The next number of JEA will contain around 41859 words! We are still working on getting it all together, aiming at getting it out in early-mid May.
I am very pleased to announce that JEA has been awarded formal ISSNs by the US Library of Congress:
ISSN 2166-6792 (Online)
ISSN 2166-6768 (Print)
John Gøtze introduces this number.
Architect in the Spotlight: Tom Graves
Interview with Tom Graves.
Reinterpreting TOGAF’s Enterprise Architecture Principles Using a Cybernetic Lens
Mohammad Esmaeil Zadeh, Gary Millar and Edward Lewis
In the literature, there are many definitions of Enterprise Architecture (EA), but most of them have three items in common: elements, relationships and principles. Among these, principles represent an essential element in the definition of EA, and some researchers posit that they are the main element in this definition. However, despite the recent advances in defining enterprise architecture principles (EAPs), this notion is suffering from the lack of a theoretical foundation that provides a logical framework for defining them. Stafford Beer’s Viable System Model (VSM) and its application to IT governance, the Viable Governance Model (VGM), have shown to be comprehensive blueprints for designing viable organizations and IT governance arrangements, respectively. Similarly, in recent realizations of EA, the design of the whole organization, and not just the IT, is brought into consideration. Therefore, this paper aims to establish whether the laws and principles of cybernetics, especially those embodied in the VSM and the VGM, can provide a sound theoretical basis for deriving EA principles. This paper investigates the principles defined in the Open Group’s TOGAF based on the theoretical concepts drawn from the VSM/VGM and cybernetics more broadly. This investigation demonstrates that the principles in TOGAF can be derived from the laws and principles of cybernetics.
The Social Dimension of Enterprise Architecture in Government
Citizens’ rising demands and expectations concerning both the quality and equality of public services are increasing pressure on the Finnish public administration to improve its efficiency and responsiveness. An enacted act on Information Management Governance in public administration declares Enterprise Architecture (abbreviated EA) as a central tool for developing administration’s services. EA is seen as a strategic management tool standardising the development of administration and exploitation of Information and Communication Technologies (abbreviated ICT). The new act demands agencies to apply EA yet there exists relatively limited knowledge and experience of the concept. Since EA is an abstract and complex tool there is great risk that the expectations put on EA are not met. The large numbers of agencies demanded to apply this tool increases the significance of the problem. This article is based on a case study research where the goal was to identify issues of EA use and adoption, to gain understanding why these issues exist and to recommend ways of improving the perceived value of EA. The focus was on the social dimension of alignment since most existing studies have emphasised the technical dimension. The study approaches the problem from the perspective of strategic management and organisational learning. EA is treated as a mechanism and a strategy tool to enable alignment of business and IT. EA adoption presents a learning challenge to an organisation – it has to learn the intellectual content but more importantly, it has to learn how to cooperate and share information across functional, hierarchical and professional boundaries.
Measuring the Realization of Benefits from Enterprise Architecture Management
Matthias Lange, Jan Mendling and Jan Recker
Enterprise architecture management (EAM) has become an intensively discussed approach to manage enterprise transformations. While many organizations employ EAM, a notable insecurity about the value of EAM remains. In this paper*, we propose a model to measure the realization of benefits from EAM. We identify EAM success factors and EAM benefits through a comprehensive literature review and eleven explorative expert interviews. Based on our findings, we integrate the EAM success factors and benefits with the established DeLone & McLean IS success model resulting in a model that explains the realization of EAM benefits. This model aids organizations as a benchmark and framework for identifying and assessing the setup of their EAM initiatives and whether and how EAM benefits are materialized. We see our model also as a first step to gain insights in and start a discussion on the theory of EAM benefit realization.
