Competences of IT Architects

The field of architecture in the digital world uses a plethora of terms to refer to different kinds of architects, and recognises a confusing variety of competences that these architects are required to have. Different service providers use different terms for similar architects and even if they use the same term, they may mean something different. This makes it hard for customers to know what competences an architect can be expected to have.\ud \ud This book combines competence profiles of the NGI Platform for IT Professionals, The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF), as well as a number of Dutch IT service providers in a comprehensive framework. Using this framework, the book shows that notwithstanding a large variety in terminology, there is convergence towards a common set of competence profiles. In other words, when looking beyond terminological differences by using the framework, one sees that organizations recognize similar types of architects, and that similar architects in different organisations have similar competence profiles. The framework presented in this book thus provides an instrument to position architecture services as offered by IT service providers and as used by their customers.\ud \ud The framework and the competence profiles presented in this book are the main results of the special interest group “Professionalisation” of the Netherlands Architecture Forum for the Digital World (NAF). Members of this group, as well as students of the universities of Twente and Nijmegen have contributed to the research on which this book is based

The PRIMO FORTE framework for good governance in public, private and civic organisations : an analysis on small EU states

Purpose: In this article we lay out and discuss a framework proposed by the Public Risk Management Organisation (PRIMO) (https://www.primo-europe.eu/) of which the authors are board members and the results of a test on public and private entities of EU small jurisdictions, specifically Malta, Slovenia, Luxembourg, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Cyprus. These are countries within the EU having less than 3 million people population. Design/methodology/approach: We collected our primary data by using a semi-structured questionnaire and administering it to participants who are working directly or indirectly with entities within these EU states. The questionnaire was structured using the FORTETM acronym as themes, ‘Financial and compliant design’, ‘Object orientation and delivery’, ‘Responsibility and stewardship’, ‘Tools and processes for creation’ and ‘Environmental awareness and interaction’, with 5 statements under each theme to which participants were required to answer using a 5-point Likert-scale ranging from “Strongly Disagree” to “Strongly Agree”. We, however, allowed the participants to open up and discuss each statement and recorded these comments. Some demographic data was also collected as to the type of entity the participants are working with, the level of expertise on governance of the participant and the size of the entity. The quantitative data was subjected to statistical analysis while the results from the open ended question was analysed using the Thematic approach. Findings: Factor analysis provided support for the FORTE Good Governance model for both the Private and Public entities, no-matter if they are small or large. Originality/value: The study provides a better understanding and supports the FORTE Model established by PRIMO-Europe, after approximately 15 years of collecting data on public risks and for the first time tests it on both Private and Public entities, in large and small firms in small EU Jurisdictions. Moreover, this model contributed to the vast literature on models of risk management within organisations, but was not validated empirically for reliability of the factors, and on small jurisdictions. Therefore, the significance and importance of such a study lies firstly on the premise that testing on small countries, can be deemed as small laboratories for more complex politics, regulations and policies of larger countries.peer-reviewe

CHORUS Deliverable 2.2: Second report - identification of multi-disciplinary key issues for gap analysis toward EU multimedia search engines roadmap

After addressing the state-of-the-art during the first year of Chorus and establishing the existing landscape in multimedia search engines, we have identified and analyzed gaps within European research effort during our second year. In this period we focused on three directions, notably technological issues, user-centred issues and use-cases and socio- economic and legal aspects. These were assessed by two central studies: firstly, a concerted vision of functional breakdown of generic multimedia search engine, and secondly, a representative use-cases descriptions with the related discussion on requirement for technological challenges. Both studies have been carried out in cooperation and consultation with the community at large through EC concertation meetings (multimedia search engines cluster), several meetings with our Think-Tank, presentations in international conferences, and surveys addressed to EU projects coordinators as well as National initiatives coordinators. Based on the obtained feedback we identified two types of gaps, namely core technological gaps that involve research challenges, and “enablers”, which are not necessarily technical research challenges, but have impact on innovation progress. New socio-economic trends are presented as well as emerging legal challenges