Evaluating Integration Architectures – A Scenario-Based Evaluation of Integration Technologies

  • Stephan Aier
  • Marten Schönherr
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3888)


A major aspect of complex Enterprise Architectures is the integration of existing heterogeneous IT-systems in a business process oriented way. The paper starts with the definition of terms as Enterprise Architecture and process orientation. Based on an empirical study the paper shows that there is no significant business process orientation in information system integration projects. Among other reasons this is due to deficits in understanding and managing integration methods and technologies. Therefore the paper addresses the evaluation and comparison of relevant integration architectures as a first step to work on that issue. The paper differentiates individually coded interfaces, centralized hub&spoke and distributed approaches based on standardized interface descriptions (Service Oriented Architecture – SOA). The mentioned empirical study was extended by an action research based prototyping to assure a reliable evaluation and comparison of the three integration architectures. To make them comparable they have been implemented in the same fictitious business scenario which is described briefly. The paper finally compares the integration architectures with a set of 11 criteria which summarize over 400 variables taken into consideration in the evaluation process. The conclusion of the paper is not a solution but a suggestion for further research.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice, 2nd edn. Pearson Education Inc., Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nadler, D.A., Gerstein, M.S., Shaw, R.B.: Organizational architecture – designs for changing organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zachmann, J.A.: A Framework for Information Systems Architecture. IBM Systems Journal 26, 276–292 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Markus, M., Robey, D.: Information technology and organizational change: Causal structure in theory and research. Management Science 34, S.583–S.589 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leavitt, H., Whisler, T.: Management in the 1980s: New information flows cut new organization flows. Harvard Business Review 36, S.41–S.48 (1958)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lewin, A.Y., Hunter, S.D.: Information Technology & Organizational Design: A Longitudinal Study of Information Technology Implementations in the U. S. Retailing Industrie, 1980-1996. In: Glaser, H., Schröder, E.F., Werder, A.v. (eds.) Organisation im Wandel der Märkte, Gabler, Wiesbaden, pp. S.251–S.286 (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Venkatraman, N.V.: IT-Induced Business Reconfiguration. In: Scott Morton, M.S. (ed.) The Corporation of the 1990s. Information Technology and Organizational Transformation, pp. 122–158. Oxford University Press, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aier, S.: Sustainability of Enterprise Architecture and EAI. In: Soliman, K.S. (ed.) Information Technology and Organizations in the 21st Century: Challenges & Solutions. Proceedings of The 2004 International Business Information Management Conference, pp. 182–189. International Business Information Management Association (IBIMA), Amman (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schekkerman, J.: How to survive in the Jungle of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks. Trafford, Victoria (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Noran, O.S.: A Mapping of Individual Architecture Frameworks onto GERAM. In: Bernus, P., Nemes, L., Schmidt, G. (eds.) Handbook on Enterprise Architecture, pp. 65–212. Springer, Berlin (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fowler, M. (ed.): Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture. MITP, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hohpe, G., Woolf, B.: Enterprise Integration Patterns. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brown, W.J., Malveau, R.C., McCormick, H.W., et al.: Anti Patterns. MITP, Bonn (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Linthicum, D.S.: Enterprise Application Integration. Addison-Wesley, Longman (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ruh, W.A., Maginnis, F.X., Brown, W.J.: Enterprise Application Integration. Wiley, John, & Sons, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krafzig, D., Banke, K., Slama, D.: Enterprise SOA: Service-Oriented Architecture. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Erl, T.: Service-oriented architecture: A Field Guide to integrating XML and Web Services. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Juric, M.B., Basha, S.J., Leander, R., et al.: Professional J2EE EAI. Wrox, Birmingham (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Aier
    • 1
  • Marten Schönherr
    • 1
  1. 1.Sekr. FR 6-7Technische Universität BerlinBerlin

Personalised recommendations