Towards an Engineering-Based Research Approach for Enterprise Architecture: Lessons Learned from Normalized Systems Theory

Huysmans, Philip; Verelst, Jan

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38490-5_5

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies addressed the significant role of EA in organisations (Alaeddini and Salekfard 2013;Kappelman and Zachman 2013), and EA frameworks and methods (Bernus and Noran 2010;Erol, Sauser, and Mansouri 2010;Fatolahi et al 2007;Hoogervorst 2004;Kilpeläinen 2007;Kim et al 2006;Lankhorst 2013;Sowa and Zachman 1992;Vargas et al 2014;Nogueira et al 2013;Bernaert et al 2016). Commonly, EA is adopted by organizations to facilitate enterprise integration issues and reduce complexities (Chen, Doumeingts, and Vernadat 2008;Henderson and Venkatraman 1993;Banaeianjahromi and Smolander 2016b), to increase quality and responsiveness to the ever changing environment (Huysmans and Verelst 2013), for better institutionalization (Chung et al 2009), for better decision making (Jensen, Cline, and Owen 2011), and to increase business performance (Boucharas et al 2010;Van Steenbergen et al 2011) . Well implemented EA is both stable and flexible which assist an organization to innovate and change (Rouhani et al 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lack of Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture Development

Banaeianjahromi

Smolander

2017

Inf Syst Front

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enterprise architecture (EA) is widely employed to reduce complexity and to improve business-information technology (IT) alignment. Despite the efforts by practitioners and academics in proposing approaches to smoothen EA development, it is not easy to find a fully successful EA. Because EA development is a complex endeavour, it is important to understand the obstacles that practitioners face during EA development. With the grounded theory, we studied how obstacles during EA development emerged from practitioners' point of view in 15 large enterprises. The study identifies lack of communication and collaboration as the core obstacle that can explain many other obstacles. Communication and collaboration were also harmed by other perceived EA development obstacles, including lack of knowledge and support inside organization and issues imposed by external parties, hesitation in training personnel, setting too ambitious goals, constant change of management, (lack of) clarity in EA development process, lack of budget, forcing personnel to adopt EA, lack of motivation, organizational culture, and organizational structure deficiencies. The lack of communication and collaboration caused several undesired effects to organizations, such as being unable to set common goals and achieve a shared understanding, personnel's distrust, endangered EA governance, lack of innovation capability, lost competitive edge, and ineffective EA outputs. The study highlights that organisations should improve their communication and collaboration before embarking on EA to encounter fewer obstacles. We provide four recommendations for practitioners to improve communication and collaboration in EA development.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lack of Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture Development

Banaeianjahromi

Smolander

2017

Inf Syst Front

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When combining an organisational design and an enterprise engineering perspective, the ques-tion arises to what extent engineering principles can be applied in harnessing/avoiding these complexities [47], as well as the question of how models can be used to provide insights into the complexities [56,73,75].…”

Section: Technical Complexitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Model-enabled design and engineering of organisations and their enterprises

Magalhães¹,

Proper

2017

Organ Des Enterp Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This editorial is concerned with the need for an integrated approach to the design and engineering of organisations and their enterprises. Organisational Design originates from the organisational sciences, while the notion of Enterprise Engineering results from the engineering sciences (most notably information systems engineering, business (process) engineering, business process optimisation, and enterprise architecture). The Organisational Design and Enterprise Engineering journal (OD&EE) is built on the premise that there should not be an "either-or" relation between Organisational Design and Enterprise Engineering, but rather an integrated approach that brings out the best of the two. A driver for the creation of the journal was the observation that the "either-or" mindset was (and still is) a major obstacle to the development of organisational thinking, and that this artificial divide must be abolished. In achieving more integration between Organisational Design and Enterprise Engineering, we suggest to take a model-enabled approach, where models should act as boundary objects between the social processes involved in organisational design processes, This editorial paper is discussed in comments available at doi:10. 1007/s41251-016-0001-0, doi:10.1007/s41251-016-0002-z, doi:10. 1007/s41251-016-0004-x, doi:10.1007/s41251-016-0006-8, doi:10. 1007/s41251-016-0007-7.

show abstract

“…When change occurs in a model or technologies, the application can be easily expanded again with the new changes. Normalized Systems has been applied to several real-world and large-scale applications (Huysmans and Verelst, 2013;De Bruyn, 2011;Oorts et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bi-directional Transformation between Normalized Systems Elements and Domain Ontologies in OWL

Suchánek

Mannaert

Uhnák

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge representation in OWL ontologies gained a lot of popularity with the development of Big Data, Artificial Intelligence, Semantic Web, and Linked Open Data. OWL ontologies are very versatile, and there are many tools for analysis, design, documentation, and mapping. They can capture concepts and categories, their properties and relations. Normalized Systems (NS) provide a way of code generation from a model of so-called NS Elements resulting in an information system with proven evolvability. The model used in NS contains domain-specific knowledge that can be represented in an OWL ontology. This work clarifies the potential advantages of having OWL representation of the NS model, discusses the design of a bi-directional transformation between NS models and domain ontologies in OWL, and describes its implementation. It shows how the resulting ontology enables further work on the analytical level and leverages the system design. Moreover, due to the fact that NS metamodel is metacircular, the transformation can generate ontology of NS metamodel itself. It is expected that the results of this work will help with the design of larger real-world applications as well as the metamodel and that the transformation tool will be further extended with additional features which we proposed.

show abstract

Towards an Engineering-Based Research Approach for Enterprise Architecture: Lessons Learned from Normalized Systems Theory

Cited by 12 publications

References 31 publications

Lack of Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture Development

Lack of Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture Development

Model-enabled design and engineering of organisations and their enterprises

Bi-directional Transformation between Normalized Systems Elements and Domain Ontologies in OWL

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About