Enterprise Architecture as Strategy

Executive Summary This report is an psychometric test of swap cognitive subroutine prompted by MEG International, a large and esteemed Finnish IT presidential term. This report explains Enterprise computer computer architecture and how it endure be utilise as a outline. It explains Coachmans material for opening move architecture (Coachman, 1987) and the comp acents of its cardinal dimensional matrix.Criticism that Coachman frame kick the bucket is alone a taxonomy follows on identifying neighboring frame field The b dismissalom Group architecture textile (known as TOGA) and its criticism that do- nonhing subprogram as architectural operate rather than a frame build, this report recommends to reserve Coachman Framework for economy and TOGA as architectural cultivate for MEG to utilize Enterprise architecture as strategy. This report thusly follows on specify Re- applied science sue from the divulge agreemental variegate perspective.The report follows on the next section explaining the overcritical risks to re-engineer an mannequination and how to make sure the re- applied science process has been utensiled triple-crownly. While analyzing the implementation of re-engineering process this report introduces Muckinesss seven S (Systems, Structures, Staff, Skills, dodge, mode, Sh ard set). The next section f the report then provides the acknowledgment that change is inevitable in an system and identifies intravenous feeding main reasons for it.Although intimately people said MEG foreign is successful, its despicable profit moderates, poor concern practice and neediness of communication and teamwork contrasted those statements. 1. 1 Enterprise Architecture as strategy Enterprise architecture is the practice of applying a large and rigorous method for describing a flow rate and future structure and appearance for an organizations processes, in stratumation systems, personnel and organisational sub- units, so that they align with the organizations core goals and strategic direction (Shaw, 2007).Similarly, Coachman (1987) describes graduation exercise spirit architecture as it is to pep the rail line from disintegrating the idea of information systems architecture is becoming less of an option and more of a necessity. Enterprise is an independent, standalone entity comprising set of argumentation functions and architecture is the netherlying framework that provides the estate for the enterprise to operate efficiently to hit organizational goals.The primary answer of creating enterprise architecture is to visualise that duty strategy and IT investments atomic number 18 line up and provide long-term debate of a comp eithers processes, systems and technologies (Ross, Well & Robertson, 2006). Enterprise architecture is crucial beca hire organizations need to adapt increasingly fast to increased opposition, ever- changing guest requirements, and lineage goals. Since MEG outside(a) w as steering crisscrosss of reduction in sales and threatening market position by foreign contention were perfect examples that MEG was not adapting to cursorily changing environss.This need for toleration has influence over the entire business line processes change in one business process may influence some other business process. To redeem enterprise architecture coherent, change should be managed accordingly in both architectures, and the relations between different architecture just be decipherable so it is vital for MEG to implement enterprise architecture as a strategy to be able to gain hawkish vantage. principal(prenominal) difficulty in gaining enterprise architecture as strategy is to ensure business architectural alignment and IT alignment because of the differences in architectural role model methods. caper analysts build complex business process models similarly IT architects crumb aspiration complex applications. These two groups of people may be best at what they do further they lack common language to understand each(prenominal) others design. Mona Lisa although being Information Systems consultant didnt boast he leadership expertness or vision on how she is going to salute the issue of reorient these two processes, or what framework to use for the enterprise architecture and what IT strategy to choose to move precedent towards the change process.Some of the well known examples of enterprise architecture frameworks that thunder mug help to build the strategies more or less enterprise architecture in MEG argon Coachmans framework for enterprise architecture (Coachman, 1987) (Figure 1) This framework is a logical structure for classifying the different perspectives involved in enterprise architecture in a two dimensional matrix that argon signifi rear endt to TTS stakeholders.The matrix consists of take aims or player perspective (scope or planner, business model or business owner, system model or designer, engineering science or builder, detailed representations or subcontractor and Functioning Enterprise) and six columns or aspects (data, function, network, people, season, motivation). From the Business owner perspective data represents information about customers, products, suppliers and relationships between these entities (Session, 2007).On the other hand data from the perspective of technical person implementing the database is rows and columns in tables which atomic number 18 linked together by Joins (Session, 007). If we move left to right on the grid we see different system descriptions from one player view whereas if we move from top to bottom it changes the different player perspective of backwash the system descriptions. Both perspectives ar in that respectfore critical for grounds the systems architecture that Coachman tries to address in his architecture.There are some criticisms about this framework that it itself doesnt crabbedise the methodology of the framework and is a co mplex process and can be applicable for large organizations only. This framework mainly acts as a pathfinder where goals, ales, processes, materials, roles, locations and events that organizations require innate be filled in. Session (2007) argues that the Coachman Framework is rattling taxonomy for organizing architectural artifacts (I. E. Design documents, unique(predicate)ations, models) that takes into account both who the artifact targets (e. G. Business owner, builder) and what particular issue (e. G. , data, functionality) is being addressed. The Open Group Architecture Framework (known as TOGA) (Figure 2) This framework mainly has four components such as business architecture, application architecture, data architecture and technical architecture. Business architecture explains how business processes are aligned to meet the organizational goals.Application architecture describes how the applications are knowing and explains the relationship between industry wide appli cations. Similarly Data architecture explains how the enterprise data are stored and accessed and fin altogethery technical architecture is creditworthy for explaining the interactions between software and hardware infrastructure. It mainly relies on already existing, proved technologies and products and tries to give a well-tested overall showtimeing model which can be further extended.Although TOGA describes itself as framework, Session (2007) categorized TOGA as architectural process rather than an architectural framework. Session (2007) further extends Coachman explains how to categories the artifacts and TOGA gives the process to earn them. So for an organization like MEG international Togas Architecture education Method (ADAM) (Figure 3) provides a strategic process for moving from generic to specific enterprise architecture.Therefore taxonomy like Coachman and an architectural process like TOGA seem very(prenominal) much appropriate for MEG to adapt Enterprise Architectur e as strategy. . 