Enterprise Architecture Assignment: Significance Of EA Governance
Question
Task:
As EA scholars and practitioners, we are sensitive to the relevance of EA research to the EA practitioner community. In relation to EA research, researchers have argued for more practically oriented EA planning methods and frameworks (Simon et al., 2013) and others have argued for research that balances the current narrow technical focus of existing research with a focus on the multiple perspectives on EA (Rozanski & Woods, 2007). Whilst existing approaches may have served a technically oriented audience well, they have resulted in a lack of research and skills in the social processes associated with an EAI (enterprise architecture intelligence). Whilst the existing research into EA has built knowledge concerning approaches to EA management, processes, and driven the development of new methods and tools (Lankhorst et al., 2005), researchers have largely ignored the social relationships between architects, business and technology stakeholders and the importance of these relationships to the outcome of EA initiatives.
Enterprise Architecture Assignment Task
Review the enterprise architecture literature. To what extent have authors examined the relationship between architects and their stakeholders and what areas of the architect and stakeholder relationship remain under-researched? What are the implications for enterprise architecture governance?
Answer
Introduction
As stated herein enterprise architecture assignment, enterprise architecture administer show the business enterprises interrelation and its IT system. To acquire the envision condition, EA includes standard and models enterprise that assist in interpret the overview of the present situation, and as per it develop the outline for the future model. EA outline includes details of the process involved in business, governance procedure, the strategy involved in it, application, information, as well as infrastructure that consist in well-mannered layer, and also includes absorption of stakeholders views of different level. Therefore its utilization may increase the benefits of a firm. This consists of the generation of adaptability, coherence, alertness, and the alignment of business realization. Its advantages can be illustrated as a concrete effect on the goals and reason for investment. And to acquire the benefits from EA is the principal impulse to invest in EA and set up the enterprise architecture function. So, to get the benefits illustrates its complicity, and insufficient insight through its assistance EA rises in value. This paper aims to get a concept of governance, strategy by evaluating the significance of EA to understand the technical and social challenges regarding EA. And focus on the relation between the stakeholder and architecture as well as how they treat each other, there to get a productive outcome it is necessary to build a good connection between them. The need of understanding the initiatives of EA, there is a need for governance implication to an excellent examination of skill training for architecture, to analyze blind flaws within EA study, as well as a guide for future research path.
Literature review
Addressing the Technical and environmental challenges of EA
As there is an emergence of new opportunities it also creates some major challenges, the architect and stakeholder should face these challenges and tackle out to reduce the chance of getting a negative impact on the firm. And as per Olsen and Trelsgård (2016), it plays a key role to deal with complex issues and successful transformation to achieve productive outcomes. This notion develops the stability of the firm and flourishes the outlook base of the structure and rises the productivity in front of the board. Now not every firm practice the EA and yet to know the features of EA by understanding the role of EA in the outcomes of the firm.
Enterprise Architecture term varies as per the situation and described according to the location, there is not any usual definition for it. Enterprises Architecture meaning also varies as per situation. But it recognized to a firm as an ICT solution to fulfill the need to represent the holistic viewpoint. A viewpoint of holistic on EA develops the assistance of architecture to a firm represent entirely, but this generates differences of solution between firm and sub-firm. Enterprises Architecture of a firm explain's the business in a way of hierarchical, the procedure involves in it, application, data, and technology to assist and operate the solution. To manage IT complex scenery in large firm EA involved since the 1990s. The usual instrument that maintains the EA is the open assemblage architecture framework. To succeed the model of EA five major factors is responsible to maintain, these are Governance, planning, management, support, and communication. In a different review of literature, Niemi and Pekkola (2019), illustrates the significant issues as well as challenges involved in the EA process. Hansen and Hacks (2017), outline the challenges concern to EAM. There is a requirement of effort to tackle the issues that contains the advantages, and lags are common. The insufficient assistance, absence of governance involve in the improvement of EA through IT and business management, and also improper skills and sources are fundamental issues. Even though structure, as well as CSFs, assist the EA procedure involved in the common segment, and describing the challenge in fronting the concept and issues related to EA. The observed challenges in this paper are illustrated in the discussion. Technical challenges correlated with infrastructure and utilize the EA outline.
Lapalme et al. (2016), illustrates the environmental challenges include challenges regarding inside the firm or outside the firm, like project management of EA as well as the culture of the firm. The most influential factor that occurs when ministry limits the management of EA inside the firm. Architecture mentioned the obstacle is totally controlled by politics, and then enterprises manage the architecture individually. Iyamu (2018), the involvement of the Political environment influence the regulatory of architect, emphasized stress on EA. Manager of the project illustrates the way follow in the political guidance, if settled of mind that only work with enterprise if foolishness, because manager recruit by the ministry and follow the leading portfolio of management. In another context, management should understand the sense of scenario create internally as well as externally, If law passed by ministry management should manage it, and implement within the EA.
Review and Discuss the relationship within EA stakeholders and architects
In Enterprise architecture every staff plays a significant role and performs extensive effort to get an efficient result. Sultan and Miranskyy (2018), explains the fascination of individuals who are related to the firm in comparison to those who are outsiders and how much a stakeholder is eager to do for their firm. If the relationship between stakeholders and architects is not so good then they should talk and shout out the issues and build a good relationship to the betterment of the firm. According to Brosius et al. (2018), if they understand each other as most of the stakeholders do then this will assist in tackling the obstacles and make them able to focus on the inquiries. And also stakeholders understand the obstacle create inside the firm more precisely than outsiders as well as the way to tackle the issue. While the other stakeholder may not be able to address the solution to the architect and following their ideas may lead to cover the actual path and also not able to guide the architect if there is a need of guidance required. Ilin and Grigoreva (2017), explain how a stakeholder suggests the solution when needed and they know what to suggest and what not and ensure the idea will work or not. So to build a strong relationship between stakeholders and architects, successful communication is needed, and anyone is new in the firm, it is difficult for them to get in-depth knowledge, but by good relationships everything is possible. So to improve the relationship, a strategy of communication should be practiced more and more, whereas they have lots of resources to assist in outline through the presentation and details they gathered from the firm, it will be only possible if there will be the existence of a healthy relationships available among everyone.
Rouhani et al. (2019), illustrated in the study about the role of stakeholders in the business as they are also human like everyone, and they also want to get the outcomes eagerly by putting effort as much as possible. Architects need to communicate with stakeholders in the native tongue they usually used, and understand easily and talk to them about their ideas where required. This will create confidence among stakeholders about their needs and engagement to the architecture and build the opinion that their needs are important for the firm. Sequentially everyone performs business and architects required to interact with more stakeholders for service outcomes as well as their assistance required for upcoming projects. Jugel, Sandkuhl and Zimmermann (2016), the relationship befalls among stakeholders, architects, as well as stakeholders themselves. The network that represent in the above line includes every relational aspect throughout the firm. The environment develops to influence the firm and assist in product maintenance and managed the required support. Efficient communication plays a vital role in maintaining and building healthy relationships, and also necessary for managing the commitment and assistance of stakeholders. The success of the firm directly relates to creating the strength, regular, effective, and planned inter-relation with stakeholders. These are the most effective and common tools that are required to accomplished the relational aspect of the EA.
Understanding the relational importance of EA
EA plays a key role to coordinate and unify the various section procedures to implement in the required business. As per Raj, Raman and Subramanian (2017), description, it assists to get the required change as well as control over the implementation process to operate the business as required by the firm, and to run it smoothly the function involved in EA should understand by the related department. Whereas Du Preez, Van der Merwe and Matthee (2018), explain about collaboration provided by EA that makes it automatically suitable to the concerned area. So by pointing the actors perform in such a manner that its operated task, as well as other parties' tasks, fit together. So that it can easily share between them to achieve the product at a high level without any clashes and miscommunication takes place. Therefore it can utilize from a very initial stage of capability, performing the activity, and task distribution that involve in EA.
Explore the connection between stakeholders and architects
Architecture practitioner can flourish different result that depends on the connection with stakeholders. Vracheva, Judge and Madden (2016), illustrates the effective connection between architects as well as stakeholders is critical to get the sufficient outcomes related to EA. Therefore stakeholder is a fundamental key of architects to understand and connect for the growth of the firm. Whereas Al-Kharusi, Miskon and Bahari (2016), describes the management of stakeholders to achieve and maintain the outcomes of the firm is critical, therefore explain the necessity of involvement of architects with stakeholders is necessary, either connecting to executive or staff implementation architect should involve maintaining a good connection to achieve a healthy relationship. The involvement needs to acquire sensitivity, political, adaptability, and flexibility to assure about the concern and need to connect with stakeholders properly for the growth of the firm. Flourished the relevant views to understand the architecture domain and its impact is critical to assure stakeholders and informed the basic criteria related to the model of the plan. However, Czischke (2018), explain the communication outline that is critical to assure the stakeholders about getting the required detail that maintain by the stakeholders to achieve the benefits and provide architecture inputs. A plan has to generate to illustrate the place of stakeholders or team of stakeholders as per the architecture model, and examine that the role of supportiveness, and their commitments towards the plan. The generated plan can be supervised regularly across the life cycle of architecture and always maintain the connection with stakeholders.
