Revision as of 16:50, 31 January 2008 editHipal (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers137,929 edits Undid revision 187493635 by Lockezachman (talk) per WP:EL, WP:SPAM, WP:NOT#LINK, WP:COI← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:46, 24 December 2024 edit undoCurb Safe Charmer (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers77,228 edits Undid revision 1264668644 by 81.101.211.70 (talk) Rv citation to article not otherwise widely cited or by renowned academic - see https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Kp-iDA0AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=aoTag: Undo | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Business function methodology}} | |||
{{Otheruses4|Enterprise Architecture|the UML modeling tool Enterprise Architect|Sparx Enterprise Architect}} | |||
'''Enterprise Architecture''' is the description of the current and/or future structure and behavior of an organization's processes, information systems, personnel and organizational sub-units, aligned with the organization's core goals and strategic direction. Although often associated strictly with ], it relates more broadly to the practice of business ] in that it addresses ], ], ] and ] as well. | |||
{{Use mdy dates|date=December 2014}} | |||
Modelling the Enterprise Architecture is becoming a common practice within the ] ] to inform the Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process. The ] (FEA) reference models serve as a framework to guide Federal Agencies in the development of their architectures. The primary purpose of creating an enterprise architecture is to ensure that business strategy and ] investments are aligned. As such, enterprise architecture allows traceability from the business strategy down to the underlying technology. | |||
'''Enterprise architecture''' ('''EA''') is a business function concerned with the structures and behaviours of a business, especially business roles and processes that create and use business ]. The international definition according to the Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations is "a well-defined practice for conducting ] analysis, design, planning, and implementation, using a comprehensive approach at all times, for the successful development and execution of strategy. Enterprise architecture applies architecture principles and practices to guide organizations through the business, information, process, and ]s necessary to execute their strategies. These practices utilize the various aspects of an enterprise to identify, motivate, and achieve these changes."<ref name=feapo>{{cite journal|url=http://feapo.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Common-Perspectives-on-Enterprise-Architecture-Final-1-copy.pdf|title=Common Perspectives on Enterprise Architecture|journal=Architecture and Governance Magazine|volume=9|issue=4|date=November 2013|page=1|access-date=2023-03-04}}</ref> | |||
The ] is an example of an organization that practices EA, in this case with its ] processes.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/E-Gov/ea_success.aspx|title=EA-Success|year=2010|publisher=The White House|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100430152712/http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/E-Gov/ea_success.aspx|archive-date=2010-04-30}}</ref> Companies such as ], ], ],<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://lawaspect.com/volkswagen-america-managing/|title=Volkswagen of America: Managing IT Priorities|last1=Austin|first1=Robert D.|last2=Ritchie|first2=Warren|last3=Garrett|first3=Greggory|journal=Harvard Business Review|date=2005-10-05}}</ref> and ] also use EA to improve their business architectures as well as to improve ] and ]. Additionally, the ]'s reference guide aids federal agencies in the development of their architectures.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/fea_docs/FEA_Practice_Guidance_Nov_2007.pdf|title=FEA Practice Guidance Federal Enterprise Architecture Program Management Office OMB|date=November 2007|publisher=The White House|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101016043354/http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/fea_docs/FEA_Practice_Guidance_Nov_2007.pdf|archive-date=2010-10-16}}</ref> | |||
Companies such as ], ] and ] also have applied enterprise architecture to improve their business architectures as well as to improve business performance and productivity. | |||
==Introduction== | |||
==Enterprise Architecture methodology== | |||
As a discipline, EA "proactively and holistically lead enterprise responses to disruptive forces by identifying and analyzing the execution of change" towards organizational goals. EA gives business and IT leaders recommendations for policy adjustments and provides best strategies to support and enable business development and change within the information systems the business depends on. EA provides a guide for ] towards these objectives.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gartner.com/it-glossary/enterprise-architecture-ea/|title=Enterprise Architecture (EA) |publisher=Gartner |access-date=July 29, 2013}}</ref> The ]'s EA best practice guidance states that an EA typically "takes the form of a comprehensive set of cohesive models that describe the structure and functions of an enterprise. The individual models in an EA are arranged in a logical manner that provides an ever-increasing level of detail about the enterprise."<ref>{{cite book|last=Jarvis|first=Bob|title=Enterprise Architecture: Understanding the Bigger Picture – A Best Practice Guide for Decision Makers in IT|publisher=The UK National Computing Centre|location=Manchester, England, United Kingdom|page=9|year=2003}}</ref> | |||
Important players within EA include enterprise architects and solutions architects. Enterprise architects are at the top level of the architect hierarchy, meaning they have more responsibilities than solutions architects. While solutions architects focus on their own relevant solutions, enterprise architects focus on solutions for and the impact on the whole organization. Enterprise architects oversee many solution architects and business functions. As practitioners of EA, enterprise architects support an organization's strategic vision by acting to align people, process, and technology decisions with actionable goals and objectives that result in quantifiable improvements toward achieving that vision. The practice of EA "analyzes areas of common activity within or between organizations, where information and other resources are exchanged to guide future states from an integrated viewpoint of strategy, business, and technology."<ref>{{cite web |work=Enterprise Architecture Book of Knowledge|title=Planning an EA – Purpose|url=http://www2.mitre.org/public/eabok/planning_an_ea/purpose.html |publisher=Mitre Corporation |access-date=2014-10-03|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131001215616/http://www2.mitre.org/public/eabok/planning_an_ea/purpose.html|archive-date=2013-10-01}}</ref> | |||
The Practice of Enterprise Architecture involves developing an ] to describe a series of "current", "intermediate" and "target" reference architectures and applying them to align change within the enterprise. Another set of terms for these are "as-is", "to-be" and the "migration plan". | |||
===Definitions=== | |||
These frameworks detail all relevant structure within the organization including business, applications, technology and data. This framework will provide a rigorous ] and ] that clearly identifies what processes a business performs and detailed information about how those processes are executed. The end product is a set of ] that describe in varying degrees of detail exactly what and how a business operates and what resources are required. These artifacts are often ]. | |||
The term ''enterprise'' can be defined as an ], ], or collection of organizations that share a set of common goals and collaborate to provide specific products or services to customers.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iiba.org/babok-guide.aspx|title=Business Analysis Body of Knowledge|publisher=International Institute of Business Analysis|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170624233443/http://www.iiba.org/babok-guide.aspx|archive-date=2017-06-24}}</ref> In that sense, the term enterprise covers various types of organizations, regardless of their size, ownership model, operational model, or geographical distribution. It includes those organizations' complete ],<ref name="Giachetti">{{cite book|last=Giachett|first=R.E.|title=Design of Enterprise Systems, Theory, Architecture, and Methods|publisher=CRC Press|location=Boca Raton, Florida, USA|year=2010}}</ref> including people, information, processes, and technologies. Enterprise as a sociotechnical system defines the scope of EA. | |||
Given these descriptions whose levels of detail will vary according to affordability and other practical considerations, decision makers can make informed decisions about where to invest resources, where to realign organizational goals and processes and what policies and procedures will support core missions or business functions. | |||
The term ''architecture'' refers to fundamental concepts or properties of a system in its environment; and embodied in its elements, relationships, and in the principles of its design and evolution.<ref name="ISO42010">{{cite web|url=https://www.iso.org/standard/50508.html|title=ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011: Systems and software engineering — Architecture description|date=2011-11-24|publisher=International Organization for Standardization|access-date=2023-03-04}}</ref> A methodology for developing and using architecture to guide the ] from a baseline state to a target state, sometimes through several transition states, is usually known as an ]. A framework provides a structured collection of processes, techniques, ], reference models, and guidance for the production and use of an enterprise-specific architecture description.{{citation needed|date=March 2023}} | |||
A strong enterprise architecture process helps to answer basic questions like: | |||
Paramount to ''changing'' the EA is the identification of a ]. Their mission, ], strategy, and the governance framework define all roles, responsibilities, and relationships involved in the anticipated transformation. Changes considered by enterprise architects typically include innovations in the structure or processes of an organization; innovations in the use of information systems or technologies; the integration and/or ] of business processes; and improvement of the quality and timeliness of business information.{{citation needed|date=March 2023}} | |||
*Is the current architecture supporting and adding value to the organization? | |||
*How might an architecture be modified so that it adds more value to the organization? | |||
*Based on what we know about what the organization wants to accomplish in the future, will the current architecture support or hinder that? | |||
According to the standard ],<ref name="ISO42010"/> the product used to describe the architecture of a system is called an ''architectural description''. In practice, an architectural description contains a variety of lists, tables, and diagrams. These are models known as '']''. In the case of EA, these models describe the logical business functions or capabilities, ]es, human roles and actors, the physical organization structure, ]s and ]s, ]s and platform applications, hardware, and communications infrastructure.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kotusev|first1=Svyatoslav|last2=Kurnia|first2=Sherah|date=2021-09-01|title=The theoretical basis of enterprise architecture: A critical review and taxonomy of relevant theories|url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0268396220977873|journal=Journal of Information Technology|language=en|volume=36|issue=3|pages=275–315|doi=10.1177/0268396220977873|s2cid=230545944 |issn=0268-3962}}</ref> | |||
A value-based approach to implementing an enterprise architecture is recommended in order to realize quick wins, most notably when the team is first being formed. An analysis of key questions as listed above that provide the most value in an organization should lead the enterprise architecture team towards their highest priority tasks. Teams that spend too much time documenting the plan, without providing real value to decision makers, will be at risk of being disbanded. | |||
The first use of the term "enterprise architecture" is often incorrectly attributed to ]'s 1987 ''A framework for information systems architecture''.<ref name=zachman>{{cite journal|last=Zachman|first=John A.|title=A framework for information systems architecture.|journal=IBM Systems Journal|edition=reprint|year=1999|volume=38|issue=2/3|pages=454–470|doi=10.1147/sj.382.0454|s2cid=12191060 }}</ref> The first publication to use it was instead a ] (NIST) Special Publication<ref name="NIST SP 500-167">{{cite journal|last=Fong|first=E. N.|author2=Goldfine, E.H.|title=Information management directions: the integration challenge.|journal=SIGMOD Record|date=December 1989|volume= 18|issue= 4|pages=40–43|url=http://www.itl.nist.gov/lab/specpubs/NIST%20SP%20500-167.pdf|doi=10.1145/74120.74125|s2cid=23939840}}</ref> on the challenges of information system integration.{{citation needed|date=March 2023}} The NIST article describes EA as consisting of several levels. ] is the top level and might be a total corporate entity or a sub-unit. It establishes for the whole organization necessary frameworks for "satisfying both internal information needs" as well as the needs of external entities, which include ], ], and ]. The lower levels of the EA that provide information to higher levels are more attentive to detail on behalf of their superiors. In addition to this structure, business unit architecture establishes ], ], and ]s that either enhance or stymie the organization's mission.<ref name="NIST SP 500-167"/> | |||
Implementing Enterprise Architecture generally starts with documenting the organization's strategy and goals. One part of this work is the company's ], which describes how the company wants to operate. What are the requirements for Business Process Standardization and Integration. | |||
The main difference between these two definitions is that Zachman's concept was the creation of individual information systems optimized for business, while NIST's described the management of all information systems within a business unit. The definitions in both publications, however, agreed that due to the "increasing size and complexity of the mplementations of nformation systems... logical construct (or architecture) for defining and controlling the interfaces and... ntegration of all the components of a system" is necessary. Zachman in particular urged for a "] ]."<ref name=zachman/> | |||
The architecture process addresses documenting and understanding the discrete enterprise structural components, typically within the following four categories: | |||
# '''Business:''' | |||
##Strategy maps, goals, corporate policies, ] | |||
##Functional decompositions (e.g. ], ]), capabilities and organizational models | |||
##]es | |||
##Organization cycles, periods and timing | |||
##Suppliers of ], ], and services | |||
# '''Applications:''' | |||
##] inventories and diagrams | |||
##] - that is: events, messages and data flows | |||
##], ], ], ], ] links with parties within and outside of the organization | |||
# '''Information:''' | |||
##] | |||
##]s: conceptual, logical, and physical | |||
# '''Technical:''' | |||
##Hardware, platforms, and hosting: ]s, and where they are kept | |||
##] and ]s, ] connectivity diagrams | |||
##] | |||
##] software: ]s, ], etc.. | |||
==Overview== | |||
Wherever possible, all of the above should be related explicitly to the organization's strategy, goals, and operations for planning and decision-making needs. The enterprise architecture is most useful when documenting the current state of the technical components listed above, as well as an ideal-world desired future state (Reference Architecture) and finally a "Target" future state which is the result of tradeoffs and compromises vs. the ideal state. Special software is available and becoming increasingly mature to handle the complex task of mapping the enterprise structure. | |||
===Schools of thought=== | |||
Within the field of enterprise architecture, there are three overarching schools: Enterprise IT Design, Enterprise Integrating, and Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption. Which school one subscribes to will impact how they see the EA's purpose and scope, as well as the means of achieving it, the skills needed to conduct it, and the locus of responsibility for conducting it.<ref name="Lapalme">{{cite journal|last=Lapalme|first=J.|title=Three Schools of Thought on Enterprise Architecture|journal=IT Professional|volume=14|number=6|pages=37–43|date=November 2012|doi=10.1109/MITP.2011.109|s2cid=206469705 }}</ref> | |||
Under Enterprise IT Design, the main purpose of EA is to guide the process of planning and designing an enterprise's ]/] capabilities to meet the desired organizational objectives, often by greater alignment between IT/IS and business concerns. Architecture proposals and decisions are limited to the IT/IS aspects of the enterprise and other aspects service only as inputs. The Enterprise Integrating school believes that the purpose of EA is to create a greater coherency between the various concerns of an enterprise (HR, IT, Operations, etc.), including the link between strategy formulation and execution. Architecture proposals and decisions here encompass all aspects of the enterprise. The Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption school states that the purpose of EA is to foster and maintain the learning capabilities of enterprises so they may be sustainable. Consequently, a great deal of emphasis is put on improving the capabilities of the enterprise to improve itself, to innovate, and to coevolve with its environment. Typically, proposals and decisions encompass both the enterprise and its environment. | |||
Such exhaustive mapping of IT dependencies has notable overlaps with both ] in the general IT sense, and with the ] concept of the ]. Maintaining the accuracy of such data can be a significant challenge. CMDBs are for managing the current state effectively, while EA repositories are employed for corporate project and strategic planning exercises. | |||
===Benefits, challenges, and criticisms=== | |||
] is the key process to keep organizational changes on target for meeting articulated goals and strategies defining the future state of the enterprise. Governance can be applied in various strengths from strongly enforced policies, to more subtle means such as the agreement and declaration of IT principles. | |||
The benefits of EA are achieved through its direct and indirect contributions to organizational goals.<ref>{{cite report|author1=Vasilis Boucharas|author2=Marlies van Steenbergen|author3=Slinger Jansen|author4=Sjaak Brinkkemper|title=The Contribution of Enterprise Architecture to the Achievement of Organizational Goals: Establishing the Enterprise Architecture Benefits Framework, Technical Report|publisher=Department of Information and Computing Sciences at Utrecht University|location=Utrecht, The Netherlands|url=http://www.cs.uu.nl/research/techreps/repo/CS-2010/2010-014.pdf|access-date=November 29, 2014|archive-date=July 4, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220704121626/http://www.cs.uu.nl/research/techreps/repo/CS-2010/2010-014.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> Notable benefits include support in the areas related to design and re-design of the organizational structures during mergers, acquisitions, or general organizational change;<ref>{{cite book|chapter=Effects of an architectural approach to the implementation of shared service centers|author1=Bert Arnold|author2=Martin Op 't Land|author-link2=Martin Op 't Land|author3=Jan Dietz|author-link3=Jan Dietz|title=Financecom05: Second international workshop on Enterprise, applications and services in the finance industry|editor1=Fethi Rabhi|editor2=Daniel Veit|editor3=Christof Weinhardt|year=2005|publisher=Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers|location=Regensburg, Germany}}</ref><ref name=schekkerman>{{cite report|title=Trends in enterprise architecture 2005: How are organizations progressing?|publisher=Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments|url=https://silo.tips/download/trends-in-enterprise-architecture|last=Schekkerman|first=Jaap|author-link=Jaap Schekkerman|page=33}}</ref><ref name=bucher>{{cite report|title=Enterprise architecture analysis and application: An exploratory study|last1=Bucher|first1=T.|last2=Fischer|first2=R.|last3=Kurpjuweit|first3=S.|last4=Winter|first4=Robert|author-link4=Robert Winter (business theorist)|publisher=EDOC Workshop TEAR|location=Hong Kong, China|year=2006}}</ref><ref name=nilsson>{{cite report|title=Management of technochange in an interorganizational E-government project|publisher=Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences|last=Nilsson|first=Andreas|year=2008|page=209}}</ref> enforcement of discipline and business process standardization, and enablement of process consolidation, reuse, and ];<ref name=varnus>{{cite report|title=TOGAF 9 enterprise architecture survey results|last1=Varnus|first1=J.|last2=Panaich|first2=N.|publisher=23rd Enterprise Architecture Practitioners Conference|url=http://opengroup.org/public/member/proceedings/q309/q309a/Presentations/pl-varnus-panaich.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://archive.opengroup.org/public/member/proceedings/q309/q309a/Presentations/pl-varnus-panaich.pdf|date=2009-07-20|archive-date=2009-07-20}}</ref><ref name=rossweill>{{cite report|title=Understanding the benefits of enterprise architecture|last1=Ross|first1=J.W.|last2=Weill|first2=P.|year=2005|publisher=CISR Research Briefings|volume=V|number=2B}}</ref> support for investment decision-making and work prioritization;<ref name=schekkerman/><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Quartel |first1=Dick |last2=Steen |first2=Maarten W.A. |last3=Lankhorst |first3=Marc M. |date=2012-05-01 |title=Application and project portfolio valuation using enterprise architecture and business requirements modelling |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2011.625571 |journal=Enterprise Information Systems |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=189–213 |doi=10.1080/17517575.2011.625571 |bibcode=2012EntIS...6..189Q |s2cid=28199240 |issn=1751-7575}}</ref><ref name=bucher/> enhancement of collaboration and communication between ]s and contribution to efficient ] and to defining more complete and consistent project ]s;<ref name=nilsson/><ref name=varnus/> and an increase in the timeliness of ] and the accuracy of requirement definitions through publishing of the EA documentation.<ref>{{cite report|chapter=Architecture-driven requirements engineering|last1=Engelsman|first1=W.|last2=Iacob|first2=M.E.|last3=Franken|first3=H.M.|last4=Jonkers|first4=J.|title=Advances in Enterprise Engineering II |series=Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing |publisher=Proceedings of the 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing|location=Honolulu, Hawaii, USA|year=2009|volume=28 |pages=285–286|doi=10.1007/978-3-642-01859-6_8|isbn=978-3-642-01858-9 }}</ref> | |||
Other benefits include contribution to ] and efficient resource allocation during system development and testing;<ref name=schekkerman/><ref name=bucher/> enforcement of discipline and standardization of IT planning activities and contribution to a reduction in time for technology-related decision making;<ref name=bucher/><ref name=rossweill/> reduction of the system's implementation and operational costs, and minimization of replicate infrastructure services across business units;<ref name=rossweill/><ref name=kappelman>{{cite report|title=Enterprise Architecture: Charting the Territory for Academic Research|last1=Kappelman|first1=Leon|last2=McGinnis|first2=Tom|last3=Pettite|first3=Alex|last4=Sidorova|first4=Anna|year=2008|publisher=AMCIS 2008 Proceedings|url=https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2008/162/}}</ref> reduction in IT complexity, consolidation of data and applications, and improvement of ] of the systems;<ref name=varnus/><ref name=rossweill/><ref name=kappelman/> more ] and ] IT as reflected through increased accessibility of data for ], and increased transparency of infrastructure changes;<ref name=rossweill/><ref>{{cite journal|title=Managing information security in a business network of machinery maintenance services business - Enterprise architecture as a coordination tool|last1=Pulkkinen|first1=M.|last2=Luostarinen|first2=K.|last3=Naumenko|first3=A.|journal=Journal of Systems and Software|volume=80|issue=10|pages=1607–1620|year=2007|doi=10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.044}}</ref> and a reduction of ] from system failures and security breaches. EA also helps reduce risks of project delivery.<ref name=rossweill/><ref>{{cite report|title=Enterprise architecture expands its role in strategic business transformation: Infosys enterprise architecture survey 2008/2009|last1=Obitz|first1=T.|last2=Babu|first2=M.K.|publisher=Infosys|year=2009}}</ref> Establishing EA as an accepted, recognized, functionally integrated and fully involved concept at operational and tactical levels is one of the biggest challenges facing Enterprise Architects today and one of the main reasons why many EA initiatives fail.<ref>{{cite journal|title=FEAMI: A Methodology to include and to integrate Enterprise Architecture Processes into Existing Organizational Processes|last=Dedic|first=N.|year=2020|journal=IEEE Engineering Management Review|volume=48|issue=4|pages=160–166 |doi=10.1109/EMR.2020.3031968|s2cid=226351029 }}</ref> | |||
Enterprise Architecture requires appropriate positioning in the organization to be successful. One such analogy of city-planning is often referenced for enterprise architecture groups. A common issue for groups that are granted too much authority is becoming known as an "Ivory Tower" group, alienating the teams involved in following architectural governance. A combination of a federated and a small enterprise team can be the most successful implementation, with a focus on democratic instead of authoritarian team involvement.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} | |||
A key concern about EA has been the difficulty in arriving at ] because of the broad-brush and often opaque nature of EA projects.<ref>{{cite thesis|title=Measuring Enterprise Architecture Effectiveness: A Focus on Key Performance Indicators|last=Günther|first=Wendy Arianne|date=August 2014|url=http://liacs.leidenuniv.nl/assets/Masterscripties/ICTiB/Gunther-Wendy-non-confidential.pdf|type=Master's thesis|publisher=Universiteit Leiden|access-date=2023-03-04}}</ref> Additionally, there have been a number of reports, including those written by ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.ivarjacobson.com/ea-failed-big-way/|title=EA Failed Big Way!|last=Jacobson|first=Ivar|author-link=Ivar Jacobson|date=2007-10-18|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160401150639/http://blog.ivarjacobson.com/ea-failed-big-way/|archive-date=2016-04-01}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=498188&tab=overview|title=Gartner Enterprise Architecture Summit: Architecting the Agile Organization, 26 – 27 September 2007|publisher=Gartner|year=2007|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070806135856/http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=498188&tab=overview|archive-date=2007-08-06}}</ref> ] and ],<ref>{{cite report|url=http://www.computerworld.com.au/whitepaper/370709/why-two-thirds-of-enterprise-architecture-projects-fail/?type=other&arg=0&location=art_related|title=Why Two Thirds of Enterprise Architecture Projects Fail|last1=Roeleven|first1=S.|last2=Broer|first2=J.|year=2010|publisher=ARIS|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131113181849/http://www.computerworld.com.au/whitepaper/370709/why-two-thirds-of-enterprise-architecture-projects-fail/?type=other&arg=0&location=art_related|archive-date=2013-11-13}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/09/fixing_enterprise_architecture.php|title=Fixing Enterprise Architecture: Balancing the Forces of Change in the Modern Organization|last=Hinchcliffe|first=Dion|date=2009-09-03|publisher=ebiz|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090906013021/http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/09/fixing_enterprise_architecture.php|archive-date=2009-09-06}}</ref> and ],<ref>{{cite report|url=http://www.ech-bpm.ch/sites/default/files/articles/why_doesnt_the_federal_enterprise_architecture_work.pdf|title=Why Doesn't the FEA Work?|last=Gaver|first=Stanley|publisher=Technology Matters, Inc.|year=2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160611170127/http://www.ech-bpm.ch/sites/default/files/articles/why_doesnt_the_federal_enterprise_architecture_work.pdf|archive-date=2016-06-11}}</ref> that argue that the frequent failure of EA initiatives makes the concept not worth the effort and that the methodology will fade out quickly. | |||
An intermediate outcome of implementing an enterprise architecture process is a comprehensive inventory of business strategy, business processes, organizational charts, technical inventories, system and interface diagrams, and network topologies, and the explicit relationships between them. The inventories and diagrams are tools to support decision making at all levels of the organization. It is key that the information remain current to be relevant and useful; a process must exist to keep the information "evergreen." | |||
==Relationship to other disciplines== | |||
The organization must design and implement processes that ensure continual movement from the current state to the future state, keeping the details current. The future state planning will generally be a combination of one or more: | |||
According to the Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations (FEAPO), EA interacts with a wide array of other disciplines commonly found in business settings such as ] and ], ] and ], ] and ], ], IT strategic planning, ], ], ], ], ], ], and ].<ref name=feapo/><ref>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.forrester.com/clay_richardson/13-04-12-design_thinking_reshapes_ea_for_dynamic_business|title=Design Thinking Reshapes EA For Dynamic Business|date=2013-04-12|publisher=Forrester|last=Richardson|first=Clay|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130419011441/http://blogs.forrester.com/clay_richardson/13-04-12-design_thinking_reshapes_ea_for_dynamic_business|archive-date=2013-04-19}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/gartner-urges-more-design-thinking-to-break-enterprise-architecture-out-of-its-silo/|title=Gartner urges more 'design thinking' to break enterprise architecture out of its silo|last=McKendrick|first=Joe|date=2010-05-19|publisher=ZDNet|access-date=2023-03-04}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.forrester.com/information_management/2010/02/who-owns-information-architecture-all-of-us.html|title=Who Owns Information Architecture? All Of Us.|last=Owens|first=Leslie|date=2010-02-02|publisher=Forrester|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100205132536/http://blogs.forrester.com/information_management/2010/02/who-owns-information-architecture-all-of-us.html|archive-date=2010-02-05}}</ref> The EA of an organization is too complex and extensive to document in its entirety, so ] techniques provide a way to explore and analyze these hidden, tacit, or implicit areas. In return, EA provides a way of documenting the components of an organization and their interaction in a systemic and holistic way that complements knowledge management.<ref>{{cite book|title=Information First - Integrating Knowledge and Information Architecture for Business Advantage|last1=Evernden|first1=Elaine|last2=Evernden|first2=Roger|author2-link=Roger Evernden|publisher=Butterworth-Heinemann|location=Oxford, England, UK|year=2003|isbn=978-0-7506-5858-4}}</ref> | |||
*Closing gaps that are present between the ''current'' organization strategy and the ability of the IT organization to support it | |||
*Closing gaps that are present between the ''desired future'' organization strategy and the ability of the IT organization to support it | |||
*Necessary upgrades and replacements that must be made to the IT infrastructure using lifecycle management practices for infrastructure and technologies employed, to address ever changing regulatory requirements, and other initiatives not driven explicitly by any single team in the organization's functional management. One such example is ], an ideal candidate for enterprise architecture team leadership. | |||
In various venues,<ref>{{cite web|title=Service Oriented Architecture : SOA and Enterprise Architecture|url=http://www.opengroup.org/soa/source-book/soa/soa_ea.htm|publisher=The Open Group|access-date=December 18, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150110073815/http://www.opengroup.org/soa/source-book/soa/soa_ea.htm|archive-date=January 10, 2015|url-status=dead|df=mdy-all}}</ref> EA has been discussed as having a relationship with ] (SOA), a particular style of application integration. Research points to EA promoting the use of SOA as an enterprise-wide integration pattern.<ref>{{cite report|title=The Role of Service Oriented Architecture as an enabler for Enterprise Architecture|last1=Kistasamy|first1=Christopher|last2=van der Merwe|first2=Alta|last3=de la Harpe|first3=Andre|year=2012|publisher=AMCIS 2012 Proceedings|location=Seattle, Washington, USA|url=https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2012/proceedings/EnterpriseSystems/4/}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/articles/soa/rosa-sampaio-soa-gov-2080776.html|title=SOA Governance Through Enterprise Architecture|last1=Rosa|first1=Manuel|last2=de Oliveira Sampaio|first2=André|date=December 2013|publisher=Oracle|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131219030125/http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/articles/soa/rosa-sampaio-soa-gov-2080776.html|archive-date=2013-12-19}}</ref> The broad reach of EA has resulted in this business role being included in the ] processes of many organizations. Analyst firm ] suggested that EA and the emerging concept of the ] are "two sides to the same coin."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.realstorygroup.com/Blog/2311-Digital-workplace-and-enterprise-architecture-two-sides-to-same-coin|title=Digital workplace and enterprise architecture -- two sides to same coin|last=Byrne|first=Tony|date=2012-03-19|publisher=Real Story Group|access-date=2023-03-04}}</ref> The Cutter Consortium described EA as an information and knowledge-based discipline.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cutter.com/article/dealing-too-much-data-architectural-perspective-469106|title=Dealing with Too Much Data from an Architectural Perspective|last=Evernden|first=Roger|author-link=Roger Evernden|date=2012-11-13|publisher=Cutter|access-date=2023-03-04}}</ref> | |||
==Relationship to other IT disciplines== | |||
Enterprise Architecture is a key component of the ] process at any organization of significant size. More and more companies are implementing a formal enterprise architecture process to support the governance and management of IT. However, as noted in the opening paragraph of this article it ideally relates more broadly to the practice of business optimization in that it addresses business architecture, ] and ] as well. Enterprise Architecture is also related to ], ] and ] in the enterprise IT sense. | |||
== See also == | |||
The following image from the 2006 FEA Practice Guidance of US OMB sheds light on the relationship between enterprise architecture and segment(BPR) or solution architectures. (From this figure and a bit of thinking one can see that software architecture is truly a solution architecture discipline, for example.) | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ], promoter of enterprise architecture | |||
* ] | |||
== External links == | |||
] | |||
* (archive) | |||
* {{Commons category-inline}} | |||
* {{Wikiquote-inline}} | |||
* {{Wiktionary-inline}} | |||
== References == | |||
==Enterprise Architecture frameworks== | |||
{{Reflist|2}} | |||
Frameworks, or prefabricated architectures, are commonly used to organize enterprise architectures into different views that are meaningful to system stakeholders. These frameworks, commonly referred to as ] are standardized for both defense and commercial systems.<ref name="faq">{{cite web|title=Architecture Framework FAQ|url=http://architectureframework.com/faq/|accessdate=2007-10-10}}</ref> | |||
{{Software engineering}} | |||
==See also == | |||
{{Authority control}} | |||
* ] - ''Recommended Practice for Architecture Description of Software-Intensive Systems'' on the ISO/IEC 25961 standards track | |||
*] Atos Origin's Enterprise Architecture Framework | |||
*] | |||
*] A four-nation effort to develop a common ontology for architecture interoperability | |||
*] - The Guide to the Enterprise Architecture Body of Knowledge - U.S. Federal-funded guide to EA in the context of legislative and strategic business requirements. | |||
*] | |||
*] or FEA | |||
*] - (EISA) can give a better understanding of the positioning of security within Enterprise Architecture. | |||
*] | |||
*] - the body that produces IT governance standards used by many governments | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] | |||
*] The UK Ministry of Defence Architecture Framework | |||
*] | |||
*] The Open Group Architecture Framework | |||
*] Zachman Enterprise Architecture Framework | |||
{{DEFAULTSORT:Enterprise Architecture (EA)}} | |||
<!-- This should be merged into References (see ]) not just external links per ] | |||
] | |||
==Published examples of enterprise architecture== | |||
When an enterprise architecture framework becomes populated... | |||
* , from . These reference models, which include XML formats for EA reference model data transfer. A single-volume consolidated model is available ( and will be updated annually. | |||
* architecture, with | |||
* - September 2006 Version of the US DoD Business Enterprise Architecture, with associated , and . | |||
* | |||
* (formerly the ) provides a number of resources, including many "quick-start" templates and educational materiel for those aspects of enterprise architecture that are more "managerial", including Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), Continuous Process Improvement (CPI), Performance Measurement, and Change Management. | |||
Sep-2006 | |||
* | |||
* launched by the 2007-06-18, with the | |||
** | |||
** Service Reference Model Mindmap as or | |||
** Technical Reference Model Mindmap as or | |||
* | |||
--> | |||
== References == | |||
<!-- See http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikpedia:Footnotes for information on how to add references using <ref> tags --> | |||
<div class="references-small"> | |||
<references/> | |||
</div> | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 17:46, 24 December 2024
Business function methodologyEnterprise architecture (EA) is a business function concerned with the structures and behaviours of a business, especially business roles and processes that create and use business data. The international definition according to the Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations is "a well-defined practice for conducting enterprise analysis, design, planning, and implementation, using a comprehensive approach at all times, for the successful development and execution of strategy. Enterprise architecture applies architecture principles and practices to guide organizations through the business, information, process, and technology changes necessary to execute their strategies. These practices utilize the various aspects of an enterprise to identify, motivate, and achieve these changes."
The United States Federal Government is an example of an organization that practices EA, in this case with its Capital Planning and Investment Control processes. Companies such as Independence Blue Cross, Intel, Volkswagen AG, and InterContinental Hotels Group also use EA to improve their business architectures as well as to improve business performance and productivity. Additionally, the Federal Enterprise Architecture's reference guide aids federal agencies in the development of their architectures.
Introduction
As a discipline, EA "proactively and holistically lead enterprise responses to disruptive forces by identifying and analyzing the execution of change" towards organizational goals. EA gives business and IT leaders recommendations for policy adjustments and provides best strategies to support and enable business development and change within the information systems the business depends on. EA provides a guide for decision making towards these objectives. The National Computing Centre's EA best practice guidance states that an EA typically "takes the form of a comprehensive set of cohesive models that describe the structure and functions of an enterprise. The individual models in an EA are arranged in a logical manner that provides an ever-increasing level of detail about the enterprise."
Important players within EA include enterprise architects and solutions architects. Enterprise architects are at the top level of the architect hierarchy, meaning they have more responsibilities than solutions architects. While solutions architects focus on their own relevant solutions, enterprise architects focus on solutions for and the impact on the whole organization. Enterprise architects oversee many solution architects and business functions. As practitioners of EA, enterprise architects support an organization's strategic vision by acting to align people, process, and technology decisions with actionable goals and objectives that result in quantifiable improvements toward achieving that vision. The practice of EA "analyzes areas of common activity within or between organizations, where information and other resources are exchanged to guide future states from an integrated viewpoint of strategy, business, and technology."
Definitions
The term enterprise can be defined as an organizational unit, organization, or collection of organizations that share a set of common goals and collaborate to provide specific products or services to customers. In that sense, the term enterprise covers various types of organizations, regardless of their size, ownership model, operational model, or geographical distribution. It includes those organizations' complete sociotechnical system, including people, information, processes, and technologies. Enterprise as a sociotechnical system defines the scope of EA.
The term architecture refers to fundamental concepts or properties of a system in its environment; and embodied in its elements, relationships, and in the principles of its design and evolution. A methodology for developing and using architecture to guide the transformation of a business from a baseline state to a target state, sometimes through several transition states, is usually known as an enterprise architecture framework. A framework provides a structured collection of processes, techniques, artifact descriptions, reference models, and guidance for the production and use of an enterprise-specific architecture description.
Paramount to changing the EA is the identification of a sponsor. Their mission, vision, strategy, and the governance framework define all roles, responsibilities, and relationships involved in the anticipated transformation. Changes considered by enterprise architects typically include innovations in the structure or processes of an organization; innovations in the use of information systems or technologies; the integration and/or standardization of business processes; and improvement of the quality and timeliness of business information.
According to the standard ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010, the product used to describe the architecture of a system is called an architectural description. In practice, an architectural description contains a variety of lists, tables, and diagrams. These are models known as views. In the case of EA, these models describe the logical business functions or capabilities, business processes, human roles and actors, the physical organization structure, data flows and data stores, business applications and platform applications, hardware, and communications infrastructure.
The first use of the term "enterprise architecture" is often incorrectly attributed to John Zachman's 1987 A framework for information systems architecture. The first publication to use it was instead a National Institute of Standards (NIST) Special Publication on the challenges of information system integration. The NIST article describes EA as consisting of several levels. Business unit architecture is the top level and might be a total corporate entity or a sub-unit. It establishes for the whole organization necessary frameworks for "satisfying both internal information needs" as well as the needs of external entities, which include cooperating organizations, customers, and federal agencies. The lower levels of the EA that provide information to higher levels are more attentive to detail on behalf of their superiors. In addition to this structure, business unit architecture establishes standards, policies, and procedures that either enhance or stymie the organization's mission.
The main difference between these two definitions is that Zachman's concept was the creation of individual information systems optimized for business, while NIST's described the management of all information systems within a business unit. The definitions in both publications, however, agreed that due to the "increasing size and complexity of the mplementations of nformation systems... logical construct (or architecture) for defining and controlling the interfaces and... ntegration of all the components of a system" is necessary. Zachman in particular urged for a "strategic planning methodology."
Overview
Schools of thought
Within the field of enterprise architecture, there are three overarching schools: Enterprise IT Design, Enterprise Integrating, and Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption. Which school one subscribes to will impact how they see the EA's purpose and scope, as well as the means of achieving it, the skills needed to conduct it, and the locus of responsibility for conducting it.
Under Enterprise IT Design, the main purpose of EA is to guide the process of planning and designing an enterprise's IT/IS capabilities to meet the desired organizational objectives, often by greater alignment between IT/IS and business concerns. Architecture proposals and decisions are limited to the IT/IS aspects of the enterprise and other aspects service only as inputs. The Enterprise Integrating school believes that the purpose of EA is to create a greater coherency between the various concerns of an enterprise (HR, IT, Operations, etc.), including the link between strategy formulation and execution. Architecture proposals and decisions here encompass all aspects of the enterprise. The Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption school states that the purpose of EA is to foster and maintain the learning capabilities of enterprises so they may be sustainable. Consequently, a great deal of emphasis is put on improving the capabilities of the enterprise to improve itself, to innovate, and to coevolve with its environment. Typically, proposals and decisions encompass both the enterprise and its environment.
Benefits, challenges, and criticisms
The benefits of EA are achieved through its direct and indirect contributions to organizational goals. Notable benefits include support in the areas related to design and re-design of the organizational structures during mergers, acquisitions, or general organizational change; enforcement of discipline and business process standardization, and enablement of process consolidation, reuse, and integration; support for investment decision-making and work prioritization; enhancement of collaboration and communication between project stakeholders and contribution to efficient project scoping and to defining more complete and consistent project deliverabless; and an increase in the timeliness of requirements elicitation and the accuracy of requirement definitions through publishing of the EA documentation.
Other benefits include contribution to optimal system designs and efficient resource allocation during system development and testing; enforcement of discipline and standardization of IT planning activities and contribution to a reduction in time for technology-related decision making; reduction of the system's implementation and operational costs, and minimization of replicate infrastructure services across business units; reduction in IT complexity, consolidation of data and applications, and improvement of interoperability of the systems; more open and responsive IT as reflected through increased accessibility of data for regulatory compliance, and increased transparency of infrastructure changes; and a reduction of business risks from system failures and security breaches. EA also helps reduce risks of project delivery. Establishing EA as an accepted, recognized, functionally integrated and fully involved concept at operational and tactical levels is one of the biggest challenges facing Enterprise Architects today and one of the main reasons why many EA initiatives fail.
A key concern about EA has been the difficulty in arriving at metrics of success because of the broad-brush and often opaque nature of EA projects. Additionally, there have been a number of reports, including those written by Ivar Jacobson, Gartner, Erasmus University Rotterdam and IDS Scheer, Dion Hinchcliffe, and Stanley Gaver, that argue that the frequent failure of EA initiatives makes the concept not worth the effort and that the methodology will fade out quickly.
Relationship to other disciplines
According to the Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations (FEAPO), EA interacts with a wide array of other disciplines commonly found in business settings such as performance engineering and management, process engineering and management, IT and enterprise portfolio management, governance and compliance, IT strategic planning, risk analysis, information management, metadata management, organization development, design thinking, systems thinking, and user experience design. The EA of an organization is too complex and extensive to document in its entirety, so knowledge management techniques provide a way to explore and analyze these hidden, tacit, or implicit areas. In return, EA provides a way of documenting the components of an organization and their interaction in a systemic and holistic way that complements knowledge management.
In various venues, EA has been discussed as having a relationship with Service Oriented Architecture (SOA), a particular style of application integration. Research points to EA promoting the use of SOA as an enterprise-wide integration pattern. The broad reach of EA has resulted in this business role being included in the information technology governance processes of many organizations. Analyst firm Real Story Group suggested that EA and the emerging concept of the digital workplace are "two sides to the same coin." The Cutter Consortium described EA as an information and knowledge-based discipline.
See also
- Enterprise architecture artifacts
- Enterprise architecture framework
- Architectural pattern (computer science)
- Architecture of Integrated Information Systems
- Architecture of Interoperable Information Systems
- Architecture domain
- John Zachman, promoter of enterprise architecture
- Enterprise Architecture Service Life Cycle - SOMF
External links
- United States Department of Defense definition of EA (archive)
- Media related to Enterprise architecture at Wikimedia Commons
- Quotations related to Enterprise architecture at Wikiquote
- The dictionary definition of enterprise architecture at Wiktionary
References
- ^ "Common Perspectives on Enterprise Architecture" (PDF). Architecture and Governance Magazine. 9 (4): 1. November 2013. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
- "EA-Success". The White House. 2010. Archived from the original on April 30, 2010.
- Austin, Robert D.; Ritchie, Warren; Garrett, Greggory (October 5, 2005). "Volkswagen of America: Managing IT Priorities". Harvard Business Review.
- "FEA Practice Guidance Federal Enterprise Architecture Program Management Office OMB" (PDF). The White House. November 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 16, 2010.
- "Enterprise Architecture (EA)". Gartner. Retrieved July 29, 2013.
- Jarvis, Bob (2003). Enterprise Architecture: Understanding the Bigger Picture – A Best Practice Guide for Decision Makers in IT. Manchester, England, United Kingdom: The UK National Computing Centre. p. 9.
- "Planning an EA – Purpose". Enterprise Architecture Book of Knowledge. Mitre Corporation. Archived from the original on October 1, 2013. Retrieved October 3, 2014.
- "Business Analysis Body of Knowledge". International Institute of Business Analysis. Archived from the original on June 24, 2017.
- Giachett, R.E. (2010). Design of Enterprise Systems, Theory, Architecture, and Methods. Boca Raton, Florida, USA: CRC Press.
- ^ "ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011: Systems and software engineering — Architecture description". International Organization for Standardization. November 24, 2011. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
- Kotusev, Svyatoslav; Kurnia, Sherah (September 1, 2021). "The theoretical basis of enterprise architecture: A critical review and taxonomy of relevant theories". Journal of Information Technology. 36 (3): 275–315. doi:10.1177/0268396220977873. ISSN 0268-3962. S2CID 230545944.
