Editing Enterprise architecture (section)

==Overview==
===Schools of thought===
Within the field of enterprise architecture, there are three overarching schools: Enterprise IT Design, Enterprise Integrating, and Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption. Which school one subscribes to will impact how they see the EA's purpose and scope, as well as the means of achieving it, the skills needed to conduct it, and the locus of responsibility for conducting it.<ref name="Lapalme">{{cite journal|last=Lapalme|first=J.|title=Three Schools of Thought on Enterprise Architecture|journal=IT Professional|volume=14|number=6|pages=37–43|date=November 2012|doi=10.1109/MITP.2011.109|s2cid=206469705 }}</ref>

Under Enterprise IT Design, the main purpose of EA is to guide the process of planning and designing an enterprise's [[Information technology|IT]]/[[Information science|IS]] capabilities to meet the desired organizational objectives, often by greater alignment between IT/IS and business concerns. Architecture proposals and decisions are limited to the IT/IS aspects of the enterprise and other aspects service only as inputs. The Enterprise Integrating school believes that the purpose of EA is to create a greater coherency between the various concerns of an enterprise (HR, IT, Operations, etc.), including the link between strategy formulation and execution. Architecture proposals and decisions here encompass all aspects of the enterprise. The Enterprise Ecosystem Adaption school states that the purpose of EA is to foster and maintain the learning capabilities of enterprises so they may be sustainable. Consequently, a great deal of emphasis is put on improving the capabilities of the enterprise to improve itself, to innovate, and to coevolve with its environment. Typically, proposals and decisions encompass both the enterprise and its environment.

===Benefits, challenges, and criticisms===
The benefits of EA are achieved through its direct and indirect contributions to organizational goals.<ref>{{cite report|author1=Vasilis Boucharas|author2=Marlies van Steenbergen|author3=Slinger Jansen|author4=Sjaak Brinkkemper|title=The Contribution of Enterprise Architecture to the Achievement of Organizational Goals: Establishing the Enterprise Architecture Benefits Framework, Technical Report|publisher=Department of Information and Computing Sciences at Utrecht University|location=Utrecht, The Netherlands|url=http://www.cs.uu.nl/research/techreps/repo/CS-2010/2010-014.pdf|access-date=November 29, 2014|archive-date=July 4, 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220704121626/http://www.cs.uu.nl/research/techreps/repo/CS-2010/2010-014.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref> Notable benefits include support in the areas related to design and re-design of the organizational structures during mergers, acquisitions, or general organizational change;<ref>{{cite book|chapter=Effects of an architectural approach to the implementation of shared service centers|author1=Bert Arnold|author2=Martin Op 't Land|author-link2=Martin Op 't Land|author3=Jan Dietz|author-link3=Jan Dietz|title=Financecom05: Second international workshop on Enterprise, applications and services in the finance industry|editor1=Fethi Rabhi|editor2=Daniel Veit|editor3=Christof Weinhardt|year=2005|publisher=Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers|location=Regensburg, Germany}}</ref><ref name=schekkerman>{{cite report|title=Trends in enterprise architecture 2005: How are organizations progressing?|publisher=Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments|url=https://silo.tips/download/trends-in-enterprise-architecture|last=Schekkerman|first=Jaap|author-link=Jaap Schekkerman|page=33}}</ref><ref name=bucher>{{cite report|title=Enterprise architecture analysis and application: An exploratory study|last1=Bucher|first1=T.|last2=Fischer|first2=R.|last3=Kurpjuweit|first3=S.|last4=Winter|first4=Robert|author-link4=Robert Winter (business theorist)|publisher=EDOC Workshop TEAR|location=Hong Kong, China|year=2006}}</ref><ref name=nilsson>{{cite report|title=Management of technochange in an interorganizational E-government project|publisher=Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences|last=Nilsson|first=Andreas|year=2008|page=209}}</ref> enforcement of discipline and business process standardization, and enablement of process consolidation, reuse, and [[Process integration|integration]];<ref name=varnus>{{cite report|title=TOGAF 9 enterprise architecture survey results|last1=Varnus|first1=J.|last2=Panaich|first2=N.|publisher=23rd Enterprise Architecture Practitioners Conference|url=http://opengroup.org/public/member/proceedings/q309/q309a/Presentations/pl-varnus-panaich.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://archive.opengroup.org/public/member/proceedings/q309/q309a/Presentations/pl-varnus-panaich.pdf|date=2009-07-20|archive-date=2009-07-20}}</ref><ref name=rossweill>{{cite report|title=Understanding the benefits of enterprise architecture|last1=Ross|first1=J.W.|last2=Weill|first2=P.|year=2005|publisher=CISR Research Briefings|volume=V|number=2B}}</ref> support for investment decision-making and work prioritization;<ref name=schekkerman/><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Quartel |first1=Dick |last2=Steen |first2=Maarten W.A. |last3=Lankhorst |first3=Marc M. |date=2012-05-01 |title=Application and project portfolio valuation using enterprise architecture and business requirements modelling |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2011.625571 |journal=Enterprise Information Systems |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=189–213 |doi=10.1080/17517575.2011.625571 |bibcode=2012EntIS...6..189Q |s2cid=28199240 |issn=1751-7575}}</ref><ref name=bucher/> enhancement of collaboration and communication between [[project stakeholder]]s and contribution to efficient [[Scope (project management)|project scoping]] and to defining more complete and consistent project [[deliverables]]s;<ref name=nilsson/><ref name=varnus/> and an increase in the timeliness of [[requirements elicitation]] and the accuracy of requirement definitions through publishing of the EA documentation.<ref>{{cite report|chapter=Architecture-driven requirements engineering|last1=Engelsman|first1=W.|last2=Iacob|first2=M.E.|last3=Franken|first3=H.M.|last4=Jonkers|first4=J.|title=Advances in Enterprise Engineering II |series=Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing |publisher=Proceedings of the 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing|location=Honolulu, Hawaii, USA|year=2009|volume=28 |pages=285–286|doi=10.1007/978-3-642-01859-6_8|isbn=978-3-642-01858-9 }}</ref>

Other benefits include contribution to [[Optimal design|optimal system designs]] and efficient resource allocation during system development and testing;<ref name=schekkerman/><ref name=bucher/> enforcement of discipline and standardization of IT planning activities and contribution to a reduction in time for technology-related decision making;<ref name=bucher/><ref name=rossweill/> reduction of the system's implementation and operational costs, and minimization of replicate infrastructure services across business units;<ref name=rossweill/><ref name=kappelman>{{cite report|title=Enterprise Architecture: Charting the Territory for Academic Research|last1=Kappelman|first1=Leon|last2=McGinnis|first2=Tom|last3=Pettite|first3=Alex|last4=Sidorova|first4=Anna|year=2008|publisher=AMCIS 2008 Proceedings|url=https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2008/162/}}</ref> reduction in IT complexity, consolidation of data and applications, and improvement of [[interoperability]] of the systems;<ref name=varnus/><ref name=rossweill/><ref name=kappelman/> more [[open-closed principle|open]] and [[responsiveness|responsive]] IT as reflected through increased accessibility of data for [[regulatory compliance]], and increased transparency of infrastructure changes;<ref name=rossweill/><ref>{{cite journal|title=Managing information security in a business network of machinery maintenance services business - Enterprise architecture as a coordination tool|last1=Pulkkinen|first1=M.|last2=Luostarinen|first2=K.|last3=Naumenko|first3=A.|journal=Journal of Systems and Software|volume=80|issue=10|pages=1607–1620|year=2007|doi=10.1016/j.jss.2007.01.044}}</ref> and a reduction of [[business risks]] from system failures and security breaches. EA also helps reduce risks of project delivery.<ref name=rossweill/><ref>{{cite report|title=Enterprise architecture expands its role in strategic business transformation: Infosys enterprise architecture survey 2008/2009|last1=Obitz|first1=T.|last2=Babu|first2=M.K.|publisher=Infosys|year=2009}}</ref> Establishing EA as an accepted, recognized, functionally integrated and fully involved concept at operational and tactical levels is one of the biggest challenges facing Enterprise Architects today and one of the main reasons why many EA initiatives fail.<ref>{{cite journal|title=FEAMI: A Methodology to include and to integrate Enterprise Architecture Processes into Existing Organizational Processes|last=Dedic|first=N.|year=2020|journal=IEEE Engineering Management Review|volume=48|issue=4|pages=160–166 |doi=10.1109/EMR.2020.3031968|s2cid=226351029 }}</ref> 

A key concern about EA has been the difficulty in arriving at [[Performance indicator|metrics of success]] because of the broad-brush and often opaque nature of EA projects.<ref>{{cite thesis|title=Measuring Enterprise Architecture Effectiveness: A Focus on Key Performance Indicators|last=Günther|first=Wendy Arianne|date=August 2014|url=http://liacs.leidenuniv.nl/assets/Masterscripties/ICTiB/Gunther-Wendy-non-confidential.pdf|type=Master's thesis|publisher=Universiteit Leiden|access-date=2023-03-04}}</ref> Additionally, there have been a number of reports, including those written by [[Ivar Jacobson]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.ivarjacobson.com/ea-failed-big-way/|title=EA Failed Big Way!|last=Jacobson|first=Ivar|author-link=Ivar Jacobson|date=2007-10-18|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160401150639/http://blog.ivarjacobson.com/ea-failed-big-way/|archive-date=2016-04-01}}</ref> [[Gartner]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=498188&tab=overview|title=Gartner Enterprise Architecture Summit: Architecting the Agile Organization, 26 – 27 September 2007|publisher=Gartner|year=2007|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070806135856/http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=498188&tab=overview|archive-date=2007-08-06}}</ref> [[Erasmus University Rotterdam]] and [[IDS Scheer]],<ref>{{cite report|url=http://www.computerworld.com.au/whitepaper/370709/why-two-thirds-of-enterprise-architecture-projects-fail/?type=other&arg=0&location=art_related|title=Why Two Thirds of Enterprise Architecture Projects Fail|last1=Roeleven|first1=S.|last2=Broer|first2=J.|year=2010|publisher=ARIS|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131113181849/http://www.computerworld.com.au/whitepaper/370709/why-two-thirds-of-enterprise-architecture-projects-fail/?type=other&arg=0&location=art_related|archive-date=2013-11-13}}</ref> [[Dion Hinchcliffe]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/09/fixing_enterprise_architecture.php|title=Fixing Enterprise Architecture: Balancing the Forces of Change in the Modern Organization|last=Hinchcliffe|first=Dion|date=2009-09-03|publisher=ebiz|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090906013021/http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/enterprise/2009/09/fixing_enterprise_architecture.php|archive-date=2009-09-06}}</ref> and [[Stanley Gaver]],<ref>{{cite report|url=http://www.ech-bpm.ch/sites/default/files/articles/why_doesnt_the_federal_enterprise_architecture_work.pdf|title=Why Doesn't the FEA Work?|last=Gaver|first=Stanley|publisher=Technology Matters, Inc.|year=2010|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160611170127/http://www.ech-bpm.ch/sites/default/files/articles/why_doesnt_the_federal_enterprise_architecture_work.pdf|archive-date=2016-06-11}}</ref> that argue that the frequent failure of EA initiatives makes the concept not worth the effort and that the methodology will fade out quickly.