Analysing enterprise architecture maturity models: a learning perspective

Abstract

In order to aid organisations in the adoption of enterprise architecture (EA) best practices, maturity models have been proposed in the literature. These models offer organisational roadmaps and assessment frameworks for increasing EA maturity. However, key questions concerning the implied meaning of the term maturity in the context of these models have been left unexplored by previous research. This research, aided by the field of organisational learning, offers new insights into the implied assumptions of current EA maturity models and offers initial concepts and constructs to guide the conceptualisation, construction and refinement of enterprise maturity models. ARTICLE HISTORY

Untitled

“…Finally, the fine-grain refinement assesses EA from a physical perspective, in terms of where the logical processes are implemented (Emery & Hilliard, 2009;Stuht & Speck, 2016). The available literature (see Bui, 2012;Tamm et al, 2015;Vallerand et al, 2017;Wang & Zhao, 2009) does not show the granularities of EA refinement utilised at the different levels of maturity. Different EA granularities of refinement could influence business value differently at the various levels of EA maturity, and organisations can benefit from information on where to appropriately focus EA effort (Schekkerman, 2011).…”

A capability model for public administration interoperability

“…This approach is concerned with selecting a set of practice areas to improve their performance level and the PAs may have different degrees of implementation within a company or entity, i.e., each PA may have different CLs. Considering enterprise architecture maturity models, a similar approach was made in Vallerand et al (2017).…”

The Uncertain Path to Enterprise Architecture (EA) Maturity in the South African Financial Services Sector

“…Limited research has been conducted to explore the relationship between EA capabilities and organisational business value, and there is also minimal research which examines EA as an intangible resource and basis for business value (see Kaisler & Armour, 2017;Ross et al, 2006;Tamm, Reynolds, Seddon, Framption, & Shanks, 2015). Furthermore, available EA maturity studies (see Alwadain, Fielt, Korthaus, & Rosemann, 2014;Tamm et al, 2015;Vallerand et al, 2017) have not specifically focused on the way that EA affects business value outcomes at different maturity levels. These gaps are further compounded by inconsistencies in the definition (see Cronk & Fitzgerald, 1999) of the term "business value", as organisations use different definitions and have multiple interpretations of value (see Keyes-Pearce, 2005).…”

“…The available literature (see Bui, 2012;Tamm et al, 2015;Vallerand et al, 2017;Wang & Zhao, 2009) does not show the granularities of EA refinement utilised at the different levels of maturity. Different EA granularities of refinement could influence business value differently at the various levels of EA maturity, and organisations can benefit from information on where to appropriately focus EA effort (Schekkerman, 2011).…”

“…Organisations operate in a complex, highly dynamic environment, driven by technological advances, disruptive innovations, regulatory changes, and globalisation (Panetto et al, 2016). The available literature demonstrates rapid acceptance of enterprise architecture (EA) within the major sectors of the economy (Lapalme et al, 2016;Vallerand, Lapalme, & Moïse, 2017).…”