Characteristics of Enterprise Architecture Analyses

Julia Rauscher, Melanie Langermeier, Bernhard Bauer

Abstract

Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) deals with the assessment and development of business processes and IT landscape of an organization. Analyses are an important mean in the EAM process. They support the understanding of the architecture and evaluate the current situation as well as possible future ones. In current literature exists various different approaches to EA analyses. Each pursues different goals and utilizes different techniques. We evaluated current literature about EA analyses and identified possible categories. Therefore we define requirements for an EA analysis and utilize them for a classification of the various approaches. We propose a two-dimensional classification approach. Technical categories cluster analyses according their procedure and utilized techniques. Functional categories cluster analyses according to their goals and outcome. To validate our categorization and the analysis requirements we develop a domain specific language, which is used to formalize the existing analysis approaches from literature.

References

  1. Aier, S., Buckl, S., Franke, U., Gleichauf, B., Johnson, P., Närman, P., Schweda, C. M., and Ullberg, J. (2009). A survival analysis of application life spans based on enterprise architecture models. In 3rd Workshop on EMISA, pages 141-154.
  2. Aier, S., Gleichauf, B., and Winter, R. (2011). Understanding enterprise architecture management design-an empirical analysis. In Proceedings of 10th Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik.
  3. Brambilla, M., Cabot, J., and Wimmer, M. (2012). Modeldriven software engineering in practice.
  4. Buckl, S., Buschle, M., Johnson, P., Matthes, F., and Schweda, C. M. (2011). A meta-language for enterprise architecture analysis. In Enterprise, BusinessProcess and Information Systems Modeling, pages 511-525. Springer.
  5. Buckl, S., Matthes, F., Neubert, C., and Schweda, C. M. (2009a). A wiki-based approach to enterprise architecture documentation and analysis. In ECIS 2009 Proceedings, pages 1476-1487.
  6. Buckl, S., Matthes, F., and Schweda, C. M. (2009b). Classifying enterprise architecture analysis approaches. In Enterprise Interoperability, pages 66-79. Springer.
  7. Buckl, S., Matthes, F., and Schweda, C. M. (2010). A Metalanguage for EA Information Modeling State-ofthe-Art and Requirements Elicitation. In Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, pages 169-181. Springer.
  8. Buschle, M., Ullberg, J., Franke, U., Lagerström, R., and Sommestad, T. (2011). A tool for enterprise architecture analysis using the PRM formalism. In Information Systems Evolution, pages 108-121. Springer.
  9. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3):319-340.
  10. de Boer, F. S., Bonsangue, M. M., Groenewegen, L., Stam, A., Stevens, S., and Van Der Torre, L. (2005). Change impact analysis of enterprise architectures. In IEEE International Conf. on Information Reuse and Integration, pages 177-181.
  11. Della Bordella, M., Liu, R., Ravarini, A., Wu, F. Y., and Nigam, A. (2011). Towards a method for realizing sustained competitive advantage through business entity analysis. In Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, pages 216-230. Springer.
  12. Johnson, P., Lagerström, R., Närman, P., and Simonsson, M. (2007). Enterprise architecture analysis with extended influence diagrams. Information Systems Frontiers, 9(2):163-180.
  13. Kazienko, P., Michalski, R., and Palus, S. (2011). Social network analysis as a tool for improving enterprise architecture. In Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and Applications, pages 651-660. Springer.
  14. Krcmar, H. (2015). Informationsmanagement. Gabler.
  15. Langermeier, M., Saad, C., and Bauer, B. (2014). A unified framework for enterprise architecture analysis. In 18th IEEE International EDOC Conference Workshops, pages 227-236.
  16. Lankhorst, M. (2013). Enterprise Architecture at Work: Modelling, Communication and Analysis. Springer.
  17. Närman, P., Franke, U., König, J., Buschle, M., and Ekstedt, M. (2011). Enterprise architecture availability analysis using fault trees and stakeholder interviews. Enterprise Information Systems, 8(1):1-25.
  18. Närman, P., Johnson, P., Ekstedt, M., Chenine, M., and König, J. (2009). Enterprise architecture analysis for data accuracy assessments. In 13th IEEE International EDOC Conference, pages 24-33.
  19. Närman, P., Schonherr, M., Johnson, P., Ekstedt, M., and Chenine, M. (2008). Using enterprise architecture models for system quality analysis. In 12th IEEE International EDOC Conference, pages 14-23.
  20. Niemann, K. D. (2006). From enterprise architecture to IT governance. Springer.
  21. Rauscher, J. (2015). Anforderungen an und Definition von einer Analysesprache für das Enterprise Architecture Management. Bachelor Thesis, University Augsburg.
  22. Razavi, M., Aliee, F. S., and Badie, K. (2011). An AHPbased approach toward enterprise architecture analysis based on enterprise architecture quality attributes. Knowledge and information systems, 28(2):449-472.
  23. Saat, J. (2010). Zeitbezogene Abhängigkeitsanalysen der Unternehmensarchitektur. In MKWI, pages 119-130.
  24. Sasa, A. and Krisper, M. (2011). Enterprise architecture patterns for business process support analysis. Journal of Systems and Software, 84(9):1480-1506.
  25. Sunkle, S., Kulkarni, V., and Roychoudhury, S. (2013). Analyzable enterprise models using ontology. In CAiSE Forum, volume 998, pages 33-40.
  26. Szyszka, B. (2009). Analysis and classification of maturity models in enterprise architecture management. Bachelor Thesis, Technical University Munich.
  27. Van Lamsweerde, A. (2001). Goal-oriented requirements engineering: A guided tour. In 5th IEEE International Symp. on Requirements Engineering, pages 249-262.
  28. Wan, H. and Carlsson, S. (2012). Towards an understanding of enterprise architecture analysis activities. In Proceedings of 6th ECIME.
  29. Winter, R. and Fischer, R. (2006). Essential layers, artifacts, and dependencies of enterprise architecture. In 10th IEEE International EDOC Conference Workshops.
  30. Xie, L., Luo, J., Qiu, J., Pershing, J., Li, Y., Chen, Y., et al. (2008). Availability “weak point” analysis over an SOA deployment framework. In IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium, pages 473-480.
  31. Zia, M. J., Azam, F., and Allauddin, M. (2011). A survey of enterprise architecture analysis using multi criteria decision making models. In Intelligent Computing and Information Science, pages 631-637. Springer.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Rauscher J., Langermeier M. and Bauer B. (2016). Characteristics of Enterprise Architecture Analyses . In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design - Volume 1: BMSD, ISBN 978-989-758-190-8, pages 104-113. DOI: 10.5220/0006222701040113


in Bibtex Style

@conference{bmsd16,
author={Julia Rauscher and Melanie Langermeier and Bernhard Bauer},
title={Characteristics of Enterprise Architecture Analyses},
booktitle={Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design - Volume 1: BMSD,},
year={2016},
pages={104-113},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0006222701040113},
isbn={978-989-758-190-8},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design - Volume 1: BMSD,
TI - Characteristics of Enterprise Architecture Analyses
SN - 978-989-758-190-8
AU - Rauscher J.
AU - Langermeier M.
AU - Bauer B.
PY - 2016
SP - 104
EP - 113
DO - 10.5220/0006222701040113