Critical Success Factors for Enterprise Architecture:

Survey, Taxonomy, and Solutions

Peter Hillmann

, Lovis Justin Immanuel Zenz, and Andreas Karcher

Universit

at der Bundeswehr M

unchen, Department of Computer Science,

Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39, 85577 Neubiberg, Germany

Keywords:

Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture Management, EA Taxonomy, EA Survey, Success Factors.

Abstract:

Enterprise architecture (EA) is a critical key competence in the organization, adaptation and improvement

of companies. The objective of this study is to identify and analyze critical success factors associated with

EA projects and EA management. In particular, the interrelationships of critical factors as key components

were examined. Therefore, we present the ﬁrst taxonomy of key factors in EA providing an overview of

the major areas to be addressed. The assessment revealed ﬁve major challenges: communication problems,

limited top management support, insufﬁcient EA expertise, ineffective knowledge management and inadequate

requirements management. Based on these ﬁndings, a comprehensive compilation of strategies was develop

encompassing preventative guidelines and reactive approaches. It provides practical recommendations for

overcoming the identiﬁed obstacles. The measures developed were integrated along the project life cycle

with reference to organizational processes, in particular with a focus on change management and controlling.

Practical recommendations were tested in expert interviews and business game for their effectiveness.

1 MOTIVATION FOR

ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE

In an increasingly digitized and globalized business

world, companies are forced to continuously adapt

and optimize their structures, processes and technolo-

gies to ensure their competitiveness (Aldea et al.,

2018; Kesseler and Karcher, 2017). Enterprise Ar-

chitecture (EA) enables organizations to efﬁciently

utilize their resources, optimize their processes, and

leverage their technologies to achieve their business

goals. EA is committed to guaranteeing that decision

makers are furnished with a full and accurate account

of the relevant facts and circumstances at the oppor-

tune time. This objective is accomplished by means

of a strategic alignment that incorporates the business,

technology and data, all of which are aggregated and

managed in a systematic fashion. This integration is

essential for optimizing case capabilities and resource

allocation. Currently, no other management best prac-

tice, with the exception of EA, can provide the com-

prehensive context for enterprise-wide strategic plan-

ning and decision-making. Furthermore, EA strength-

ens the collaboration of Business-IT-Alignment (Hill-

mann et al., 2024).

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4346-4510

In the context of our VUCA world, the capability

to think in comprehensive and complex contexts rep-

resents a signiﬁcant challenge for the future (CON-

SIDEO Gmbh, 2013). Architectural Thinking plays

a pivotal role in providing the support needed to ad-

dress this challenge. Nevertheless, the number of suc-

cessful EA projects is estimated to be only about 25

to 30 % (Voegele, 1997). Given the complexity and

dynamics of today’s business environment, organiza-

tions face a number of challenges when implement-

ing EA projects (Kotusev and Kurnia, 2021). By

identifying critical success factors (CSF), analyzing

key components, and developing solutions tailored to

these, we contribute to overcoming these challenges

and supporting organizations in successfully shaping

their EA. This study aims to providing practical and

effective recommendations for the success of EA ap-

proaches. The goal is to assess the prevailing dif-

ﬁculties and inﬂuencing factors in EA, EA manage-

ment (EAM) and EA projects. Based on this, we de-

velop a taxonomy of CSF to capture the complexity

and provide an overview for a successful EA applica-

tion. The solutions developed are presented in form

of a catalog of speciﬁc measures to support compa-

nies in proactively addressing challenges as well as

effectively preparing for and reacting to them. Fur-

Hillmann, P., Zenz, L. J. I. and Karcher, A.

Critical Success Factors for Enterpr ise Architecture: Survey, Taxonomy, and Solutions.

DOI: 10.5220/0013134500003929

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2025) - Volume 2, pages 793-803

ISBN: 978-989-758-749-8; ISSN: 2184-4992

793

thermore, our concept facilitates the integration of the

resulting catalog of measures into the business pro-

cesses and life-cycle phases of EA projects. It deﬁnes

a general framework and can be combined with exist-

ing approaches.

The following research questions guide us in the

investigation of success factors in EA:

1. What are the CSF in enterprise architecture

projects that determine their relative importance

and inﬂuence?

2. What correlations and interactions exist between

these factors and how can they be processed in

order to gain a better understanding?

3. How can a early warning system be set up for the

factors to apply suitable best practices as preven-

tive and reactive procedures?

In summary, we obtain the following requirements

to address the success rate of EA application with a

catalog of speciﬁc techniques:

• Completeness: Overview to functionally cover all

possible areas and stakeholder objectives.

• Resource utilization: Support in the task prioriti-

zation and effective allocation of resources for the

suitable actions.

• Methodology: Structured catalog of efﬁcient

measures and practicable strategies to solve chal-

lenges in EA projects.

• Modularity: Flexibility to adapt measures de-

pending on the speciﬁc company, EA, and project

environment.

• Continuous improvement: Integrated process for

dynamic updating of the catalog to integrate new

ﬁndings and best practices.

2 RELATED WORK ON FLAWS

Table 1 presents a survey of the principal inﬂuenc-

ing factors and key challenges applying EA. The CSF

were identiﬁed and validated through a combination

of literature review and ten expert interviews. In

conclusion, it reveal a multitude of factors that de-

cide over success and failure. Additionally, there is a

dearth of analysis concerning interdependencies and

mutual inﬂuences. In summary, in the context of EA

application, we identify key issues, which require at-

tention:

1. EA is seen purely as a service center for ad-hoc

demand requests and without integration.

2. EA is only utilised reactively and there is no adap-

tation to changes in business strategy.

3. Instead of actually applying EA concepts and

techniques, there is merely the creation of mod-

els with abstract object-oriented representations.

4. The application is carried out without precise ob-

jectives and in an inappropriate level of detail

without assessment of the required maturity level.

5. There is no consideration of the architecture con-

tinuum, which leads to a lack of re-usability.

6. There is no alignment of methodology, with too

many EA approaches compete, and the degrees of

freedom are unrestricted.

3 TAXONOMY OF CRITICAL

SUCCESS FACTORS IN EA

This section presents a comprehensive description of

the taxonomy for CSF in EA and EAM, including its

constituent components. We are ensure comprehen-

sive coverage of all requisite areas throughout the EA

project life cycle. Four principal categories have been

identiﬁed as signiﬁcant inﬂuencing factors for EA:

Organizational, Technological, Human, and Process-

related factors. The following factors play a crucial

role in creating an environment that inﬂuences the

success of EA. Figure 1 provides an overview of the

taxonomy.

3.1 Organizational Factors

Organizational factors play a crucial role in creating

an environment that inﬂuences the success of EA. In

particular, a clear organizational structure and effec-

tive communication are of signiﬁcant importance in

this regard. The organizational factors can be further

subdivided into the following areas:

Goal and Strategic Orientation. In the absence of

precise objectives and evidence of added value, it is

not possible to make effective use of EA in a targeted

and proﬁtable way. EA is only likely to be a success if

those responsible have the requisite skills and capabil-

ities. The objectives of EA must be aligned with the

business strategy, which is of particular importance

for motivating employees.

Governance and Management. Empirical evidence

suggests that a change in leadership is the most efﬁca-

cious approach when attempting to effect change. It is

therefore evident that the support of top management

is of considerable importance. The implementation of

appropriate governance structures provides the possi-

bility of controlling EA activities. This coordinating

structure is responsible for the successful use of EA,

extending from business to EA with direct integration.

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

794

Table 1: Critical factors in EA including EA management and EA projects due to the inherent relationship.

ID Organizational Factors Sources

1 Top management support (Aleatrati K. et al., 2015; Masuda et al., 2021)

2 EA priority in overall context (Aleatrati K. et al., 2015; Banaeianjahromi and Smolander, 2019; Aier, 2014)

3 Inﬂuence of architects to decision-making committees (Dale and Scheepers, 2020; L

ohe and Legner, 2014; Bente et al., 2012)

4 Autonomy of management and organizational units (Ajer et al., 2021; Ajer and Olsen, 2019; Ajer and Olsen, 2018)

5 Organizational culture (establishment) (Iyamu, 2009; Iyamu, 2013; Freeman, 1972)

6 Information strategy (Iyamu, 2009; Niemietz and de Kinderen, 2013)

7 Stakeholder relationship management (Iyamu, 2009; Wood et al., 2013; Bente et al., 2012)

8 Alignment of architects and other IT specialists (Iyamu, 2009; Iyamu, 2013; Aier et al., 2008)

9 Trust of the organizations in the EAM function (Aleatrati K. et al., 2015)

10 Bureaucracy and responsibilities within EA management (Aleatrati K. et al., 2015)

11 Awareness of the beneﬁts of information technology (Dang and Pekkola, 2017; Ajer and Olsen, 2018; Iyamu, 2009)

(Winter and Schelp, 2008)

12 Data quality and documentation (Aleatrati K. et al., 2015; Hillmann et al., 2022)

13 Realisation gap of EA concepts (Bui and Levy, 2017; Reichstein et al., 2019; Aier et al., 2008)

14 Financing (Kurnia et al., 2021; Ajer and Olsen, 2019; Ajer and Olsen, 2018; Iyamu, 2009)

15 Performance in implementation and amount resources (Dang and Pekkola, 2017; Lim et al., 2024)

16 Guiding Governance and clear targets (Isom

aki and Penttinen, 2008; Hauder et al., 2013)

17 Common expectations with regard to EA functionalities (Dang and Pekkola, 2020)

Technical Factors Sources

18 Integration of EA and development (Aleatrati K. et al., 2015; Brandis et al., 2014; Langermeier and Bauer, 2018)

(Zenz et al., 2023)

19 Consideration of technical requirements (Aleatrati K. et al., 2015; Heiland et al., 2023)

20 Guidelines and architectural principles (Bui and Levy, 2017; Olsen and Trelsg

ard, 2016; Hjort-Madsen, 2006)

21 Reuse of existing EA artifacts (L

ohe and Legner, 2014; Ascher et al., 2022; P

ohn and Hillmann, 2021)

22 Alignment of efﬁcient tools and methods (Dale and Scheepers, 2020; Dang and Pekkola, 2016)

23 Selection, migration and integration of tools (Brandis et al., 2014; Heiland and Karcher, 2019)

24 Availability and complexity of EA tools (Olsen and Trelsg

ard, 2016; Nyg

ard and Olsen, 2016)

(Gong and Janssen, 2020; Heiland et al., 2021)

Human Factors Sources

25 Communication and collaboration (Banaeianjahromi and Smolander, 2019; Niemietz and de Kinderen, 2013)

(Gong and Janssen, 2020; Banaeianjahromi and Smolander, 2016)

(Banaeianjahromi and Hekkala, 2019; Rouvari and Pekkola, 2023)

26 Motivation and commitment of employees (Kurnia et al., 2021; L

ohe and Legner, 2014)

(Banaeianjahromi and Smolander, 2016)

27 Stakeholdern Management (Dale and Scheepers, 2020)

28 Skill and knowledge of enterprise architects (Gong and Janssen, 2020; Sepp

anen, 2014; Gellweiler, 2020)

(Al-Kharusi et al., 2021; Marabelli and Newell, 2019)

29 Business know-how and leadership skills of architects (Dale and Scheepers, 2020; Al-Kharusi et al., 2021)

30 Human resources management (Banaeianjahromi and Smolander, 2019; Iyamu, 2013; Banaeianjahromi and Smolander, 2016; Safari et al., 2016)

Process-related Factors Sources

31 Process management with appropriate clarity and control (Brandis et al., 2014; Br

ee and Karger, 2022)

32 Participation and communication along processes (Kurnia et al., 2021; Dale and Scheepers, 2020)

33 Adaptability of the company (Iyamu, 2009; Hjort-Madsen, 2006; Darvish R. et al., 2013)

(Br

ee and Karger, 2022)

34 Structured identiﬁcation and analysis of challenges (Gong and Janssen, 2020; Sepp

anen, 2014)

Time management and consideration of best practices (Darvish R. et al., 2013; LeanIX GmbH, 2020)

36 Hurdles in consolidating suitable architectures (Iyamu, 2009; Hjort-Madsen, 2006)

37 Obstacles to the adoption of EA (Winter and Schelp, 2008; Sepp

anen, 2014)

In addition to clear responsibilities, the importance of

EA in the overall context must be deﬁned by the busi-

ness. In order for results to have a proﬁtable inﬂu-

ence, the information from the EA department must

ﬂow into the company’s decision-making bodies.

Structure. The absence of structural anchoring in

company operations hinders long-term acceptance.

This phenomenon is intrinsically related to the do-

main of business and EA. A contractual agreement

on EA activities serves to underscore the importance

of these activities, which must be designed in a ﬂex-

ible manner in order to achieve an optimal level of

efﬁciency. By integrating EA into the organizational

structures of other departments, end-to-end collabo-

ration is strengthened. This is a CSF in the context of

projects and restructuring initiatives, given that other-

wise proﬁtable cooperation cannot be achieved.

Organisation Culture and Politics. It is essential

that the utilisation of EA skills be culturally estab-

lished such that proactive planning can take place.

The concept of Architectural Thinking encapsulates

the essence of planning. It entails an understanding

of EA and necessitates an EA mindset, which must be

cultivated through regular engagement. Presupposed

trust facilitates collaborative cooperation, particularly

in a federal setting. A continuous improvement by

cultural establishment bolsters sustainable use and en-

hances efﬁciency, particularly regarding the reuse of

EA artifacts.

Framework and Methodology. The existing frame-

works must be adapted to align with the speciﬁc char-

acteristics of the organization and harmonized with

other approaches and established standards. It is cru-

cial for considering appropriate harmonization strate-

gies to mitigate the complexities associated with the

integration of multiple systems. Moreover, it is essen-

tial to deﬁne framework conditions and guidelines for

collaboration between the EA and the technical spe-

cialists. In particular, the involvement of stakehold-

ers can be facilitated by tailored frameworks, thereby

bridging the gap between the EA and specialised de-

partments with regard to implementation.

Proﬁtability and Efﬁciency. The availability of ad-

Critical Success Factors for Enterprise Architecture: Survey, Taxonomy, and Solutions

795

equate ﬁnancing and suitable lead times for EA rep-

resents a considerable risk. Furthermore, the intro-

duction of bureaucratic processes has the potential to

impede efﬁciency. In order to guarantee measurabil-

ity and control within an EA project, it is essential to

have precise deﬁnitions of purpose, scope, and objec-

tives. This enables effective monitoring and evalua-

tion, and builds the capacity to make necessary ad-

justments. The scope of the project encompasses data

collection and analysis. The governance has the task

to guarantee the proﬁtability and the adjusted schedul-

ing of resources.

Information Distribution and Sharing. The objec-

tive is to facilitate clear information sharing and coop-

eration between the various stakeholders, ensure data

availability and quality, as well as guarantee the con-

tinuous alignment of EA with the corporate strategy.

In addition to a communication strategy, a clearly de-

ﬁned information governance policy is required. This

should include the handling of data with regard to

collaborative working in the sense of a digital thread

across the entire life cycle.

3.2 Technological Factors

The potential of new technologies and innovations for

further development is also considered. The tech-

nological factors are further subdivided in tools and

utilization structure, data and quality management,

methods, as well as innovation and technology.

Tools and Utilization. The selection of appropriate

EA tools and their integration into a comprehensive

tool chain, which is deeply interwoven with other ad-

jacent areas of the company, serves as a foundation

for the effective implementation of the EA strategy.

User-friendliness and simplicity with regard to the in-

tended purpose should be of paramount importance.

Moreover, standards for exchange and interoperabil-

ity at the interfaces are crucial for streamlining the

workﬂow.

Data and Quality Management. It is imperative

that the documentation of EA activities adheres to

the agreed-upon criteria with regard to quality and

scope and is based on established standards. In or-

der to achieve overall standardization, it is possible

to declare appropriate maturity levels. The manage-

ment of EA artifacts represents a pivotal determinant

of success, with a centralized repository offering low-

threshold access proving an optimal solution for ad-

ministration. This should be aligned with a Service-

oriented Architecture (SOA) approach to facilitate the

exchange and linkage of information in accordance

with the linked data principle. With respect to the

objective of usefulness, EA literacy must be devel-

oped, which corresponds to effective communication

and collaboration using EA artifacts with regard to ap-

plication, analysis, and dissemination.

Methods. The success factors in the area of method-

ology pertain to the technical implementation of EA

activities, particularly with regard to the documenta-

tion of EA artifacts. The methods should adhere to

coordinated guidelines, in particular a system decom-

position. In terms of effectiveness, there should be

a focus on reusability along a continuum, which also

promotes the principle of equality. Subsequently, the

EA activities should be streamlined in the form of au-

tomated workﬂows. Low-threshold access to EA arti-

facts is crucial for their use and long-term anchoring

in the company.

