Systemic Management of Architectural Decisions in Enterprise Architecture Planning. Four Dimensions and Three Abstraction Levels

This paper presents a process model for the management of architectural decisions in enterprise architecture planning. First, decisions are made at the enterprise level, with strategic business considerations on the enterprise information, systems and technology strategy and governance issues. The next step is to define the domains, to then go on with domain architecture decisions. At the systems level, the enterprise and domain architecture decisions are collected and converted into architecture descriptions accurate in precision, form and detail to be given as input to the information systems development process, following the architectural planning. The model is derived from previous work and empirical findings in three large organizations, where the enterprise architecture and enterprise systems have been developed. This case study contributes with considerations on the domains, their definition, and produces refinements to an enterprise architecture process model presented before. For the development of the model, the "living system" paradigm is followed.

[1]  Elizabeth N. Fong,et al.  Information management directions , 1989 .

[2]  Jean Hartley,et al.  Case study research , 2004 .

[3]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[4]  John A. Zachman,et al.  A Framework for Information Systems Architecture , 1987, IBM Syst. J..

[5]  F. J. Armour,et al.  A big-picture look at enterprise architectures , 1999 .

[6]  Mirja Pulkkinen,et al.  EA Planning, Development and Management Process for Agile Enterprise Development , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[7]  Pedro Manuel Antunes Sousa,et al.  A method to define an Enterprise Architecture using the Zachman Framework , 2004, SAC '04.

[8]  F. J. Armour,et al.  Building an enterprise architecture step by step , 1999 .

[9]  YukioNAMBA,et al.  “EII META—MODEL” ON INTEGRATION FRAMEWORK FOR VIABLE ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS——CITY PLANNING METAPHOR BASED ON STRUCTURAL SIMILARITY , 2003 .

[10]  F. J. Armour,et al.  Enterprise architecture: agile transition and implementation , 2001 .

[11]  Elizabeth N. Fong,et al.  Information management directions: the integration challenge , 1989, SGMD.

[12]  John F. Sowa,et al.  Extending and Formalizing the Framework for Information Systems Architecture , 1992, IBM Syst. J..

[13]  J. H. Frey,et al.  The Interview: From Structured Questions to Negotiated Text , 2000 .

[14]  I. Hodder.  The Interpretation of Documents and Material Culture , 1994 .

[15]  B. Burmahl.  The big picture. , 2000, Health facilities management.

[16]  J CarlosMota.  Big picture. , 2007, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[17]  Col Perks,et al.  Guide to enterprise IT architecture : with 110 illustrations , 2003 .

[18]  Alain Wegmann,et al.  On the Systemic Enterprise Architecture Methodology (Seam) , 2003, ICEIS.

[19]  Col Perks,et al.  Guide to Enterprise IT Architecture , 2003, Springer Professional Computing.

[20]  R. Yin.  The Case Study as a Serious Research Strategy , 1981 .

[21]  R. Malan,et al.  Less is more with minimalist architecture , 2002 .

[22]  Lynda M. Applegate,et al.  Managing in an Information Age: Transforming the Organization for the 1990s , 1994, Transforming Organizations with Information Technology.

[23]  Wilhelm Hasselbring,et al.  Information system integration , 2000, CACM.

[24]  Mirja Pulkkinen,et al.  A Practical Approach to EA Planning and Development: the EA Management Grid , 2004 .

[25]  Elizabeth N. Fong,et al.  Information Management Directions: The Integration Challenge | NIST , 1989 .

[26]  Larry Whitman,et al.  A taxonomy of a living model of the enterprise , 2001, Proceeding of the 2001 Winter Simulation Conference (Cat. No.01CH37304).