HMEF: framework to evaluate merging of Higher Education Institutions – application of Enterprise Architecture

Mergers of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are organisational processes requiring tremendous amount of resources, in terms of time, work, and money. A number of mergers have been seen on previous years and more are to come. Several studies on mergers have been conducted, revealing some crucial factors that affect the success of mergers. Based on literature review on these studies, factors are: the initiator of merger, a reason for merger, geographical distance of merging institutions, organisational culture, the extend of overlapping course portfolio, and Quality Assurance Systems (QASs). Usually these kind of factors are not considered on mergers, but focus is on financial matters. In this paper, a framework (HMEF) for evaluating merging of HEIs is introduced. HMEF is based on Enterprise Architecture (EA), focusing on factors found to be affecting the success of mergers. By using HMEF, HEIs can focus on matters that crucial for merging

The art of shooting the moving goal - explorative study of EA pilot

Enterprise Architecture (EA) has been recognised as an important tool in modern business management for closing the gap between strategy and its execution. The current literature implies that for EA to be successful, it should have clearly defined goals. However, the goals of different stakeholders are found to be different, even contradictory. In our explorative research, we seek an answer to the questions: What kind of goals are set for the EA implementation? How do the goals evolve during the time? Are the goals different among stakeholders? How do they affect the success of EA? We analysed an EA pilot conducted among eleven Finnish Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in 2011. The goals of the pilot were gathered from three different stages of the pilot: before the pilot, during the pilot, and after the pilot, by means of a project plan, interviews during the pilot and a questionnaire after the pilot. The data was analysed using qualitative and quantitative methods. Eight distinct goals were recognised by the coding: Adopt EA Method, Build Information Systems, Business Development, Improve Reporting, Process Improvement, Quality Assurance, Reduce Complexity, and Understand the Big Picture. The success of the pilot was analysed statistically using the scale 1-5. Results revealed that goals set before the pilot were very different from those mentioned during the pilot, or after the pilot. Goals before the pilot were mostly related to expected benefits from the pilot, whereas the most important result was to adopt the EA method. Results can be explained by possibly different roles of respondents, which in turn were most likely caused by poor communication. Interestingly, goals mentioned by different stakeholders were not limited to their traditional areas of responsibility. For example, in some cases Chief Information Officers' goals were Quality Assurance and Process Improvement, whereas managers’ goals were Build Information Systems and Adopt EA Method. This could be a result of a good understanding of the meaning of EA, or stakeholders do not regard EA as their concern at all. It is also interesting to notice that regardless of the different perceptions of goals among stakeholders, all HEIs felt the pilot to be successful. Thus the research does not provide support to confirm the link between clear goals and success

Função Sistemas de Informação nas organizações: realidade, desafios e oportunidades do uso de arquiteturas empresariais

As tecnologias e sistemas de informação são ferramentas indispensáveis para a sobrevivência e sucesso das organizações, exigindo-se atualmente uma espécie de quadratura do círculo: fazer mais, melhor e mais rápido, com os mesmos ou menos recursos, mas gastando menos. A integração é a nova palavra de ordem e o conceito e modelo de Arquitetura Empresarial emerge de novo. Neste artigo, são abordados vários dos aspetos da realidade atual da função sistemas de informação nas organizações e os desafios e oportunidades que hoje se colocam no uso de Arquiteturas Empresariais

Measuring Enterprise Architecture success: a tentative model for measuring success

Interest towards Enterprise Architecture (EA) has been increasing during the last few years. EA has been found to be a crucial aspect of business survival, and thus the importance of EA implementation success is also crucial. Current literature does not have a tool to be used to measure the success of EA implementation. In this paper, a tentative model for measuring success is presented and empirically validated in EA context. Results show that the success of EA implementation can be measured indirectly by measuring the achievement of the objectives set for the implementation. Results also imply that achieving individual's objectives do not necessarily mean that organisation's objectives are achieved. The presented Success Measurement Model can be used as basis for developing measurement metrics

Exploring the Role of Enterprise Architecture in IS-enabled Ot: An EA Principles Perspective

© 2016 IEEE. Although EA principles have received considerable attention in recent years, there is still little known about how EA principles can be used to govern the transformation of the Information Systems enabled organization. In this research-in-progress paper, we communicate our initial step towards answering the sub-question: how do enforcing EA principles contribute to IS-enabled OT? Based on a comprehensive literature review, we initially propose five testable hypotheses and a research model, which is a pre-requisite to developing a data-driven theory for this important area of research. It is anticipated that the ensuing theory will provide a basis for further research studying the impact of EA on IS-enabled OT. The tested research model will also provide guidance to practitioners on how to effectively design and use EA principles in managing transformative changes caused by IS within their organizations and overall industry sectors

Assessing the Complexity of Dynamics in Enterprise Architecture Planning – Lessons from Chaos Theory

Enterprise Architecture (EA) models capture the fundamental elements of organizations and their relationships to serve documentation, analysis and planning purposes. As the elements and their relationships change over time, EA planning becomes increasingly complex. An analysis of existing methods shows that the complexity of dynamics is not sufficiently addressed. We argue that a sophisticated understanding of the complexity matter is prerequisite for EA planning method construction. As Chaos Theory (CT) is deployed in natural and social sciences—as well as in different contexts of IS research—to describe and understand the behavior of complex systems over time, we use properties of CT to assess the complexity of dynamics in EA planning and to derive requirements for EA planning methods. Our findings emphasize the importance of initial conditions of the architecture for EA planning and the need to harmonize planning granularities in order to achieve predictable results

Theoretical perspectives of enterprise architecture

The number of published Enterprise Architecture (EA) research has increased during the last few years. As a discipline, EA is still young and lacking theoretical foundation. Lately some research trying to ground EA to theory has been published, including linkage to systems theory. Enterprise Architecture can be defined as; (i) a formal description of the current and future state(s) of an organisation, and (ii) a managed change between these states to meet organisation’s stakeholders’ goals and to create value to the organisation. Based on this definition, this conceptual paper tries to shed light to theoretical underpinnings of EA from three theoretical perspectives; EA as a communication media, EA as an activity, and EA as an information technology system. Our conclusions are that; (i) EA can be categorised as a communication media and theoretically underpinned by ontology and semiotics, (ii) EA can be explained and theoretically underpinned by Activity Theory, and (iii) EA can be categorised as an information technology system and theoretically underpinned by General Systems Theory and Technology Acceptance Theory

Let’s Get in Touch - Decision Making about Enterprise Architecture Using 3D Visualization in Augmented Reality

Making informed decisions about historically grown and often complex business and Information Technology (IT) landscapes can be particularly difficult. Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) addresses this issue by enabling stakeholders to base their decisions on relevant information about the organization’s current and future Enterprise Architectures (EAs). However, visualization of EA is often confronted with low usefulness perceptions. Informed by the cognitive fit theory (CFT), we argue that decision-makers benefit from interacting with EA visualizations using Augmented Reality (AR), because it enables a consistent task-related mental representation based on the natural use of decision-makers’ visual-spatial abilities. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate ARs suitability for EA-related decision-making. We follow the design science research (DSR) approach to develop and evaluate an AR head-mounted display (HMD) prototype, using the Microsoft HoloLens. Our results suggest that EA-related decision-making can profit from applying AR, but users find the handling of the HMD device cumbersome

Enterprise Architecture Planning: Analyses of Requirements from Practice and Research

Enterprise architecture management (EAM) has become an increasingly important topic in practice due to the growing complexity of organizations and their underlying IT. While there is a strong interest in Enterprise Architecture (EA) modeling, evaluation, and frameworks, a lack of knowledge remains in the research field of EA planning. We conducted a series of expert interviews on the topic of EA planning. From these interviews we were able to extract requirements for EA planning from practice as the foundation of our analyses. Additionally, we conducted a structured literature review to elicit requirements for EA planning from a research perspective. This paper combines the results of both the practitioner interviews and the literature review to emphasize the gaps between the two worlds. As a result, we identified that current research does not adequately address the pressing problems of EA planning in practice