Advertisement

Enterprise Architecture in Innovation Implementation

  • Heinrich Arnold
  • Michael Erner
  • Peter Möckel
  • Christopher Schläffer

Abstract

A core challenge in technology-oriented innovation is the correct focus of innovation implementation in highly complex environments, including a fragmented value chain. This section presents a method that helps innovation departments steer innovation implementation in order to decrease timeto- market and improve the quality and alignment of the technology artifacts developed.

Keywords

Dition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aier, S., Riege, C.; Schönherr, M.; Bub, Udo 2009. Situative Methodenkonstruktion für die Projektbewertung aus Unternehmensarchitekturperspektive. In: Business Services: Konzepte, Technologien, Anwendungen. Hansen, H.R. et al (eds), S. 109–118.Google Scholar
  2. Arnold, H. M., Dunaj, M., Enterprise Architecture and Modularization in Telco R&D as a Response to an Environment of Technological Uncertainty. Presented at ICIN 2007, October 26–29, in Bordeaux, France.Google Scholar
  3. Bacher, J., Wenzig, K., Vogler, M. 2004. SPSS TwoStep Clustering – A First Evaluation. Presented at the Sixth International Conference on Logic and Social Science Methodology, August 16–20, in Amsterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  4. Baumöl, U. 2005. Strategic Agility through Situational Method Construction. Presented at the European Academy of Management Annual Conference, May 4–7, in Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
  5. Bucher, T., Klesse, M., Kurpjuweit, S., Winter, R. 2007. Situational Method Engineering – On the Differentiation of “Context” and “Project Type”. Presented at IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference on Situational Method Engineering – Fundamentals and Experiences (ME07), September 12–14, in Boston, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, R. G. 2003. Best Practices in Product Innovation: What Distinguishes Top Performers. Ancaster: Stage-Gate.Foorthuis, R. M., Brinkkemper. 2007. A Framework for Project Architecture in the Context of Enterprise Architecture. Presented at the Second Workshop on Trends in Enterprise Architecture Research (TEAR 2007), June 6, in St. Gallen, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  7. Harmsen, A. F., Brinkkemper, S., Oei, H. 1994. Situational Method Engineering for Information System Project Approaches. Presented at IFIP 8.1 Working Conference on Methods and Associated Tools for the Information Systems Life Cycle, September 26–28, in Amsterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  8. IEEE. 2000. IEEE Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software Intensive Systems. IEEE Std 1471–2000. New York: IEEE.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, P., Lagerström, R., Närman, P., Simonsson, M. 2006. Extended Influence Diagrams for Enterprise Architecture Analysis. Presented at the Tenth IEEE International EDOC Enterprise Computing Conference, October 16–20, in Los Alamitos, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  10. Jonkers, H. 2006. Architecture Language Reference Manual v4.1. Netherlands: Telematica Instituut/Archimate Consortium.Google Scholar
  11. Kumar, K., Welke, R.J. 1992. Methodology Engineering – A Proposal for Situation-specific Methodology Construction. In Challenges and Strategies for Research in Systems Development, ed. W. Cotterman and J. A. Senn, 257–69. New York:John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  12. Närmann, P., Schönherr, M., Johnson, P., Ekstedt, M., Chenine, M. 2008. Using Enterprise Architecture Models for System Quality Analysis. Presented at Enterprise Distributed Object Conference, September 15–19, in Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
  13. Niemann, K. D. 2005. Von der Unternehmensarchitektur zur IT-Governance: Leitfaden für effizientes und effektives IT-Management. Wiesbaden: Vieweg.Google Scholar
  14. Simonsson, M., Linström, Å., Johson, P., Nordström, L., Grundbäck, L., Wijnbladh, O. 2006. Scenario-Based Evaluation of Enterprise Architecture – A Top-Down Approach for CIO Decision-Making. Presented at the International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, May 23–27, in Paphos, Greece.Google Scholar
  15. Van Slooten, K., Hodes, B. 1996. Characterizing IS Development Projects. Presented at IFIP TC8, WG8.1/8.2 Working Conference on Method Engineering, Springer, Berlin et al 1996, 29–44, in Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  16. Vasconcelos, A., Sousa, P., Tribolet, J. 2007. Information System Architecture Metrics: an Enterprise Engineering Evaluation Approach. The Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation (EJISE) 10:91–122.Google Scholar
  17. Winter, R., Bucher, T., Fischer, R., Kurpjuweit, S. 2007. Analysis and Application Scenarios of Enterprise Architecture – An Exploratory Study. Journal of Enterprise Architecture 3:3343.Google Scholar
  18. Winter, R., Fischer, R. 2007. Essential Layers, Artifacts, and Dependencies of Enterprise Architecture. Enterprise Architecture 3:7–18.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heinrich Arnold
    • 1
  • Michael Erner
    • 1
  • Peter Möckel
    • 1
  • Christopher Schläffer
    • 2
  1. 1.LaboratoriesDeutsche Telekom AGBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Deutsche Telekom AGBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations