Available very soon:
August 2012 – Volume 8, Number 3 of
Enterprise Architecture, IT Service Management and Service Oriented Architecture: relationships, approaches and operative guidelines (part 2 of 2)
Enterprise Architecture, IT Service Management (and Governance) and Service Oriented Architecture are current topics, widely discussed in the information technology departments and professional publications. In addition, many companies have been (or are) involved with the adoption of at least one of these innovations. While each of these elements can be considered in its own right, it is in their relationships, and more or less strong intersections, that interesting opportunities and synergies can emerge, potentially even with some specific issues to manage. The focus of this two part article is just that: to show the relationships, approaches and operative guidelines related to the synergic adoption in an IT organization and/or in an Enterprise of concepts from the Enterprise Architecture (EA), IT Service Management (ITSM) and Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) domains.
Enterprise Architecture Principles as Values
Mohammad Esmaeil Zadeh, Edward Lewis and Gary Millar
Although Enterprise Architecture Principles (EAPs) are important parts of several Enterprise Architecture (EA) frameworks, there are difficulties in their derivation and use. As a foundation for a broader research in developing a set of generic EAPs, this paper aims to discover the notion of EAPs conceptually and to find a way of structuring them systematically. For this purpose, the variety in the definitions of EA is stated and a new definition is given to clarify its scope more precisely. Then different thoughts in the notion of EAPs are investigated to find their features and shortages. Finally, by introducing the concept of values, a new definition of EAPs as values is proposed. This definition leads to the use of the work done in the field of values and governance to investigate, tidy up and classify the existing principles.
A Systemic-Discursive Framework for Enterprise Architecture
Anders Østergaard Jensen-Waud and John Gøtze
This article examines, through a case study of an Australian government agency, the systemic and discursive properties of Enterprise Architecture adoption in a government enterprise. Through the lens of Luhmann’s generalised systems theory of communication, the authors argue that the manner in which organisational communication is organised throughout the Enterprise Architecture adoption process has a noticeable impact on successful implementation. Two important conclusions are made: Firstly, successful Enterprise Architecture adoption demands sustainable resonance of Enterprise Architecture as a discourse communicated in the enterprise. Secondly, misunderstanding and reshaping Enterprise Architecture as a management discourse is an inherent premise for high quality adoption. The authors propose a new theoretical model, the Enterprise Communication Ecology, as a metaphor for the communicative processes that precede, constrain, and shape Enterprise Architecture implementations. As a result, Enterprise Architecture as a discipline must adopt a systemic-discursive framework in order to fully understand and improve the quality of Enterprise Architecture management programs.
Archetypes of Organisation: Laying Systemic Enterprise Architecture Foundations at an Upstream Oil and Gas Company
Enterprise Architecture (EA), a discipline that emerged from IT with the aim to link ‘strategy to design’ provides frameworks, taxonomies and languages for organisational design. However, it lacks an appreciation of the dynamic relationship between technology and organisational evolution and the complex process of strategy. Systems Thinking (ST), a multidisciplinary science and praxis that evolved from the coming together of social systems theory, second order cybernetics and biology provides holistic and reflexive approaches for intervention into complex situations. Similar to EA, it has a number of modelling tools for describing and diagnosing organizational problems. However, it lacks precise and rigorous modelling approaches for describing technology solutions. This article explores the process and possibility of embedding systemic thinking into enterprise architecture and the practice of organisation design by carrying out theoretical research and practical inquiry in a particular oil and gas independent.
Towards an Enterprise Security Architecture for Broadband Network Providers
Andrew Gontarczyk, Peter Watson, Troy Ridgewell, Daniel Gehrig, Gregory Acutt, Ramanbir Kaur, Peter Budimir, George Topfner, Phil McMillan, Vivek Pande, Nigel Roberts, Mick Smajkic, Steve Tancred, Ian Faulks, Michael Hoffmann, Chris Pavlovski
Security solutions are increasingly becoming a vital component of telecommunications and internetworking systems for all organizations. There are increased vulnerabilities due to online access that allow malicious intervention to IT and network systems from remote locations. Traditionally, the thought of insider attack has been viewed as the key risk affecting businesses, however the threat of cyber attacks upon the communications network has become a primary source of concern. A key challenge facing communication network providers is how to effectively manage and secure the enterprise Information and Communications Technologies (ICT). There are many prevailing standards and emerging products now available. However, the integration and cohesive design of these security solutions is becoming an obstacle to the effective deployment of security solutions. In this paper we propose a security enterprise architecture for communication network providers. The security architecture is based upon our experience in deploying enterprise architectures and security solutions world wide, whilst drawing upon key standards such as SABSA and TOGAF. The security architecture may be used as a blueprint and framework for network providers to ensure coverage in security, reduce risk of malicious threats, and for mitigating delivery risk due to integration and deployment challenges. The framework is also applicable to the broader industry seeking to develop their enterprise security architectures.