EA governance implication
The basic aspect of maintaining any business is the practice of EA governance. It promotes the strategy of enterprise by involving the following activities such as leadership of a firm, a positive path, an effective IT system, complete idea about the firm. Carter, Moorthy and Walters (2016), By adopting the EA governance plan following benefits can be achieved like getting the quick and accurate decision that assists in transparency and remedies of challenges, consistency of architecture with smooth agreement, Useful and relevant EA management through practical method, Inclined and raised business value through the EA. EA governance is the most beneficial approach, introduction of culture, a sequence of procedure, as well as the obligations that assure the effectiveness and uprightness of the firm architectures. According to Janssen (2019), EA governance structure to manage the process involved in the enterprise architecture that comprises these aspects like tools, guidelines, standards, process, responsibilities, organizational structure, roles, and many others. Singh (2018), EA includes wide areas of roles and constraints like outlined to the firm business model, communication and leadership, knowledge about technologies, develop design skills, develop a basis of control mechanism to develop the idea about the implementation of effective of EA. EA governance method is a well-mannered performance or operation that takes space, time, expertise and other sources to achieve the acceptable outcomes. It is a procedure that involves all the elements of EA to get the solution. There is an illustration of some processes that involved in EA are documentation, communication, review, framework continuity, as well as compliance. Dang and Pekkola (2016), without implementing EA governance, the firm is about to fall under non-standard technology, poor product quality, and inconsistent architectures. These habits will affect the firm financially as well as operationally to achieve the enterprise level. These factors are responsible for the failure of the firm.
Understing the relational challenges of EA governance
In the earlier stage, EA governance was taken as a challenge, and by the influential enterprise architect's governance, its continuous practice makes it known to everyone as an important factor in the field of EA. Szabó and Öri (2017), affirmed that there is a scarcity of governance in several EA plans, due to less consistent, poor responsibilities, procedures, and lack of performance involved. And because of fewer respondents and lack of relational aspects, it needs to strengthen governance to develop the EA efforts. According to Zimmermann et al. (2018), the sources thought about decision-makers that they couldn't reach and difficult for them to get assistance from there to achieve an EA agenda. This shows how different actors are located comparable to each other. Tanaka, de Barros and de Souza Mendes (2018), asserts, that building an architecture order is an essential factor responsible for implementing EA in the government sector. The EA governance challenges describe that it is an understanding of EA that it doesn't include only IT infrastructure, but it also maintains projects, policies, as well as firms’ factors. To perceive the details raise stress between the architects and stakeholders. This is the reason behind the rise in communication difficulty to get the outcomes of EA, due to lack of effective communication, and it creates difficulty in achieving long term goals.
Conclusion
By reviewing the above paper, it can conclude that the EA governance, strategy outcomes improves the firm efficiency, productivity, as well as performance. The firm values conclude from the following models of architecture, standard, and principal that is ensured by architecture governance. The role of relationships plays an important function to improve the EA governance, strategy between stakeholders, and architecture. The technical and environmental challenges of Enterprise Architecture and its solution improve the notion to invest in EA that assists in the development of a firm. Therefore analysing the paper can assist in governance and strategy and its effect on the outcomes of the firm. Factors that involve in EA can be responsible for the growth of the firm if they will utilize properly by following the procedure of management. These factors are leadership, firm culture, firm dimension, business, the maturity of IT, and the capability of EA performance. These factors regularly supervise to reduce the limitation. So implementing EA is not only involve the Information Technology technical aspects or redeveloping the firm's business for transforming. Besides, it renders the structure of the firm and cultural change too. EA operation requires the involvement of stakeholders actively to fulfil the complex social connection, Hence the relation of stakeholders and architects analyze in the paper. So by implementing good relationship and developing the connection between the stakeholders and architecture the productivity of the firm grow day by day by the assistance EA, and also utilizing the different tools and factors like adaptability, flexibility, task performance, and many others.
References
Al-Kharusi, H., Miskon, S. and Bahari, M., 2016, June. Factors Influencing the Engagement between Enterprise Architects and Stakeholders in Enterprise Architecture Development. In PACIS (p. 262).
Brosius, M., Aier, S., Haki, K. and Winter, R., 2018. Enterprise architecture assimilation: an institutional perspective. Association for Information Systems.
Carter, B., Moorthy, S. and Walters, D., 2016. Enterprise architecture view of complex system governance. International Journal of System of Systems Engineering, 7(1-3), pp.95-108.
Czischke, D., 2018. Collaborative housing and housing providers: towards an analytical framework of multi-stakeholder collaboration in housing co-production. International Journal of Housing Policy, 18(1), pp.55-81.
Dang, D.D. and Pekkola, S., 2016. Root Causes of Enterprise Architecture Problems in the Public Sector. PACIS, 287.
Du Preez, J., Van der Merwe, A. and Matthee, M., 2018, September. Understanding Enterprise Architects: Different Enterprise Architect Behavioral Styles. In International Conference on Research and Practical Issues of Enterprise Information Systems (pp. 96-108). Springer, Cham.
Hansen, P. and Hacks, S., 2017. Continuous delivery for enterprise architecture maintenance. Full-scale Software Engineering/The Art of Software Testing, 56.
Ilin, I. and Grigoreva, A., 2017. How stakeholders make decision about changes in enterprise architecture. Cases in private business and public organization. A. A Grigoreva//Computer Modelling in Decision Making, pp.50-62.
Iyamu, T., 2018. Implementation of the enterprise architecture through the Zachman Framework. Journal of Systems and Information Technology.
Janssen, M., 2019, July. Governance as a condition for creating business value from enterprise architecture. In International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design (pp. 229-235). Springer, Cham.
Jugel, D., Sandkuhl, K. and Zimmermann, A., 2016, July. Visual analytics in Enterprise Architecture Management: a systematic literature review. In International Conference on Business Information Systems (pp. 99-110). Springer, Cham.
Lapalme, J., Gerber, A., Van der Merwe, A., Zachman, J., De Vries, M. and Hinkelmann, K., 2016. Exploring the future of enterprise architecture: A Zachman perspective. Computers in Industry, 79, pp.103-113.
Niemi, E. and Pekkola, S., 2019. The Benefits of Enterprise Architecture in Organizational Transformation. Business & Information Systems Engineering, pp.1-13.
Olsen, D.H. and Trelsgård, K., 2016. Enterprise Architecture adoption challenges: An exploratory case study of the Norwegian higher education sector. Procedia Computer Science, 100, pp.804-811.
Raj, P., Raman, A. and Subramanian, H., 2017. Architectural Patterns: Uncover essential patterns in the most indispensable realm of enterprise architecture. Packt Publishing.
Rouhani, B.D., Ahmad, R.B., Nikpay, F. and Mohamaddoust, R., 2019. CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR MODEL FOR ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE IMPLEMENTATION. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science, 32(2), pp.133-148.
Singh, N., 2018. Strategic Operating Model for Enterprise Architecture. Available at SSRN 3098864.
Sultan, M. and Miranskyy, A., 2018, April. Ordering stakeholder viewpoint concerns for holistic enterprise architecture: the W6H framework. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (pp. 78-85).
Szabó, Z. and Öri, D., 2017, December. Information strategy challenges in the digital era how enterprise architecture management can support strategic IS planning. In 2017 11th International Conference on Software, Knowledge, Information Management and Applications (SKIMA) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.
Tanaka, S.A., de Barros, R.M. and de Souza Mendes, L., 2018, June. A proposal to a framework for governance of ICT aiming at smart cities with a focus on Enterprise architecture. In Proceedings of the XIV Brazilian symposium on information systems (pp. 1-8).
Vracheva, V., Judge, W.Q. and Madden, T., 2016. Enterprise strategy concept, measurement, and validation: Integrating stakeholder engagement into the firm's strategic architecture. European Management Journal, 34(4), pp.374-385.
Zimmermann, A., Schmidt, R., Sandkuhl, K., Jugel, D., Bogner, J. and Möhring, M., 2018, October. Evolution of enterprise architecture for digital transformation. In 2018 IEEE 22nd International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW) (pp. 87-96). IEEE.
