Review Of Literature On Enterprise Architecture And Implications For Governance And Training Of Architects

Challenges of EA Governance

In today’s time and need of providing appropriate goods and services, the modern enterprises are facing an emergency to transform themselves. Enterprise Architecture governance has been accepted and executed by many organizations for bringing a transformation. It facilitates the organizations with an integrated and prominent outlook on their business methods, policies and their IT systems, and also provides with a perspective, suggesting the changes. Therefore, in the current scenario, enterprise architecture is crucial for any organization for transforming their strategies into the substantial process and systems, which will also improve the organizations sharpness and will support in an effective transformation. An enterprise architecture is a logical and consistent combination of methods, principles and structures, which are utilized for the design of an organization’s enterprise structure, business methods and information system. The enterprise architecture collects the requirements of the organization. The architecture is beneficial in protecting the requirements of the business, at the same time allowing modifications and flexibility. A good enterprise architecture is an essential part of success in an organization.

In comparison to the different business practices, EA acquires a lot of time to mature. In the past few years, almost two decades, the methods and practices of EA governance, is facing a lot of challenges. An enterprise architecture is approached as a technical model, and thus it ignores the social issues which erupt due to its implementation (Geng, Niu and Li, 2014). In enterprise architectural structure, people from various cultures, that is both origin and corporation, have to function together. In a diverse culture teams, having an effective communication is a challenge which all the organizations face. Due to inappropriate communication, there have been always some misunderstandings, which affects the trust and understanding between people and also results in inadequate sharing of knowledge. Some other social problems are the equal rights to use information and the conversion of the social structure (Seigerroth, 2011). The technical issues associated with the enterprise architecture governance, is that today the structures are more complex both functionally and structurally. The functional structure design, behavior and the working are massive problems and due to the continuous change in technology, it is very difficult to maintain them up-to-date.

Enterprise architecture has become a huge term in the business industry. People are frequently using it, even when they don’t know the true meaning. Also by the practitioners and the researchers the term is misinterpreted and confused. A number of authors have given their views on the structure and the working of an enterprise architecture (Nugroho and Herawan, 2016). In the view of IEEE 1471-2000 standard explains that enterprise architecture also the known as the software architecture is a foundational administration of an organization, incorporated in its elements, the relationship between them and the guidelines which are governing, the design and the development (Varghese and Kurien, 2004). In the opinion of Tarabanis, Peristeras and Fragidis (2001), EA is a more of a data model, which facilitates the creation of an integrated process for public administration and provides with a data storehouse for all the PAs, which will act as a knowledge center for them. According to certain researchers, enterprise architecture has a bigger function and responsibility in cooperating and collaborating technologies with organizations to accomplish competitiveness. Wegman (2002) asserts that enterprise architecture is a regulation, with a motive to align more appropriately the plans and strategies of an organization.

Review of Enterprise Architecture Literature by Various Authors

According to Buchanan & Soley (2002), the EA explains the logical connections amongst the enterprise business, the enterprise solution architectures and the information and technical architecture (Jahani, Reza Seyyed Javadein and Abedi Jafari, 2010). The traditional aspect of an EA is expanded so that the architectures can spread from the strategic level and can connect with the IT strategies, and supports the decision making and communication between the IT management team and the business strategy (Buchanan & Soley, 2002).

In the view of both Wegman (2002) and Buchanan & Soley on EA, there is a huge difference. Wegman (2002) explains the main aim of EA is to help the enterprise in aligning with their organization and with IT, whereas Buchanan & Soley, explains that the implementation doesn’t come into the scope of EA (Tambouris et al., 2012).

The Zachman framework is a logical design for categorizing and organizing the illustrative portrayal of an enterprise that are beneficial to the EA. According to Zachman (1987), enterprise architecture is a matrix which explains the different perspectives through which the stakeholders perceive their business and its structure. It distinguishes architecture, according to the opinions of different stakeholders and their attention on different features of the architecture. It has been asserted that the framework have been generated from the symmetrical structures which were found in the older regulations of architecture and the design was generated, through the process of producing and designing complex structures (Rábová, 2010).

The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF), is a structure with a detailed process and a bunch of supporting components, which facilitates the development of the enterprise architecture in an organization. TOGAF is formed and regulated by the partners of the Open Group, who works within the forum of architecture. The first, and the original development of the first version of TOGAF took place in 1995, which was based on the TAFIM, which is the Technical Architecture Framework for Information Management and was developed by the United States Department of Defense (Qumer Gill and Atif Qureshi, 2015). There are seven main elements in the TOGAF-

1. Introduction- This element facilitates a high-level introduction to the different elements of EA.
2. Architecture Development Method- This is the main element of TOGAF, which explains the TOGAF as a step-by-step approach.
3. Architecture Guidelines & Techniques- This element has a set of guidelines and techniques, which have to be used in applying TOGAF.
4. Architecture Content Framework- This explains the TOGAF content structure.
5. Enterprise Continuum & Tools- This element is used to store the results of architecture activities in an enterprise.
6. TOGAF Reference Models- This element facilitates with the different architectural models and it also includes the TOGAF foundation architecture, and the Integrated Information Infrastructure Reference Model.
7. Architecture Capability Framework- This element examines the process, organization, skills, roles and responsibilities, which are needed for the development and working of an architectural function.

EA governance is a logical and consistent rules that are up-front, all the decisions are made with a general agreement, and if not, then the decision is taken by the chief architect. There are some relations between the EA governance, Enterprise governance and the IT governance (Masuda et al., 2018). This association is also utilized in accomplishing high results which are acquired through high mature governance. The different relational aspects of EA governance are-

1. Disparity between different “types” of governance.

• Enterprise Architecture Governanceconcerns with the different roles which is involved in architecture like developing, sharing, managing, verifying, monitoring, etc. This also states that governing doesn’t mean governing the different elements of EA, which includes the legal requirements, organization’s rules, etc.
• Governance as elements of EA,involves the aspects which affect the architecture relationships and the other element’s options (Walters, Moorthy and Carter, 2014).
• IT governance is related to managing and controlling the IT part of an enterprise-the rules which apply for the IT for the effective application.

1. EA, EA Governance & Business Instruments.

• The common factor of EA, is that it is the interrelated link between other different sub architectures.
• EA governance is the regulation that helps in the appropriate functioning of the EA in an organization. This relationship is between the EA and EAG.
• The business instrument handles all the issues which are related, to an organization from the top to the bottom (Huysmans and Verelst, 2012).

1. Double Legacy in Governance.

• An EA which is comprehensively driven, will combine the business and the IT governance elements.
• The top-down look of the entire enterprise is the true enterprise-architecture.
• The IT governance is the convergence of the enterprise-wide architecture and the IT governance (Rahmansyah, 2013).

Importance of Understanding the Relational Aspects of EA Governance

The relationship between the architects and the stakeholders is important for starting and conserving the enterprise architecture program. Architects have to involve with different stakeholders from the seniors to the implementation team. This relationship and involvement needs diplomacy, flexibility and political sensitivity, to manage the needs and wants of the stakeholders, assuring they are handled appropriately (Clarke, Hall and Rapanotti, 2013). The architect needs to provide all the information to the stakeholders of any alteration of modifications related to the architecture, so that the stakeholders know of any major changes and the influence of it on their domain. It is also important to have a critical strategy or a communication plan to will ensure that the stakeholders will be provided with the information related to the architecture whenever they need, which will also help in maintaining the interest of the stakeholders. This relationship is very crucial for the EA initiatives (Aarti and Karande, 2017).

The following are the implications for EA practices and the training and recruitment of the architects-

• Aligning the Organization- A good functioning organization utilizes its resources, in the implementation process of the enterprise strategies. This helps in the financial growth of an organization, according to the literature. EA practices have a positive impact initially due to the effective strategies by the EA team (Carter, Moorthy and Walters, 2016)
• Revealing Information- The revealing of information, facilitates the decision makers, with the quality of information which is high in standard. This has a positive impact on the four components of literature, which are, growth, customer, internal and learning. But the influence of EA, on making better the accessibility of information, which is of high quality, is not that strong in comparison to the other benefit providers. There are two practices which are of prime importance, which are, a regularized EA method and the supply of advice related to strategy.
• Boosting the Resource Portfolio- The boosting of resource portfolio by combining the compatible resources, which is considered as a crucial component of EA in the literature. To bring an improvement in this part, the EA realization practices have been considered valuable. The results of regression highlights that it’s a necessary practice of facilitating the EA staff with advices and information, along with the boosting of this resource portfolio (Tambouris et al., 2012).
• Innovation- The organization which maintains a keen focus on innovation, should also build their focus on the EA launching practices. It has been discovered that EA can recognize the resource, if there is an appropriate communication between the organization and the EA. The organization where the main priority is given to innovation, there the focus should not be wasted on the formation of enterprise architectural documents like principles, requirements and the blueprints. Such organization should create their EA efforts which should be built the main role of the organization.
• The Training and Recruitment of Architects-The architects should be provided with a disciplined and appropriate knowledge, so they could utilize it in the different process of EA governance. The training provided should be conducted regularly, due to the regular change in technology. The architects should also be recruited to the appropriate position, which should be according to their skills

Conclusion

It is due to the architecture, that the complex structures can be designed, whereas, the enterprise architecture is explained as a coherent structure. The different models of architecture help in bridging the gaps of communication between the stakeholders and the architects. Architecture is a crucial component in handling the complex nature of the enterprise, but the enterprise architecture is also a huge structure and takes time to mature and are complex which increases the issues associated with the enterprise architecture. But with the continuous development, new technologies will be introduced for making the methods of enterprise management simple and easy to operate. The EA development practices are conducted with the aim to establish an understanding which should be accurate about the current and the future architecture in a business, this is conducted by formulating various development plans. The EA alignment, works with the scope of aligning the business architecture with the future state of an organization.

References

Aarti, M. and Karande, M. (2017). Selection of Enterprise Architecture Based on Agile Parameters For SCM-Based Case Study. Scholedge International Journal of Business Policy & Governance ISSN 2394-3351, 4(5), p.36.

Carter, B., Moorthy, S. and Walters, D. (2016). Enterprise architecture view of complex system governance. International Journal of System of Systems Engineering, 7(1/2/3), p.95.

Clarke, M., Hall, J. and Rapanotti, L. (2013). Enterprise Architecture. International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance, 4(1), pp.1-10.

Geng, J., Niu, S. and Li, Z. (2014). Using Enterprise Architecture to Direct IT Governance. Advanced Materials Research, 971-973, pp.2452-2457.

Huysmans, P. and Verelst, J. (2012). Improving Enterprise Architecture Evaluation Based on Concepts from the Normalized Systems Theory. International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance, 3(2), pp.38-50.

Jahani, B., Reza Seyyed Javadein, S. and Abedi Jafari, H. (2010). Measurement of enterprise architecture readiness within organizations. Business Strategy Series, 11(3), pp.177-191.

Masuda, Y., Shirasaka, S., Yamamoto, S. and Hardjono, T. (2018). Architecture Board Practices in Adaptive Enterprise Architecture with Digital Platform. International Journal of Enterprise Information Systems, 14(1), pp.1-20.

Nugroho, H. and Herawan, T. (2016). Enterprise Architecture Characteristics in Context Enterprise Governance Base On COBIT 5 Framework. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 3(1), p.240.

Qumer Gill, A. and Atif Qureshi, M. (2015). Adaptive Enterprise Architecture Modelling. Journal of Software, 10(5), pp.628-638.

Rábová, I. (2010). Methodology of the Enterprise Architecture creating and the role of the Enterprise Architecture in rural development. Agricultural Economics (Zem?d?lská ekonomika), 56(No. 7), pp.334-340.

Rahmansyah (2013). Service Oriented Architecture Governance Implementation in a Software Development Project as an Enterprise Solutions. Journal of Computer Science, 9(12), pp.1638-1647.

Seigerroth, U. (2011). Enterprise Modeling and Enterprise Architecture. International Journal of IT/Business Alignment and Governance, 2(1), pp.16-34.

Tambouris, E., Zotou, M., Kalampokis, E. and Tarabanis, K. (2012). Fostering enterprise architecture education and training with the enterprise architecture competence framework. International Journal of Training and Development, 16(2), pp.128-136.

Varghese, J. and Kurien, P. (2004). IT imperatives beyond strategic alignment: enterprise architecture flexibility and IT delivery efficiency. Handbook of Business Strategy, 5(1), pp.275-280.

Walters, D., Moorthy, S. and Carter, B. (2014). System of systems engineering and enterprise architecture: implications for governance of complex systems. International Journal of System of Systems Engineering, 5(3), p.248.

Aprocessgroup.com. (2018). [online] Available at: https://www.aprocessgroup.com/atpl/togaf9.intro/guidances/supportingmaterials/resources/01_structure.png [Accessed 18 May 2018].

Image.slidesharecdn.com. (2018). [online] Available at: https://image.slidesharecdn.com/a-comparison-of-frameworks-for-enterprise-architecture-modeling2983/95/a-comparison-of-frameworks-for-enterprise-architecture-modeling-13-728.jpg?cb=1275978536 [Accessed 18 May 2018].

Researchgate.net. (2018). [online] Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tyson_Brooks/publication/279950461/figure/fig10/AS:[email protected]/The-Why-Who-What-and-How-of-Business-and-Enterprise-Architecture-Strategy.png [Accessed 18 May 2018].

Tambouris, E., Zotou, M., Kalampokis, E. and Tarabanis, K. (2012). Fostering enterprise architecture education and training with the enterprise architecture competence framework. International Journal of Training and Development, 16(2), pp.128-136.