Advertisement

The Dynamic Architecture Maturity Matrix: Instrument Analysis and Refinement

  • Marlies van Steenbergen
  • Jurjen Schipper
  • Rik Bos
  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6275)

Abstract

The field of enterprise architecture is still very much in development. Many architecture teams are looking to improve their effectiveness. One of the instruments to do so is the Dynamic Architecture Maturity Matrix. In the past the DyAMM has been applied to many architecture practices to assess their architecture maturity level. In this paper we present an analysis of these assessments. This provides us with an overview of common strengths and weaknesses in existing architecture practices. In addition, we use the set of assessments to analyze the DyAMM instrument for four types of anomalies.

Keywords

enterprise architecture maturity models architecture maturity matrix 

References

  1. 1.
    Lankhorst, et al.: Enterprise Architecture at Work. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ross, J.W., Weill, P., Robertson, D.: Enterprise Architecture as Strategy. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Versteeg, G., Bouwman, H.: Business architecture: a new paradigm to relate business strategy to ICT. Information Systems Frontier 8, 91–102 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van der Raadt, B., Slot, R., Van Vliet, H.: Experience report: assessing a global financial services company on its enterprise architecture effectiveness using NAOMI. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van Steenbergen, M., Van den Berg, M., Brinkkemper, S.: A Balanced Approach to Developing the Enterprise Architecture Practice. In: Filipe, J., Cordeiro, J., Cardoso, J. (eds.) Enterprise Information Systems. LNBIP, vol. 12, pp. 240–253 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    GAO: A framework for assessing and improving enterprise architecture management (2003) Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    CMMI: CMMISM for Systems Engineering, Software Engineering, Integrated Product and Process Development, and Supplier Sourcing (CMMI-SE/SW/IPPD/SS, V1.1) Staged Representation; CMU/SEI-2002-TR-012; ESC-TR-2002-012 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Appel, W.: Architecture Capability Assessment. Enterprise Planning & Architecture Strategies. METAGroup 4(7) (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    METAgroup: Diagnostic for Enterprise Architecture, META Practice (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    NASCIO: NASCIO enterprise architecture maturity model (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Westbrock, T.: Architecture Process Maturity Revisited and Revised. METAgroup Delta 2902 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luftman, J.: Assessing business-IT alignment maturity. Communications of AIS 4, Article 14, 1–49 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Koomen, T., Pol, M.: Test Process Improvement, a practical step-by-step guide to structured testing. Addison-Wesley, Boston (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van de Weerd, I., Bekkers, W., Brinkkemper, S.: Developing a Maturity Matrix for Software Product Management. Institute of Computing and Information Sciences, Utrecht University. Technical report UU-CS-2009-015 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van den Berg, M., Van Steenbergen, M.: Building an Enterprise Architecture Practice. Springer, Dordrecht (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wagter, R., Van den Berg, M., Luijpers, L., Van Steenbergen, M.: Dynamic Enterprise Architecture: how to make it work. Wiley, Hoboken (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Information site DYA: http://www.dya.info
  18. 18.
    DeSanctis, G., Gallupe, R.B.: A Foundation for the Study of Group Decision Support Systems. Management Science 33(5), 589–609 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    GroupSystems MeetingRoom: Concepts Guide, Tucson, Arizona (1990 – 2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marlies van Steenbergen
    • 1
  • Jurjen Schipper
    • 2
  • Rik Bos
    • 2
  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
    • 2
  1. 1.Sogeti NetherlandsDiemenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Information and Computing SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations