Advertisement

Determinants to Benefit from Enterprise Architecture Management – A Research Model

  • Ralf-Christian HärtingEmail author
  • Christopher ReichsteinEmail author
  • Kurt SandkuhlEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 339)

Abstract

A successful digital transformation in enterprises requires surpassing infrastructural flexibility within firms and high IT competency to accomplish changing business requirements. Digital Enterprises are challenged to combine business and IT to gain from existing technological achievements. Previous studies showed that there are certain factors influencing the benefit of Enterprise Architecture Management. However, there are some more influencing factors due to the digital transformation that were not taken into consideration yet. An alternative research approach investigates more factors and helps to get a deeper insight of impact factors. This paper draws on a first approach to investigate additional factors and their impact on EAM. The approach is based on a profound literature research in order to build a new empirical research model. In addition, the indicators were examined in a case of industrial digital transformation. It is shown that factors aggregated to the determinants IT Landscapes, internal as well as external Business Environments and the level of EAM Establishment have substantially impact on the benefit of EAM in enterprises.

Keywords

EAM Enterprise Architecture Impact factors Benefit of EAM Use of EAM Qualitative study IT Business Alignment 

References

  1. 1.
    Lange, M., Mendling, J., Recker, J.: An empirical analysis of the factors and measures of enterprise architecture management success. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 25, 411–431 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Möhring, M., Schmidt, R., Härting, R.-C., Bär, F., Zimmermann, A.: Classification framework for context data from business processes. In: Fournier, F., Mendling, J. (eds.) BPM 2014. LNBIP, vol. 202, pp. 440–445. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15895-2_37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zimmermann, A., et al.: Decision case management for digital enterprise architectures with the Internet of Things. In: Neves-Silva, R., Jain, L., Howlett, R.: Proceedings of the 8th KES International Conference on Intelligent Decision Technologies Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies (KES-IDT 2016), pp. 27–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39627-9_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wegmann, A.: The systemic enterprise architecture methodology (SEAM) - business and IT alignment for competiteveness. In: International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems 2003 (ICEIS 2003), pp. 483–490 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tamm, T., Seddon, P.B., Shanks, G., Reynolds, P.: How does enterprise architecture add value to organizations? Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 28(10), 141–168 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Niemi, E.: Perceptions from literature and practice, evaluation of enterprise and software architectures: critical issues, metrics and practices: AISA Project 8. University of Jyväskylä, Information Technology Research Institute (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schmidt, C., Buxmann, P.: Outcomes and success factors of enterprise IT architecture management: empirical insight from the international financial services industry. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 20(2), 168–185 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cooper, D.R., Schindler, P.S., Sun, J.: Business research methods (2013). http://sutlib2.sut.ac.th/sut_contents/H139963.pdf. Accessed 19 Feb 2015
  9. 9.
    Cooper, H.M.: Synthesizing Research – A Guide for Literature Reviews, vol. 3. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hennig-Thurau, T., Walsh, G., Schrader, U.: VHB-JOURQUAL: Ein Ranking von betriebswirtschaftlich-relevanten Zeitschriften auf der Grundlage von Expertenurteilen. Z. betriebswirtsch. Forsch. 56(9), 520–545 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Computing Research & Education: Conference rankings. http://www.core.edu.au/index.php/conference-rankings. Accessed 20 July 2016
  12. 12.
    Schmidt, R., Möhring, M., Härting, R.-C., Reichstein, C., Zimmermann, A., Luceri, S.: Benefits of enterprise architecture management – insights from European experts. IFIP Working Conference on The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, pp. 223–236. Springer, Heidelberg (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25897-3_15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ross, J.W., Weill, P., Robertson, D.C.: Enterprise Architecture As Strategy, vol. 1. Harvard Business School Press, Brighton (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sandkuhl, K., Wißotzki, M., Stirna, J.: Unternehmensmodellierung: Grundlagen, Methode und Praktiken. Berlin, Wiesbaden: Springer (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31093-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hanschke, I.: Strategisches Management der IT-Landschaft: Ein praktischer Leitfaden für das Enterprise Architecture Management, vol. 2. Carl Hanser, Munich (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    BITKOM: Enterprise Architecture Management – neue Disziplin für die ganzheitliche Unternehmensentwicklung (2011). https://www.bitkom.org/Bitkom/Publikationen/Leitfaden-EAM-Enterprise-Architecture-Management.html. Accessed 10 July 2016
  17. 17.
    Aier, S., Riege, C., Winter, R.: Unternehmensarchitektur – Literaturüberblick und Stand der Praxis. Wirtschaftsinformatik 50(4), 292–304 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wigand, R.T., Picot, A., Reichwald, R.: Information, Organization and Management: Expanding Markets and Corporate Boundaries. Wiley, Hoboken (1997)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pereira, C.M., Sousa, P.: Enterprise architecture: business and IT alignment. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 1344–1345 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Luftman, J.: Assessing business-IT alignment maturity. In: Strategies for Information Technology Governance, vol. 4, p. 99 (2004)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Luftman, J., Brier, T.: Achieving and sustaining business-IT alignment. Calif. Manag. Rev. 42, 109–122 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hanschke, I.: Enterprise Architecture Management – einfach und effektiv: Ein praktischer Leitfaden für die Einführung von EAM. vol. 2, Munich (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Timm, F., Wißotzki, M., Köpp, Ch., Sandkuhl, K.: Current state of enterprise architecture management in SME. In: INFORMATIK 2015 - 45. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Informatik, Workshop Digital Enterprise Architecture, DEA 2015, Cottbus, Germany (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hanschke, S., Ernsting, J., Kuchen, H.: Integrating agile software development and enterprise architecture management. In: 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 4099–4108 (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lakhrouit, J., Ba, K.: Evaluating complexity of enterprise architecture components landscapes. In: 10th International Conference on Intelligent Systems: Theories and Applications, pp. 1–5 (2015)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Plataniotis, G., De Kinderen, S., Ma, Q., Proper, E.: A conceptual model for compliance checking support of enterprise architecture decisions. In: 17th Conference on Business Informatics, vol. 1, pp. 191–198 (2015)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Banaeianjahromi, N., Smolander, K.: What do we know about the role of enterprise architecture in enterprise integration? a systematic mapping study. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 29(1), 140–164 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hinkelmann, K., Gerber, A., Karagiannis, D., Thoenssen, B., van der Merwe, A., Woitsch, R.: A new paradigm for the continuous alignment of business and IT: combining enterprise architecture modelling and enterprise ontology. Comput. Ind. 79, 77–86 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Geerts, G.L., O’Leary, D.E.: A Note on an Architecture for Integrating Cloud Computing and Enterprise Systems using REA. Int. J. Acc. Inf. Syst. 19, 59–67 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rouhani, B.D., Mahrin, M.N.R., Nikpay, F., Ahmad, R.B., Nikfard, P.: A Systematic Literature Review on Enterprise Architecture Implementation Methodologies. Inf. Softw. Technol. 62, 1–20 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Azevedo, C.L., Iacob, M.E., Almeida, J.P.A., van Sinderen, M., Pires, L.F., Guizzardi, G.: Modeling resources and capabilities in enterprise architecture: a well-founded ontology-based proposal for archimate. Inf. Syst. 54, 235–262 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Alwadain, A., Fielt, E., Korthaus, A., Rosemann, M.: empirical insights into the development of a service-oriented enterprise architecture. Data Knowl. Eng. 105, 39–52 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lapalme, J., Gerber, A., Van der Merwe, A., Zachman, J., De Vries, M., Hinkelmann, K.: Exploring the future of enterprise architecture: a zachman Perspective. Comput. Ind. 79, 103–113 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Romero, D., Vernadat, F.: Enterprise information systems state of the art: past, present and future trends. Comput. Ind. 79, 3–13 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sandkuhl, K., Seigerroth, U., Kaidalova, J.: Towards Integration Methods of Product-IT into Enterprise Architectures. In: EDOC Workshops, pp. 23–28. IEEE (2017)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Härting, R.C., Reichstein, C., Jozinovic, P.: The Potential value of digitization for business – insights from German-speaking experts. In: Eibl, M., Gaedke, M. (eds.) Informatik 2017, Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Informatik. Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI), vol. 1647, Gesellschaft für Informatik, Bonn (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aalen University of Applied Sciences, Business AdministrationAalenGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Computer ScienceRostock UniversityRostockGermany

Personalised recommendations