The Contribution of Enterprise Architecture to the Achievement of Organizational Goals: A Review of the Evidence

  • Vasilis Boucharas
  • Marlies van Steenbergen
  • Slinger Jansen
  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 70)

Abstract

This paper reports the findings of a systematic review on the literature concerning the potential contribution of Enterprise Architecture (EA) to the achievement of various business goals. The review revealed the current state of the scientific and practitioner’s literature concerning the potential benefits of EA as describing 29 unique contexts within which EA has been found to deliver 100 unique benefits through 3 value-generative mechanisms. This review enhances the understanding of EA of both researchers and practitioners by providing valuable information on the potential benefits of EA and their relationships, their applicability (context), and the mechanisms that generate them. Additionally, this review is expected to enable practitioners to establish the business case for EA by means of scientifically grounded reasoning about how EA might contribute to the achievement of certain business goals.

Keywords

enterprise architecture organizational goals systematic review 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bucher, T., Fischer, R., Kurpjuweit, S., Winter, R.: Enterprise architecture analysis and application: An exploratory study. In: EDOC Workshop TEAR (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schelp, J., Stutz, M.: A balanced scorecard approach to measure the value of enterprise architecture. In: 2nd Workshop on Trends in Enterprise Architecture Research Via Nova Architectura, pp. 5–11 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Steenbergen, M.v., Brinkkemper, S.: Modeling the contribution of enterprise architecture practice to the achievement of business goals. In: 17th International Conference on Information Systems Development (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kappelman, L., McGinnis, T., Pettite, A., Sidorova, A.: Enterprise architecture: Charting the territory for academic research. In: 14th Americas Conference on Information Systems, University of North Texas (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Slot, R., Dedene, G., Maes, R.: Business value of solution architecture. Advances in Enterprise Engineering II, vol. 28, pp. 84–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martinsons, M., Davison, R., Tse, D.: The balanced scorecard: a foundation for the strategic management of information systems. Decis. Support Syst. 25(1), 71–88 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lankhorst, M.: Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modeling, Communication and Analysis. Springer, Heidelberg (December 2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., van Aken, J.E.: Developing design propositions through research synthesis. Organ. Stud. 29(3), 393 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pawson, R.: Evidence-based policy: the promise of realist synthesis. Evaluation 8(3), 340 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bunge, M.: Technology as applied science. Technol. Cult. 7(3), 329–347 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aken, J.E.v.: Management research as a design science: Articulating the research products of mode 2 knowledge production in management. Br. J. Manag. 16(1), 19–36 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tranfield, D.R., Denyer, D., Smart, P., Bedfordshire, M.K., Cranfield, M.K.: Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br. J. Manag. 14, 207–222 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Higgins, J.P.T., Green, S.: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. 5.0.1 edn. The Cochrane Collaboration (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Centre for Reviews & Dissemination: Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Healthcare. Centre for Reviews & Dissemination, University of York, York (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hopewell, S., McDonald, S., Clarke, M., Egger, M.: Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2) (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dickersin, K., Scherer, R., Lefebvre, C.: Systematic reviews: Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. Br. Manag. J. 309(6964), 1286–1291 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Murphy, E., Dingwall, R., Greatbatch, D., Parker, S., Watson, P.: Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature. Health Tech. Assess 2(16), 1–274 (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hammersley, M.: Reading ethnographic research: A critical guide. Longman Publishing Group, Berlin (1991)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mays, N., Pope, C.: Assessing quality in qualitative research. Br. Med. J. 320(7226), 50–52 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yin, R.K.: Case study research: design and methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Health Care Practice Research & Development Unit, U.o.S.: Evaluation tool for quantitative research studies (2005)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    CASP: The critical appraisal skills programme (casp): 10 questions to help you make sense of qualitative researchGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Campbell, R., Pound, P., Pope, C., Britten, N., Pill, R., Morgan, M., Donovan, J.: Evaluating meta-ethnography: a synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Soc. Sci. Med. 56(4), 671–684 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boaz, A., Ashby, D.: Fit for purpose?: assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice. ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice (2003)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pawson, R.: Evidence-based policy: in search of a method. Evaluation 8(2), 157 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G., Walshe, K.: Realist review-a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 10(1), 21–34 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ross, J.W., Weill, P.: Understanding the benefits of enterprise architecture. CISR Research Briefings (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Engelsman, W., Iacob, M.E., Franken, H.M.: Architecture-driven requirements engineering. In: 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 285–286. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pulkkinen, M., Naumenko, A., Luostarinen, K.: Managing information security in a business network of machinery maintenance services business - enterprise architecture as a coordination tool. J. Syst. Softw. 80(10), 1607–1620 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kamogawa, T., Okada, H.: Enterprise architecture create business value. In: 9th Annual International Symposium on Applications and the Internet, pp. 205–208 (2009)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nilsson, A.: Management of technochange in an interorganizational e-government project. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, p. 209 (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Boh, W.F., Yellin, D.: Using enterprise architecture standards in managing information technology. J. Manag. Inform. Syst. 23(3), 163–207 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gregor, S., Hart, D., Martin, N.: Enterprise architectures: enablers of business strategy and is/it alignment in government. Inform. Tech. People 20(2), 96 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Obitz, T., Babu, M.K.: Enterprise architecture expands its role in strategic business transformation: Infosys enterprise architecture survey 2008/2009. Technical report (2009)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Varnus, J., Panaich, N.: Togaf 9 enterprise architecture survey results. In: 23rd Enterprise Architecture Practitioners Conference (2009)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schekkerman, J.: Trends in enterprise architecture 2005: How are organizations progressing? Technical report (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Arnold, B., Land, M.O., Dietz, J.L.G.: Effects of an architectural approach to the implementation of shared service centers. In: 2nd International Workshop on Enterprise Applications and Services in the Finance Industry (2005)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Martin, N., Gregor, S., Hart, D.: Advances in Government Enterprise Architecture. In: Government Enterprise Architectures: Enabling the Alignment of Business Processes and Information Systems. Information Science Reference - Imprint, pp. 409–437. IGI Publishing, Hershey (2008)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Boucharas, V., Steenbergen, M.v., Jansen, S., Brinkkemper, S.: The contribution of enterprise architecture to the achievement of organizational goals: Establishing the enterprise architecture benefits framework. Technical Report UU-CS-2010-014, Department of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University (2010)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kaplan, R.M., Norton, D.: Strategy maps: converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2004)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Niemi, E.: Enterprise architecture benefits: Perceptions from literature and practice. In: 7th IBIMA Conference on the Internet & Information Systems in the Digital Age, pp. 14–16 (2006)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Noran, O., Bernus, P.: Service oriented architecture vs. enterprise architecture: Competition or synergy? In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM-WS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5333, pp. 304–312. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vasilis Boucharas
    • 1
  • Marlies van Steenbergen
    • 2
  • Slinger Jansen
    • 1
  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information and Computing SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Architecture and Business SolutionsVianenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations