Towards a Theory on Collaborative Decision Making in Enterprise Architecture

Nakakawa, Agnes; Bommel, P. van; Proper, Henderik A.

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13335-0_40

Cited by 39 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, current EAIMs do not represent the appropriate maintaining process; some of those represents implicitly process and not in detailed and others do not consider this process as whole [23]. As a result Table 1 shows the summary of current issues on EAIMs.…”

Section: Maintaining Processmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Current Issues on Enterprise Architecture Implementation Methodology

Rouhani

Mahrin

Nikpay

et al. 2014

Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Enterprise Architecture (EA) becomes a strategy plan for enterprises to align their business and Information Technology (IT). EA is developed, managed, and maintained through EA implementation methodology (EAIM) processes. There are some problems in current EAIMs that lead to ineffectiveness implementation of EA. This paper represents current issues on EAIM. In this regard, we set the framework in order to represent EAIM's issues based on the processes of EAIM including: modeling, developing, and maintaining. The results of this research not only increase the knowledge of EAIM, but also could be useful for both scientific and practitioner in order to realize the current situation of EAIMs.

show abstract

Section: Maintaining Processmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…As a consequence it is difficult to make appropriate communication and decision. It is need to EAIM consider interoperability in a stepby-step manner [21,23].…”

Section: Developing Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current Issues on Enterprise Architecture Implementation Methodology

Rouhani

Mahrin

Nikpay

et al. 2014

Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 cannot be satisfied by the enterprise architecture. 57 This implies the need for the negotiation theory in enterprise architecture creation. In the negotiation theory, the joint decision is not only the final decision in a given task, since a negotiation involves several emerging opportunities for joint decisions that eventually lead to the final joint decision.…”

Section: The Theory For Ceadamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…"realizing CDM in enterprise architecture creation requires enterprise architects and organizational stakeholders to cooperate, with the aim of: gaining shared understanding of the "as-is" and "to-be" situations of the organization; identifying and devising possible design alternatives for realizing the desired or "to-be" (or target) organization situation; evaluating the possible impacts of these design alternatives; and finally selecting (and agreeing on) the design alternative that is feasible, effective, and efficient". 57 The underlying factors in this declaration, the associated (causal and conditional) a relations, and the resulting sequential relations, constitute the theory shown in Fig. 3.…”

Section: The Theory For Ceadamentioning

confidence: 99%

Definition and Validation of Requirements for Collaborative Decision-Making in Enterprise Architecture Creation

Nakakawa

Bommel

Proper

2011

Int. J. Coop. Info. Syst.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gartner advises that for enterprise architecture development to be successful, it is vital that enterprise architects ensure effective communication and also form virtual teams that create and agree on enterprise architecture content. One of the ways to achieve this is to enforce Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) during enterprise architecture creation. Guided by Design Science, we are developing a method referred to as Collaborative Evaluation of (Enterprise) Architecture Design Alternatives (CEADA) to enable CDM during enterprise architecture creation. The method attempts to resolve challenges in enterprise architecting that are caused by ineffective collaboration between enterprise architects and organizational stakeholders. Requirements for CEADA have been defined based on the causality analysis theory, the generic decision-making process, enterprise architecture frameworks (and literature), and the CDM theory. In addition, Collaboration Engineering has been used to design a collaboration process to address these requirements. Models describing the requirements and the design of the collaboration process, have been evaluated using the analytical, experimental, and observational methods. This paper discusses the implications of findings from these evaluations and presents the validated requirements for realizing CDM in enterprise architecture creation. Thus, this research generally attempts to strengthen enterprise architecting guidelines with collaborative activities, so as to enable effective execution of collaboration-dependent tasks.

show abstract

“…Al-Naeem et al propose using the Analytical Hierarchy Process in group architectural decision making [50]. Nakakawa et al propose a theoretical model on group architectural decision making for enterprise software systems [51]. Sousa et al present a process for group architectural decision making, in which a facilitator helps the group interactions [52].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical evaluation of a process to increase consensus in group architectural decision making

Tofan

Galster

Lytra

et al. 2016

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Many software architectural decisions are group decisions rather than decisions made by individuals. Consensus in a group of decision makers increases the acceptance of a decision among decision makers and their confidence in that decision. Furthermore, going through the process of reaching consensus means that decision makers understand better the decision (including the decision topic, decision options, rationales, and potential outcomes). Little guidance exists on how to increase consensus in group architectural decision making.Objective: We evaluate how a newly proposed process (named GADGET) helps architects increase consensus when making group architectural decisions. Specifically, we investigate how well GADGET increases consensus in group architectural decision making, by understanding its practical applicability, and by comparing GADGET against group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach.Method: We conducted two empirical studies. First, we conducted an exploratory case study to understand the practical applicability of GADGET in industry. We investigated whether there is a need to increase consensus, the effort and benefits of GADGET, and potential improvements for GADGET. Second, we conducted an experiment with 113 students from three universities to compare GADGET against group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach.Results: GADGET helps decision makers increase their consensus, captures knowledge on architectural decisions, clarifies the different points of view of different decision makers on the decision, and increases the focus of the group discussions about a decision. From the experiment, we obtained causal evidence that GADGET increases consensus better than group architectural decision making without using any prescribed approach.Conclusions: There is a need to increase consensus in group architectural decisions. GADGET helps inexperienced architects increase consensus in group architectural decision making, and provides additional benefits, such as capturing rationale of decisions. Future work is needed to understand and improve other aspects of group architectural decision making.

show abstract

Towards a Theory on Collaborative Decision Making in Enterprise Architecture

Cited by 39 publications

References 5 publications

Current Issues on Enterprise Architecture Implementation Methodology

Current Issues on Enterprise Architecture Implementation Methodology

Definition and Validation of Requirements for Collaborative Decision-Making in Enterprise Architecture Creation

Empirical evaluation of a process to increase consensus in group architectural decision making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About