Abstract
What is the best plan worth if one does not succeed at controlling its implementation? What is the benefit of identifying consolidation potential (e.g. in the case of development lines) in ones organization if it is left unexploited, if reference architecture models are not specified and introduced as obligatory? What is the value of eliminating redundant development lines if the capacity that is saved is not sensibly re-channeled, for instance, in order to reinforce the innovative strength of ones IT unit? We have all seen Parkinson ’ s Law at work in organizations. The law states that work has a tendency to fill up the available time. This means that savings can only be realized where other useless activities do not fill up the space that was previously occupied by superfluous development lines, infrastructure components or the misguided projects!
Keywords
- Critical Success Factor
- Reference Architecture
- Architecture Management
- Governance Board
- Enterprise Architect
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlag ∣ GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
(2006). Safeguarding: Controlling Enterprise Architecture Development. In: From Enterprise Architecture to IT Governance. Vieweg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8348-9011-5_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8348-9011-5_8
Publisher Name: Vieweg
Print ISBN: 978-3-8348-0198-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-8348-9011-5
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)
