Implementation of the enterprise architecture through the Zachman Framework
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JSIT-06-2017-0047 |
| Date | 12 March 2018 |
| Published date | 12 March 2018 |
| Pages | 2-18 |
| Author | Tiko Iyamu |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information systems,Information & communications technology |
Implementation of the enterprise
architecture through the
Zachman Framework
Tiko Iyamu
Faculty of Informatics and Design, Cape Peninsula University of Technology,
Cape Town, Western Cape Province, South Africa
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to providea guide through which the Zachman Framework can be
used to address challenges and for successful implementation of enterprise architecture (EA) in an
organisationthat deploys it.
Design/methodology/approach –Qualitative research methods were followed,within which the case
study approachwas applied. The interpretive methodwas used in the analysis of the qualitative data.
Findings –Based on the findings, a method is proposed through which EA can be implemented in an
organisationby using the Zachman Framework.
Originality/value –This is an original research work. Also, the paper has not been submitted to other
journalfor review and possiblepublication.
Keywords Qualitative methods, Enterprise architecture, Case study, Zachman Framework
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
The enterprise architecture (EA)is an approach that is more than information systems and
technologies (IS/IT) design, as it holistically covers activities of an entire organisation, from
business to technology domains (Tamm et al., 2011). Iyamu (2015) argues that an
architecture process addresses organisation’s key business, information, application and
technology strategies.Based on such beneficial premise, many organisations use the EA for
these aforementioned purposes, which include competitiveness, sustainability and
adaptiveness, rather than reminiscing about the way things used to be or how they were
done. However, implementation of EA continues to be challenging in many organisations
(Rouhani et al.,2015). As a result, different approaches have been used by various
organisations to increase chances of successful implementation towards sustainability and
competitiveness (Safari et al.,2016). The approaches include the adoption and use of
different frameworks, such as Gartner Inc., Forester and The Open Group Architecture
Framework (TOGAF), for EA implementation (Urbaczewski and Mrdalj, 2006). Yet, the
challenges persist, which could be attributed to poor understanding of the concept
(Alwadain et al., 2016).
The poor rate of EA implementation in organisations has been blamed on different
factors, such as incompatibility of framework and lack of an understanding of the concept
(Kappelman and Zachman, 2013). To some degree, the two factors,incompatibility and lack
of an understanding, cannot be separated in EA implementation. The activities of an
organisation and the frameworks must be well understood to select an appropriate
framework for the implementation of EA in an environment. One of the main reasons as
explained by Niemi and Pekkola (2017) is that EA is an approachwhich is intended to guide
JSIT
20,1
2
Received26 June 2017
Revised23 October 2017
Accepted26 October 2017
Journalof Systems and
InformationTechnology
Vol.20 No. 1, 2018
pp. 2-18
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1328-7265
DOI 10.1108/JSIT-06-2017-0047
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1328-7265.htm
the development and implementation of software, selection and implementation of
technologies in a consistent, flexible and uniformed manner. These activities must be
viewed and understood from an organisation’s context (Närman et al., 2014). Also, the
concept implores to business-technology-based changes in an organisation and aligns both
the business and IS/IT units (Fritscher and Pigneur, 2015). According to Ullah and Lai
(2013), alignment is a process of mutual synchronisation of business goals and IS/IT
services, which requiresimplementation within context.
One of the main challenges for enterprise architects during EA implementation in an
organisation is to determine and understand the factors which influence the different
frameworks (Rouhani et al., 2015). Even though the EA frameworks have common goal,
they do differ in one way or the other. Winter and Schelp (2008) argued that some EA
frameworks distinguish themselves to reduce the number of artefacts per model. The
differences among the frameworks have impact on their implementations, which could be
attributed to their complexities (Iyamu, 2017). Also, because of the lack of compatibility,
there have been a decline in adoptionof some frameworks; hence, only few, such are Gartner
Inc., Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEA) and TOGAF, are currently
available (Simon et al.,2014). Among these frameworks, the Zachman Framework was
surveyed to be the most popular (Benkamounet al.,2014).
Organisations continue to show interest in the Zachman Framework, because of its
premise for organisational benefits, from both business and IS/IT perspectives. This is an
indication to the fact that the Zachman Framework provides a well-guided descriptive
representation of activitiesinto dimensions (Pereira and Sousa, 2004). Despite its popularity,
the framework continues to pose challenges to architects and organisations (Löhe and
Legner, 2014). The challenges of the Zachman Framework are more from practical
perspective (Fatolahi and Shams, 2006). Robertson-Dunn (2012) argues that some shortfalls
of the Zachman Framework are from both business and IS/IT domains. Most of the other
works that have been carried out covering the use of Zachman Framework focus on
diagrammatic representations in different ways, including comparative studies and the
application of unifiedmodeling language (UML) (Fatolahi and Shams, 2006).
As a result of the existing gaps and challenges, models and approaches have been
proposed in recent years. Based on Zachman Framework, Pereira and Sousa (2004),
proposed an approach through which EA can be achieved in an organisation. Through
methodology based on action research, Nogueira et al. (2013) proposed models for
implementing the Zachman Framework. Jafari et al. (2009) developed a knowledge
architecture model based on the Zachman Framework. Hernández et al. (2014) proposes a
reference architecture model for collaborative activities, which is based upon the Zachman
Framework. Despiteof the work that has been done in this area, challenges persist.
Thus, the aim of this study was to propose a different approach which guides
implementation of EA in an organisation by using the Zachman Framework. In achieving
this aim, the focus was in twofold:
(1) how EA deliverables drive the use of the Zachman Framework; and
(2) how the Zachman Framework can be mapped with organisational activities in
addressing the challenges towards successful implementation of EA in an
organisation that deploys it.
The remainder of thisarticle is divided into five main sections. Section2 presents a review of
EA literature, from implementation and the Zachman Framework perspectives. The
research approach that was applied in the study is covered in Section 3. In Section 4,
the analysis is presented. A guide on how the Zachman Framework can be used for the
Zachman
Framework
3
To continue reading
Request your trial