Enterprise Architecture, IT Service Management and Service Oriented Architecture: Relationships, Approaches and Operative Guidelines. Part 1
Enterprise Architecture, IT Service Management (and Governance) and Service Oriented Architecture are current topics, widely discussed in the information technology departments and professional publications. In addition, many companies have been (or are) involved with the adoption of at least one of these innovations. While each of these elements can be considered in its own right, it is in their relationships, and more or less strong intersections, that interesting opportunities and synergies can emerge, potentially even with some specific issues to manage. The focus of this two-part article is just that: to show the relationships, approaches and operative guidelines related to the synergic adoption in an IT organization and/or in an Enterprise of concepts from the Enterprise Architecture (EA), IT Service Management (ITSM) and Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) domains.
An Enterprise Framework for Operationally Effective System of Systems Design
Joseph Bobinis and Thomas Herald
This paper proposes a transformation of traditional engineering design methods for Enabling System Design from “influence” to “synthesis” through an enterprise focus of both the primary system functionality as well as the required enabling systems, concurrently during design. An architectural transformation is required to improve the affordable, full life cycle operational effectiveness of customer solutions. Challenged is the notion of the primary and enabling support systems as separate in achieving enterprise operational effectiveness. Enterprise-level, integrated requirements and trade studies drive optimal user performance while still embracing the independent development of each system. This work proposes that operational effectiveness can be enhanced through leverage of an enterprise framework of primary and enabling systems entitled: Systems of Systems – System Design for Operational Effectiveness (SOS-SDOE). The initial driver of this research began with improving the Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition and sustainment of complex and network-centric systems. The description of traditional approaches to design are framed by industrial and commercial methods, the International Council on Systems Engineering methods and the recent evolution for sustainment represented by System Design and Operational Effectiveness (SDOE) model from military and academic literature. The framework proposes performing a System of Systems (SOS) trade-space analysis as a logical extension of proven traditional methods. To convey this message, a soft system analysis, using systemigram methods developed by Dr. John Boardman, is implemented to examine the transition from the traditional practices to address customer and user needs with SOS-SDOE. The SOS-SDOE enterprise framework emerges from expanding the system design boundary to capture the causal relationships, which are relevant to system operational effectiveness. There is a shared contribution of primary and enabling systems and in the framework, creates a more complete trade space that facilitates improved long-term user effectiveness. The SOS-SDOE architectural framework embraces and captures the emergent system behaviors of the combined enterprise in addition to the traditional behaviors of the independent systems. In an attempt to address the historically persistent problem of measuring and improving operational effectiveness, this approach embraces the fundamentals of an enterprise system framework: 1. Structured and explicit relational views, through the use of Systemigram representations, which provide an accepted methodology for communicating information about the relationships, which are relevant to the architectural objective of managing the causal mechanisms which effect operational outcomes of an enterprise; 2. Explicit methods and trade space definitions which enable the system design discipline to gather and organize the data and construct the design solution in ways that help ensure integrity, accuracy and completeness of the design over its life cycle; and 3. Abstracting of empirical and heuristic phenomenon (system behaviors) in support of the method and as a utility verification of the framework.
Making Use of a Target Technical Architecture to Support Acquisition Business Decisions
Russell S. Boyd and Brian Boynton
Enterprise architecture (EA) documents current conditions, future visions, and the transition plan between them. It pertains to and encompasses one or all of the following: programs, offices, segments, solutions, departments, lines of business, and agencies. IT acquisition management (ITAM) includes the set of tasks required to accomplish the directed and funded efforts to provide a new, improved, or continuing information system or services capability to satisfy a business need. Thus, an EA contains business operation information for decision support and communication and informs decision-makers about what technology to acquire and when. This article illustrates how a technical architecture can both provide a clear picture of the technical goals that lie ahead for the enterprise, as well as providing decision support to selecting and acquiring a product that will help satisfy the organizational requirements and scheduling needs.
Book Review: Managed Evolution
Michael Linke reviews Managed Systems: A Strategy for Very Large Information Systems by Stephan Murer and Bruno Bonati.
As a quarterly journal, JEA is always open for new contributions. JEA reaches a large number of enterprise architects, and is a great platform for sharing experiences and contribute to the growing body of knowledge in enterprise architecture as a discipline and profession.
When preparing your manuscript, please follow the format guidelines. And when submitting it, please fill out this submission form.