- ^ Zachman, John A. (1999). "A framework for information systems architecture". IBM Systems Journal. 38 (2/3) (reprint ed.): 454–470. doi:10.1147/sj.382.0454. S2CID 12191060.
- ^ Fong, E. N.; Goldfine, E.H. (December 1989). "Information management directions: the integration challenge" (PDF). SIGMOD Record. 18 (4): 40–43. doi:10.1145/74120.74125. S2CID 23939840.
- Lapalme, J. (November 2012). "Three Schools of Thought on Enterprise Architecture". IT Professional. 14 (6): 37–43. doi:10.1109/MITP.2011.109. S2CID 206469705.
- Vasilis Boucharas; Marlies van Steenbergen; Slinger Jansen; Sjaak Brinkkemper. The Contribution of Enterprise Architecture to the Achievement of Organizational Goals: Establishing the Enterprise Architecture Benefits Framework, Technical Report (PDF) (Report). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Department of Information and Computing Sciences at Utrecht University. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 4, 2022. Retrieved November 29, 2014.
- Bert Arnold; Martin Op 't Land; Jan Dietz (2005). "Effects of an architectural approach to the implementation of shared service centers". In Fethi Rabhi; Daniel Veit; Christof Weinhardt (eds.). Financecom05: Second international workshop on Enterprise, applications and services in the finance industry. Regensburg, Germany: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
- ^ Schekkerman, Jaap. Trends in enterprise architecture 2005: How are organizations progressing? (Report). Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments. p. 33.
- ^ Bucher, T.; Fischer, R.; Kurpjuweit, S.; Winter, Robert (2006). Enterprise architecture analysis and application: An exploratory study (Report). Hong Kong, China: EDOC Workshop TEAR.
- ^ Nilsson, Andreas (2008). Management of technochange in an interorganizational E-government project (Report). Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. p. 209.
- ^ Varnus, J.; Panaich, N. (July 20, 2009). TOGAF 9 enterprise architecture survey results (PDF) (Report). 23rd Enterprise Architecture Practitioners Conference. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 20, 2009.
- ^ Ross, J.W.; Weill, P. (2005). Understanding the benefits of enterprise architecture (Report). Vol. V. CISR Research Briefings.
- Quartel, Dick; Steen, Maarten W.A.; Lankhorst, Marc M. (May 1, 2012). "Application and project portfolio valuation using enterprise architecture and business requirements modelling". Enterprise Information Systems. 6 (2): 189–213. Bibcode:2012EntIS...6..189Q. doi:10.1080/17517575.2011.625571. ISSN 1751-7575. S2CID 28199240.
- Engelsman, W.; Iacob, M.E.; Franken, H.M.; Jonkers, J. (2009). "Architecture-driven requirements engineering". Advances in Enterprise Engineering II (Report). Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Vol. 28. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Proceedings of the 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. pp. 285–286. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01859-6_8. ISBN 978-3-642-01858-9.
- ^ Kappelman, Leon; McGinnis, Tom; Pettite, Alex; Sidorova, Anna (2008). Enterprise Architecture: Charting the Territory for Academic Research (Report). AMCIS 2008 Proceedings.
- Pulkkinen, M.; Luostarinen, K.; Naumenko, A. (2007). "Managing information security in a business network of machinery maintenance services business - Enterprise architecture as a coordination tool". Journal of Systems and Software. 80 (10): 1607–1620. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.044.
- Obitz, T.; Babu, M.K. (2009). Enterprise architecture expands its role in strategic business transformation: Infosys enterprise architecture survey 2008/2009 (Report). Infosys.
- Dedic, N. (2020). "FEAMI: A Methodology to include and to integrate Enterprise Architecture Processes into Existing Organizational Processes". IEEE Engineering Management Review. 48 (4): 160–166. doi:10.1109/EMR.2020.3031968. S2CID 226351029.
- Günther, Wendy Arianne (August 2014). Measuring Enterprise Architecture Effectiveness: A Focus on Key Performance Indicators (PDF) (Master's thesis). Universiteit Leiden. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
- Jacobson, Ivar (October 18, 2007). "EA Failed Big Way!". Archived from the original on April 1, 2016.
- "Gartner Enterprise Architecture Summit: Architecting the Agile Organization, 26 – 27 September 2007". Gartner. 2007. Archived from the original on August 6, 2007.
- Roeleven, S.; Broer, J. (2010). Why Two Thirds of Enterprise Architecture Projects Fail (Report). ARIS. Archived from the original on November 13, 2013.
- Hinchcliffe, Dion (September 3, 2009). "Fixing Enterprise Architecture: Balancing the Forces of Change in the Modern Organization". ebiz. Archived from the original on September 6, 2009.
- Gaver, Stanley (2010). Why Doesn't the FEA Work? (PDF) (Report). Technology Matters, Inc. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 11, 2016.
- Richardson, Clay (April 12, 2013). "Design Thinking Reshapes EA For Dynamic Business". Forrester. Archived from the original on April 19, 2013.
- McKendrick, Joe (May 19, 2010). "Gartner urges more 'design thinking' to break enterprise architecture out of its silo". ZDNet. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
- Owens, Leslie (February 2, 2010). "Who Owns Information Architecture? All Of Us". Forrester. Archived from the original on February 5, 2010.
- Evernden, Elaine; Evernden, Roger (2003). Information First - Integrating Knowledge and Information Architecture for Business Advantage. Oxford, England, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 978-0-7506-5858-4.
- "Service Oriented Architecture : SOA and Enterprise Architecture". The Open Group. Archived from the original on January 10, 2015. Retrieved December 18, 2014.
- Kistasamy, Christopher; van der Merwe, Alta; de la Harpe, Andre (2012). The Role of Service Oriented Architecture as an enabler for Enterprise Architecture (Report). Seattle, Washington, USA: AMCIS 2012 Proceedings.
- Rosa, Manuel; de Oliveira Sampaio, André (December 2013). "SOA Governance Through Enterprise Architecture". Oracle. Archived from the original on December 19, 2013.
- Byrne, Tony (March 19, 2012). "Digital workplace and enterprise architecture -- two sides to same coin". Real Story Group. Retrieved March 4, 2023.
- Evernden, Roger (November 13, 2012). "Dealing with Too Much Data from an Architectural Perspective". Cutter. Retrieved March 4, 2023.