2006 International Enterprise Architecture Survey

Get the journal article we wrote about this.

Peter Engelund Christiansen and I are pleased to announce a new report and website: EASurvey.org: International Enterprise Architecture Survey – Trends in Governmental Enterprise Architecture on a National Level.

The report presents key findings from an international survey about governmental EA on a national/federal level conducted earlier this year. 16 countries participated in the survey: Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nothern Ireland, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, the United Kingdom and USA.

The survey documents trends in governmental EA and focuses on eight areas:

  • EA motivation
  • Achieved goals and barriers
  • EA measurement
  • EA process
  • EA framework
  • EA tool
  • EA governance
  • Existing EA assets

The key findings are:

EA on a national level is emerging fast
93.3% of the participating governments are already having – or planning to have within the next two years – a national EA program. Only one government does not have any future plans incorporating a national EA program.

Limited realisation of EA goals
54% of the governments with national EA programs have experienced the achievement of EA goals.

The lack of skilled staff is considered as the greatest barrier against the achievement of EA goals
55% of the governments report “lack of skilled staff” as the greatest barrier against the achievement of EA goals.

Less than half of the governments are measuring EA program performance
Accordingly, less that one half of the governments are using key performance indicators.

Less than one fifth of the governments are calculating the ratio EA benefits to cost
18% of the governments, Japan and Taiwan, are calculating the total expenditures in EA, the total amount gained from EA and the ratio EA benefits to costs.

Less than one fifth of the governments have mandated their EA programs via legislation
18% of the governments, USA and Korea, have national EA programs that are mandated by legislation.

Less than one third of the governments know whether their publicized EA processes are used
72% of the participating governments have publicized guidelines describing an EA process. 29% of those governments do not know whether the guidelines are used or not.

We conclude with some calls to action:

  • Define clear and measurable EA goals
  • Do not uncritically buy the vendors ‘Ten steps to successful EA’ and expect the world to change in any advantageous direction
  • Measure EA performance to ensure progress and ultimately EA success
  • Calculate EA expenses-/earnings to enable communication in a monetary terminology; it becomes necessary
  • Do not make the mistakes of the past
  • Do not isolate an EA team and expect them to generate value-adding EA

The survey is endorsed by the Association of Enterprise Architects (a|EA), but a|EA does not necessarily agree with our calls to action.

The bulk of the work was done by Peter in his Master of IT thesis project, which explains the survey in excruciating levels of detail, and which is as clear an A+ as I’ve ever seen and supervised. I helped connecting Peter to the survey I started two years ago, and introduced him to relevant respondents around the world. After the exams, we have worked together on quality assurance and recommendations, but Peter should really get all the credit.

Get the journal article we wrote about this.

, , , , , ,
Previous Post
WordPressing GotzeBlogged
Next Post
Openize Denmark, Parliament Orders

Related Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Fill out this field
Fill out this field
Please enter a valid email address.

Menu
';