Enterprise Architecture Literature Research Articles

Enterprise Architecture: Enabling Digital Transformation for Healthcare Organization

This paper examines the role of Enterprise Architecture (EA) in facilitating digital transformation for healthcare organisations, considering the expanding demand for a comprehensive blueprint to leverage information technology in achieving long-term strategic goals. Through a review of pertinent EA literature, this study investigates the applicability of EA and the Architecture Development Method (ADM) from TOGAF in healthcare. The article emphasises the benefits of employing TOGAF ADM as a proven EA methodology, which provides a systematic and precise step-by-step process for capturing an organisation's current and future states and identifying gaps between them. By adopting TOGAF ADM, healthcare organisations can employ decision-making and management analytic tools to expedite digital transformation. The primary objective is to develop a robust EA framework that facilitates the seamless transition from the existing baseline architecture to the desired target architecture while also addressing any identified voids. In addition, TOGAF ADM plays a crucial role in identifying areas where governance mechanisms may be absent, thereby enhancing alignment with system requirements, objectives, and stakeholder engagement. This research ultimately demonstrates the significance of Enterprise Architecture in facilitating digital transformation within the healthcare industry. By implementing TOGAF ADM, healthcare organisations can utilise EA to improve their operational efficiency, strategic decision-making, and overall performance. The study illuminates the critical role of enterprise architecture (EA) in designing and developing an effective healthcare architecture, enabling organisations to navigate the complexities of the digital landscape and leverage technology to meet their evolving requirements and aspirations.

Analysis of the Scale Types and Measurement Units in Enterprise Architecture (EA) Measurement

Aim/Purpose: This study identifies the scale types and measurement units used in the measurement of enterprise architecture (EA) and analyzes the admissibility of the mathematical operations used. Background: The majority of measurement solutions proposed in the EA literature are based on researchers’ opinions and many with limited empirical validation and weak metrological properties. This means that the results generated by these solutions may not be reliable, trustworthy, or comparable, and may even lead to wrong investment decisions. While the literature proposes a number of EA measurement solutions, the designs of the mathematical operations used to measure EA have not yet been independently analyzed. It is imperative that the EA community works towards developing robust, reliable, and widely accepted measurement solutions. Only then can senior management make informed decisions about the allocation of resources for EA initiatives and ensure that their investment yields optimal results. Methodology: In previous research, we identified, through a systematic literature review, the EA measurement solutions proposed in the literature and classified them by EA entity types. In a subsequent study, we evaluated their metrology coverage from both a theoretical and empirical perspective. The metrology coverage was designed using a combination of the evaluation theory, best practices from the software measurement literature including the measurement context model, and representational theory of measurement to evaluate whether EA measurement solutions satisfy the metrology criteria. The research study reported here presents a more in-depth analysis of the mathematical operations within the proposed EA measurement solutions, and for each EA entity type, each mathematical operation used to measure EA was examined in terms of the scale types and measurement units of the inputs, their transformations through mathematical operations, the impact in terms of scale types, and measurement units of the proposed outputs. Contribution: This study adds to the body of knowledge on EA measurement by offering a metrology-based approach to analyze and design better EA measurement solutions that satisfy the validity of scale type transformations in mathematical operations and the use of explicit measurement units to allow measurement consistency for their usage in decision-making models. Findings: The findings from this study reveal that some important metrology and quantification issues have been overlooked in the design of EA measurement solutions proposed in the literature: a number of proposed EA mathematical operations produce numbers with unknown units and scale types, often the result of an aggregation of undetermined assumptions rather than explicit quantitative knowledge. The significance of such aggregation is uncertain, leading to numbers that have suffered information loss and lack clear meaning. It is also unclear if it is appropriate to add or multiply these numbers together. Such EA numbers are deemed to have low metrological quality and could potentially lead to incorrect decisions with serious and costly consequences. Recommendations for Practitioners: The results of the study provide valuable insights for professionals in the field of EA. Identifying the metrology limitations and weaknesses of existing EA measurement solutions may indicate, for instance, that practitioners should wait before using them until their design has been strengthened. In addition, practitioners can make informed choices and select solutions with a more robust metrology design. This, in turn, will benefit enterprise architects, software engineers, and other EA professionals in decision making, by enabling them to take into consideration factors more adequately such as cost, quality, risk, and value when assessing EA features. The study’s findings thus contribute to the development of more reliable and effective EA measurement solutions. Recommendation for Researchers: Researchers can use with greater confidence the EA measurement solutions with admissible mathematical operations and measurement units to develop new decision-making models. Other researchers can carry on research to address the weaknesses identified in this study and propose improved ones. Impact on Society: Developers, architects, and managers may be making inappropriate decisions based on seriously flawed EA measurement solutions proposed in the literature and providing undue confidence and a waste of resources when based on bad measurement design. Better quantitative tools will ultimately lead to better decision making in the EA domain, as in domains with a long history of rigor in the design of the measurement tools. Such advancements will benefit enterprise architects, software engineers, and other practitioners, by providing them with more meaningful measurements for informed decision making. Future Research: While the analysis described in this study has been explicitly applied to evaluating EA measurement solutions, researchers and practitioners in other domains can also examine measurement solutions proposed in their respective domains and design new ones.

