Enterprise Architecture Stakeholders Research Articles

A foundational framework for agile enterprise architecture

PurposeThe application of agility principles and methodologies on Enterprise Architecture (EA) is a promising field. This paper aims to provide an in-depth study of the Agile Enterprise Architecture (AEA) by studying EA practitioners’ perspectives to propose a foundational framework for AEA.Design/methodology/approachThe authors formulate a foundational framework that defines the AEA motivators, enablers and blockers using the agile manifesto as one of the AEA enablers where a total of 156 EA stakeholders with at least one year of experience in enterprise architecture were surveyed, and a set of hypotheses was analyzed and tested based on the proposed framework. The authors also develop a quantitative method to evaluate the agility index of the EA based on the introduced framework.FindingsThe research results show with significance that enterprise architects perceive positively the application of the agility methodologies on the enterprise architecture. This perception is primarily affected by the enterprise size, the EA dependency and the agile methodologies awareness. The findings also indicate that AEA is primarily motivated by the Business and IT Change Ready and Responsive EA. Finally, an EA Agility Index (EAAI) was designed to assess the agility application of the EA based on the three forces, i.e. motivators, enablers and blockers.Research limitations/implicationsBecause of the chosen research approach and the sample size, the research results may lack generalizability. Also, EAAI designed was not thoroughly tested.Practical implicationsThe paper includes implications for the design and development of an EA Agility Index, and the need to increase the awareness of the agility methodologies to overcome the blocker of the unfamiliarity with the agile methodologies implying that the current business models in enterprise must be more aligned with the agile methodologies.Originality/valueWhile there are efforts to develop AEA frameworks, one of the major findings of the literature review conducted is that there is evident research gap in the literature on the perception and associated factors of the EA stakeholders on having an agile enterprise architecture. This paper attempts to fill this gap.

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 Benefit Realization

In recent years, Enterprise Architecture (EA) has been of interest to both researchers and practitioners. However, EA benefit realization has not been focused on much. Even though a few studies have addressed the subject, the results are somewhat fragmented and are subjected to limited empirical validation, particularly from the viewpoint of different theoretical constructs and their interrelations in the benefit realization process. To understand how the EA benefits accumulate and how related constructs influence each other, we propose a model and criteria for analyzing the explanatory power of the existing EA benefit realization models. Our model emerged from the data of a qualitative case study with 14 semi-structured EA stakeholder interviews. The results support earlier findings, thereby contributing to the enhancement of the relevance and generalizability of the constructs present in previous studies. However, the results also indicate that no existing EA benefit realization model fully captures the complex process of EA benefit realization. Our findings highlight the following: the importance of EA process quality; EA service quality and supportive social environment; constructs that have received less attention in previous studies.

Using enterprise architecture artefacts in an organisation

As a tool for management and planning, Enterprise Architecture (EA) can potentially align organisations’ business processes, information, information systems and technology towards a common goal, and supply the information required within this journey. However, an explicit view on why, how, when and by whom EA artefacts are used in order to realise its full potential is not defined. Utilising the features of information systems use studies and data from a case study with 14 EA stakeholder interviews, we identify and describe 15 EA artefact use situations that are then reflected in the related literature. Their analysis enriches understanding of what are EA artefacts, how and why they are used and when are they used, and results in a theoretical framework for understanding their use in general.

An investigation into the perceptions of business stakeholders on the benefits of enterprise architecture: The case of Telkom SA

This study identifies the perceived benefits of Enterprise Architecture (EA) among business stakeholders who are aware of EA but are not specialists in the field of ICT, and proposes a clearly differentiated and comprehensive cluster of stakeholder groups based on these perceptions. It provides an understanding of the benefits of EA from the perspective of business beneficiaries, not the perspective of its practitioners.The study was conducted using Q-methodology, which was developed specifically to uncover subjective perceptions and preferences. Q-methodology correlates people in respect of their perception of a sample of tests, and is particularly useful in bridging the sharp dichotomy between qualitative and quantitative methodologies.The research identifies and describes 9 EA stakeholder types: Transformational Task-Driven Strategist, Universal Risk-Tolerant Pragmatist, Evolutionary Reuse Overseer, Technology Leverager, Simplicity Valuer, IT Commoditiser, Operational Stability Maintainer, Organisational Change Manager, and Siloed Product Manager. The study demonstrates an increasing understanding of EA benefits, and points to strategies that may be deployed when engaging each stakeholder class.

Fostering enterprise architecture education and training with the enterprise architecture competence framework

Enterprise architecture (EA) implementation refers to a set of activities ultimately aiming to align business objectives with information technology infrastructure in an organization. EA implementation is a multidisciplinary, complicated and endless process, hence, calls for adequate education and training programs that will build highly skilled personnel (called enterprise architects) with diverse competencies. This development of domain‐specific competencies is also supported by European policies on education and vocational training. To this end, the authors present training uses of the Enterprise Architecture Competence Framework (EA‐CF). EA‐CF is a proposed conceptual model that describes EA competencies in compliance to the European e‐Competence Framework (e‐CF). The authors argue that EA stakeholders can consult the framework regarding competencies they want to underpin and thus identify the corresponding skills, knowledge and attitudes that result as learning outcomes in EA courses and training programs.

The relation between EA effectiveness and stakeholder satisfaction

Enterprise Architecture (EA) is increasingly being used by large organizations to get a grip on the complexity of their business processes, information systems and technical infrastructure. Although seen as an important instrument to help solve major organizational problems, effectively applying EA seems no easy task. Active participation of EA stakeholders is one of the main critical success factors for EA. This participation depends on the degree in which EA helps stakeholders achieve their individual goals. A highly related topic is effectiveness of EA, the degree in which EA helps to achieve the collective goals of the organization. In this article we present our work regarding EA stakeholder satisfaction and EA effectiveness, and compare these two topics. We found that, regarding EA, the individual goals of stakeholders map quite well onto the collective goals of the organization. In a case study we conducted, we found that the organization is primarily concerned with the final results of EA, while individual stakeholders also worry about the way the architects operate.