Systems theory based architecture framework for complex system governance

SYSTEMS THEORY BASED ARCHITECTURE FRAMEWORK FOR COMPLEX SYSTEM GOVERNANCE Bry Carter Old Dominion University, 2016 Director: Dr. Charles B. Keating The purpose of this research was to develop a systems theory based framework for complex system governance using grounded theory approach. Motivation for this research includes: 1) the lack of research that identifies modeling characteristics for complex system governance, 2) the lack of a framework rooted in systems theory to support performance of complex system governance functions for maintaining system viability. This research focused on answering: What systems theoretic framework can be developed to inform complex system governance and enable articulation of governance function performance? The grounded theory research approach utilized three phases. First, the literature in systems theory, management cybernetics, governance and enterprise architecture was synthesized and open-coded to generalize main themes using broad analysis in NVivo software, researcher note taking in EndNote, and cataloging in Excel spreadsheets. Second, the literature underwent axial-coding to identify interconnections and relevance to systems theory and complex system governance, primarily using Excel spreadsheets. Finally, selective coding and interrelationships were identified and the complex system governance architecture framework was shaped, reviewed, and validated by qualified experts. This research examined a grounded theory approach not traditionally used in systems theory research. It produced a useful systems theory based framework for practical application, bridging the gap between theory and practice in the emerging field of complex system governance. Theoretical implications of this research include identifying the state of knowledge in each literature domain and the production of a unique framework for performing metasystem governance functions that is analytically generalizable. Management cybernetics, governance, and systems theory are expanded through a testable tool for meta-level organizational and system governance theories. Enterprise architecture is advanced with a multi-disciplinary framework that coherently presents and facilitates new use for architecture at the metasystem level. Methodological implications of this research include using grounded theory approach for systems theory research, where it is atypical. Although a non-traditional method, it provides an example for conducting fruitful research that can contribute knowledge. Practical implications of this research include a useable framework for complex system governance which has never before existed and a living structure adaptable to evolutionary change coming from any related domain or future practical application feedback. Copyright, 2016, by Bry Carter, All Rights Reserved. iv This dissertation is dedicated to Esmeralda and Alexandra. -Together Foreverv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am most grateful to Dr. Charles B. Keating, my Advisor, for opening the aperture of my worldview in systems thinking and inspiring me to be part of a Learning Community on the leading edges of complex system governance. Thank you Dr. Mamadou D. Seck, Dr. Teddy Cotter, and Dr. James C. Pyne for your academic partnership and oversight as research committee members. Thank you Dr. Kim Sibson for your time and effort conducting editing review. Thank you Learning Community members for your professional partnership and critical peer reviews of this research and related briefings, journal articles, and book chapter material. I look forward to continuing the journey with you. Many cast doubt on the potential for return on investment in time and resources required to pursue this endeavor of independent scholarly research, but never once was there a shred of doubt expressed by my devoted wife or loving daughter despite the many competing challenges we faced together along the way. Esmeralda and Alexandra, thank you. vi NOMENCLATURE ADP Architecture Development Process AF-EAF Air Force Enterprise Architecture Framework AFIoT IEEE P2413 – Architecture Framework for the Internet of Things AGA Australian Government Architecture Reference Models AGATE Atelier de Gestion de l’ArchiTecturE des Systèmes d’Information et de Communication AM Avancier Methods ARCHI ArchiMate AUSDAF Australian Defence Architecture Framework AAF Automotive Architecture Framework ATO Australian Taxation Office BCA Business Capability Architecture BDAF Big Data Architecture Framework BEAM Business Enterprise Architecture Modeling BPEAM Best Practice Enterprise Architecture Management CAFCR Customer Objectives, Application, Functional, Conceptual, and Realisation Model CAFEA Common Approach to Federal Enterprise Architecture CBDI-SAE CBDI Service Architecture & Engineering (CBDI-SAETM) for SOA CEA CEA Framework: A Service Oriented Enterprise Architecture Framework CEAF Commission Enterprise IT Architecture Framework CIAF Capgemini Integrated Architecture Framework vii CSG Complex System Governance CSGAF Complex System Governance Architecture Framework DoDAF Department of Defense Architecture Framework DND/CF Canadian Department of National Defense and the Canadian Forces DNDAF DN/CF Architecture Framework DRA1 Dragon 1 DYA Dynamic Architecture EA Enterprise Architecture EAB Enterprise Architecture Blueprinting E2AF Extended Enterprise Architecture Framework EAM-PC EAM Pattern Catalog EAP Enterprise Architecture Design Principles EEAF US OMB Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework EES Extended Enterprise Systems EPCAF EPC Global Architecture Framework ESAAF European Space Agency Architecture Framework ESG Enterprise Systems Governance ESSAF Essential Architecture Framework eTOM Business Process Framework EXAF Extreme Architecture Framework FEAF Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework FESS Framework of Enterprise Systems and Structures viii FFLV+GODS Functions-Flows-Layers-Views + Governance-OperationsDevelopment-Support FMLS-ADF FMLS Architecture Description Framework 3.0 FSAM Federal Segment Architecture Methodology GA Garland and Anthony GEAF Gartner’s Enterprise Architecture Framework GERA ISO 15704 Generic Enterprise Reference Architecture HEAF Health Enterprise Architecture Framework HV Human View (NATO) IADS IBM Architecture Description Standard IAF Index Architecture Framework ICODE iCode Security Architecture Framework IFW IBM Information Framework 3D EAF 3-Dimensional Enterprise Architecture Framework 4+1 Kruchten’s 4+1 View Model LEAD Leading Enterprise Architecture Development Practice LST Living Systems Theory MACCIS An Architecture Description Framework for Technical Infostructures and their Enterprise Environment MCS Minimal Critical Specifications MBSA Model Based System Architecture MEGAF Mega-modeling Architecture Framework MODAF Ministry of Defense Architecture Framework ix MP Metasystem Pathology MV Metasystem Viewpoint NAF NATO Architecture Framework NIST-EAM NIST Enterprise Architecture Model OIO OIO Enterprise Architecture Method PEAF Pragmatic Enterprise Architecture PPOOA Processes Pipeline in Object Oriented Architectures PRINCE2 Projects In Controlled Environments PRISM Partnership for Research in Information Systems Management QGEA Queensland Government Enterprise Architecture RASDS Reference Architecture for Space Data Systems RM-ODP ISO Reference Model for Open Distributed Processing RWSSA Rozanski and Woods S4V Siemens 4 Views SABSA Sherwood Applied Business Security Architecture SASSY Self-Architecting Software Systems SDLC System Development Life Cycle SGCAF Smart Grid Conceptual Architecture Framework SoS System of Systems ST Systems Theory TEAF (US) Treasury Enterprise Architecture Framework TOGAF The Open Group Architecture Framework TRAK The Rail Architecture Framework x UADF Universal Architecture Description Framework VCD Value Chain Diagram VSM Viable System Model WFM Work Flow Model xAF Extensible Architecture Framework ZAF Zachman Framework xi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... xiii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... xv Chapter I INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 Problem Statement and Background ............................................................................................ 1 Research Question ....................................................................................................................... 9 Research Purpose ......................................................................................................................... 9 Research Delimitations .............................................................................................................. 10 Research Significance ................................................................................................................ 11 Research Limitations ................................................................................................................. 12 Dissertation Structure ................................................................................................................ 14 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................................... 15 II LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 16 Literature Domain Reviews and Critique .................................................................................. 17 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................................... 45 III RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE ..................................................................