The practical roles of enterprise architecture artifacts: A classification and relationship

Enterprise architecture (EA) is a description of an enterprise from an integrated business and IT perspective. EA is typically defined as a comprehensive blueprint of an organization covering its business, data, applications and technology domains and consisting of diverse EA artifacts. EA has numerous potential stakeholders and usage scenarios in organizations. However, the existing EA literature does not offer any consistent theories explaining the practical roles of individual EA artifacts and fails to explain how exactly different types of EA artifacts are used in practice. This study intends to explore the roles of different EA artifacts in organizations and develop a generic descriptive theory explaining these roles. The theory purports to cover various properties of EA artifacts as well as the relationships between them. The research method of this study follows two consecutive phases: theory construction and theory validation. First, theory construction is based on the qualitative in-depth analysis of five case organizations with established EA practices. Next, theory validation includes confirmatory interviews with ten EA experts. This study develops a descriptive theory explaining the roles of different EA artifacts in an EA practice. The resulting theory defines six general types of EA artifacts (Considerations, Standards, Visions, Landscapes, Outlines and Designs, CSVLOD) and explains their type-specific practical roles, including their informational contents , typical usage, ensuing organizational benefits and interrelationships with each other. This study presents the first systematic theory describing the usage of EA artifacts in organizations. Our theory facilitates better theoretical understanding of the concept of EA and also provides evidence-based solutions to the commonly reported practical problems with EA. This study suggests that the EA research community should focus on studying individual EA artifacts instead of studying EA in general and calls for further research on EA artifacts and their usage as part of EA practices.

Stakeholder engagement in enterprise architecture practice: What inhibitors are there?

Enterprise architecture (EA) is a collection of artifacts describing various aspects of an organization from an integrated business and IT perspective. EA practice is an organizational activity that implies using EA artifacts for facilitating decision-making and improving business and IT alignment. EA practice involves numerous participants ranging from C-level executives to project teams and effective engagement between these stakeholders and architects is critically important for success. Moreover, many practical problems with EA practice can be also attributed to insufficient engagement between architects and other EA stakeholders. However, the notion of engagement received only limited attention in the EA literature and the problem of establishing engagement has not been intentionally studied. This paper intends to explore in detail the problem of achieving effective engagement between architects and other EA stakeholders in an organization, identify the main inhibitors of engagement and present a theoretical model explaining the problem of establishing engagement in practice. This paper is based on a single in-depth revelatory case study including nine interviews with different participants of EA practice (e.g. architects and other EA stakeholders) and documentation analysis. It leverages the grounded theory method to construct a conceptual model explaining the problem of engagement in the studied organization. This paper identifies 28 direct and indirect inhibitors of engagement and unifies them into a holistic conceptual model addressing the problem of achieving engagement that covers the factors undermining both strategic and initiative-based engagement between architects and other EA stakeholders. This paper focuses on the notion of engagement and offers arguably the first available theoretical model that explains how typical engagement problems between architects and other stakeholders inhibit the realization of value from EA practice. However, the developed model has a number of limitations and we call for further empirical research on engagement problems in EA practice and coping strategies for addressing these problems.

Enterprise Architecture Best Practices in Large Corporations

Enterprise architecture (EA) is an integrated strategy, business, and information systems approach for analysis, governance, and information technology (IT) alignment. It is a comprehensive blueprint that requires the careful planning, documentation, and analysis of all the operations of an organization. Employing EA helps companies achieve strategic goals with the support of business activities and information systems. However, some large corporations avoid EA frameworks and methodologies owing to their implementation difficulties or the presence of conflicting frameworks and business needs. The goal of this paper is to increase large organizations’ awareness of enterprise architecture best practices (EABPs) and methods of EA framework implementation. Thus, this research has developed an EABP capability matrix to measure companies’ capacities to implement EABPs and provided lessons based on how 17 organizations implemented EABPs. Based on an analytical literature review, the developed matrix includes eight critical EABPs categorized under four themes: EA framework and methodology, strategic practices, business activities, and information systems. As practical and theoretical contributions: (1) This inclusive approach was not found in the EA literature as most past research focuses on only one of these themes. (2) The EA matrix can be used as a measurement matrix research methodology to measure the extent to which cases adopt EABPs, making it beneficial to EA researchers and practitioners. (3) EA practitioners can also use it to practically determine and rectify the weak points of EABPs, thus taking advantage of EA frameworks. The findings indicate that many large organizations implement EABPs as business-as-usual practices without EA frameworks and methodologies. However, those that adopt an EA framework use the open group architecture framework and rely heavily on enterprise resource planning in the implementation of EABPs.

What can enterprise architecture do for healthcare A framework of antecedents and benefits

The aim of this study is to provide a consolidated knowledge of the organisational impact of enterprise architecture (EA) healthcare and the factors affecting its adoption and maturity. In this paper, we provide a synthesis based on a systematic review of the EA literature which has implication for both research and practice. First, we provide an overview framework of the antecedents and benefits of EA in healthcare. Second, we present a conceptualisation of four EA activity streams: 1) negotiation; 2) coordination; 3) descriptive; 4) prescriptive activity streams. For researchers, the healthcare EA framework, benefits, factors and lessons described in this review provide the necessary components to make sense of EA adoption and maturity in healthcare. For practitioners, we highlight the need to concurrently build EA capabilities of the four activity streams in order to adequately engage with the techno-organisational change in healthcare.

What can enterprise architecture do for healthcare? A framework of antecedents and benefits

The aim of this study is to provide a consolidated knowledge of the organisational impact of enterprise architecture (EA) healthcare and the factors affecting its adoption and maturity. In this paper, we provide a synthesis based on a systematic review of the EA literature which has implication for both research and practice. First, we provide an overview framework of the antecedents and benefits of EA in healthcare. Second, we present a conceptualisation of four EA activity streams: 1) negotiation; 2) coordination; 3) descriptive; 4) prescriptive activity streams. For researchers, the healthcare EA framework, benefits, factors and lessons described in this review provide the necessary components to make sense of EA adoption and maturity in healthcare. For practitioners, we highlight the need to concurrently build EA capabilities of the four activity streams in order to adequately engage with the techno-organisational change in healthcare.

Designing interoperable health information systems using Enterprise Architecture approach in resource-limited countries: A literature review.

Enterprise Architecture (EA) integrates business and technical processes in health information systems (HIS). Low-income and middle-income countries (LMIC) use EA to combine management components with disease tracking and health care service monitoring. Using an EA approach differs by country, addressing specific needs. Articles in this review referenced EA, were peer-reviewed or gray literature reports published in 2010 to 2016 in English, and were identified using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Fourteen articles described EA use in LMICs. India, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Mozambique, and Rwanda reported building the system to meet country needs and implement a cohesive HIS framework. Jordan and Taiwan focused on specific HIS aspects, ie, disease surveillance and electronic medical records. Five studies informed the context. The Millennium Villages Project employed a "uniform but contextualized" approach to guide systems in 10 countries; Malaysia, Indonesia, and Tanzania used interviews and mapping of existing components to improve HIS, and Namibia used of Activity Theory to identify technology-associated activities to better understand EA frameworks. South Africa, Burundi, Kenya, and Democratic Republic of Congo used EA to move from paper-based to electronic systems. Four themes emerged: the importance of multiple sectors and data sources, the need for interoperability, the ability to incorporate system flexibility, and the desirability of open group models, data standards, and software. Themes mapped to EA frameworks and operational components and to health system building blocks and goals. Most articles focused on processes rather than outcomes, as countries are engaged in implementation.

Enterprise Architecture: A Reconceptualization Is Needed

Enterprise architecture (EA) is a description of an organization from an integrated business and IT perspective. Current literature conceptualizes EA as a comprehensive blueprint of an enterprise organized according to a logical framework and describing its current state, desired future state and migration roadmap. However, the current concept of EA originates from non-empirical sources, lacks demonstrated examples of its successful practical implementation and deviates from the real practical use of EA in organizations in multiple important aspects. Due to these and other problems the notion of EA needs to be reconceptualized in order to more accurately reflect empirical realities. In this paper, based on an extensive EA literature review, I describe the problems with the current concept of EA, demonstrate the critical inconsistencies between this concept and the real practice use of EA in organizations and illustrate them based on a recent exemplary case study of a successful EA practice. Although this paper justifies the need for the reconceptualization of EA and points to the most essential aspects of this reconceptualization, it does not offer an alternative ready-to-use conceptualization and represents only the first step towards developing a new, evidence-based concept of EA.

Enterprise Architecture: What Did We Study?

Enterprise architecture (EA) is a description of an enterprise from an integrated business and IT perspective intended to improve business and IT alignment, and is used in the majority of large companies. However, despite that EA was established as an independent discipline long ago, a commonly accepted “big picture” in EA research is still missing. As a result, the scope of the EA discipline is vague, the extent of diversity in EA publications is poorly understood and the progression of the EA research stream over time is unclear. In this paper I conduct a comprehensive EA literature review covering 1075 publications aiming to structure, clarify and consolidate the whole EA research stream. I analyze the distribution of the EA research stream by time, source, research methodology and attitude, code all the issues discussed in EA publications into 42 narrow EA-related topics and 11 broader themes, establish the conceptual relationship between them and present a picture of the EA discipline “on a page”. Moreover, I classify all EA-related topics into four categories according to their lifecycles helping future EA researchers to better understand the evolution of the EA discipline and make the maximum contribution to it.

Overcoming implementation challenges in enterprise architecture management: a design theory for architecture-driven IT Management (ADRIMA)

Enterprise architecture management (EAM) is acknowledged as a discipline to drive organizational change, to improve IT landscapes' transparency, and to align business and IT. Despite its increasing popularity in practice, many EAM initiatives are confronted with substantial challenges, as demonstrated by the low usage level of enterprise architecture (EA) documentation and enterprise architects' lack of authority, and often fail. This motivates our research, which aims at developing a design theory that may guide organizations to successfully implement EAM. Based on three field studies, we first analyze the issues that arise when implementing EAM in practice. We find that EAM often suffers from being regarded as a separate and parallel initiative, although it needs to be embedded in established management processes and organization. We then suggest a design theory for architecture-driven IT management (ADRIMA) that synthesizes prescriptive knowledge related to embedding EAM practices, artifacts, and roles in the existing IT management processes and organization. By consolidating both IT management and EAM perspectives, our research goes beyond existing EA literature and EA frameworks which describe EAM as a stand-alone management concept focusing on EA models and the EA life cycle.

SCOR-based enterprise architecture methodology

Increasing competition and fast changes in markets require more enterprise agility and adaptability. Enterprises have to evolve continuously to attract customers and ensure sustainability. In fact, organisations of all sectors are facing two main challenges: (i) Better understanding of enterprise structures and (ii) Aligning information technologies with business strategies. These challenges are faced by all manufacturing organisations whether they are global companies or small enterprises. Many research activities have been carried out by the scientific community in order to develop and improve enterprise modelling frameworks. Zachman (1987. A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 26 (3), 176–292.) specified a framework to represent enterprises according to different points of view. It was the first enterprise Architecture Framework. Since 1987, researchers and experts have proposed several Enterprise Architecture frameworks for military (Chief Information Officer Council, 2001. A practical guide to federal enterprise architecture [online]. Available from: http://www.gao.gov /best practices/bpeaguide.pdf [Accessed April 2010].) or manufacturing organisations (Lapkin A., 2005. Gartner's enterprise architecture process and framework help meet 21st century challenges [online]. Available from: http://www.gartner. com/DisplayDocument?doccd=133132 [Accessed April 2010].). Existing approaches do not apprehend supply chain complexity though they provide many views of organisations. Furthermore, there are no rigorous methodologies defined for Enterprise Architecture projects. In this study, a SCOR (Supply Chain Operations Reference) based Enterprise Architecture Methodology (S-BEAM) is proposed to guide decisions of improvement at both strategic and operational levels. The methodology is intended to provide a global vision of supply chain and to improve its performance. In the present study, we begin by researching enterprise architecture literature, and then we present the proposed methodology. A case study of this methodology application will also be carried out.

How Does Enterprise Architecture Add Value to Organisations?

Enterprise architecture (EA) is the definition and representation of a high-level view of an enterprise's business processes and IT systems, their interrelationships, and the extent to which these processes and systems are shared by different parts of the enterprise. EA aims to define a suitable operating platform to support an organisation's future goals and the roadmap for moving towards this vision. Despite significant practitioner interest in the domain, understanding the value of EA remains a challenge. Although many studies make EA benefit claims, the explanations of why and how EA leads to these benefits are fragmented, incomplete, and not grounded in theory. This article aims to address this knowledge gap by focusing on the question: How does EA lead to organisational benefits? Through a careful review of EA literature, the paper consolidates the fragmented knowledge on EA benefits and presents the EA Benefits Model (EABM). The EABM proposes that EA leads to organisational benefits through its impact on four benefit enablers: Organisational Alignment, Information Availability, Resource Portfolio Optimisation, and Resource Complementarity. The article concludes with a discussion of a number of potential avenues for future research, which could build on the findings of this study.