Advertisement

Enterprise Architecture: Informed Steering of Enterprises in Motion

  • Henderik A. Proper
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 190)

Abstract

Enterprises are constantly in motion. Novel technologies, new markets opportunities, cost reduction, process improvement, service innovation, globalisation, mergers, acquisitions, etc., continuously trigger enterprises to change. This variety of change drivers also fuels the need for enterprises to seek the right balance between the many, quite often contradicting, drivers for change.

In this position paper, we aim to investigate the potential role of enterprise architecture as a means to support senior management in steering/influencing the direction in which an enterprise “moves” in response to, or in anticipation of, the many change drivers. In doing so, we aim to develop a fundamental understanding of the systemic playing field in which enterprise architecture is to play a role. To this end, we will start by exploring how enterprises can be seen as being continuously “in motion”. We then turn to the control paradigm to reflect on the need to steer this motion. We will also argue that the resulting steering system is a second order information system. Using this understanding we then identify the ingredients needed for enterprise architecture.

Keywords

Enterprise architecture Enterprise transformation Enterprises in motion 

References

  1. 1.
    Mergers and Acquisitions; Dangerous Liaisons – the integration game. Research and opinions; executive summary, Hay, Group (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    TechnoVision 2012 – Bringing business technology to life. Research report, Capgemini, Utrecht, The Netherlands (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining: Discovery Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abraham, R., Tribolet, J., Winter, R.: Transformation of multi-level systems – theoretical grounding and consequences for enterprise architecture management. In: Proper, H.A., Aveiro, D., Gaaloul, K. (eds.) EEWC 2013. LNBIP, vol. 146, pp. 73–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Achterbergh, J., Vriens, D.: Organisations: Social Systems Conducting Experiments. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ashby, W.R.: An Introduction to Cybernetics. Chapman & Hall, London (1956)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Åström, K.J., Murray, R.M.: Feedback Systems: An Introduction for Scientists and Engineers. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Avison, D.E.: Information Systems Development: Methodologies Techniques and Tools, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beer, S.: Diagnosing the System for Organizations. Wiley, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bjekovic, M., Proper, H.A., Sottet, J.-S.: Towards a coherent enterprise modelling landscape. In: Sandkuhl, K., Seigerroth, U., Stirna, J. (eds.) Short Paper Proceedings of the 5th IFIP WG 8.1 Working Conference on the Practice of Enterprise Modeling, Rostock, Germany, 7–8 November 2012, vol. 933, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2012). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-933/pap3.pdf
  11. 11.
    Buckl, S., Matthes, F., Schweda, C.M.: A viable system perspective on enterprise architecture management. In: 2009 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC 2009. pp. 1483–1488, October 2009Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Buckl, S., Matthes, F., Schweda, ChM: A method base for enterprise architecture management. In: Ralyté, J., Mirbel, I., Deneckère, R. (eds.) ME 2011. IFIP AICT, vol. 351, pp. 34–48. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ciborra, C.U.: From thinking to tinkering: the grassroots of strategic information systems. Inf. Soc. 8, 297–309 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davenport, T.H.: Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through Information Technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1993)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Deming, W.E.: Out of the Crisis. MIT Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dietz, J.L.G.: Architecture - building strategy into design. Netherlands Architecture Forum, Academic Service - SDU, The Hague, The Netherlands (2008). http://www.naf.nl
  17. 17.
    Dietz, J.L.G., Hoogervorst, J.A.P., Albani, A., Aveiro, D., Babkin, E., Barjis, J., Caetano, A., Huysmans, P., Iijima, J., van Kervel, S.J.H., Mulder, H., Op ’t Land, M., Proper, H.A., Sanz, J., Terlouw, L., Tribolet, J., Verelst, J., Winter, R.: The discipline of enterprise engineering. Int. J. Organ. Des. Eng. 3(1), 86–114 (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Drucker, P.F.: Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Harper Collins, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Farenhorst, R., de Boer, R.: Architectural knowledge management: supporting architects and auditors. Ph.D. thesis, Free University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, December 2009Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Feltus, C., Dubois, E., Proper, H.A., Band, I., Petit, M.: Enhancing the ArchiMate standard with a responsibility modeling language for access rights management. In: Singh Gaur, M., Elçi, A., Makarevich, O.B., Orgun, M.A., Singh, V. (eds.) 5th International Conference of Security of Information and Networks, SIN ’12, Jaipur, India, 22–26 October 2012, pp. 12–19. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gibson, J.J.: The theory of affordances. In: Shaw, R., Bransford, J. (eds.) Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing, pp. 76–82. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1977)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Greefhorst, D., Proper, H.A.: Architecture Principles - The Cornerstones of Enterprise Architecture. Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Harmsen, F., Proper, H.A.E., Kok, N.: Informed governance of enterprise transformations. In: Proper, E., Harmsen, F., Dietz, J.L.G. (eds.) PRET 2009. LNBIP, vol. 28, pp. 155–180. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Harmsen, F., Proper, E., Schalkwijk, F., Barjis, J., Overbeek, S. (eds.): PRET 2010. LNBIP, vol. 69. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hayles, N.K.: Computing the human. Theor. Cult. Soc. 22(1), 131–151 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Proper, H.A.: A communicative perspective on second order information systems. In: Lasker, G.E. (ed.) Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on System Research, Informatics and Cybernetics, Baden-Baden, Germany. IIAS (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hurwitz, J., Nugent, A., Halper, F., Kaufman, M.: Big Data For Dummies. Wiley, Hoboken (2013)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Iacob, M.-E., Jonkers, H., Lankhorst, M.M., Proper, H.A., Quartel, D.A.C.: ArchiMate 2.0 Specification. The Open Group (2012)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    IFIP-IFAC Task Force. GERAM: Generalised Enterprise Reference Architecture and Methodology. March 1999. Version 1.6.3, Published as Annex to ISO WD15704Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    de Kinderen, S., Gaaloul, K., Proper, H.A.E.: On transforming DEMO models to ArchiMate. In: Bider, I., Halpin, T., Krogstie, J., Nurcan, S., Proper, E., Schmidt, R., Soffer, P., Wrycza, S. (eds.) EMMSAD 2012 and BPMDS 2012. LNBIP, vol. 113, pp. 270–284. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lahrmann, G., Winter, R., Fischer, M.M.: Design and engineering for situational transformation. In: Harmsen et al. [24], pp. 1–16Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Lamsweerde, A.: Goal-oriented requirements engineering: a guided tour. In: Proceedings of RE’01: 5th International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (2001)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Lankhorst, M.M., et al.: Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling Communication and Analysis. Enterprise Engineering Series, 3rd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    de Leeuw, A.C.J.: Organisaties: Management, Analyse, Ontwikkeling en Verandering, een systeem visie. Van Gorcum, Assen (1982). In DutchGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    de Leeuw, A.C.J., Volberda, H.W.: On the concept of flexibility: a dual control perspective. Omega Int. J. Manage. Sci. 24(2), 121–139 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mandis, S.G.: What Happened to Goldman Sachs: An Insider’s Story of Organizational Drift and Its Unintended Consequences. Harvard Business Review Press, Boston (2013)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mathiassen, L.: Systemudvikling og Systemudviklings-Metode. Ph.D. thesis, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark (1981) (In Danish)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Meriam-Webster. Meriam-Webster Online, Collegiate Dictionary (2003)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nakakawa, A., van Bommel, P., Proper, H.A.: Definition and validation of requirements for collaborative decision-making in enterprise architecture creation. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 20(1), 83–136 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Object Management Group. Business process modeling notation, v1.1. OMG Available Specification OMG Document Number: formal/2008-01-17, January 2008Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Liu, X., Pedrycz, W.: Fundamentals. In: Liu, X., Pedrycz, W. (eds.) Axiomatic Fuzzy Set Theory and Its Applications. STUDFUZZ, vol. 244, pp. 3–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Op ’t Land, M., Proper, H.A., Waage, M., Cloo, J., Steghuis, C.: Enterprise Architecture - Creating Value by Informed Governance. Enterprise Engineering Series. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Plataniotis, G., de Kinderen, S., Proper, H.A.: EA anamnesis: towards an approach for enterprise architecture rationalization. In: Printing, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Domain-Specific Modeling (DSM12). ACM DL (2012)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Prakken, B.: Information, Organization and Information Systems Design: An Integrated Approach to Information Problems. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Proper, H.A.: ISP for Large-scale Migrations. Information Services Procurement Library. Ten Hagen & Stam, Den Haag, The Netherlands (2001)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Proper, H.A.: Enterprise Architecture - Growing up to evidence-based management? Chapter 8.1, pp. 317–328. Netherlands Architecture Forum, The Netherlands (2012)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Proper, H.A.: Business informatics for enterprise transformations. In: 2013 IEEE 6th International Conference on Service-Oriented Computing and Applications (SOCA), pp. 251–251, December 2013Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Proper, H.A., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Veldhuijzen van Zanten, G.E.: Communication of enterprise architectures. In: Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling, Communication and Analysis [33], pp. 67–82Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Proper, H.A., Op ’t Land, M.: Lines in the water - the line of reasoning in an enterprise engineering case study from the public sector. In: Harmsen et al. [24], pp. 193–216Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pyzdek, T.: The Six Sigma Handbook: The Complete Guide for Greenbelts, Blackbelts, and Managers at All Levels, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2003). Revised and Expanded EditionGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    van Reijswoud, V.E., Dietz, J.L.G.: DEMO Modelling Handbook, vol. 1, 2nd edn. Delft University of Technology, Delft (1999)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ettema, R., Dietz, J.L.G.: ArchiMate and DEMO – mates to date? In: Albani, A., Barjis, J., Dietz, J.L.G. (eds.) CIAO! 2009. LNBIP, vol. 34, pp. 172–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rouse, W.B.: A theory of enterprise transformation. Syst. Eng. 8(4), 279–295 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Seligmann, P.S., Wijers, G.M., Sol, H.G.: Analyzing the Structure of I.S. Methodologies, an alternative approach. In: Maes, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the 1st Dutch Conferenceon Information Systems. Amersfoort, the Netherlands, 1-2 November 1989Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Siegel, M.: The sense-think-act paradigm revisited. In: 2003 1st International Workshop on Robotic Sensing, ROSE’ 03, pp. 5–10, June 2003Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Sol, H.G.: A feature analysis of information systems design methodologies: methodological considerations. In: Olle, T.W., Sol, H.G., Tully, C.J. (eds.) Information Systems Design Methodologies: A Feature Analysis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 1–7. North-Holland/IFIP WG8.1, Amsterdam (1983)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Sousa, P., Lima, J., Sampaio, A., Pereira, C.: An approach for creating and managing enterprise blueprints: a case for IT blueprints. In: Albani, A., Barjis, J., Dietz, J.L.G. (eds.) CIAO! 2009. LNBIP, vol. 34, pp. 70–84. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sousa, P., Gabriel, R., Tadao, G., Carvalho, R., Sousa, P.M., Sampaio, A.: Enterprise transformation: the Serasa experian case. In: Harmsen, F., Grahlmann, K., Proper, E. (eds.) PRET 2011. LNBIP, vol. 89, pp. 134–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sowa, J.F., Zachman, J.A.: Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst. J. 31(3), 590–616 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    The Open Group: TOGAF Version 9. Van Haren Publishing, Zaltbommel (2009)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Veldhuijzen van Zanten, G.E., Hoppenbrouwers, S.J.B.A., Proper, H.A.: System development as a rational communicative process. J. Syst. Cybern. Inf. 2(4), 47–51 (2004). http://www.iiisci.org/Journal/sci/pdfs/P492036.pdf
  62. 62.
    Wagter, R., van der Berg, M., Luijpers, J., van Steenbergen, M.: Dynamic Enterprise Architecture: How to Make It Work. Wiley, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wagter, R., Proper, H.A., Witte, D.: The extended enterprise coherence-governance assessment. In: Aier, S., Ekstedt, M., Matthes, F., Proper, E., Sanz, J.L. (eds.) PRET 2012 and TEAR 2012. LNBIP, vol. 131, pp. 218–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Wagter, R., Proper, H.A., Witte, D.: A theory for enterprise coherence governance. In: Saha, P. (ed.) A Systematic Perspective to Managing Complexity with EA. IGI Publishing (2013, To appear)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Wegmann, A.: On the systemic enterprise architecture methodology (SEAM). In: International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2003) (2003)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    van’t Wout, J., Waage, M., Hartman, H., Stahlecker, M., Hofman, A.: The Integrated Architecture Framework Explained. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Zachman, J.A.: A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst. J. 26(3), 276–292 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CRP Henri TudorLuxembourgLuxembourg
  2. 2.EE-TeamLuxembourgLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations