Poietical Foundation

  • Jan A. P. Hoogervorst
Part of the The Enterprise Engineering Series book series (TEES)


Realizing proper ways of organizing is based on the foundation for creating enterprises, which is formed by the enterprise governance competence discussed in the previous chapter and the theories, methodology, and methods of enterprise engineering, which are the topics of this chapter. After summarizing enterprise challenges and resuming the need for holistic, enterprise-wide design, the theoretical basis for the enterprise engineering design science is presented. For avoiding theoretical incompleteness, the enterprise conceptual model introduced in Chap.  2 is taken as the reference for the necessary enterprise-wide perspective, whereby an enterprise is viewed as a system. Based on the system perspective and the fundamental function-construction distinction, our outline of the enterprise engineering design science starts with explaining the essence of a system function as a relationship with the system environment and construction as a system property. The profound implications of this distinction for functional and constructional design are explained and illustrated. Various other concepts for design are introduced, such as functional and constructional decomposition into functional and constructional design domains. These domains are essential for defining functional and constructional requirements and architecture. The difference between these concepts is explained. Through the schematic of the generic requirements and architecture framework, the design concepts are expressed with respect to their mutual relationships. Subsequently, the schematics of the generic system development framework and the generic system development process illustrate the practice of system development.

Having discussed the concepts for design from the general system development perspective, these concepts are in turn applied to the design of enterprises. After explaining the notion of a ‘model’ and discussing the concept of essential construction models, the theory of essential enterprise modeling is outlined as the starting point for enterprise design. Subsequently, further enterprise functional and constructional design is discussed. As in the general system case, enterprise functional and constructional decomposition into enterprise functional and constructional design domains is essential for defining enterprise functional and constructional requirements and architecture. Special attention is paid to the publication of requirements and architecture as an important aspect of enterprise governance. Various examples of enterprise requirements and enterprise architecture are provided, and their role in creating coherent and consistent enterprise-wide design is stressed as a critical condition for enterprise operational and strategic performance. In view of the complexity of enterprises, which also includes concepts like behavior and culture, the important distinction between direct and indirect design, and their relationship, is explained. All design concepts and their mutual relationships are expressed by the schematic of the enterprise requirements and architecture framework and the generic enterprise development framework, as well as positioned against the phases of enterprise realization discussed in Chap.  3. Finally, the implications of the poietical foundation for enterprise governance and enterprise engineering are summarized.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adler, P.: Corporate scandals: it’s time for reflection in business schools. Acad. Manag. Exec. 16(3), 148–149 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Apostel, L.: Towards the formal study of models in the non-formal sciences. Synthese. 12(2/3), 125–161 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrett, F.J., Fry, R.E.: Appreciative Inquiry. Taos Institute Publications, Chagrin Falls (2005)Google Scholar
  4. Beer, M., Finnström, M., Schrader, D.: Why leadership training fails—and what to do about it. Harv. Bus. Rev. 94(10), 50–57 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. Bryan, L.L., Joyce, C.I.: Better strategy through organizational design. McKinsey Q. 2, 21–29 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. Burns, D.: Systematic Action Research. Policy, Bristol (2007)Google Scholar
  7. Caluwé, L. de, Vermaak, H.: Leren veranderen. Samson, Alphen aan den Rijn (2000)Google Scholar
  8. Chemero, A.: An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecol. Psychol. 15(2), 181–195 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ciborra, C. (ed.): From Control to Drift. The Dynamics of Corporate Information Infrastructures. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)Google Scholar
  10. Creswell, J.W.: Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1994)Google Scholar
  11. Dietz, J.L.G.: The atoms, molecules and fibers of organizations. Data Knowl. Eng. 47, 301–325 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dietz, J.L.G.: Enterprise Ontology. Springer, Berlin (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dietz, J.L.G.: Architecture, Building Strategy into Design. Academic Service, The Hague (2008)Google Scholar
  14. Dietz, J.L.G., Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: Enterprise ontology and enterprise architecture—how to let them evolve into effective complementary notions. GEAO J. Enterprise Architect. 2(1), 3–20 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. Dietz, J.L.G., Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: A critical investigation of TOGAF—based on the enterprise engineering theory and practice. In: Albani, A., Dietz, J.L.G., Verelst, J. (eds.) Advances in Enterprise Engineering V, pp. 76–90. Springer, Berlin (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dietz, J.L.G., Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: The principles of enterprise engineering. In: Albani, A., Aveiro, D., Barjis, J. (eds.) Advances in Enterprise Engineering VI, pp. 15–30. Springer, Berlin (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dietz, J.L.G., Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: The discipline of enterprise engineering. Int. J. Organ. Des. Eng. 3(1), 86–114 (2013)Google Scholar
  18. Espejo, R., Reyes, A.: Organizational Systems. Springer, Berlin (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Foroohar, R.: Driven of the road by MBA’s. Time, July 18, 2011Google Scholar
  20. Ghoshal, S.: Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 4(1), 75–91 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gibson, J.J.: The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton Mifflin, Boston (1979)Google Scholar
  22. Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the Corporation. Nicholas Brealey, London (1993)Google Scholar
  23. Hall, J., Healy, K.A., Ross, R.G.: The Business Motivation Model. Business Rules Group (2005)Google Scholar
  24. Halpin, T., Morgan, T.: Information Modeling and Relational Databases. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2008)Google Scholar
  25. Hayes, R.H., Abernathy W.A.: Managing our way to economic decline. Harv. Bus. Rev. July-August 2007, pp. 138–149Google Scholar
  26. Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: Enterprise architecture: enabling integration, agility and change. J. Cooper. Inform. Syst. 13(3), 213–233 (2004a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: Enterprise Engineering en -architectuur: een antwoord op falende strategie-implementaties. Holland Manag. Rev. 98, 20–31 (2004b)Google Scholar
  28. Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: The imperative for employee-centric organizing and its significance for enterprise engineering. Organ. Des. Enterprise Eng. 1(1), 43–58 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hoogervorst, J.A.P.: Foundations of Enterprise Governance and Enterprise Engineering—Presenting the Employee-Centric Theory of Organization. Springer, Berlin (2018)Google Scholar
  30. Hoogervorst, J.A.P., Dietz, J.L.G.: Kernbegrippen omtrent Enterprise Architectuur en Architectureren. Tiem, Tijdschrift voor Informatie en Management. 10, 40–48 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. IEEE: Std 1471: Recommended Practices for Architecture Descriptions for Software Systems. IEEE Computer Society, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  32. Jackson, M.C.: Systems Thinking. Wiley, Chichester (2003)Google Scholar
  33. Johansson, H.J., McHugh, P., Pendlebury, A.J., Wheeler, W.A.: Business Process Reengineering. Wiley, Chichester (1993)Google Scholar
  34. Khurana, R.: From Higher Aims to Hired Hands. The Social Transformation of American Business Schools and the Unfulfilled Promise of Management as a Profession. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2007)Google Scholar
  35. Kuhn, T.S.: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago University Press, Chicago (1962)Google Scholar
  36. Lammers, C.J.: Organisaties vergelijkenderwijs. Spectrum, Utrecht (1987)Google Scholar
  37. Lindström, A.: On the syntax and semantics of architecture principles. In: Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–10 (2006)Google Scholar
  38. Lutz, B.: Car Guys vs. Bean Counters. The Battle for the Soul of American Business. Penguin, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  39. Mannaert, H., Verelst, J., de Bruyn, P.: Normalized Systems Theory. Koppa, Kermt (2016)Google Scholar
  40. Martin, J.: The Great Transition. Using the Seven Principles of Enterprise Engineering to Align People, Technology and, Strategy. American Management Association, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  41. Morgan, G.: Images of Organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2006)Google Scholar
  42. Nadler, D.A., Tushman, M.L.: Competing by Design: The Power of Organizational Architecture. Oxford University Press, New York (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nagel, E.: The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London (1961)Google Scholar
  44. Perks, C., Beveridge, T.: Guide to Enterprise IT Architecture. Springer, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  45. Recker, J.: Scientific Research in Information Systems. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rothenberg, J.: The nature of modeling. In: Widman, L.E., Lopardo, K.A., Nielson, N.R. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence, Simulation, and Modeling. Wiley, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  47. Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge (1969)Google Scholar
  48. Simon, H.A.: Administrative Behavior. Free, New York, 1947, 4th edn (1997)Google Scholar
  49. Thomas, A.B.: Controversies in Management. Routledge, Abingdon (2003)Google Scholar
  50. Urwick, L.: The Elements of Administration. Pitman, London (1947)Google Scholar
  51. Winograd, T.: A language/action perspective on the design of cooperative work. Hum. Comput. Interact. 3(1), 3–20 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Winograd, T., Flores, F.: Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design. Addison-Wesley, Boston (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. Wooldridge, A.: Masters of Management. HarperCollins, New York (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan A. P. Hoogervorst
    • 1
  1. 1.BennebroekThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations