to have the EABOK become an ever-evolving map to insightful and useful information about enterprise architecture. Whether you are an experienced practitioner, an aspiring architect, or just someone interesting in this fascinating field, we welcome you to join our consortium hosted by MITRE and become a part of the Enterprise Architecture Body of Knowledge.
This book is a comprehensive reader about how enterprises can apply systems thinking in their enterprise architecture practice, for business transformation and for strategic execution. The book's contributors find that systems thinking is a valuable way of thinking about the viable enterprise and how to architect it. Edited by John Gøtze and Anders Jensen-Waud, the book features contributions from 32 international experts in the fields of systems thinking and enterprise architecture. Contributors: Adrian Campell, Alex Conn, Dennis Sherwood, Don deGuerre, Erik Perjons, Gene Bellinger, Harold Bud Lawson, Ilia Bider, Jack Ring, James Lapalme, James Martin, Jan Dietz, Jan Hoogervorst, Janne J. Korhonen, John Morecroft, Leo Laverdure, Linda Clod Præstholm, Mesbah Khan, Mikkel Stokbro Holst, Namkyu Park, Olov Östberg, Olusola O. Oduntan, Patrick Hoverstadt, Per Johannisson, Per-Arne Persson, Peter Sjølin, Rasmus Fischer Frost, Sally Bean, Tom Graves, and Tue Westmark Steensen.
Ever-changing business needs have prompted large companies to rethink their enterprise IT. Today, businesses must allow interaction with their customers, partners, and employees at more touch points and at a depth never thought previously. At the same time, rapid advances in information technologies, like business digitization, cloud computing, and Web 2.0, demand fundamental changes in the enterprises' management practices. These changes have a drastic effect not only on IT and business, but also on policies, processes, and people. Many companies therefore embark on enterprise-wide transformation initiatives. The role of Enterprise Architecture (EA) is to architect and supervise this transformational journey. Unfortunately, todays EA is often a ponderous and detached exercise, with most of the EA initiatives failing to create visible impact. The enterprises need an EA that is agile and responsive to business dynamics. Collaborative Enterprise Architecture provides the innovative solutions todays enterprises require, informed by real-world experiences and experts' insights. This book, in its first part, provides a systematic compendium of the current best practices in EA, analyzes current ways of doing EA, and identifies its constraints and shortcomings. In the second part, it leaves the beaten tracks of EA by introducing Lean, Agile, and Enterprise 2.0 concepts to the traditional EA methods. This blended approach to EA focuses on practical aspects, with recommendations derived from real-world experiences. A truly thought provoking and pragmatic guide to manage EA, Collaborative Enterprise Architecture effectively merges the long-term oriented top-down approach with pragmatic bottom-up thinking, and that way offers real solutions to businesses undergoing enterprise-wide change. This title covers the latest emerging technologies affecting business practice, including digitization, cloud computing, agile software development, and Web 2.0. It focuses on the practical implementation of EAM rather than theory, with recommendations based on real-world case studies. It addresses changing business demands and practices, including Enterprise 2.0 , open source, global sourcing, and more. It takes an innovative approach to EAM, merging standard top-down and pragmatic, bottom-up strategies, offering real solutions to businesses undergoing enterprise-wide changes.
One-Stop Shop for Enterprise Architects
Many organizations struggle with the dynamics and the complexity of todayâ€™s social ecosystems connecting everyone and everything, everywhere and all the time. Facing challenges at the intersection of business models, technical developments and human needs, enterprises must overcome the siloed thinking and isolated efforts of the past, and instead address relationships to people holistically. In Intersection, Milan Guenther introduces a Strategic Design approach that aligns the overarching efforts of Branding, Enterprise Architecture and Experience Design on common course to shape tomorrowâ€™s enterprises. This book gives designers, entrepreneurs, innovators and leaders a holistic model and a comprehensive vocabulary to tackle such challenges. The Enterprise Design framework cuts through the complexity of Strategic Design work, explains how to navigate key aspects and bridge diverging viewpoints. In 9 examples, the author looks at the way companies like Apple, SAP, BBVA, and Jeppesen (a Boeing Company) apply design thinking and practice to shape their enterprises. Moving from strategy to conceptual design and concrete results, Intersection shows what is relevant at which point, and what expertise to involve.
Right Sourcing - Enabling Collaboration puts forward the proposal that the modern enterprise must fundamentally rethink its 'sourcing equation' to become or remain viable. By presenting perspectives on sourcing from 21 different contributors, the editors hope to enable and inspire readers to make better-informed decisions.
This research project set out to identify effective practices and models for working with projects that are required to comply with Enterprise Architecture (EA), and investigate the benefits and drawbacks brought about by compliance. Research methods used are canonical action research, a statistical survey study (n=293), focus groups and a structured literature review. Concrete contributions include a descriptive framework of different types of architecture (such as enterprise, domain and project architecture), best practices and an artifact and process model for projects conforming to EA (targeted at practitioners), a conceptualization of compliance (including four dimensions and compliance checks), a statistical explanatory model for EA conformance and benefits, and a typology of compliance tactics. In addition, the research has contributed to our knowledge on Enterprise Architecture and compliance in general. We will shortly elaborate on this below. The statistical study showed that most of the identified techniques are used in practice. Important compliance tactics in this respect are: knowledge exchanges, providing advice, working with a PSA, conducting compliance assessments, and having management propagate EA. Financial sanctions and disincentives proved to be barely used in practice. The results also showed that projects benefit in several ways from working with EA, namely delivering the desired quality more often, being better equipped to deal with risk and being able to manage complexity more effectively. Several of the hypothesized project benefits could not be confirmed, however, such as exceeding deadlines and budgets less often, and delivering the required functionality more frequently. EA simply did not have a significant effect on these aspects. The results also demonstrated that EA has a downright negative impact on the speed of initializing projects, probably due to EA introducing additional project complexity (e.g. getting acquainted with abstract EA prescriptions, dealing with additional stakeholders and balancing possible conflicts of interests). The results furthermore showed that several organization-wide benefits are achieved due to EA, namely accomplishing enterprise goals, gaining insight into organizational complexity, achieving integration, standardization and deduplication of related processes and systems, depicting a clear image of the future situation and providing a communicational frame of reference. Hypothesized organizational benefits not confirmed are achieving business/IT alignment and agility, controlling costs and complexity, and co-operating with other organizations effectively and efficiently. The statistical results furthermore showed that, although most techniques identified are used in practice, only three have a significant impact on achieving compliance with EA: compliance assessments, management propagation and assisting projects. Compliance of projects subsequently results in an increased ability to achieve EA-related benefits. At the organizational level, conformance has significant effects on achieving business/IT alignment, accomplishing enterprise-wide goals and integrating, standardizing and deduplicating processes and systems. At the project level, conformance is shown to have significant effects on the ability to manage project complexity, and delivering the desired quality and functionality. Interestingly, project compliance with EA has the strongest effects on organization-wide benefits, whereas projects themselves benefit to a lesser extent and in more subtle ways. In any case, the project level is shown to play an important part in achieving organization-wide goals, which is one of the key goals of EA.
Michael is CEO of a $64 billion global corporation, driving a strategy founded on productivity and growth. Despite having 'best practices' in place, spearheaded by Finance, he's convinced that many of the company's investments in change are still not delivering the most value they can, or even the value they promised. Late one night, while reading a hard-to-believe Business Case for an IT transformation, he makes it his business to find out why. With the help of his inner-circle of trusted executives and managers, and the serendipitous appearance of a friend-of-a-friend, Michael discovers what's been missing all along in the Boardroom, the businesses, and the company culture. He is faced with deciding what it's worth to sort things out, once and for all, with a strategy that combines Enterprise Architecture with Investing in Change. In this conclusion to the trilogy that began with FruITion and continued with RecrEation, Michael finds that the consequences for everyone are part cultural, part structural, and part operational. They mean challenging some of the orthodoxies that were supposed to solve the problem but have made things worse instead. What will he choose to do?
An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture is the culmination of several decades of experience that I have gained through work initially as an information technology manager and then as a consultant to executives in the public and private sectors. I wrote this book for three major reasons: (1) to help move business and technology planning from a systems and process-level view to a more strategy-driven enterprise-level view, (2) to promote and explain the emerging profession of EA, and (3) to provide the first textbook on the subject of EA, which is suitable for graduate and undergraduate levels of study. To date, other books on EA have been practitioner books not specifically oriented toward a student who may be learning the subject with little to no previous exposure. Therefore, this book contains references to related academic research and industry best practices, as well as my own observations about potential future practices and the direction of this emerging profession.
An Oracle White Paper on Enterprise Architecture. July 2012: Anecdotally, most Enterprise Architecture (EA) professionals probably rose through IT ranks in their careers. And most IT professionals like to experiment and work with computer-based technology. They like to solve problems and make things better. Whether its building the Linux kernel or writing Java code, there is a thrill with making something work. Setting up rules, procedures, and processes to regulate such activities can be counter intuitive for some individuals. They might feel constrained and even have their very agility jeopardized when delivering a solution. This paper will discuss a number of technologies and technology-related phenomena being introduced to corporations. For each, sample issues and questions will be addressed. The paper concludes with a discussion of the attributes of a quality EA program and how to instill a holistic, governance-driven technology/capability adoption process.
Jan K. Gravesen: Since the mid-1990s, enterprise architecture has been evolving as an independent design discipline in the area between strategy and architecture. Although interest has been growing in recent years, the discipline is still considered immature, and many enterprises remain ambivalent or skeptical. Jan Gravesen discusses the considerable value that enterprise architecture can bring and how it can be successfully implemented to overcome much of that organizational skepticism.
David M. Dikel, David Kane: For investments in enterprise architecture to pay off, they must be based on a clear understanding of the organization. Whatever approach you choose to implement your enterprise strategy, an understanding of Conway's Law can help to make your alignment efforts successful.
DO YOU THINK? OR DO YOU KNOW? PART II: The EA Value Chain, The Strategic Intent Domain, and Principles
NASCIO Enterprise Architecture Committee, September 2010: Investment in business intelligence and business analytics must be driven by enterprise strategic intent. Proper leverage of analytics should start with a clear understanding of the outcomes state government is trying to achieve. This issue brief presents the rationale for analytics using the NASCIO Enterprise Architecture Value Chain as a framework for organizing the thinking and the questions which eventually drive investment in analytics capabilities. It builds on the foundational concepts discussed in NASCIOs first issue brief on this subject, and strongly recommends an enterprise approach. Without an enterprise approach to analytics, investment across the enterprise is un-orchestrated and uncoordinated. That creates redundant investment in tools and training, and creates barriers to cross line of business collaboration. State government can not afford redundant and disconnected investment. One of the values of enterprise architecture is the management, optimization and simplification of investment within state government. Proper investment and application of analytics is essential to deploying effective and efficient government services. Finally, the level of complexity of analytical methods and tools depends on the complexity of the decisions and the issues.
The Common Approach to Federal Enterprise Architecture and FEAF-II was launched publicly on May 2, 2012 in an important memo from Federal CIO VanRoekel. The Common Approach is clearly inspired by the EA3 Cube, and replaces/upgrades FSAM..
Simple web app for looking up terms and definitions in EA. EA3 Cube, Common Approach and ISO42010.
If you're a general manager or CFO, do you feel you're spending too much on IT or wishing you could get better returns from your IT investments? If so, it's time to examine what's behind this IT-as-cost mind-set. In The Real Business of IT, Richard Hunter and George Westerman reveal that the cost mind-set stems from IT leaders' inability to communicate about the business value they create-so CIOs get stuck discussing budgets rather than their contributions to the organization. The authors show how to communicate about these forms of value with non-IT leaders-so they understand how your firm is benefiting and see IT as the strategic powerhouse it truly is.
Who says enterprise architecture frameworks are worse than useless? Vivek Kundra, that's who. The former CIO of the United States made a blistering case against enterprise architecture in his keynote at the 43rd Society for Information Management (SIM) meeting this week. It came in a talk on his efforts to reform the federal IT program with initiatives like IT dashboards and a cloud-first policy. The remarks were especially exciting because they followed a passionate argument for the value of enterprise architecture by John Zachman, an early pioneer of enterprise architecture frameworks.
Ron Ross offers the first public download of the new version of Zachman's framework, the Enterprise Ontology.
Enterprises, from small to large, evolve continuously. As a result, their structures are transformed and extended continuously. Without some means of control, such changes are bound to lead to an overly complex, uncoordinated and heterogeneous environment that is hard to manage and hard to adapt to future changes. Enterprise architecture principles provide a means to direct transformations of enterprises. As a consequence, architecture principles should be seen as the cornerstones of any architecture. In this book, Greefhorst and Proper focus on the role of architecture principles. They provide both a theoretical and a practical perspective on architecture principles. The theoretical perspective involves a brief survey of the general concept of principle as well as an analysis of different flavors of principles. Architecture principles are regarded as a specific class of normative principles that direct the design of an enterprise, from the definition of its business to its supporting IT. The practical perspective on architecture principles is concerned with an approach to the formulation of architecture principles, as well as their actual use in organizations. To illustrate their use in practice, several real-life cases are discussed, an application of architecture principles in TOGAF is included, and a catalogue of example architecture principles is provided. With this broad coverage, the authors target students and researchers specializing in enterprise architecture or business information systems, as well as practitioners who want to understand the foundations underlying their practical daily work.
Intended for anyone charged with coordinating enterprise architectural design in a small, medium, or large organization, Sustainable Enterprise Architecture helps you explore the various elements of your own particular network environment to develop strategies for mid- to long-term management and sustainable growth. Organized much like a book on structural architecture, this one starts with a solid foundation of frameworks and general guidelines for enterprise governance and design. The book covers common considerations for all enterprises, and then drills down to specific types of technology that may be found in your enterprise. It explores strategies for protecting enterprise resources and examines technologies and strategies that are only just beginning to take place in the modern enterprise network.
This book will provide IS architects with an easy pragmatic (non academic) way to deliver proven ROI, lower risks and a faster time to market in Enterprise Architecture. The chapters will concentrate on the motivations of enterprises, the pragmatic reuse of the existing assets, the implementation of a standard process in architecture and the description and implementation suggestions on some standard business processes This book will not assume that you familiar with any frameworks or theories on Enterprise Architecture.
This book shows its readers how to achieve the goal of genuine IT governance. The key here is the successful development of enterprise architecture as the necessary foundation. With its capacity to span and integrate business procedures, IT applications and IT infrastructure, enterprise architecture opens these areas up to analysis and makes them rich sources of critical data. Enterprise architecture thereby rises to the status of a crucial management information system for the CIO.
Weitten by Claus Jensen, IBM chief architect, this Redbook publication explains how to combine business process management (BPM) and Enterprise Architecture (EA) for better business outcomes. This book provides a unique synergistic approach to BPM and EA, based on a firm understanding of the life cycles of the enterprise and the establishment of appropriate collaboration and governance processes. When carried out together, BPM provides the business context, understanding, and metrics, and EA provides the discipline to translate business vision and strategy into architectural change. Both are needed for sustainable continuous improvement. This book provides thought leadership and direction on the topic of BPM and EA synergies. Although technical in nature, it is not a typical IBM Redbooks publication. The book provides guidance and direction on how to collaborate effectively across tribal boundaries rather than technical details about IBM software products. The primary audience for this book is leaders and architects who need to understand how to effectively combine BPM and EA to drive, as a key differentiator, continuous improvement and transformational change with enterprise scope.
Nick Malik: In order to solve a problem, you have to know the problem you are solving. In a growing number of organizations, Enterprise Architecture is responsible for insuring the alignment of business change programs (including but not limited to programs that impact computing systems). But what does a misaligned program look like? How would you know one when you saw it, and what would you do when you do recognize one? Until you can answer these questions, your EA program may be a dog chasing a car. What will you do when you catch it?
Mats-Ake Hugoson, Thanos Magoulas, Kalevi Pessi. EJISE - Volume 14 Issue 1, ECIME 2010 Special Issue / Jan 2011. The strategic role of IT and its significance throughout the organization increases complexity, variety, and the need of change. Hence IT management must deal with uncertainties derived from different, conflicting and ever changing demands. In this sense Enterprise Architecture is playing an increasingly important role in improving IT management practice. If contemporary organizations do not succeed in managing architectural issues, there is a clear risk that considerable resources will be invested without achieving desirable effects. This paper investigates how Enterprise Architecture Principles impact on the management of IT%u2011investments in the context of large organizations. The purpose of the paper is to provide a deeper insight of the relationship between Enterprise Architecture and management of IT Investments throughout the elucidation of two significant types of principles: Delineation (differentiation) principles and Interoperability (integration) principles. Our conclusion is that the choice of architectural principles has an impact both on alignment between information systems and business demands and on the management of IT investments. This impact concerns at least four aspects: (1) The responsibility for IT investments (2) Time to value (3) Long term alignment, (4) Coordination of investments in information systems with changes in business processes.
This book will help you understand what is in store for you if you are a new or an aspiring EA. Step One will help you assess whether you are qualified to do the job. Steps Two and Three will help you learn the skills and abilities you need to excel in the role as well as help you define your future in the role. In these steps, you will read and learn information about deciding to pursue a career in enterprise architecture. Steps Four and Five will allow you to visualize and think like a master architect. They will provide a step-by-step approach to gaining the hard and soft skills you need to be in the top 10 percent of all enterprise and IT architects.
An IT project can succeed only if the business and the rest of the IT organisation is ready. Cliff Saran reports from a lecture Peter Hungerford gave at the Gartner Symposium in Cannes on how one organisation has approached an IT transformational change. An enterprise architecture (EA) is often used to help a business codify its structure, the business processes and how it operates. Through a well-defined EA, companies have the opportunity to identify areas of inefficiency. From an IT perspective, the EA provides a blueprint for simplifying IT. Syngenta, formed in 2000 by the merger of Novartis and AstraZeneca's agribusinesses, has developed an enterprise architecture to help the company simplify and lower the cost of IT and support key applications such as SAP and Microsoft. When the company was formed, there were two separate IT groups - one technically focused and one strategically focused, and the business wanted one face to the customer.
Simon is a seasoned Enterprise Architect who joins a corporation in New York as their first-ever Vice President of Enterprise Architecture. On his very first day, he meets the global Chief Executive Officer (CEO) who asks Simon What do you do? Simon's reply triggers the CEO to respond in a way that our hero least expects. What follows is a journey across continents and oceans in which Simon uncovers the true meaning of Enterprise Architecture, who is doing it, and how successful they are. On his travels, Simon teams up with senior executives around the world to integrate Enterprise Architecture into their strategies and business plans, and to innovate in the architecture of their enterprise. Everyone he meets has some wisdom to offer, and is looking for his in return. Finally, Simon has to make a choice between the kind of Enterprise Architect he used to be and the one he has become. Join the characters in this sequel to the highly-acclaimed business novel fruITion, as they contribute to Simon's journey and he makes his final choice. Share in his thoughts and experiences, and join the author in observing key messages along the journey.
Mohammad Ahmadi Achachlouei: In the last two decades, enterprise architecture (EA) has become a common approach for the management of information systems in organizations. However, the academic development of the field has not paralleled this turn of events. There is considerable divergence among researchers as to the very definition of EA. The present project seeks to clarify the concepts of EA, drawing relevant examples from the academic literature and addressing different perspectives in EA research community. The study aims to reveal the ontological arguments about the nature of EA and the related notions and to take one step towards developing theoretical foundations of the field. The present project first critically reviews the competing, predominant academic definitions of EA and identifies major research circles in the field. Based on an analysis of recent doctoral dissertations and of key academic publications, it then reviews the perspectives of the various research circles regarding different notions related to the concept of EA. Template analysis (thematic coding) of the data (eleven doctoral dissertations, as well as articles and books cited as the principle references in the dissertations) is performed to critically review and analyze the concept of enterprise architecture. A critical review of the previous work examining EA research communities in isolation shows that even articles claiming to provide a big picture of the EA research community are ultimately focused on one narrow research circle. In the current project, a novel categorization of the current EA research circles is presented, and their views on the concept of EA and the related notions are discussed.
Organizational Transformation: A Framework for Assessing and Improving Enterprise Architecture Management (Version 2.0)
Effective use of an enterprise architecture (EA) is a hallmark of successful organizations and an essential means to achieving a desired end: having operations and technology environments that maximize institutional mission performance and outcomes. Among other things, this includes realizing cost savings through consolidation and reuse of shared services and elimination of antiquated and redundant mission operations, enhancing information sharing through data standardization and system integration, and optimizing service delivery through streamlining and normalization of business processes and mission operations. Not using an EA can result in organizational operations and supporting technology infrastructures and systems that are duplicative, poorly integrated, unnecessarily costly to maintain and interface, and unable to respond quickly to shifting environmental factors. To assist organizations in successfully developing, maintaining, and using an EA, GAO is issuing this major update to its Enterprise Architecture Management Maturity Framework. Its purpose is to provide a flexible benchmark against which to plan for and measure EA program maturity. To develop the update, GAO solicited comments from 27 federal departments and agencies, as well as representatives from the private sector, state governments, and academia, and it leveraged its prior experience in applying the framework. The framework consists of three interrelated components: (1) seven hierarchical stages of management maturity; (2) four representations of management attributes that are critical to the success of any program or organizational endeavor; and (3) 59 elements, or building blocks, of EA management that are at the core of an EA program. Each of the seven maturity stages reflects those EA management conditions that an enterprise should meet to logically build on the capability established at the preceding stage. As such, the stages provide a road map for systematically maturing or evolving an organization's capacity to manage an EA. The stages are: Stage 0: Creating EA Awareness; Stage 1: Establishing EA Institutional Commitment and Direction; Stage 2: Creating the Management Foundation for EA Development and Use; Stage 3: Developing Initial EA Versions; Stage 4: Completing and Using an Initial EA Version for Targeted Results; Stage 5: Expanding and Evolving the EA and Its Use for Institutional Transformation; Stage 6: Continuously Improving the EA and Its Use to Achieve Corporate Optimization. The four critical success attribute representations provide different and complementary ways to view and thus understand the 59 core elements. The four are referred to as the (1) EA Management Action Representation, (2) EA Functional Area Representation, (3) Office of Management and Budget Capability Area Representation, and (4) EA Enabler Representation. Each provides a unique perspective on the focus and nature of the framework's core elements. The 59 core elements are collectively the EA practices, structures, activities, and conditions that, when properly employed based on the unique facts and circumstances of each organization and the stated purpose of its EA program, can permit that organization to progress to increasingly higher states of EA management maturity and thereby maximize its chances of realizing an EA's institutional value.
Enterprise Architecture (EA) needs to evolve to better support more agile and innovative approaches to corporate challenges, a noted author and IT researcher told attendees at The Open Group Conference this week in Boston, MA - that means going beyond documenting the "as-is" state of the enterprise, and providing new guidance that helps transform the business. This trend will see the move of enterprise architecture from the IT side to the business side, said Jeanne Ross, author of "Enterprise Architecture as Strategy" and "IT Savvy." It will prefigure a change of EA as it was formerly established, she suggested.
As the complexity of IT grows, more and more organizations are realizing the need for architecture. But the definition of what architecture is, the titles that architects have, and the role of an architect vary widely from one organization to another. Business, IT, management, and even architects don't necessarily know what a good architect does to add value in his or her organization. This Executive Report by Michael Rosen discusses the role of the architect and describes 10 activities that architects should perform to add value to projects.
Gartner Says Hybrid Thinking for Enterprise Architecture Can Help Organisations Embrace Transformation, Innovation and Strategy
Most enterprise architecture (EA) initiatives remain trapped in the IT department, and a new approach â€“ hybrid thinking â€“ is required to break EA out and into the wider organisation, according to Gartner, Inc. Adopting hybrid thinking is an excellent way to meld design thinking, IT thinking and business thinking, and achieve transformative, innovative and strategic changes.
Podcast with Tarak Modi, an industry thought leader in IT transformation and modernization technology such as enterprise architecture, SOA and cloud computing. In this podcast, we discuss the role of enterprise architecture within the federal government.
John Wu: This is part of the research for an Organic Enterprise Architecture. Coherent Architecture is the effort to do the right architecture for the right people on the right area at the right time. The Organic EA consist of the static part of principle and primitives and the dynamic part of Coherent Architecture to adapt change by rearranging the fundamental enterprise primitives and building blocks. The area in yellow color illustrate the Coherent Architecture which include the diagnosis part on business performance measurement and gap analysis the other part is the segment architecture to close the business performance gap.
Fuchs-Kittowski, F.; Faust, D.: The design and evolution of an enterprise architecture (EA) is a challenging and complex task. A participative approach to collaborative EA management is needed to support the collaboration of all individuals involved in the process of EA design and evolution. This paper presents our concept of a semantic collaboration tool for collaborative EA management. This includes the concept of a semantic, wiki-like collaboration tool for collaborative EA management and an EA ontology as a formal representation of the EA. Additionally, the prototypical implementation of the semantic collaboration environment and its architecture are described and the benefits of the approach discussed.
FEA Reference Models include the Consolidated Reference Model Version 2.3 and Data Reference Model 2.0. FY10 FEA Reference Model Mapping Quick Guide.
Tom Graves: Courtesy of a link by fellow enterprise-architect Sally Bean, I've just spent the past couple of hours viewing and then reviewing an online seminar on complexity by one of the thought-leaders on complexity-theory and practice, Dave Snowden.
Janne J. Korhonen: In this series of blog posts, I have addressed some of the challenges that the emergence of extended enterprise paradigm entails in terms of strategy, governance, leadership, and, in this last article, enterprise architecture.
The book introduces the idea of Coherency Management, and asserts that this is the primary outcome goal of an enterprise's architecture. With submissions from over 30 authors and co-authors, the book reinforces the idea that EA is being practiced in an ever-increasing variety of circumstances - from the tactical to the strategic, from the technical to the political, and with governance that ranges from sell to tell. The characteristics, usages, value statements, frameworks, rules, tools and countless other attributes of EA seem to be anything but orderly, definable, classifiable, and understandable as might be hoped given heritage of EA and the famous framework and seminal article on the subject by John Zachman over two decades ago. Notably, EA is viewed as an Enterprise Design and Management approach, adopted to build better enterprises, rather than a IT Design and Management approach limited to build better systems.
Digitization of business interactions and processes is advancing full bore. But in many organizations, returns from IT investments are flatlining, even as technology spending has skyrocketed. These challenges call for new levels of IT savvy: the ability of all managers-IT or non-IT-to transform their company's technology assets into operational efficiencies that boost margins. Companies with IT-savvy managers are 20 percent more profitable than their competitors. In IT Savvy, Peter Weill and Jeanne Ross-two of the world's foremost authorities on using IT in business-explain how non-IT executives can acquire this savvy. Concise and practical, the book describes the practices, competencies, and leadership skills non-IT managers need to succeed in the digital economy. You'll discover how to: -Define your firm's operating model-how IT can help you do business -Revamp your IT funding model to support your operating model -Build a digitized platform of business processes, IT systems, and data to execute on the model -Determine IT decision rights -Extract more business value from your IT assets Packed with examples and based on research into eighteen hundred organizations in more than sixty countries, IT Savvy is required reading for non-IT managers seeking to push their company's performance to new heights.
Boris Lublinsky: In his new post - A Value Proposition for Enterprise Architecture - Richard Veryard discusses the role of enterprise architecture (EA).
Mark McDonald, Gartner Group: People talk about the â€˜enterpriseâ€™ all the time, particularly in IT. There are enterprise solutions, enterprise architecture, enterprise portals, enterprise security, etc. In this context the term enterprise is more often meant to mean all encompassing, across business units or geographies, the whole of our business operations. Just because we say something is enterprise level that does not mean that it applies to the entire company. When that happens you have to ask yourself the question - are we an enterprise?
To help bridge the gap between engineering, IT and management, Griffith University has created a new Masters program. The Master of Enterprise Architecture unites MBA and Masters of IT courses into a single degree. Enterprise Architecture at Griffith provides a comprehensive, modern postgraduate education in the principles and practice of Enterprise Architecture, a discipline unifying management and engineering knowledge. An Enterprise Architect has good understanding of strategy making and how strategies can be successfully implemented through a coordinated practice that harmonises business needs with the development of technology and the development of the organisation. Graduates will gain skills in analysis, problem solving, business modelling and systems architecture â€“ both from information technology and business perspectives, as well as skills in change management, leadership and communication.
Konstantin Ivanov, ARIS BPM Blog: Take it or leave it, but often EA is referred as a lengthy initiative with very unclear and practically not very applicable results. Like a set of references architectures, which in practice turn to be 80% different from architectures of actually deployed solutions or a set of principles of building new data centers, which are too high-level and theoretical, so any solution built do comply with them.
Architecture descriptions are formal descriptions of an information system, organized in a way that supports reasoning about the structural and behavioral properties of the system and its evolution. They define the components or building blocks that make up the overall information system, and provide a plan from which products can be procured, and subsystems developed, that will work together to implement the overall system. It thus enables you to manage your overall IT investment in a way that meets the needs of your business. To provide a uniform representation for such architecture descriptions, the ArchiMate enterprise architecture modeling language has been developed. It offers an integrated architectural approach that describes and visualizes the different architecture domains and their underlying relations and dependencies. In a short time, ArchiMate has become the open standard for architecture modeling in the Netherlands, it is also fairly well known in the international enterprise architecture community, and recently it has been brought under the aegis of The Open Group.
Over the past two decades, the government sector has emerged as the area of largest implementation of enterprise architecture - a critical success factor for all types, scales, and intensities of e-government programs. Advances in Government Enterprise Architecture is a seminal publication in the emerging and evolving discipline of enterprise architecture (EA). Presenting current developments, issues, and trends in EA, this critical resource provides IT managers, government CIOs, researchers, educators, and professionals with insights into the impact of effective EA on IT governance, IT portfolio management, and IT outsourcing, creating a must-have holding for academic libraries and organizational information centers.
Achieving enterprise success necessitates addressing enterprises in ways that match the complexity and dynamics of the modern enterprise environment. However, since the majority of enterprise strategic initiatives appear to fail â€“ among which those regarding information technology â€“ the currently often practiced approaches to strategy development and implementation seem more an obstacle than an enabler for strategic enterprise success. Two themes underpin the fundamentally different views outlined in this book. First, the competence-based perspective on governance, whereby employees are viewed as the crucial core for effectively addressing the complex, dynamic and uncertain enterprise reality, as well as for successfully defining and operationalizing strategic choices. Second, enterprise engineering as the formal conceptual framework and methodology for arranging a unified and integrated enterprise design, which is a necessary condition for enterprise success.
At the beginning of 2008, JISC funded a pilot project which set out to explore the applicability of Enterprise Architecture (EA), a strategic management technique for enabling large companies to adapt to change, to the higher education operational context. Although largely unknown in the education sector, EA has been widely adopted over the last 15 years in the commercial world and in public sector organisations. EA provides an evolving, dynamic way of describing and aligning the functional aspects of an organisation: its people, activities, tools, resources and data/information, so that they work more effectively together to achieve the organisation's business goals. Three universities - Cardiff, Liverpool John Moores and King's College London - were the early adopter organisations that were considered suitably 'EA ready' to undertake a 12-month evaluation of EA in the context of their own institution. In particular they road-tested TOGAF, a non-proprietary framework for undertaking EA which has been developed by The Open Group. During the course of the project a small group of staff from each institution was exposed to the work of The Open Group, trained in the use of TOGAF and associated tools and techniques, and supported in the development of the first stages of an architecture for their institution.
8-10 June 2009, London, UK. With John Zachman, Andy Mulholland, John GÃ¸tze, Sally Bean, Chris Potts, Tim Shoubridge and many others.
Creating a Web site that combines information from multiple agencies is always difficult, especially when agency leaders become territorial about the data they supply. But the Interior Department, the spearhead of Recreation.gov, combined a well-developed enterprise architecture with a set of strong policies to make it happen.
Mike Rosen, Cutter Consortium:As 2009 brings dramatic change to the economy, politics, and IT, some consistency might be in order. So, as I have in past years, I'm making suggestions for New Year's resolutions for enterprise architects.
The Federal Segment Architecture Methodology (FSAM) is a step-by-step process for developing and using segment architectures that was developed by distilling proven best practices from across Federal agencies. Use of the FSAM should result in more complete and consistent segment architecture products and will result in greater reuse of segment architectures by providing key information that informs downstream processes for capital planning, security (e.g. certification and accreditation), and the system development life cycle.
Kim S. Nash: When technology infrastructure lines up with business projects like musicians in a marching band, you know you have a good enterprise architect on staff. But will you keep him when it's time to start handing out pink slips?
John Zachman, 2007: There appears to be a gross misunderstanding about Architecture, particularly in the information technology community. Many people seem to think that an implementation, an end result, is Architecture. To use an Architecture and Construction example, many people think that the Roman Coliseum is Architecture. The Roman Coliseum is NOT Architecture. The Roman Coliseum is the RESULT of Architecture. The RESULT of Architecture is an instance of Architecture, an implementation. In the end result, the implementation, you can see an instantiation of the Architect's Architecture. If an Architect had not created the descriptive representations (the Architecture) of the Roman Coliseum, they could not have built the Roman Coliseum. They couldn't have even ordered the stones they required in order to build the Coliseum without the Coliseum Architecture which had to be created long before the Coliseum was constructed.
Ian Rowlands: Consider the supposed purpose of Enterprise Architecture (EA): 'The Enterprise Architect connects the IT Organization to business goals' (Van Meter 2008). Then consider the IT budget - anticipated by one respected research organization to hit something close to $1.5 trillion by 2010 (Morgan, 2007). Put those two facts together. Shouldn't Enterprise Architecture be the driving force of the IT function?
Enterprise Architecture Best Practice Handbook: Building, Running and Managing Effective Enterprise Architecture Programs
This book claims to cover 'every detail, including some missed in other books'. False declaration!
The purpose of this guide is to provide guidance to organization's in initiating, developing, using, and maintaining their enterprise architecture (EA) practice. This guide offers a set of Enterprise Architecture Good Practices that have proven their benefits to organizations and that addresses an end-to-end process to initiate, implement, and sustain an EA program, and describes the necessary roles and associated responsibilities for a successful EA program. Enterprise Architecture is a complete expression of the enterprise; a master plan which â€œacts as a collaboration forceâ€ between aspects of business planning such as goals, visions, strategies and governance principles; aspects of business operations such as business terms, organization structures, processes and data; aspects of automation such as information systems and databases; and the enabling technological infrastructure of the business such as computers, operating systems and networks.
This book is for business professionals interested in learning techniques for managing change in technology driven companies. It focuses on bridging business and I/T strategies through the Enterprise Architecture function. Unlike many books about I/T, it is not about building things. Rather, it is about what business people can do with what I/T produces.
This book explains how to connect tangible business value with IT decisions, and how to build an organization around that practice. It describes how to create an agile IT organization that implements governance in a nimble yet effective manner that, and that turns that into a strategic advantage. It explains how to connect enterprise architecture with business strategy, and how to reconcile the many different perspectives of architecture, including business architecture, data architecture, and software architecture. These are addressed at all levels, from the project to the CIO, and in terms of how IT should interact with the other parts of the organization.
David Longworth: What you'd give to be a fly on the wall in the City IT architects' drinking club right now. The secretive club, which is reputed to meet regularly in a public house in the City of London, must be an interesting talking shop, as the current bloodbath at the banks puts the role of the enterprise architect centre stage. One of the most prominent, Alix Cheema, head of architecture and design at Lloyds TSB, for example, will soon have the task of integrating its architecture with what's left of HBOS. That's some responsibility.
Twenty years after the first publications and books on enterprise architecture, the domain is evolving from a technology-driven towards a more business-driven approach, thus empowering decision makers to adapt and transform an enterprise in order to keep up with changing business needs. At the same time the discipline of enterprise architecting has matured, leading to a better understanding of the profession of an enterprise architect. With this book, the authors - consultants with CapGemini - aim to provide an overview of enterprise architecture including the process of creating, applying and maintaining it, thus taking into account the perspectives of CxOs, business managers, enterprise architects, solution architects, designers and engineers. They explore the results that are produced as part of an enterprise architecture, the process by which these are produced, and the role the architect plays in this process.As such, they do not describe a specific method for developing an enterprise (IT) architecture, nor do they define a specific modeling language for enterprise architecture, rather they offer the reader a fundamental way of thinking about enterprise architecture, which will enable him to select and apply the right approach, architecture framework and tools that meet the objective and context of the architecture work at hand. This approach is emphasized by discussion statements at the end of each chapter, sparking thoughts about benefits, shortcomings, and future research directions. Covering both theoretical foundations and practical use, and written in close collaboration between industry professionals and academic lecturers, "Enterprise Architecture" thus offers an ideal introduction for students in areas like business information systems or management science, as well as guidance and background for professionals seeking a more thorough understanding of their field of work.
Vladan Jovanovic, Stevan Mrdalj, Adrian Gardiner (2006) The Zachman Framework (ZF) is a matrix of distinct stakeholder perspectives and unique concerns or aspects of information system architecture. This work suggests how the ZF can be extended into a multi-dimensional Zachman's Cube. We illustrate its use with a set of UML usage styles.
It's time to completely rethink IT. It's time for a radical change in IT. It's time for Fusion. This book provides a roadmap for the journey to completely rethink IT, and transform IT into something radically new. The book includes a chapter about how enterprise architecture relates to Business/IT Fusion.
Enterprise architecture as a collaboration tool - discursive process for enterprise architecture management, planning and development
Mirja Pulkkinen's PhD thesis, 2008. The information and communication technology (ICT) advancements change the role of ICT in organizational use to a central concern, since both business and public enterprises heavily depend on information systems and technological infrastructure. Management, planning and development of the organizational ICT are no more a task for the ICT experts only. The expertise of both business and ICT specialists is needed to align ICT deployment with organizational goals, ensuring appropriateness of related investments with respect to the enterprise resources. However, collaboration between the business and ICT communities of practice is perceived as a challenge. Enterprise architecture (EA) proposes a holistic approach to the management of organizational ICT systems and infrastructure. By structuring the collaboration, it interlinks the contributions from different communities of practice to the decision making process. From both IS and EA literature, a common framework of reference is derived and validated through practitioner experience. Distinct levels of abstraction in the framework accommodate the concerns of different decision makers: managerial overview for the whole enterprise, business operations management at the level of the activity domains, and the systems design and development concerns for the implementers. An understanding of the ICT management and planning in the context of a deploying organization is deduced as a prerequisite for an eligible EA methodology. An EA process meta-model is constructed to guide the overall EA process for well-informed strategies and decisions on the organizational ICT and, as well, for consulting assignments. The study is conducted as an action research effort within an ICT consultancy, for which it develops an EA methodology. Case studies of client projects in different industry domains and various types of organizations provide the empirical basis. The constructed results are validated in practical use along the research effort. Reflective analysis of the series of studies reported on academic fora conveys a discursive process. Establishing a common agenda and giving empowered roles for different expert groups characterize both the research process and the EA process meta-model that logically guides and coordinates the dynamics of the collaborative enterprise development.
Welcome to the Federal CPIC Forum. Founded in 2006, The Federal CPIC Forum is a 501c3 Educational NonProfit Organization (our tax ID number is posted on the members-only site.) The FCPF Charter is to bring together the government Capital Planning community to develop and provide CPIC standards, best practices, access to training and education as well as certification. Our mission is to develop the CPIC community and utilize the knowledge and resources of our member companies and professionals to identify and develop best practices, CPIC performance measures, working groups, capital planning services. We will work together with our member community to provide and ensure a pool of qualified and educated government and industry capital planning talent.
The (ISO Standard) RM-ODP model is a powerful and well reasoned mechanism for creating Architectural descriptions ("architectures"). Leveraging the IEEE-1471 taxonomy, and building out a visual style and standardized approach, there is tremendous value in learning and using this the RM-ODP (Reference Model for Open Distributed Processing), and I'm getting to the point of recommending it. That said, there is a gap in one of the most fundamental areas of the RM-ODP model. RM-ODP specifies exactly five viewpoints.
David Aden, Government Technology: For many agency heads or department managers, any mention of "Enterprise Architecture" (EA) causes emotional reactions ranging from fear to outright antagonism. Often EA has come to mean "yet another IT project and expense which I don't have time for and from which I won't see any tangible results." For others, it is simply a checkbox that must be filled to get the money needed to get real work done. But what is Enterprise Architecture (EA) really? And who is it intended to benefit?
The SABSA (Sherwood Applied Business Security Architecture) framework has evolved as a "best practice" method for delivering cohesive information security solutions to enterprises. SABSA is a six-layer model covering all four parts of the IT lifecycle: Strategy, Design, Implementation and Management & Operations. SABSA ensures the security needs of your enterprise are met completely and that security services are designed, delivered, and supported as an integral part of your IT Management infrastructure. For detailed analysis of each of the six layers, the SABSA Matrix also uses the same six questions that are used in the Zachman Framework.
Bob Hablutzel: Enterprise Archiecture practitioners view a solid EA as critical to setting a three-to-five year strategic plan for the company. I don't see that view as frequently at the business leadership level. As EA practitioners, we need to be able to articulate how and why EA is important. Any kind of long-range planning follows a basic pattern: Purpose, Vision, Strategy, Objective, Plan. The Purpose is why the company exists. In the US, that's frequently "to maximize shareholder value". The Vision is how the company intends to get there - this defines the scope of the business activies that the company will engage it. Purpose and Vision don't change much on a year-to-year basis.
Called 'part entertaining novel and part enlightening textbook' by reviewers, FruITion is about Ian the CIO. How will Ian as the CIO react when the management team explores a very different relationship with IT? The strategy that emerges has major implications for the CIO and everyone in the IT department. The book is followed up with two other books, RecrEAtion and DefrICtion. Chris Potts has developed a unique approach to enterprise architecture and portfolio management, called Enterprise Investment.
Lise Urbaczewski and Stevan Mrdalj, 2006: An Enterprise Architecture Framework (EAF) maps all of the software development processes within the enterprise and how they relate and interact to fulfill the enterpriseâ€™s mission. It provides organizations with the ability to understand and analyze weaknesses or inconsistencies to be identified and addressed. There are a number of already established EAF in use today; some of these frameworks were developed for very specific areas, whereas others have broader functionality. This study provides a comparison of several frameworks that can then be used for guidance in the selection of an EAF that meets the needed criteria. (Registration required)
Oscar Berg: You might think that it sounds quite pretentious for someone to call oneself Enterprise Architect (at least if you don't see yourself as one of them). Well, I don't blame you if you do. The term Enterprise Architect easily leads one's thoughts to someone who architects an entire enterprise from scratch or who orchestrates every wink and turn of an enterprise as a sort of puppy master. Such a conception is course wrong. The Enterprise Architects are cogs in the enterprise wheel just as all others - they are only different in the sense that they have been assigned the responsibility to observe the complete machinery and keep track of the different parts and how they relate to each other. But also to envision how new or changing requirements and constraints - big or small, few or many, dramatic or subtle - will need to change the enterprise and its different but yet often very tightly related parts.
The Enterprise Architecture Reference Cube provides guidance to enterprise architects for concepts used in modeling architecture. The Cube faces represent the dimensions to consider in enterprise architectures - the architectural concepts and their relationships to each other. These relationships are defined between the Cube faces and visually presented in three dimensions. This Cube is the result of the work of the INCOSE ISO/TC184/SC5 liaison team to update the ISO 15704:2000 standard. Registration required.
Stephen Lahanas: In many ways, Enterprise Architecture (EA) is as misunderstood as Semantics. Although EA has been practiced across a much wider community of IT professionals for a longer period of time, it still suffers from an identity crisis. Is EA the mandatory precursor for model driven development, or is it part of a bigger picture and if so, what is that picture? It is my contention that the reason Enterprise Architecture is still misunderstood in many quarters and often unsuccessful in practice is precisely because it does exist within the context of a larger picture. All too often, that larger picture is simply ignored leaving those executing EA projects somewhat perplexed as to find meaningful ways to make their efforts relevant to the organization sponsoring their efforts.
This TOGAF chapter provides a set of role, skill, and experience norms for staff undertaking enterprise architecture work. Skills frameworks provide a view of the competency levels required for specific roles. They define the roles within a work area, the skills required by each role, and the depth of knowledge required to fulfil the role successfully. They are relatively common for defining the skills required for a consultancy and/or project management assignment, to deliver a specific project or work package. They are also widely used by recruitment and search agencies to match candidates and roles. Their value derives from their ability to provide a means of rapidly identifying skill matches and gaps. Successfully applied, they can ensure that candidates are fit for the jobs assigned to them. Their value in the context of enterprise architecture arises from the immaturity of the enterprise architecture discipline, and the problems that arise from this.
Gabriel Morgan: We all agree now that Adoption is key for Enterprise Architects. And the trick to adoption is resonating with those that make change and influence them to make the change that is best for the enterprise. In a previous blog post, I introduced the Solution Model concept. In this post, I want to talk about the concept of the Traceability Critical Path, which is the portion of the Solution Model necessary to trace from Strategy to Code.
Sethuraj Nair: Proper representation of Enterprise Architecture has always been quite a challenge. Many times the sheer scope of the canvas required can be the problem, but most of the times it is the question of a proper style and standard of representation that poses issues to the IT architects. While Enterprise Reference Models (TRM or ARM) are normally pulled together as simple 'box of boxes', the lower level representations are vulnerable to subjectivity unless a firm modeling framework has been implemented and governed by the architecture board that controls the IT architecture of the enterprise.
Yogish Pai: One of the best practices for Enterprise Architecture teams to redo the enterprise road map on a periodic basis. It is typically reviewed and updated during the yearly budgeting cycle and my preference is to perform this activity every 18 months. The best practices (and the traditional approach) is to first document the as-is, next develop the target or future state (architecture) and finally develop a short term (6 months), mid term (12 months) and long term (18 months) road map. Preferable an actionable road map that ties back to the business initiatives.
Implementing Service Oriented Architecture at the Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information
Anthony, Stephen K. The Serials Librarian, 55(01-02), pp. 235 - 253. As they seek new roles in the digital realm, libraries are finding it increasingly difficult to manage the complexity of technology implementation while continuing to cost-effectively meet their mandates as information providers. Many organizations find themselves dealing with legacy, isolated, duplicated and ineffective information systems. The practices of enterprise architecture and service oriented architecture hold much promise as methodologies to reduce complexity, to encourage and enable collaborations, and finally to rein in the beast of technology. Even libraries under budgetary constraints can benefit from knowledge of enterprise architecture and service oriented architecture best practices.
Jeff Carlson: I work in a very large company and I am the lead architect of one of the divisions. I have had various architecture positions at different companies and I have had this current role for more than a year. I work with some very smart architects who are organized to business domains or disciplines and we are working together very well. There are many other architects and architectural organizations that are not having similar success. We meet sometimes for lunch and sometimes we talk about what it means to be an architect. I realize some of you have just thrown your computers out the window or tried to commit seppuku with some powerpoint printouts, but I continue.
Mike Walker: Is the comparison of EA Frameworks like comparing Apples and Oranges? Yes it is. When you compare these frameworks they should not be treated the same nor should be judged based on the same criteria. Rather they should be correlated with your specific requirements.
Several times in my Enterprise Architecture (EA) practice, people asked me which framework shall I adopt or what are the benefits of the Zachman framework over TOGAF, etc. Others asked me to help them to define their own corporate EA framework. Before answering these types of questions, it is important to know what the differences and commonalities are of these frameworks and standards. This book explains the role of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks and shows the differences between the most popular Enterprise Architecture Frameworks now a day available in the world. Giving an overview of the history of most Enterprise Architecture frameworks as well as their purpose, scope, principles, structure, guidance and compliance, will support you in identifying the usefulness of these Enterprise Architecture frameworks for your own situation. For the in-depth details of the described Enterprise Architecture Frameworks, references to the original sources of information are added in the chapter References and Bibliography. Separate chapters are addressing the most popular Enterprise Architecture tools on the market and their support of existing frameworks. The book compares the 14 most popular Enterprise Architecture Frameworks in the world.
Neil Ward-Dutton, July 24, 2008: Via Service Oriented Enterprise, I recently picked up an Infoworld blog post by SOA journeyman David Linthicum, where he makes a couple of very strange points about SOA and ESBs. It may be, of course, that the post is pure link bait: certainly, David appears to have said some relatively sane things in the past, so that might be it. If it is link bait, I'm going to fall for it now.
Presentations from the 19th Enterprise Architecture Practitioners Conference, 21-23 July 2008
Scott A. Bernard: The architecture - structure, functions and resources - of an organization exists whether anyone acknowledges it or not. Much of the continuing growth of enterprise architecture as a methodology worth pursuing hinges on the claim that acknowledging and formalizing an EA is helpful to an organization, especially one thatâ€™s large, complex and exists in a dynamic and competitive operating environment.
"There has never been an Enterprise Architecture manual like this. 100 Success Secrets is not about the ins and outs of Enterprise Architecture. Instead, it answers the top 100 questions that we are asked and those we come across in forums, our consultancy and education programs. It tells you exactly how to deal with those questions, with tips that have never before been offered in print. This book is also not about Enterprise Architecture's best practice and standards details. Instead, it introduces everything you want to know to be successful with Enterprise Architecture."
Enterprise-architecture is often described as part of IT, but its real scope is much wider - the structure of everything the enterprise is and does. This book introduces a new approach to tackle this broader role for whole-of-enterprise architecture, using a systematic, iterative process for architecture development. Topics include how to bridge the business/IT divide; how to link architecture with business strategy; and how to improve balance between manual, machine and IT-based processes.
Dismantle the overwhelming complexity in your IT projects with strategies and real-world examples from a leading expert on enterprise architecture. This guide describes best practices for creating an efficient IT organization that consistently delivers on time, on budget, and in line with business needs. IT systems have become too complex - and too expensive. Complexity can create delays, cost overruns, and outcomes that do not meet business requirements. The resulting losses can impact your entire company. This guide demonstrates that, contrary to popular belief, complex problems demand simple solutions. The author believes that 50 percent of the complexity of a typical IT project can and should be eliminated - and he shows you how to do it. Youâ€™ll learn a model for understanding complexity, the three tenets of complexity control, and how to apply specific techniques such as checking architectures for validity. Find out how the authorâ€™s methodology could have saved a real-world IT project that went off track, and ways to implement his solutions in a variety of situations.
C.K. Prahalad, the world's premier business thinker, and IT scholar M.S. Krishnan unveil the critical missing link in connecting strategy to execution--building organizational capabilities that allow companies to achieve and sustain continuous change and innovation. The New Age of Innovation reveals that the key to creating value and the future growth of every business depends on accessing a global network of resources to co-create unique experiences with customers, one at a time. To achieve this, CEOs, executives, and managers at every level must transform their business processes, technical systems, and supply chain management, implementing key social and technological infrastructure requirements to create an ongoing innovation advantage. In this landmark work, Prahalad and Krishnan explain how to accomplish this shift--one where IT and the management architecture form the corporation's fundamental foundation. This book provides strategies for: Redesigning systems to co-create value with customers and connect all parts of a firm to this process; Measuring individual behavior through smart analytics; Ceaselessly improving the flexibility and efficiency in all customer-facing and back-end processes; Treating all involved individuals--customers, employees, investors, suppliers--as unique; Working across cultures and time-zones in a seamless global network; Building teams that are capable of providing high-quality, low-cost solutions rapidly. The fomula is N=1 and R=G.
Burton Group's Mike Rollings: While many enterprise architecture (EA) programs may be less than effective or threatened by extinction, the EA discipline is still an important set of skills and processes that improve IT decision-making and CIO effectiveness. Yet, after decades of architecting systems, the advent of several EA frameworks, and the many definitions available for the term EA, we still strive to understand what EA is, what it does, and what it looks like when it is successful. Most enterprise architects start out wanting to be effective, but organizational isolation driven by ivory tower syndrome, a lack of participation, or a lack of commitment to the results inhibits their influence on getting things done. Disconnects like these and those with the software development lifecycle (SDLC) should be seen as a sign of danger, but all EA programs, even effective ones, can be improved. This is accomplished by understanding fundamental operating model principles for process integration and standardization, avoiding framework-centric approaches, and focusing on getting things done. (registration required)
By now you've probably heard the phrase "enterprise architect." People in the know are hard-pressed to describe exactly what an enterprise architect is, but they say one thing is clear: the relatively new job title represents a growing and lucrative field for IT pros. An enterprise architect is sort of like a city planner, says Allen Brown, president and CEO of the Open Group, a standards organization. Rather than tinkering with individual pieces of hardware and software, the architect attempts to ensure proper integration of all the infrastructure and applications throughout an organization, Brown says. A global bank is likely to have 400 architects, but the profession is still in its infancy, he says.
Enterprise Architecture in Denmark - Trends in business driven IT within the public sector of Denmark
Flemming Hald's Master Thesis, CBS, 2006. Enterprise Architecture - often referred to as business oriented use of IT or simply put EA - has been an issue within the public domain at State level for some time now. It is often used in conjunction with another popular acronym, SOA, Service-Oriented Architecture. The intentions of EA in public Denmark has been formulated through a white book and the Ministry of Finances are talking about the strategic use of IT in the public domain. This thesis sets out by analyzing the maturity of the municipalities and the State of this matter. It does so by describing the EA activities within the public domain. These are described based on a comprehensive survey made within the field targeted towards the municipal CIO's. I reach the conclusion that the municipalities not are at a mature state in regard to the awareness, propagation and use of enterprise architecture. I reach the conclusion that the State is however more mature in this area. But there is something missing in the way the public is structured in order to move Denmark upward the maturity ladder and to support, coordinate and communicate EA efforts throughout the entire public sector. The answer lies in the organizational structure. From my research I propose the establishment of an Enterprise Architecture Committee as a central actor in carrying out all EA initiatives throughout public Denmark. This newly formed committee will be in close connection with already established and well functioning councils and committees. Representatives of the most important actors will be part of this committee thus carrying weight and influence behind its initiatives and suggestions.
Dave Oliver: Recently I attended a TOGAF certification course up in merry old London town run by Architecting the Enterprise (AtE). My certification should show up in the list of other 5000 odd architects that have passed in the next few weeks. So what is TOGAF in a nutshell? Well it's a very generic architecture framework that helps build, in a non-prescriptive way, how to develop parts of an Enterprise Architecture capability. Notice the caveats, 'very generic', 'non-prescriptive', 'develop parts'. What am saying is that if you want an idiots guide to implementing Enterprise Architecture in your organisation, this is not it and forget that quest because it doesn't exist! TOGAF sits a few levels above; it is the high-level plan that on specific subjects delves a little deeper with advice, guidance and best practice.
Raf Cammarano: In Enterprise Architecture we often talk about models, patterns, best practices, technology and the like. Given that EA is fundamentally about change, it's interesting that change management doesn't get a lot of coverage in EA circles. In this post I'll introduce a very simple model of change management that has been around for over 50years.
R. Suter in Defense AT&L: January-February 2007: The objective of enterprise architecture is to improve the efficiency of the capital investments in IT. How does it help achieve this goal? How do we make sure that it helps achieve this goal?
Serge Thorn: Recently I have attended the ITIL V2 to V3 bridge course and took the examination. It is clear that one day is not enough and a day and a half would have been convenient. IIL V3 is supposed to be an evolution and not a revolutionâ€¦ Pretty sure that a day and a half would have frightened some IT decision makersâ€¦ and the decision was from trainers to only offer that single day.
Telelogic System Architect Is First to be Awarded Preliminary Certification by Capgemini for Support of its Integrated Architecture Framework (IAF). Press Release 12 March 2008. Telelogic (STO:TLOG) today announced that Capgemini, one of the world's foremost providers of consulting, technology and outsourcing services, has awarded Telelogic System Architect preliminary certification for support of the Capgemini Integrated Architecture Framework (IAF). Telelogic System Architect is a leading enterprise architecture and business process analysis solution. Telelogic System Architect is the first enterprise architecture solution to be preliminarily approved in Capgemini's framework certification process. Capgemini consultants worldwide will be able to take advantage of the benefits of Telelogic System Architect in their projects. System Architect offers customized templates and diagrams that are pre-configured to support all levels of the IAF. This integrated support simplifies and accelerates the deployment of the IAF by automating the creation of scenarios and supporting documentation in a traceable and extensible repository. In addition, System Architect's central repository helps reduce errors and related costs by offering a standard approach to enterprise architecture across all of Capgemini. By using System Architect, users can simplify the maintenance and enhance the integrity of the large volumes of information being collected and analyzed. "By combining a tool like System Architect and the Capgemini IAF, our consultants gain the ability to work smarter on their enterprise architecture projects," said Bernard Huc, Architects Community Global Leader at Capgemini "They will have access to a leading solution that automates the collection, analysis and sharing of information across the organization and with clients. With System Architect's integrated support of this framework, we will gain improved traceability and use of a standard format across all projects. System Architect should go a long in improving productivity, delivering fact-based decision making, and efficiently delivering project results to our customers." "Telelogic has always been committed to supporting major enterprise architecture frameworks and standards," said Greg Sikes, executive vice president, Modeling Solutions Product Division, Telelogic. "The addition of Capgemini IAF support extends our framework support into a new area. It builds on 20 years of enterprise architecture framework support, starting with Zachman and now encompassing telecom, retail, defense, civil government, business/open source and other industries. We are proud to be the first to provide this support to Capgemini, one of the leading consulting organizations in the world." System Architect helps organizations more fully deploy, visualize, collaborate on, and scale their enterprise architecture and business process analysis initiatives. Capgemini IAF support is available now. For more information, visit www.telelogic.com.
Frank Goethals, SAP: A number of enterprise architecture frameworks do exist. In this paper, we differentiate between two classes of frameworks: classic enterprise architecture frameworks, and federated enterprise architecture frameworks. From each class, a number of reputable frameworks are presented. Conclusions are made concerning what these frameworks learn us for setting up an Extended Enterprise architecture framework.
The enterprise architecture provides benefits to the organization that utilizes it. However, if the enterprise architecture is not tightly coupled with other enterprise level programs such as investment management and system development process, its overall effectiveness is compromised. This paper will identify the process integration and enterprise architecture touchpoints from the perspective of the investment management process and it outlines an overall Integrated Enterprise Life Cycle process flow. The paper also presents a case study of the implementation of the enterprise life cycle process flow.
Christopher B. Emery and Frank Armour: A primer on weaving EA and systems development into an investment management framework. An enterprise architecture can provide significant benefits to an organization that embraces it. But many fail to tightly couple and integrate EA efforts with other enterprise programs, particularly investment management and systems development. To be successful, the target EA and information technology initiatives must be managed within an overall investment management process: an integrated enterprise life cycle (IELC).
Nick Malik: Does anyone ever ask you to justify what you do? I've worked in most roles in technical development and management. Only in Enterprise Architecture do I get that question. So I'm posing an open question to the EA community: how do you demonstrate value?
Chirag Mehta, SAP: Scenario-based planning is inevitable for an enterprise architect. The changing business models, organizational dynamics, and disruptive technology are some of the change agents that require enterprise architecture strategy to be agile enough to respond to these changes.
Shaji Sethu: In my work often I am asked to go in and setup Enterprise Architecture within organisation or help existing Architecture function. The sponsors of these projects tend to be CIO or Managers of Strategy and Architecture. In most of these engagements over past few years I have seen a consistent message being repeated over and over again. "We need Enterprise Architecture and there is no need for you to speak to the business while developing one." Some time they may have a sound reason; such as they have done lots of workshops with business already and don't want to repeat it or they have Business Process Improvement team in place who can supply most of the information.
The international standard for systems engineering ISO/IEC 15288 â€œSystems Engineering Life Cycle Processesâ€ receives more and more attention; probably due to an increasing need for a common framework within the systems engineering community. For example; NATO has decided that ISO/IEC 15288 shall be the framework for Systems Life Cycle Management (SLCM). Architectural Frameworks is sometimes regarded as the necessary communication tool of system design when stakeholders communicate what the systems are, the purpose they fulfil, and what the systems elements are. Department of Defence (DoD), NATO, Ministry of Defence (MOD) and the Swedish Armed Forces to mention a few, all develop Architectural Frameworks. Modelling & Simulation (M&S) is the â€œsilver bulletâ€ that will make systems engineering more efficient with respect to delivering the right systems; within budget and time limits. The present paper will give a brief introduction to ISO/IEC 15288, Architectural Frameworks and M&S. It will also present an example on how ISO/IEC 15288, Architectural Frameworks and M&S can be integrated and the benefits of that integration, especially how M&S can be used to develop and execute system designs. Finally this paper gives a very short presentation of some ideas concerning tool support. The presented work was performed under contract from the Swedish Defence Material Administration.
Andrew N. Blumenthal: Enterprise architecture is about planning, managing, and measuring change in an organization. To effect change requires true leadership, and this requires multiple skills. In the book, The Leadership Triad by Dale Zand, three essential forces of leadership are presentedâ€”knowledge, trust, and power. These leadership forces guide constructive organizational change. â€œLike three horses pulling a chariot, these forces, if coordinated and working together, provide a swift and exhilarating ride. But if one force is mismanaged or pulls against the others, the ride is bumpy and can end in disaster.â€
Stew Welbourne: Yet more circular debate about whether SOA is just hype or whether it offers anything of value. It's addictive reading, not that I expect anyone to reach a definitive answer, but moreso to observe the correlation between the debating individual, the scope of his/her problem-space, and his/her corresponding position on whether SOA is hype or not. The relationship between Enterprise Architecture and SOA (and here I have just detatched a seprate thread about EA and Hype!!) is significant in my opinion as a result of the hugely important question of scope. The good old example of the difference between an Enterprise Architect and a System or Application Architect is the analogy with Town Planners and Building Planners. In simple terms Enterprise Architects are focusing at the optimal arrangement of buildings and utilities over a large area, whereas System/Application architects are focusing on the optimal construction of a small number of buildings and their optimal interfacing with the utilities they assume will be there at some point.
Nick Malik: You have probably heard of the Iron Triangle of project management (Cost, Scope, and Time). Did you know that Enterprise Architecture has it's own iron triangle? It does, and understanding the EA triangle is a great way to understand and describe the role, mission, and value of Enterprise Architecture.
G.J.N.M. (Guido) Chorus, Y.H.C. (Yves) Janse, S.J.B.A. (Stijn) Hoppenbrouwers, C.J.P. (Chris) Nellen, and H.A. (Erik) Proper. Technical report: ICIS-R07006, February, 2007. This technical report is the result of two experiments conducted as part of an ongoing research effort to formalize architecture principles. The experiment involves a first, and modest, evaluation of the use of ORM and ORC as a means to formalize and ground architecture principles. The experiments involve the evaluation of the use of ORM and ORC to formalize the example principles provided by the TOGAF (The Open Group Architecture Framework) and principles taken from industrial practice.
F. Arbab, F.S. de Boer, M. Bonsangue, and M.M. Lankhorst. In: Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures, Nr: 1, Vol: 2, Pages: 40-57, January, 2007. The diversity of architectural models in enterprise architecture is a problem for their integration. In this paper we distinguish three kinds of models from each other and their visualization, and we illustrate how the distinctions can be used for model integration within the architectural approach. Symbolic models express properties of architectures of systems, semantic models interpret the symbols of semantic models, and subjective models are purposely abstracted conceptions of a domain. Building on results obtained in the ArchiMate project, we illustrate how symbolic models can be integrated using an architectural language, how integrated models can be updated using the distinction between symbolic models and their visualization, and how semantic models can be integrated using a new kind of enterprise analysis called semantic analysis. We also suggest that subjective models can be integrated using techniques from natural language analysis.
If one thing catches the eye in almost all literature about (re)designing or (re)engineering of enterprises, it is the lack of a well-founded theory about their construction and operation. Often even the most basic notions like action or process are not precisely defined. Next, in order to master the diversity and the complexity of contemporary enterprises, theories are needed that separate the stable essence of an enterprise from the variable way in which it is realized and implemented. Such a theory and a matching methodology, which has passed the test of practical experience, constitute the contents of this book. The enterprise ontology, as developed by Dietz, is the starting point for profoundly understanding the organization of an enterprise and subsequently for analyzing, (re)designing, and (re)engineering it. The approach covers numerous issues in an integrated way: business processes, in- and outsourcing, information systems, management control, staffing etc. Researchers and students in enterprise engineering or related fields will discover in this book a revolutionary new way of thinking about business and organization. In addition, it provides managers, business analysts, and enterprise information system designers for the first time with a solid and integrated insight into their daily work.
Do you speak business or IT? Perhaps you speak a little of both. In today's connected world, where business and IT are fused, chances are that if you're a business or IT executive, or someone working to transform a business, you speak a little of both. But what if there was a third language? A common language that was natural for both business and IT, straightforward enough to use, yet sophisticated enough to work in today's connected world? What if such a language only comprised a handful of words? With such a language, the loss in translation between the business and IT would happen less, because both would be using the same language. With such a language, business outcomes and transformations would become much more achievable. This handbook describes what this language is - the language of Information Systems for the 21st century.
Ivar Jacobson. Around the world introducing an Enterprise Architecture (EA) has been an initiative for most financial institutions (banks, insurance companies, government, etc.) for the last five years or so, and it is not over. I have been working with such companies and helped some of them to avoid making the worst mistakes. Most EA initiatives failed. My guess is that more than 90% never really resulted in anything useful. ... Many of the companies that failed are now looking for the next silver bullet â€“ Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). To me SOA is what EA should have become. SOA can be described as EA++ -- it is Enterprise Architecture made better. SOA is clearly on the right path, but again adopting it requires that you work smart!
IT is no longer an enabler of corporate strategy, it is now the key element of corporate strategy. Governance of the Extended Enterprise explores how some of the world's most successful enterprises have integrated information technology with business strategies, culture, and ethics to optimize information value, attain business objectives, and capitalize on technologies in highly competitive environments. Providing a process for change and a governance model, Governance of the Extended Enterprise encompasses the latest emerging practices from major information and knowledge businesses, providing a major new knowledge resource for enterprises. It also opens up new avenues of practice in strategy setting, enterprise management, control assessment, and risk management. From sales-force automation to workgroup collaboration, forms processing to knowledge management systems, customer service to technical support, Governance of the Extended Enterprise will help readers improve IT governance in all facets of their organization.
The Business Motivation Model has a business focus, which we characterize as reflecting Zachman 'row 2.' This paper deals with the 'motivation' cell of the Zachman Framework. Motivation tells us 'why' an enterprise has the business rules it has put in place to govern what it does with its products and services, its people, its locations, and its timing. The latest version of the paper was published in September 2007, reflecting the small number of changes made to the Business Motivation Model during the OMG standardization work. The BRG's Release 1.3 publication is available in PDF format.
Organizations are struggling for greater return on their multibillion-dollar technology and project-related investments. Individual projects may be useful, but when examined collectively, they often work at cross-purposes, duplicate each other's efforts, or aim for obsolescing business objectives. And all are competing for scarce resources. In today's earnings-driven business environment, companies must look to their portfolios to better deliver on objectives and propel the organization forward. Based on their experience with a variety of companies, authors Cathleen Benko and distinguished professor F. Warren McFarlan have developed an alignment approach that better connects an organization's project portfolio to its corporate objectives in a manner responsive to today's unpredictable environment. Connecting the Dots provides a scalable framework and practical tools for better aligning a company's: (1) project portfolio with its objectives; (2) individual projects with each other; and (3) portfolio and objectives with the volatile environment. Better-aligned companies enhance business/technology performance by increasing shareholder value and confidence and improving the portfolio's return on investment. This in-the-trenches guidebook helps companies capture this latent value while building a more adaptive organization.
Many large scale projects are delivered over schedule and over budget. Programme management is a new approach to maximize the likelihood of successful change management. While being based around a set of techniques, this book describes an approach to programme management that outlines the skills and capabilities that organizations need to develop in order to manage change programmes effectively. This updated paperback edition includes a new chapter on programme governance.
At last, here is a book that brings IT's relationship with business to life, and enables you to implement strategy rather than develop it. Richard Wyatt-Haines helps you see the true potential of IT in delivering the growth and success to which you aspire. Whilst you may have seen the chapter headings before, you won't have seen the topics approached in a manner that helps you understand the what, the why and the how, and then shows you what you have to do on the ground to deliver impact and success.
Building an Enterprise Architecture Practice provides practical advice on how to develop your enterprise architecture practice. The authors developed different tools and models to support organizations in implementing and professionalizing an enterprise architecture function. The application of these tools and models in many different organizations forms the basis for this book. The result is a hands-on book that will help you to avoid certain pitfalls and achieve success with enterprise architecture.
In the last decade, enterprise architecture has grown into an established approach for management of organization-wide information systems. Enterprise architecture is model based, in the sense that diagrammatic descriptions of the systems and their environment constitute the core of the approach. This book emphasizes the decision-supporting potential of enterprise architecture. It presents a comprehensive set of enterprise architecture models as well as how these may be used to assess important properties of the represented systems, such as availability, modifiability, performance, and information security. The book is directed at two groups of readers. Students are provided a background to enterprise information systems and the problems associated with their management. Practitioners will find hands-on descriptions on how to get started with enterprise architecture in their company.
This is the first book that addresses all three main activities in improving business and technology decisions: the planning, design and assessment of enterprise architectures (EAs). Emphasis is on medium and large-size organizations in the private sector (such as banks, airlines and auto industries) and the public sector (such as federal agencies, local government organizations and military services in the Department of Defense). The book addresses the challenges faced by EA builders through an organized presentation of the issues and a step-by-step approach. The material is based on real-life EA project experience and lessons learned over a decade working in multiple-contractor, multiple-discipline teams, and multiple-agency environments.
The basis for an Enterprise Architecture IT project comes from the identification of the changes necessary to implement the enterprise or organisations strategy, and the growing information needs arising from this, which increases the demand for the development of the IT system. The development of an IT system can be carried out using an urbanisation approach i.e. building an IT system using the metaphor of a city. This concept is based on the fact that in constructing or reorganising information systems, the reconstruction and modernisation involves permanent elements, as are found in a city. Although relatively new, this approach has been successfully employed in a number of projects over the past few years. The practical approach given in this book allows enterprises or organisations trying to safeguard the efficiency of their IT system, while minimising costs and risk, to implement the theory and put it into practice.
Many IT deployments fall short of delivering value to the businesses that pay for them. On top of this, the combined forces of rapid business change and technology innovation frequently outpace the ability of IT organisations to make sense of their implications. With business activity and IT now so intimately intertwined, organizations urgently need a framework which allows them to align IT capabilities with business strategies and priorities in a way that is sustainable. A team of IT-expert authors with more than 80 years combined experience have interviewed dozens of CIOs, IT directors and other senior technical and business decision makes to find out what works and what doesn't. The result is a handbook for organizations of all sizes that want to improve the value of their IT investments, thus enabling their IT capabilities to play a more pivotal business role. Written in plain English that does not descend into technical detail, The Technology Garden provides practical advice for organizations looking to achieve sustainable IT-business alignment. To do so, it defines: Six key principles - a distillation of best practice that readers can apply directly to the domain of IT-business alignment; A framework for their application - a pragmatic roadmap for the application of the principles; Adoption guidelines - a set of self-assessment checklists that readers can use to understand where they are on the IT-business alignment roadmap and how to progress. With groundbreaking research and proven approaches, this blueprint enables readers to understand what is at the heart of IT-business alignment. Combining IT research, analysis and real-world insight, The Technology Garden is the ultimate no-nonsense guide.
ISO has published ISO/IEC 42010:2007, Systems and software engineering - Recommended practice for architectural description of software-intensive systems. The text of this ISO standard is identical to IEEE 1471:2000, and will serve as basis for the joint ISO and IEEE revision.
CIO.com, August 2007: What jobs should you focus on filling in 2007? Our Hot Jobs spec sheets describe the IT roles that are most in demand, explain why they're so critical and offer suggestions on how to hire for them. On top of the list is Enterprise architect.
This book presents an approach to enterprise architecture, which enables corporations to achieve their business objectives faster. Focusing on the governance of IT in the organization, it provides tangible tools, advice and strategies for implementing and designing the architectural process within a corporation that will make a major contribution in driving the business forward and achieve its goals.
The author developed Lightweight Enterprise Architecture (LEA) to enable a quick alignment of technology to business strategy. LEA's simple and effective framework makes it useful to a wide audience of users throughout an enterprise, coordinating resources for business requirements and facilitating optimal adoption of technology. Lightweight Enterprise Architectures provides a methodology and philosophy that organizations can easily adopt, resulting in immediate value-add without the pitfalls of traditional architectural styles. This systematic approach uses the right balance of tools and techniques to help an enterprise successfully develop its architecture. The first section of the text focuses on how enterprises deploy architecture and how architecture is an evolving discipline. The second section introduces LEA, detailing a structure that supports architecture and benefits all stakeholders. The book concludes by explaining the approach needed to put the framework into practice, analyzing deployment issues and how the architecture is involved throughout the lifecycle of technology projects and systems. This innovative resource tool provides you with a simpler, easily executable architecture, the ability to embrace a complex environment, and a framework to measure and control technology at the enterprise level.
The role of the enterprise architecture professional is one of the most challenging roles in information technology today. Many aspects of the role are technical, while much more of the job is becoming political. To say the least, it is a challenging position. Many enterprise architects have significant responsibility, but do not have the necessary authority to bring about success. The primary focus of this book is to be a guide and trusted advisor to those who want to be successful in this pursuit. Through real-world examples from experts who have filled the role of enterprise architect, the reader will learn how to solve complex problems, maintain technical competencies, and make a positive impact on the overall business. The most successful architecture will have an architect that can describe the motivation behind the technical choices; this book provides the background the practitioners will need to become the enterprise evangelist.
An enterprise architecture tries to describe and control an organisation's structure, processes, applications, systems and techniques in an integrated way. The unambiguous specification and description of components and their relationships in such an architecture requires a coherent architecture modelling language. Lankhorst and his co-authors present such an enterprise modelling language, ArchiMate, that captures the complexity of architectural domains and their relations and allows the construction of integrated enterprise architecture models. They provide architects with concrete instruments that improve their architectural practice. As this is not enough, they additionally present techniques and heuristics for communicating with all relevant stakeholders about these architectures. Since an architecture model is useful not only for providing insight into the current or future situation but can also be used to evaluate the transition from 'as-is' to 'to-be', the authors also describe analysis methods for assessing both the qualitative impact of changes to an architecture and the quantitative aspects of architectures, such as performance and cost issues. The modelling language and the other techniques presented have been proven in practice in many real-life case studies. So this book is an ideal companion for enterprise IT or business architects in industry as well as for computer or management science students studying the field of enterprise architecture.
More advanced than traditional system planning approaches, Enterprise Architecture Planning (EAP) outlines a stable business model independent of organizational boundaries, systems and procedures; defines data before applications; and allows data to determine the sequence for implementing application systems. This invaluable book offers a common-sense approach to EAP and includes numerous examples of architectures, procedures, checklists and useful guidelines. The book was described as a substantive contribution to the body of IS planning knowledge by John A. Zachman.
Please refer to the third edition.
From Business Strategy to IT Action gives companies of all sizes the tools to effectively link IT to business strategy and produce effective, actionable strategies for bottom-line results. The authors present CEOs, CFOs, CIOs, and IT managers with a powerful and accessible resource packed with such useful material as the Strategy-to-Bottom-Line Value Chain, which integrates the management practices relating to planning, prioritization, alignment, and assessing a company's entire IT budget; methods for using IT Impact Management to establish IT culture and performance models for the business/IT connection; the IT Improvement Zone, which quickly identifies where a company can focus its energies for maximum results, etc.
Enterprise IT architecture made practical -- finally! There's only one way to maximize legacy infrastructure while integrating new partners, technologies, applications, and data streams: begin with a coherent enterprise architecture. But most approaches to enterprise architecture have been far too complex and theoretical--until now. IT Architecture Toolkit is a breakthrough: a practical, simple, rapid, and complete approach to delivering on the promise of enterprise architecture. Jane Carbone's approach has been proven in mid-market and Fortune 500 enterprises alike. Step by step, Carbone shows how to integrate business, architecture, implementation, and all key outputs: for data, applications, technology, and people. Whether you're an IT leader, architect, planner, or analyst, you'll learn how to create strong, auditable links with business drivers; model your architecture simply, easily, and quickly; translate your models to real, manageable projects; define the value proposition for architecture and establish realistic metrics; achieve buy-in throughout your organization; and manage the soft aspects of your architecture initiative, including processes, roles, responsibilities, and organizational structure. Carbone provides a soup to nuts collection of methods and examples. Using her exercises, you will construct a complete draft architecture for your own business: one that will handle change, opportunity, growth, mergers, downsizing, whatever comes your way.
Strategic IT Portfolio Management delivers a solution to the IT dilemma that has evolved over the past 40 years - namely, how do we get the most value from our IT investment? Author Jeff Kaplan, a lead partner in the Strategic IT Management Practice at consulting firm PRTM, puts nearly two decades of expertise to work exploring and identifying the knowledge, techniques, and strategies needed to maximize technology investments and achieve long-term business transformation for all types of organizations. Written for executives from all disciplines, the book highlights many of the root causes of the IT value dilemma and explains how executives can prevent and counter these issues. Readers will learn the portfolio management methods essential to achieving value. The book provides executives with the tools to: - Illuminate, assess, and improve existing practices - Design a governance structure and allocate appropriate decision rights - Ensure centralized control with decentralized execution - Increase collaboration between business-unit and IT leadership - Instill a culture of continuous improvement and innovation Executives, board members, policymakers, analysts, and the media all want to know: are companies spending too much on information technology (IT)? But the question they should ask is whether organizations are seeing sufficient value from their IT investment - the value that comes from effectively managing technology as part of overall business transformation. Many organizations don't know how to move from managing technology to managing overall business transformation. Large-scale transformation efforts often go awry because the business leadership team and IT project teams are out of sync. In most of these cases, the organization lacks a governance method that fuses strategic management of the business, the technology, and the projects. Portfolio management is the governance method that's needed. Strategic IT Portfolio Management describes the portfolio management governance method necessary for transformation success. This book highlights many of the root causes for the IT dilemma and explains how executives can prevent and counter these issues. Readers gain an inside look at how portfolio management can instill a culture of continuous improvement and innovation within the organization.
Most organisations have problems to explain and manage the economic benefits of Enterprise Architecture. Managers often asked me what Enterprise Architecture can do for me. At the same time several Governmental organisations are adopting Enterprise Architecture as part of their change and E-Government initiatives. A holistic Enterprise Architecture approach can deliver a lot of benefits to organisations depending on the focus where to find these benefits. Even so Enterprise Architecture delivers the foundation for Enterprise Portfolio Management, the ultimate business driver for Enterprise Architecture. The main purpose of this book is achieving awareness at management level as well as at enterprise architects level about adopting an economic approach when dealing with Enterprise Architecture programs. This book explains the areas of economic benefits of Enterprise Architecture programs, the different views as well as a holistic approach to show the areas of economic benefits. Economic methods, models and approaches are described in short to show, how to quantify and manage the economic benefits of Enterprise Architecture programs as well as how Enterprise Architecture supports Enterprise Portfolio Management. This book has not the intention to be a scientific research document, nor a handbook to deliver solutions for all your EA related economic issues.
Carnegie Mellon University's Software Engineering Institute's Architecture Expert (ArchE) tool is an assistant to the architect. Version 2.1 of ArchE is now available for download. ArchE embodies quality attribute theories, techniques for ascertaining the appropriate quality attribute model from an architectural description, techniques for solving the quality attribute model to determine a predicted response in given situations, and the ability to use legacy designs as input.
The Role of Event Processing in Modern Business. In eBizQ, 30 July 2007. By Dr. K. Mani Chandy, Simon Ramo Professor of Computer Science, California Institute of Technology and Roy Schulte, Vice President and Distinguished Analyst, Gartner, Inc. Almost everyone wants to have an adaptive enterprise, a company that runs faster and smarter because it has "situational awareness," can "sense-and-respond" to opportunities and threats, and can "track-and-trace" items as they go through their life cycles. What do these three capabilities have in common? They are all achieved through event processing.
Enterprise architecture defines a firmâ€™s needs for standardized tasks, job roles, systems, infrastructure, and data in core business processes. Thus, it helps a company to articulate how it will compete in a digital economy and it guides managersâ€™ daily decisions to realize their vision of success. This book clearly explains enterprise architectureâ€™s vital role in enabling - or constraining - the execution of business strategy. The book provides clear frameworks, thoughtful case examples, and a proven-effective structured process for designing and implementing effective enterprise architectures.
Johan Strandler, InfoQ, 26 July 2007. System complexity is the key reason for the many failures of IT organizations to deliver what they are supposed to do, said Roger Sessions, ObjectWatch CTO. In May, Sessions published an indepth comparison of the top four current Enterprise Architecture frameworks Zachman, TOGAF, FEA, and Gartner's methodology, and in a separate article this July he stated that the methods have not evolved to meet the compexity of today's system development & business needs. Instead Sessions says that "the key is thinking small, partitioning the organization into narrowly defined areas of business need, instead of attempting to define the architecture for the entire company"; then, build out these features in an iterative fashion, showing early value and success in the EA project. Sessions last year proposed this new methodology, calling it the Partitioned-Iterative Approach to Enterprise Architecture, a process drawn from the lessons of probability theory and war strategy.
By Vitalie Temnenco, Architect, WSIB. 15 Jan 2007. IBM developerWorks. From The Rational Edge: This article contrasts the disciplines of enterprise architecture, solution architecture, and business architecture; compares these disciplines to the IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP) and suggests ways to combine them; and advocates applying The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) in combination with RUP to advance the implementation of enterprise architecture within organizations.
A Comparison of the Top Four Enterprise-Architecture Methodologies. An article, posted by MSDN Architecture, looks at the differences in the top four enterprise architectures. Here, Vaughn Christie makes a comparison of each based on 12 criteria that are most often used for comparing and evaluating enterprise-architectural methodologies. Note that these criteria might not be relevant to your organization, and some might be more or less important than others. But, at least, this section can serve as a starting point for your own evaluation.
Un article de WikipÃ©dia, l'encyclopÃ©die libre. Les concepts de l'urbanisation de l'habitat humain (organisation des villes, du territoire) ont Ã©tÃ© rÃ©utilisÃ©s en informatique (notamment par Jacques Sassoon dans les annÃ©es 1990 dans le secteur bancaire) pour formaliser ou modÃ©liser l'agencement du systÃ¨me d'information (SI) de l'entreprise.
By Diann Daniel. With equal parts technology expertise and business savvy, today's enterprise architects are connecting silos and enabling the enterprise vision. Enterprise architecture focuses on four crucial C's: connection, collaboration, communication and customers. Imagine needing to manually log onto five different systems to create and track an order, or putting in 20 hours researching a project because you didn't know the information already existed in another department. These situations result from fragmentation and siloed thinking; the goal of enterprise architecture, on the other hand, is to create unity.
Podcast from december 2006 hosted by R. Scott Bittler, Research VP. Businesses that embrace service-oriented architecture (SOA) principles across the organization will see that SOA is an approach that permeates the entire enterprise architecture (EA). Listen as the CIO of Nykredit - one of Denmark's foremost financial institutions - explains how his organization has benefited by executing on a comprehensive EA strategy.
Bob McIlree: As enterprise architects, we collectively have made many attempts to explain and define what enterprise architecture is through the use of analogies, models, and frameworks. Although the desire for completeness across the entire scope of EA when such attempts are made is admirable, all of these fall somewhat short of the mark, for reasons that I discuss within this post.
Daniel Petley and Neil Ross, in DM Review Magazine, January 2006 Issue. Every organization has one. Sometimes it is complex and rapidly changing; sometimes it is relatively straightforward and stable. It supports an organization of 50,000 employees with billions of dollars in revenues or 100 employees with modest revenues. Whether or not it is formally documented and understood, it exists. What we are referring to is the enterprise architecture (EA). In most organizations, the enterprise architecture is viewed as an abstract concept that has little value. This view is false. In a world of rapid change, the enterprise architecture is real, has significant benefits and is more important now than ever.
David Linthicum: Working directly on SOA projects as an independent I'm exposed to many more organizations than when I was building technology. As such, I see some common patterns or issues emerging.
Federal Budget Information
The Operating Units of the Department of Commerce (DoC) have made a heavy investment in the development of enterprise-wide IT Architectures. We need to ensure that the Department continues to build on previous efforts and fully realize the benefits of IT Architecture. Assessments of IT processes within an organization are needed to evaluate where we are and where we should be headed. The Department has developed an IT Architecture Capability Maturity Model (CMM) to aid in conducting such assessments. The goal is to enhance the overall odds for success of the IT Architecture by identifying weak areas and providing a defined path towards improvement. As an Architecture matures it should increase the benefits it offers the organization.
The VITAL project investigates the problem of aligning the services offered by networked ICT with the requirements of networked businesses. In businesses of any significant size, business-ICT alignment is a hard problem, which is currently not solved completely. With the advent of network organizations, the problem gets a new dimension, because in a network, there is not a single decision point about ICT support and different actors in a network may have conflicting requirements. Networks exist when different businesses decide to cooperate by means of ICT networks, but they also exist in large corporations, which often consist of nearly independent business units. In VITAL, we investigate an economic value-based approach to alignment in networked businesses. The project consists of three parts. All three parts build upon work in value-based requirements engineering and on ICT architecture design research done in the GRAAL program.
For a novel to be successful, the reader is supposed to wonder what happens to the characters after the book ends. This rule doesnâ€™t apply to business books, which is why I came away vaguely disappointed by Enterprise Architecture As Strategy: Creating A Foundation For Business Execution (Harvard Business School Press, 2006), the new book by Jeanne W. Ross, Peter Weill, and David C. Robertson.
In my experience, when Enterprises perform Business Transformation design exercises where the solution is to be enabled or underpinned by technology, a core list of the same potential pitfalls are regularly encountered. It would be interesting to see whether others come across the same types as well, so here are a few examples of what I always tend to come across.
Editor's Note: Ten years ago, Congress passed the Information Technology Management Reform Act, later renamed for its co-sponsors, Rep. William Clinger, R-Pa., and Sen. William Cohen, R-Maine. In this four-part series, retired Air Force Lt. Col. Wes Andrues, an IT policy consultant and CIO Certificate holder from the National Defense University, looks at the changes in federal technology procurement since the law was passed.
Metrics are an important and elusive aspect of enterprise architecture. They're important for a primary reason, if you can't prove your worth to the business, then you are not likely to be around for long. Metrics are also a good way to gauge areas in your architecture practice that are running smoothly, or need improvement. Further, they're key to a mature EA process.
"To be an Enterprise Architect is to live in a bit of a temporal disconnect from the rest of the world. This disconnect is two-fold: 1) Architecture, to my mind, must be looking at the continuously receeding 3-year time horizon. That creates the critical bridge between the day-to-day and month-to-month activities of the organization, and the organization's stated 5-year strategic plan. 2) The people in your organization may not even be living in the present. They may have a technological viewpoint that lags several years behind. So you're in the meeting room in 2006, and you're trying to have a conversation based on where you think things will be in 2009, meanwhile, the organization is still back in 2001.
Jeff Schneider is noticing something really interesting about SOA adoption. You can put the adopters in 4 buckets: 1. Companies that don't do SOA and have no intention of doing it; 2. Companies that don't do SOA but keep talking about it and have mastered the blame game; 3. Companies that do SOA, but poorly; and 4. Companies that do SOA and reap huge benefits
Dynamic Documentation, EA, SOA etc ... "Y'all need Documentation to support your EA, hear!". Peter has posted his MSc thesis here.
Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'05). Over the past decades, large organisations have developed increasingly complex portfolios of information systems to support business processes. Maintenance and leveraging of these so-called system complexes have become a major challenge to many executive boards. The challenge is even bigger for organisations that are the result of mergers. The question arises whether, from both an operational and a strategic perspective, it would be feasible to migrate to a single (new) system complex. In this paper, we describe the 'picture approach', a method for analysing, redesigning and combining system complexes in information-intensive organisations. The method was applied successfully in three cases (insurance companies), all operating multiple system complexes. The method consists of mapping an organisation's information systems and showing their roles in the business processes. The picture approach is evaluated in three ways, one of which is a comparison with design principles for process modelling in Enterprise Application Integration.
MSDN Solution Architecture Center. By Roger Sessions, April 2006. Sessions offers guidelines for creating an effective enterprise architecture through the use of partitioned iteration, a process drawn from the lessons of probability theory and war strategy. (26 printed pages)
The MIT Enterprise Architecture Guide (EAG) documents MIT's architectural principles and goals, the current state of MIT's enterprise architecture, and a future state architectural vision. The EAG also includes information regarding the ITAG architecture review process. Since this document serves to inform developers about available enterprise tools and services, we expect the EAG will be useful to enterprise system developers across the institute.
EAvaluator - the EAS Enterprise Architecture maturity assessor - will evaluate the answers you give to a set of sixteen questions and will provide an assessment of the level of maturity of your organisationâ€™s Enterprise Architecture. Based on the assessment, it will also provide suggestions regarding how you may improve your Enterprise Architecture. The test will take approximately five minutes.
Approaches to Web enablement of legacy systems By Martyn Hill, SOA Web Services Journal. Mar. 19, 2006
Robert McIlree: I'm often asked what makes a good architect (enterprise, system, application, etc.) over other business and IT roles in an organization such as business analyst or developers. The key attribute an enterprise architect has is what I'll call balanced abstractionism.
By JP Morgenthal. Column DMReview, January 26, 2006
BenjiSmith . 30. september 2005 on how he got his own general-purpose tool-building factory factory factory when all he wanted was a spicerack.
Recordings from a public meeting. The meeting had two parts. The first was a presentation by Nicholas Gall, VP and Distinguished Analyst at Gartner Research. He talked about OSS, the current state, and trends. It was a preview of a talk to be given at Gartner's Summit the following week. The second part covered user experiences, with presentations by Julie Atkins, Director of IT Operations and Info Security of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, and Michael Askew and Charles Pickelhaupt of Fidelity Investments' Center for Applied Technology.
(In Danish) Et projekt om relationen mellem Enterprise Arkitechture og Knowledge Management.
Do you really know the impact and cost of application changes in your enterprise environment? Column by Michael Jennings published in DM Review Magazine, October 2005 Issue.
Terms such as grid, on-demand, and service-oriented architecture are mired in confusion, but there is an overarching trend behind them all. ACM Queue vol. 3, no. 6 - July/August 2005 by Ian Foster, Argonne National Laboratory and University of Chicago, Steven Tuecke, Univa
Scott Bittler from Meta Group. IT World Canada, 18 May 2005.
This paper by Frank Lillehagen and Dag Karlsen from Computas AS, Norway, presents an overview of current practices and development initiatives in the field of Enterprise Architecture, focusing on their underlying concepts and principles.
Bringing Relevance Back to IT: This website is dedicated to the new realm of IT: the smart, rational and cost-efficient use of information technology resources to achieve a company's business objectives.
ITscout Blog on how Harry G. Frankfurt's On Bullshit applies in EA.
Jeff Tash's ITscout Blog.
Article by John A. Zachman published in DM Review Magazine December 1999 Issue
Dr. Scott A. Bernard, CEO and President of BTMG has developed the Enterprise Architecture Cube (EA3).
Storytelling about Enterprise Transformation, from the McCafferty Chronicles, by Daniel S. Appleton.
EA communities and the home of The Journal of Enterprise Architecture.
The enterprise architecture framework is widely used as a mechanism to manage the development and evolution of architectures. In this article we introduce a generic approach to integrating the SOA framework requirements with existing frameworks. By David Sprott and Lawrence Wilkes
Webinar with Dr. Jeanne Ross, Principal Research Scientist, Center for Information Systems Research (CISR), MIT Sloan School of Management.
Enterprise Unified Process, EUP, is an extension to the RUP.
Natty Gur compiled 10 questions that might help you to get an idea about your enterprise condition.
Jane Carbone: The purpose of undertaking an enterprise architecture assessment is to understand how well the current architecture is aligned with the organizations needs and goals. Here we talk about the value of assessments and outline the steps you need to take.
Helping to Transform EA from Creative "Art" to "Engineering" Discipline. A Partial Application of the General Enterprise Management (GEM) Methodology. Provided by Roy Roebuck, Enterprise Engineer/Architect. One World Information System .
This article by Antoine Lonjon, MEGA International is about the many approaches using process modeling, including BPR, BPM, ABC, and BAM. And then there are standards like XPDL, BPML, and BPEL which are process modeling languages that are dedicated to process execution. And UML, BPMN, BPDM and of course ISO 9000.
Graeme Simsion, Simsion and University of Melbourne. January 2005
Enterprise architecture is not just about mapping and standardizing hardware and software anymore. Now it's about services, events and-get this-good old ROI. CIO Magazine Mar 1,2005
Ziv Baida's Master thesis in computer science from Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. February 2002.
SWOT analysis method and examples, with free SWOT template
Done right, an enterprise architecture allows decentralization of the deployment without a concomitant degradation in interoperability. Phil Windley's Technometria.
Bringing Agility to Architecture, and Architecture to Agility
The alignment between Business Processes (BP) and Information Technologies (IT) is a major issue in most organizations, as it directly impacts on the organization's agility and flexibility to change according to business needs. The concepts upon which alignment is perceived are addressed in what is called today the "Enterprise Architecture", gathering business and IT together. The focus of this paper is to show how alignment between Business and IT can be stated in terms of the components found in most Enterprise Architectures. .NET Architecture Center.
The purpose of this column is to discuss software architecture and software architecture analysis. We will emphasize practical results that can be used by practicing software designers, developers, and other stakeholders involved in developing the architecture of software systems. The Architect, September 1998.
Experience with Global Analysis: A Practical Method for Analyzing Factors that Influence Software Architectures
Robert L. Nord and Dilip Soni of Siemens Corporate Research: A practical method for analyzing the factors that influence software architectures is presented. Factors include organizational context and constraints, available technologies, and product requirements.
Architecture, applied to IT, is usually considered a matter of determining and applying technology choices. The omitted critical part is that the choices are most effective when they suit a firm's strategies and demands. Gartner Group, 14 July 2003, Bill Rosser.
metadata, data architecture, information, knowledge
Jason Briggs: Still, using a wiki for high-level architectural docs and then drilling down to a lower-level system design seems, to me at least, to be somewhat of a dark horse in the software development world.
Column by Clive Finkelstein published in DMReview.com, December 1, 2004
Mehrdad Foroozesh, Ph.D., P.E., President, Inquest Corporation, offers nine action items for EA.
At General Motors enterprise architecture is a dynamic, living process dependent upon integration with related enterprise process disciplines.
From Research and Markets, a $213 EA Toolbox offers a common-sense approach to Enterprise architecture Planning and includes numerous examples of architectures, procedures, checklists and useful guidelines.
Jane Carbone looks at how to create the often-missing link between enterprise architecture and data modeling, through this list of nine Dos and Don'ts.
Executive overview of EA, by Paul Harmon. Introduces Zachman, The Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework,HP Supply Chain, OMG's Model Driven Architecture and BP Trends Enterprise Architecture Pyramid and more. In 14 pages! (PDF)
A Metis Customer Success Story: FDA Leverages Enterprise Architecture to Make Faster, Better Business and IT Budget Decisions
A Metis Customer Success Story: FDA Leverages Enterprise Architecture to Make Faster, Better Business and IT Budget Decisions
An independent site for IT Architects, where youâ€™ll find a wide range of useful resources, including news, articles and information about relevant books, events and training courses.
For investments in enterprise architecture to pay off, they must be based on a clear understanding of the organization. Whatever approach you choose to implement your enterprise strategy, an understanding of Conway's Law can help to make your alignment efforts successful.
The US National Weather Service Enterprise Architecture. By Chief Enterprise Architect Bobby J. Jones and CIO Barry West. January 2004.
Andrew Macaulay of CGEY describes Cap Gemini Ernst & Young's Integrated Architecture Framework, and describes a model for enterprise architecture and its importance in helping software architects understand the business as a whole. (8 printed pages, Microsoft Architect Journal)
Meta Group's Brian Burke says that enterprise architecture must be understood and supported to be successful as a method for designing and implementing change and the city-planning metaphor helps accelerate the understanding and acceptance of architecture.
The integration of business and IT strategies is driving the enterprise architecture planning process. META Group, 1 Jan 2001.
Redhat's CTO Michael Tiemann: "When a private individual mediates an undertaking, however directly connected it may be to the welfare of society, he never thinks of soliciting the cooperation of the government, but he publishes his plan, offers to execute it himself, courts the assistance of other individuals, and struggles manfully against all obstacles. Undoubtedly he is often less successful than the state might have been in his position, but in the end, the sum of these private undertakings far exceeds what the government could have done." -- Alexis de Tocqueville
This white paper is written for business managers and considers what an Enterprise Architecture is, what it consists of, what its benefits are, and why they are becoming increasingly popular. (registration required)
The Global Enterprise Architecture Organisation (GEAO) is a new not-for-profit organisation created by and for professionals who work in the field of Enterprise Architecture.
Scott W. Ambler. Beyond Enterprise Data Modeling - Bringing data professionals and application developers together. When project teams work under the assumption that they can do anything that they want, that they can use any technology that they want, chaos typically results. Functionality and information will be duplicated and reuse will occur sporadically if at all. Systems will not integrate well. Systems will conflict with one another and cause each other to fail. Costs will skyrocket because similar products from different vendors, or even simply different versions of the same product, will be purchased and then operated within production. Although each individual project may be very successful, as a portfolio they may have serious challenges. It doesn%u2019t have to be this way.
With the Zachman Framework Diagram and other informative stuff about John Zachman's work.
New development models and tools compel rethinking of IT design. Peter Coffee in eWeek.com.
Intervista's education courses update IT teams with the latest concepts in learning for Enterprise Architecture, Knowledge Management, Enterprise Integration and Enterprise Portals
This site is a comprehensive reference site and community resource for Enterprise-wide Information Technology Architecture (EWITA) or Enterprise Architecture (EA).
The place to go for Architecture Interoperability Validation.
"Practical SAFE", Software Architect's Toolbox, a book draft by Boris Monin.
Scott W. Ambler: Bringing data professionals and application developers together.
The FEAC Institute is a non-profit organization offering Enterprise eGovernment and Performance solutions that focus on pragmatic Enterprise Architecture hands-on Education and Training.
Interesting information, links and articles about Enterprise Architecture specific for Strategists and Enterprise Architects. Jaap Schekkerman.
As information technology accelerates the pace of business and the economy, CIOs will need to rebuild their companies' computer backbones to keep up, says Gartner Research Vice President W. Roy Schulte.
This FEAPMO-document describes a Federal-wide E-Gov target conceptual architecture, the Common Reference Model. The architecture is based on the business requirements derived from the initiatives as well as system engineering design best practices. It provides a workable description of the components needed by E-Gov Initiatives and business activities to move rapidly into the web service-enabled business transaction environment.
TOGAF is an open framework for defining an IT architecture. It is published by The Open Group.
Various materials from Gartner
Gartner's Alexander Drobik: Integrating enterprise architecture into the business is an issue facing many enterprises. To ensure IT capability is in tune with business needs, enterprises need a new method of synchronizing enterprise architecture with the business.
W3C Working Draft 26 March 2003. The World Wide Web is a networked information system. Web Architecture consists of the requirements, constraints, principles, and design choices that influence the design of the system and the behavior of agents within the system. When followed, the large-scale effect is that of a shared information space. This document organizes the technical discussion of the system in three parts: identification, representation, and interaction. This document also addresses some non-technical (social) issues that contribute to the shared information space.
Comparison between common and agile architectural practices.
Roy Fielding's PhD-dissertation which introduced the concept Representational State Transfer (REST).