A COMPARISON OF ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE …

1 A COMPARISON OF ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE FRAMEWORKS. Lise Urbaczewski, Eastern Michigan University, Stevan Mrdalj, Eastern Michigan University, ABSTRACT have also been made [7]. The Open Group [12] has drawn comparisons between its architectural An ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE framework (EAF) maps framework , TOGAF, and existing frameworks. Tang all of the software development processes within the et. al provide an analysis of frameworks at a high ENTERPRISE and how they relate and interact to fulfill level, based on their goals, inputs and outcomes.

2 The ENTERPRISE 's mission. It provides organizations [10]. The aim of this paper is to provide a direct with the ability to understand and analyze COMPARISON of the frameworks, based on their views weaknesses or inconsistencies to be identified and and aspects. In order to establish a common ground addressed. There are a number of already for the framework COMPARISON , we studied several established EAF in use today; some of these existing ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE frameworks. Second, frameworks were developed for very specific areas, we created a method to compare the frameworks whereas others have broader functionality.

3 This study based on the perspectives of their stakeholders and provides a COMPARISON of several frameworks that abstractions. Third, we then compared the can then be used for guidance in the selection of an frameworks. From this, we discuss the ways that such EAF that meets the needed criteria. comparisons can be used in determining a best-fit of a framework dependent on specific stakeholder needs Keywords: ARCHITECTURE Frameworks, ENTERPRISE for a given project. ARCHITECTURE , COMPARISON OVERVIEW OF EXISTING ENTERPRISE .

4 INTRODUCTION ARCHITECTURE FRAMEWORKS. ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE serves as the blueprint for the The following are concise descriptions of five EAFs system and the project that develops it. An ENTERPRISE that are used in this COMPARISON . ARCHITECTURE framework can describe the underlying infrastructure, thus providing the groundwork for the Zachman framework for ENTERPRISE hardware, software, and networks to work together. ARCHITECTURE : John Zachman published the Zachman According to the Systems & Software Consortium framework for ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE in 1987 [14].

5 [11], An ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE relates and is considered to be one of the pioneers in this organizational mission, goals, and objectives to work domain [6]. According to Zachman [15], the processes and to the technical or IT infrastructure increased scope of design and levels of complexity of required to execute them. In addition, a good information systems implementations are forcing the ARCHITECTURE and its corresponding documentation use of some logical construct (or ARCHITECTURE ). The allow for ease of maintenance in order that the Zachman framework is based around the principles system does not become obsolete before it is even of classical ARCHITECTURE that establish a common built.

6 There are a number of architectures and vocabulary and set of perspectives for describing architectural frameworks in use today. Though they complex ENTERPRISE systems. The Zachman may overlap or address similar views, frameworks framework has six perspectives or views: Planner, also have been designed to address specific needs or Owner, Designer, Builder, Subcontractor, and User. concerns. These frameworks differ by the The second dimension of Zachman's framework stakeholders they address and the issues that concern deals with the six basic questions: what, how, where, their *world*.

7 These issues or building blocks who, when and why [6]. The framework does not represent methods, common vocabulary, standards provide guidance on sequence, process, or [13], and tools that provide a means to implement implementation, but rather focuses on ensuring that and integrate the building blocks. In addition, all views are well established, ensuring a complete government, commercial, and sub-categories of each system regardless of the order in which they were of these may require certain protocols to follow.

8 Established. The Zachman framework has no explicit Goethals [6] and Schekkerman [8] provide compliance rules since it is not a standard written by comprehensive overviews of EAF in the literature. or for a professional organization. However, Informal comparisons between specific architectures Volume VII, No. 2, 2006 18 Issues in Information Systems A COMPARISON of ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE Frameworks compliance can be assumed if it is used in its entirety that these work products align with FEAF models and all the relationship rules are followed [9].

9 And DoDAF products [6]. Department of Defense ARCHITECTURE framework The Open Group Architectural framework (DoDAF): The Department of Defense ARCHITECTURE (TOGAF): The Open Group Architectural framework (DoDAF) [2] builds on three sets of framework (TOGAF) was first developed in 1995. views : Operational, System, and Technical and was based on the Department of Defense's Standards. A fourth view, All View,' augments the Technical ARCHITECTURE framework for Information other views by providing the linkage between the Management [12].

10 TOGAF focuses on mission- views by means of a dictionary to define terms and critical business applications that use open systems by providing context, summary, or overview-level building blocks. A key element of TOGAF is information [3]. This framework provides ARCHITECTURE Development Method (ADM) that descriptions of final products as well as guidance and specifies a process for developing ENTERPRISE rules for consistency. This ensures a common ARCHITECTURE [10]. TOGAF explains rules for denominator for comparing, and integrating Families developing good principles, rather than providing a of Systems, Systems of Systems, and interoperating set of ARCHITECTURE principles.