Innovation and Technology. It is imperative to con-

sider the technical challenges that may arise when

monitoring and adopting new approaches. In such

cases, digital solutions in the form of services are to

be preferred, with these being managed over the life

cycle of a product. In order to facilitate cooperation,

especially in a federal context, it is essential to evalu-

ate the approaches across companies.

3.3 Human Factors

The success or failure of an EA project is contin-

gent upon a number of human factors. All include

the skills for communication abilities and collabora-

tive tendencies as well as motivation levels or resis-

tance management strategies of the team members in-

volved. It is evident that the commitment and cooper-

ation of all parties involved are crucial for the success

of EA.

Stakeholder Management. Without active stake-

holder management, it will be challenging to align the

results of EA with the preferences of the stakehold-

ers. By facilitating participation in EA activities, it is

possible to foster trust and understanding. Close co-

operation can contribute to the creation of a common

language and uniform expectations regarding the role

of EA and its functionality. In particular, the moti-

vation factor based on noticeable added value can be

considered a signiﬁcant criterion.

Interaction and Social Aspects. Transparency of EA

activities and awareness of the potential beneﬁts serve

to strengthen dealings with EA. It is imperative that

cooperation and collaboration be prioritized in order

to achieve joint success like a we-culture. Interaction

and social aspects serve as indicators of the social and

emotional skills exhibited by employees. Insufﬁcient

bottom-up commitment and human barriers impede

implementation, which in turn hinders success. The

establishment of a learning and error culture is cru-

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

796

cial for long-term success and meaningful further de-

velopment and improvement in all areas. A lack of

adaptability and a low willingness to change represent

signiﬁcant challenges in this regard.

Personnel, Role, and Qualiﬁcation. Dedication of

the personnel and their readiness to embrace change

are pivotal to the effective implementation of EA. The

human resources management factor is comprised of

several elements, including sufﬁcient personnel, sta-

ble conditions, consistent quality, and the ability to

execute effectively. This encompasses the formation

of a suitable team with the requisite skills. The opti-

mal qualiﬁcation for the role in question is made pos-

sible by uniform competence development and com-

prehensive knowledge transfer. This includes, in par-

ticular, the exchange of knowledge and experience be-

tween enterprise architects in terms of EA, business,

and IT. Furthermore, ongoing training and induction

of new employees is a crucial factor in determining

success. Additionally, EA is often performed as a

secondary task, which means that insufﬁcient space

needs to be allocated to EA. The spectrum of skills

ranges from familiarity with a subject area to special-

ization as a subject matter expert. The ability to adapt

EA artifacts is a signiﬁcant determinant of success.

3.4 Process-related Factors

The process-related factors address the design, man-

agement, and adaptability of the processes within EA

governance, EA management and EA projects. Here,

the design and management of the processes, in ad-

dition to the communication and participation of the

stakeholders involved, play an important role. The

ability to adapt to changing requirements is crucial

given the dynamic nature of EA projects.

Process Management and Harmonization. The

lack of clarity in processes and procedures, coupled

with the absence of coordination with the EA de-

partment and the presence of erroneous project plans,

contribute to delays. The success factor of process

management is comprised of three aspects: clear re-

sponsibilities, integration of EA into company-wide

processes, and alignment of these processes to cre-

ate value for stakeholders. By harmonizing the pro-

cesses accordingly, the diversity and thus the com-

plexity of the processes is reduced. This simpliﬁes

possible automation and allows batch processing to

increase efﬁciency. Further challenges in the area of

process management are frequent changes in require-

ments on the part of the client as well as delimited

innovation projects that are not thought through and

disseminated across organizations.

Communication and Reporting. The involvement

of roles and communication must be considered at

each stage of the process, in order for the workﬂow to

run smoothly; furthermore, appropriate deputies must

be appointed for this purpose. Additionally, it is es-

sential to treat the data as a digital thread. Open in-

terfaces and standards facilitate collaboration; how-

ever, the interfaces must be coordinated in advance.

Finally, the management of time and the implemen-

tation of deep work phases are key factors that con-

tribute to productivity as well as the consideration of

the adequate best practice.

Maintenance and Continuous Improvement. It is

essential that the EA artifacts be documented in a

manner that facilitates their utilization by stakehold-

ers and allows for their reuse. Furthermore, any

adjustments must be duly recorded in the event of

changes to the circumstances or framework condi-

tions, thus preventing the occurrence of repetition

errors. This directly correlates with the factors of

change management.

Requirements and Information Management. The

effective utilisation of EA, particularly within the

context of projects, hinges upon the availability of

comprehensive and reliable requirements. The accu-

rate acquisition and examination of information as-

sume paramount importance in this regard. To this

end, it is imperative to ﬁrstly identify the pertinent

stakeholders and facilitate the exchange of integrated

information.

Knowledge Management and Utilization. The

practice of knowledge management entails the aggre-

gation and reuse of designs and reference architec-

tures, the adaptation of good practices, and the acqui-

sition of insights from past experiences. It necessi-

tates the incorporation of the repository of measures

into the knowledge base, the facilitation of transparent

communication, and the assessment of the efﬁcacy of

implemented measures for the purpose of continuous

improvement.

Change Management. Effective compliance and

risk management is essential for navigating resistance

to change and safeguarding the integrity of the change

process. It entails prompt identiﬁcation, constructive

resolution, transparent communication, and inclusive

involvement to de-escalate conﬂicts and nurture trust

and collaboration. A comprehensive approach fosters

acceptance, commitment, and cooperation, which are

crucial for the effective integration of the new mea-

sures.

Compliance and Risk Management. With respect

to EA activities, the harmonization of structure, man-

agement, and documentation yields performance ben-

eﬁts and recognition values. Furthermore, the com-

Critical Success Factors for Enterprise Architecture: Survey, Taxonomy, and Solutions

797

plexity inherent in many modern systems can be ef-

fectively managed through the use of EA, enabling

the control of known artifact types with coordinated

purpose reference and the reduction of potential de-

sign inconsistencies.

3.5 Summary of Factors

Overall, considering and addressing these factors will

enhance the likelihood of success in EA projects. It

should be noted that a multitude of factors could be

classiﬁed in a variety of subcategories, as they of-

ten interact with and are inﬂuenced by one another.

This complexity underscores the challenges in clearly

delineating individual factors and emphasizes the ne-

cessity for an integrative approach when analyzing

and addressing factors in EA projects. The key CSF,

as identiﬁed in both the literature and the expert in-

terviews by number and emphasis, have been high-

lighted.

4 ASSESSMENT OF CSF

Organizational factors exert the greatest inﬂuence on

the success of EA projects, exhibiting an above-

average impact. The governance and structure is of

critical importance, as evidenced by numerous stud-

ies. A number of research studies have demonstrated

that the direct anchoring of EA management via gov-

ernance structures within a company has a positive

inﬂuence on EA projects (Hillmann et al., 2024). Fur-

thermore, this is the only way to deliver the compre-

hensive added value of EA for holistic further devel-

opment via Top-Down approach. Additionally, it has

been shown that limited access of enterprise architects

to information from decision-making bodies and or-

ganizational measures signiﬁcantly inhibits success,

which in turn inﬂuences the results of such initiatives.

Added value is contingent upon the implementation

of an efﬁcacious communication strategy and the dis-

semination of pertinent information to the intended

recipient at the optimal juncture, in the requisite for-

mat.

The motivation and trust of stakeholders in the

beneﬁts of EA are of paramount importance. The ev-

idence indicates that the backing of top management

and the conviction of non-expert stakeholders regard-

ing the signiﬁcance of EA are especially crucial to

ensuring the success of initiatives (Aleatrati K. et al.,

2015; Masuda et al., 2021). However, mistrust of ar-

chitects, a lack of awareness of the beneﬁts of infor-

mation technology, and a lack of architectural aware-

ness have been identiﬁed as challenges particularly in

time of a digital age (Dang and Pekkola, 2017; Ajer

and Olsen, 2018; Iyamu, 2009; Winter and Schelp,

2008). The organization of processes and roles within

EA initiatives is a crucial aspect that inﬂuences suc-

cess. An excess of roles within EA management leads

to inefﬁcient bureaucracy and a negative impact on the

process. Furthermore, problems with data quality and

a lack of documentation can create bureaucratic hur-

dles. The implementation of EA concepts is often a

challenge due to their abstract nature, which makes it

difﬁcult to translate them into practical artifacts using

suitable processes.

The autonomy of organizational units and the

political and conﬂict dynamics of the organiza-

tional environment are identiﬁed as additional chal-

lenges (Ajer et al., 2021; Ajer and Olsen, 2019; Ajer

and Olsen, 2018). These factors are further exac-

erbated, by frequent changes in government and a

severe lack of resources (Dang and Pekkola, 2017).

Cultural and social aspects, such as organizational

culture or competition between architects and other

IT specialists, have a notable impact on the effective-

ness of EA projects (Iyamu, 2009; Iyamu, 2013).

The manner in which resources are budgeted and

allocated is a signiﬁcant determinant of the success

of EA projects. Political inﬂuences and funding dif-

ﬁculties are identiﬁed as critical issues in the liter-

ature (Kurnia et al., 2021; Ajer and Olsen, 2018;

Ajer and Olsen, 2019; Iyamu, 2009). Furthermore, a

dearth of resources and delays in the implementation

of EA projects results in setbacks and unwarranted

damage to the reputation of EA (Dang and Pekkola,

2017; Lim et al., 2024). Adequate communication is

essential for the success of EA projects. A lack of

organizational support and communication problems

can impede EA’s ability to achieve its goals (Iyamu,

2009; Niemietz and de Kinderen, 2013). Effective

governance and clearly deﬁned EA objectives are cru-

cial factors (Isom

aki and Penttinen, 2008). Similarly,

unrealistic expectations on the part of management

regarding EA functionality can lead to project fail-

ure (Dang and Pekkola, 2020). Therefore, effective

management of stakeholder relationships and strate-

gic communication with the company is vital (Iyamu,

2009; Wood et al., 2013). In accordance to our com-

prehension of a good EA, a stakeholder ideally does

not need to have knowledge of EA in order to derive

added value.

Figure 2 provides the summary of the most impor-

tant factors and their relation. The colors of the cat-

egories are in accordance with the taxonomic struc-

ture. The strength of the connections is contingent

upon their importance, as evidenced by their repre-

sentation in the literature and expert interviews. For

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

798

Figure 1: Taxonomy of critical success factors of EA and EAM.

Critical Success Factors for Enterprise Architecture: Survey, Taxonomy, and Solutions

799

Figure 2: Mutual inﬂuence of CSF in the area of EA.

the sake of clarity, weaker connections were excluded

from the analysis.

The costs and beneﬁts of EA are contingent upon

the equilibrium between strategic and tactical orienta-

tion (Hauder et al., 2013; LeanIX GmbH, 2020; Hill-

mann et al., 2021). Excessive planning and conceptu-

alization result in the dissipation of valuable time and

ﬁnancial resources that could otherwise be utilized for

the actual realization. Conversely, the premature and

immediate action for ad-hoc solutions may yield in-

adequate and unsustainable outcomes. Therefore, it

is preferable to start with the description of the target

architecture such that the scope and required details

for the as-is architecture becomes clear.

EA has to be seen as an integral component in the

sense of a co-worker. It would be prudent to impose

limitations on the diversity of EA applications in or-

der to facilitate alignment with and integration into

neighboring disciplines. Multiple case studies have

shown that EA is particularly effective when used

proactively in contrast to reactively. In general, the

following seven recommendations can be made with

regard to the introduction and establishment of EA in

a company:

1. EA Awareness. Cultivation of a comprehensive

understanding and deﬁned targets of EA across

the entire organization

2. EA Governance. Establishment and anchoring of

a uniform and harmonized structure for EA

3. Architectural Thinking. Facilitation of collabo-

ration and participation, from the initial stages of

conceptualization through to the implementation

phase, in order to foster cooperation and support

the application

4. EA Workﬂows. Strategic planning of ac-

tive stakeholder management and company-wide

communication with focus and value creation

5. EA Repository and Glossary. Utilization of es-

tablished standards and modular reference archi-

tectures, in conjunction with the deﬁnition and use

of terminology.

6. Interoperability and Re-usability via Linked

Data and SOA. Connections of individual com-

pany divisions by employing methodologies to in-

tegrate and connect the distributed EA artifacts

7. Transparency and Dashboard. Creation of low-

threshold and user-friendly access point to EA ar-

tifacts, associated documents and relevant infor-

mation.

5 CSF RELATED PRACTICES

ALONG THE LIFE CYCLE

A variety of measures can be employed to address

each individual success factor in a targeted manner.

A dedicated catalog has been developed that lists po-

tential best practices in a bullet-point format, see Ta-

ble 2. This is to be expanded upon in future work and

tailored to the speciﬁc needs of the organization. It is

essential to establish appropriate measurement meth-

ods for key values with deﬁned threshold values.

6 SUMMARY

In this study, we have developed the ﬁrst taxonomy

for critical success factors for EA and EA manage-

ment. Among other things, this serves as an overview

of what needs to be considered and addressed when

managing EA projects. It thus represents a kind of

checklist for the successful introduction of EA in a

company and enables continuous monitoring to en-

sure success. In conclusion, three critical success fac-

tors were identiﬁed from the totality of factors that

signiﬁcantly inﬂuence the success of EA and con-

tribute to the positive development of the company.

These factors are: Initial is the direct incorporation of

EA management into the company through the estab-

lishment of governance structures. This demonstrates

the endorsement and conﬁdence of top management

in EA. Secondly, a precise deﬁnition of objectives,

tasks and character of EA within the company and in

projects is essential. This enables focused work, par-

ticularly with regard to implementation and integra-

tion. Furthermore, it prevents excessive expectations.

The third point is the strategic communication of EA

within the company and with external stakeholders.

To this end, it is essential to draw up a communica-

tion plan and anchor it in processes to foster the cul-

ture. The guiding principle of “Architectural Think-

ing” can be used to motivate employees with the goal

of creating a better company.

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

800

Table 2: Critical factors along the rough EA cycle with possible key measures for success.

Phase Factor Supporting Method

Plan

Goal and Strategic

Orientation

Creation of a clear target deﬁnition using SMART

Organisation of regular strategic workshop and review the strategic direction

Create a step-by-step plan with milesontes

Plan

Governance and

Management

Convincing leaders and stakeholders about EA beneﬁts

Obtain Top-Down-Support

Deﬁne a precise Business Case

Reconsider the allocation of resources

Plan Structure

Deﬁne clear project organisation structures.

Develop interdisciplinary collaboration

Establishment of interfaces and integration mechanism

Plan

Framework and

Methodology

Check the adaptation and alignment of the frameworks used.

Describe the methodical procedure for using different approaches.

Plan Tools and Utilization

Focus on the use of simple tools

Development of a tool chain with compatible interfaces

Facilitation of seamless data exchange.

Process Management

and Harmonization

Review of capacity planning and scaling options

Establishment of buffers, in particular for improvements

Establishment of priorities for projects

Enabling ﬂexibility and adaptability

Do Stakeholder Management

Analysis and engagement of potential stakeholder

Plan communication and establish a proper communication platform

Involving Stakeholders in the EA processes

Deﬁne a methodology to solve conﬂicts and to create resolution

Requirements and

Information Management

Firmly deﬁned requirements from the start

Carrying out a thorough analysis phase

Organization of workshops to ensure completeness and understanding

Countering complexity and scope with tool support

Data and Quality

Management

Establish a common database for EA artifacts

Introduce quality assurance for EA data via process

Enable the cleansing of EA data over long periods of time

Focus on Data Integration Technologies

Information

Distribution and Sharing

Creating transparency and opportunities for self-exploration

Establishing clarity and consistency

Establish of a broad distribution of information via plan

Do Methods Build a collection of best practices by cases

Organisation

Culture and Politics

Promoting a culture of cooperation

Enable continuous feedback by deﬁning time periods.

Enable critical reﬂections of EA initiatives through meetings or surveys.

Innovation and

Technology

Considering a holistic solution

Collection of requirements across all business areas

Personne, Role,

and Qualiﬁcation

Introduction of qualiﬁcation management with review of staff training

Carry out a personnel requirements analysis and surveys

Carry out regular employee engagement and motivation measures

Enabling prospects, career and talent development for long term

Communication

and Reporting

Establishment of a two-way communication with conﬁrmation

Establishment of default communication channels

Information through regular updates on the processing status

Interaction and

Social Aspects

Recognition and appreciation of performance

Creation of a motivating working environment

Enabling participation and co-determination

Knowledge Management

and Utilization

Establishment of knowledge-management-platform

Deﬁning a culture of a learning organization

Recording experiences and lessons-learned by means of process

Announcement that information management is the task of all

Check

Proﬁtability

and Efﬁciency

Deﬁnition of clear objectives using SMART and assessment of EA metrics

Announcement of Key Performance Indicators

Establishment of regular review and reporting in a KPI-related format

Review of targeted action and ressource allocation

Enabling deep work phases and sprints

Checking of the required level of detail for EA artifacts

Check

Compliance and

Risk Management

Focus on standardization and integration

Create check list for evaluation

Act Change Management

Consideration of a holistic approach taking into account the environment

Deﬁnition of a standardized and structured procedure

Act

Maintenance and

Continuous Improvement

Establish and trigger a regular cycle of feedback, learning, and improvement

Deﬁne a cyclic timeframe via validity period for re-examination

Critical Success Factors for Enterprise Architecture: Survey, Taxonomy, and Solutions

801

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to express our gratitude to our student,

Kevin Riesel, for his invaluable assistance.

REFERENCES

Aier, S. (2014). The role of organizational culture for

grounding, management, guidance and effectiveness

of enterprise architecture principles. Information Sys-

tems and e-Business Management, 12.

Aier, S., Riege, C., and Winter, R. (2008). Classiﬁcation

of Enterprise ArchitectureScenarios. Enterprise Mod-

elling and Information Systems Architectures, 3.

Ajer, A. K. S., Hustad, E., and Vassilakopoulou, P. (2021).

Enterprise architecture operationalization and institu-

tional pluralism: The case of the Norwegian Hospital

sector. Information Systems, 31.

Ajer, A. K. S. and Olsen, D. H. (2018). Enterprise Archi-

tecture Challenges: A Case Study of three Norwegian

Public Sectors. European Conference on Information

Systems.

Ajer, A. K. S. and Olsen, D. H. (2019). Enterprise Archi-

tecture Implementation Is a Bumpy Ride. Electronic

Journal of E-Government, 17.

Al-Kharusi, H., Miskon, S., and Bahari, M. (2021). En-

terprise architects and stakeholders alignment frame-

work in enterprise architecture development. Informa-

tion Systems and e-Business Management, 19.

Aldea, A., Iacob, M., and Quartel, D. (2018). From Busi-

ness Strategy to Enterprise Architecture and Back. In

International Enterprise Distributed Object Comput-

ing Workshop.

Aleatrati K., P., Aier, S., Hauder, M., Roth, S., Matthes, F.,

and Winter, R. (2015). Success Factors for Federated

Enterprise Architecture Model Management. In Ad-

vanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops.

Ascher, D., Heiland, E., Schnell, D., Hillmann, P., and

Karcher, A. (2022). Methodology for Holistic Ref-

erence Modelingin Systems Engineering. Interna-

tional Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

(ICEIS), CEUR.

Banaeianjahromi, N. and Hekkala, R. (2019). Factors In-

ﬂuencing Communication and Collaboration in Enter-

prise Architecture Development. In Hawaii Interna-

tional Conference on System Sciences.

Banaeianjahromi, N. and Smolander, K. (2016). Under-

standing obstacles in Enterprise Architecture Devel-

opment. In Conference on Information Systems.

Banaeianjahromi, N. and Smolander, K. (2019). Lack of

Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Ar-

chitecture Development. Information Systems Fron-

tiers, 21.

Bente, S., Bombosch, U., and Langade, S. (2012). Collab-

orative Enterprise Architecture: Enriching EA with

Lean, Agile, and Enterprise 2.0 practices.

Brandis, K., Dzombeta, S., and Haufe, K. (2014). Towards

a framework for governance architecture management

in cloud environments. Future Generation Computer

Systems, 32.

ee, T. and Karger, E. (2022). Challenges in enterprise ar-

chitecture management. Governance and Regulation,

11.

Bui, Q. N. and Levy, M. (2017). Institutionalization of Con-

tested Practices: A Case of Enterprise Architecture

Implementation in a US State Government. Hawaii

International Conference on System Sciences.

CONSIDEO Gmbh (2013). Planspiel: Grabenkriege im

Management!? White Paper.

Dale, M. and Scheepers, H. (2020). Enterprise architecture

implementation as interpersonal connection: Building

support and commitment. Information Systems Jour-

nal, 30.

Dang, D. and Pekkola, S. (2020). Institutional Perspectives

on the Process of Enterprise Architecture Adoption.

Information Systems Frontiers, 22.

Dang, D. D. and Pekkola, S. (2016). Root Causes of Enter-

prise Architecture Problems in the Public Sector. Pa-

ciﬁc Asia Conference on Information Systems, 287.

Dang, D. D. and Pekkola, S. (2017). Systematic Literature

Review on Enterprise Architecture in the Public Sec-

tor. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 15.

Darvish R., B., Mahrin, M., Nikpay, F., and Rouhani, B.

(2013). Current Issues on Enterprise Architecture Im-

plementation Methodology, volume 2.

Freeman, J. (1972). The Tyranny of Stuctureless. The Sec-

ond Wave.

Gellweiler, C. (2020). Types of IT Architects: A Content

Analysis on Tasks and Skills. Theoretical and Applied

Electronic Commerce Research, 15.

Gong, Y. and Janssen, M. (2020). Exploring Causal Factors

Inﬂuencing Enterprise Architecture Failure. Confer-

ence on Transfer and Diffusion of IT.

Hauder, M., Roth, S., and Matthes, F. (2013). Organiza-

tional factors inﬂuencing enterprise architecture man-

agement challenges. In Software Engineering for

Business Information Systems.

Heiland, E., Hillmann, P., and Karcher, A. (2021). Enter-

prise Architecture Model Transformation Engine. In-

ternational Conference on Operations Research and

Enterprise Systems (ICORES).

Heiland, E., Hillmann, P., and Karcher, A. (2023). Con-

straint based Modeling according to Reference De-

sign. International Conference on Perspectives in

Business Informatics Research (BIR).

Heiland, E. and Karcher, A. (2019). Language Indepen-

dent Enterprise Model Mapping and Integration. En-

terprise Information Systems.

Hillmann, P., Heiland, E., and Karcher, A. (2021). Auto-

mated Enterprise Architecture Model Mining. Inter-

national Symposium on Computer Science and Intel-

ligent Controls (ISCSIC).

Hillmann, P., Kesseler, M., Schnell, D., Mihelcic, G., and

Karcher, A. (2024). Enterprise Architecture Gover-

nance of Excellence. In International Conference on

Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS).

Hillmann, P., Schnell, D., Hagel, H., and Karcher, A.

(2022). Enterprise Model Library for Business-IT-

Alignment. International Conference on Computer

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

802

Science, Engineering and Applications (SEAPP).

https://www.unibw.de/ia/publikationen-2/

2022-csea-enterprise-model-library-paper.

pdf.

Hjort-Madsen, K. (2006). Enterprise Architecture Imple-

mentation and Management. In Hawaii International

Conference on System Sciences, volume 4.

Isom

aki, H. and Penttinen, K. (2008). Challenges of Gov-

ernment Enterprise Architecture Work - Stakeholders’

Views. In Electronic Government, volume 5184.

Iyamu, T. (2009). The Factors Affecting Institutionalisa-

tion of Enterprise Architecture in the Organisation. In

Conference on Commerce and Enterprise Computing.

Iyamu, T. (2013). Enterprise Architecture Strategic Frame-

work. In Issues In Information Systems, Business,

Computer Science.

Kesseler, M. and Karcher, A. (2017). Gesch

aftsmodelle im

Wandel. Zeitschrift f

ur Systemdenken und Entschei-

dungsﬁndung im Management, 16.

Kotusev, S. and Kurnia, S. (2021). The theoretical basis of

enterprise architecture. Information Technology, 36.

Kurnia, S., Kotusev, S., Shanks, G., Dilnutt, R., and Mil-

ton, S. (2021). Stakeholder Engagement in Enterprise

Architecture Practice. Information and Software Tech-

nology, 134.

Langermeier, M. and Bauer, B. (2018). A Model-Based

Method for the Evaluation of Project Proposal Com-

pliance within EA Planning. Enterprise Distributed

Object Computing Workshop.

LeanIX GmbH (2020). Enterprise Architecture Success Kit.

White Paper.

Lim, W. S., Loya, P., Sinha, V., Slott, L. V., Yu, J., and

Dilnutt, R. (2024). Non-Technical Enterprise Archi-

tecture in Healthcare. Enterprise Architecture Profes-

sional Journal.

ohe, J. and Legner, C. (2014). Overcoming implemen-

tation challenges in enterprise architecture manage-

ment: a design theory for architecture-driven IT Man-

agement. Information Systems E-Business Manage-

ment, 12.

Marabelli, M. and Newell, S. (2019). Absorptive Capac-

ity and Enterprise Systems Implementation. SIGMIS

Database, 50.

Masuda, Y., Zimmermann, A., Bass, M., Nakamura, O.,

Shirasaka, S., and Yamamoto, S. (2021). Adaptive En-

terprise Architecture Process for Global Companies in

a Digital IT Era. Enterprise Information Systems, 17.

Niemietz, H. and de Kinderen, S. (2013). Communication

Breakdowns in Architecture Driven Transformations:

The Result of Cultural Diversity? In Conference on

Business Informatics.

Nyg

ard, M. and Olsen, D. H. (2016). Enterprise Archi-

tecture Implementation Challenges: an Exploratory

Study of the Norwegian Health Sector. Information

Science and Information Systems, 24.

Olsen, D. H. and Trelsg

ard, K. (2016). Enterprise Architec-

ture Adoption Challenges: An exploratory Case Study

of the Norwegian Higher Education Sector. Enterprise

Information Systems, 100.

ohn, D. and Hillmann, P. (2021). Reference Service Model

for Federated Identity Management. In Enterprise,

Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling.

Reichstein, C., H

arting, R.-C., and Sandkuhl, K. (2019).

How companies can beneﬁt from Enterprise Architec-

tureManagement -. Enterprise Modelling and Infor-

mation Systems Architectures.

Rouvari, A. and Pekkola, S. (2023). Improving Commu-

nication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture

Projects. International Conference on Software Busi-

ness.

Safari, H., Faraji, Z., and Majidian, S. (2016). Identify-

ing and evaluating enterprise architecture risks using

FMEA and fuzzy VIKOR. Intelligent Manufactoring,

27.

Sepp

anen, V. (2014). From problems to critical success

factors of enterprise architecture adoption. Jyv

askyl

Studies in Computing.

Voegele, A. (1997). Das große Handbuch zum

Konstruktions- und Entwicklungsmanagement. 1.

Winter, R. and Schelp, J. (2008). Enterprise Architec-

ture Governance: The Need for a Business-to-IT Ap-

proach. In Symposium on Applied Computing.

Wood, J., Sarkani, S., Mazzuchi, T., and Eveleigh, T.

(2013). A Framework for Capturing the Hidden Stake-

holder System. Systems Engineering, 16.

Zenz, L. J. I., Heiland, E., Hillmann, P., and Karcher,

A. (2023). Aligning Models with Their Realization

through Model-based Systems Engineering. Con-

ference on Advanced Enterprise Information System

(AEIS).

Critical Success Factors for Enterprise Architecture: Survey, Taxonomy, and Solutions

803