Prioritization of EA Debts Facilitating Portfolio Theory

Implementing an enterprise architecture (EA) project might not always be a success due to uncertainty and unavailability of resources. Hitherto, we have proposed a new metaphor –Enterprise Architecture Debt (EAD)–, which makes bad habits within EAs explicit. We anticipate that the accumulation of EAD will negatively influence EA quality, also expose the business into risk. Recognizing the importance of business-IT alignment in enterprise architecture context, this paper proposes an application of portfolio-based thinking and utility theory for EAD prioritization. For proof-of-concept purpose, we develop synthetic data using coarse-grained estimates to demonstrate the application of the proposed portfolio-based approach which helps to determine the optimum selection of EAD to be resolved. The results show that our approach can help EA practitioners and management to reason their EA investment decisions based on the EAD concept, with adjustable enterprises risk tolerance level.

[1]  Rami Bahsoon,et al.  Systematic Elaboration of Compliance Requirements Using Compliance Debt and Portfolio Theory , 2014, REFSQ.

[2]  Reinhold Plösch,et al.  Design Debt Prioritization , 2018 .

[3]  Siew Hock Ow,et al.  Management Practices : The Criteria for Success or Failure , 2008 .

[4]  Peng Liang,et al.  A systematic mapping study on technical debt and its management , 2015, J. Syst. Softw..

[5]  Christer Carlsson,et al.  A Possibilistic Approach to Selecting Portfolios with Highest Utility Score , 2001, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[6]  Yuanfang Cai,et al.  Using technical debt data in decision making: Potential decision approaches , 2012, 2012 Third International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD).

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

[8]  Carolyn B. Seaman,et al.  A portfolio approach to technical debt management , 2011, MTD '11.

[9]  Ward Cunningham,et al.  The WyCash portfolio management system , 1992, OOPSLA '92.

[10]  Rami Bahsoon,et al.  Prioritizing Technical Debt in Database Normalization Using Portfolio Theory and Data Quality Metrics , 2018, 2018 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Technical Debt (TechDebt).

[11]  John Norstad,et al.  An Introduction to Utility Theory , 2005 .

[12]  Forrest Shull,et al.  Prioritizing design debt investment opportunities , 2011, MTD '11.

[13]  Jean-Louis Letouzey,et al.  The SQALE method for evaluating Technical Debt , 2012, 2012 Third International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt (MTD).

[14]  Rüdiger Buchkremer,et al.  Past, current and future trends in enterprise architecture - A view beyond the horizon , 2018, Comput. Ind..

[15]  Richard T. Vidgen,et al.  An exploration of technical debt , 2013, J. Syst. Softw..

[16]  Horst Lichter,et al.  Towards the Definition of Enterprise Architecture Debts , 2019, 2019 IEEE 23rd International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOCW).

[17]  Zahra Shakeri Hossein Abad,et al.  Using real options to manage Technical Debt in Requirements Engineering , 2015, 2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE).

[18]  Marek G. Stochel,et al.  Value-Based Technical Debt Model and Its Application , 2012, ICSEA 2012.

[19]  Iyiola Omisore,et al.  The modern portfolio theory as an investment decision tool , 2012 .

[20]  Apostolos Ampatzoglou,et al.  The financial aspect of managing technical debt: A systematic literature review , 2015, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[21]  Nigel P. Melville,et al.  Theories Used in Information Systems Research: Insights from Complex Network Analysis , 2013 .

[22]  Dag H. Olsen Enterprise Architecture management challenges in the Norwegian health sector , 2017, CENTERIS/ProjMAN/HCist.

[23]  Robert L. Nord,et al.  Managing technical debt in software-reliant systems , 2010, FoSER '10.