2 Re-engineering Re-engineering could also be interpreted as reverse engineering or radical design of a business process which disregards all the traditions and assumptions of the past business processes or procedures and develops new one aiming to leap forward in get alongance and this seems essential for MEG International.Reengineering process involves in identifying the characteristics of an already engineered product or services and the processes involved in developing those, then redesigning all the processes from the scratch to improve current productivity or customer satisfaction. putz & Champs (1993) describe business re-engineering as the fundamental reconsiderationing and radical redesign of an entire business system to achieve dramatic improvements in critical measures of performance. Reengineering is most often called business process reengineering which is aimed to accomplish tremendous changes within an organization and underpins all the possible outcomes to maintain a true competitive advantage among the competitors. Reengineering focuses on identifying and abandoning outdated rules and assumptions and creating new rules, work methods and workflow to achieve organizational goals aiming to increase productivity, product quality and customer satisfaction drastically. firstly play along need to identify the problems and what can be the solutions to fix them.If that cannot be fixed by some other meaner or change process then a basic re engineering model must be substantial, then companys core processes should be redesigned and final wooden leg is to adopt the new design. Re-engineering is not a simple task to accomplish, it requires fundamental rethink and radical redesign of business processes. For effectiveness it requires structured and analytic approach to generate aromatic improvements in cost reduction, quality improvements, customer satisfaction, move etc. Epic Reengineering (Hammer & Champs, 2003, p. 2) Companies t hat are in deep competitive differences with their competitors, companies who have managers who can see problems arising like MEG and start on re-engineer the business onwards all their competitive advantage are wiped off. Hammer and Champs (1993)gs rhetorical head word of reengineering is that If I were re-creating this company today, given what I know and the current train of technology, what would it look liker.Focus on fundamentals, radical redesign element, the potential for dramatic results and business process orientation must be addressed while respond the question. Fundamentals like what the organization does, why it is done that way, what are the tactical aspects, should be addressed while designing re-engineered process what should be. seeming(prenominal) changes and quantum leap in performance is the must while re-engineering not only bare(a) enhancements and improvements. These changes should address current business process, plus implement change and simplified processes that improve value to he customer. . Critical risks to re-engineer organization and successful change implementation Re-engineering the organization processes or business process reengineering (BPR) can produce drastic change and improvement in the organizational processes if implemented successfully. However if it is not implemented correctly it depart not work as advertised and fail to meet the high expectations. Recent surveys show that about 70% BPR fail and some organizations that have put coarse effort in BPR are only able to gain marginal benefits (Davenport, 1993).These figures indicate that re- engineering has high risk barely also organizations are ready to take the risk because the output when executed efficiently can be astounding. Some of the risk that could derail BPR process can be no support from senior managers, focusing on automating current processes in front reengineering process is identified, making technology alone dependent on change process and not identifying the limitation of the current Information technology infrastructure.Other like a shot jaring difficulties that BPR can represent involves employee resistance to change, not addressing employee concerns, schismatic of strategy & goals, lack of leadership oversight and commitment. Including all these risks main critical factor is that organization must be truly committed to change in the re-engineering process with full support of senior level management. At Meg international even though Latino thought that everyone would be excited by the prospects of organizational change, only few expressed any enthusiasm for understanding general management.Most of the divisional heads were not clear on what re-engineering process is and were misinterpreting the fantasy in their own words which created an anxiety among most of the employees which resulted in loss of number of good technical staff. These were clear signs that most of the divisional heads were not ready to help in the re-engineering process that was very bad sign for Mona Lisa to start with. Since the BPR is a high risk process and involves high level of tasks to achieve, it can never be one man Job it stresses the use of team throughout the process.Lisa however didnt show any initiative in having a team as a result her rigorous efforts were vitiated and ultimately lead to her resignation. If I was in her position then my first priority of this project could be to create team of experts from different move of organization to understand the business processes and technical infrastructure, and hire few members in the team from outside who have smash understanding of re-engineering process who will be responsible for explaining the management team what re-engineering actually is and what we are supply to achieve.It is unlikely that an organization can ignore the existing infrastructure and implement a process from scratch. It is more realistic to acknowledge the resources available and an y real constraints and develop fundamental understanding of their implications on the process redesign (Davenport, 1993). After the process is redesigned, available Information Technology should be utilise to facilitate the implementation of new process that rules out the possibility of technology to be the limited factor.While process re-engineering is not a technology endeavourer, IT is recognised as having a critical role to play in re- engineering efforts, primarily as an modifyr of new operational and management processes (Davenport and Short 1990 Hammer and Champs 1993 Davenport 1993). However, IT in itself cannot be held responsible for the ultimate success or misery of the business strategy. When skillfully applied, IT can provide support for the intermediate processes that taken together comprise the execution of an organizations strategy.Since organizations culture is an beta aspect and cannot be ignored in the change process, the framework that I will be using during re-engineering process is Muckinesss seven S diagram (Figure 4) because it encapsulates the key components of an organization and has Shared Values (or Culture) at its centre. 2. 1 Systems- These are the processes, methods, procedures, rules, techniques, technology, manuals, etc. That ensures that work is undertaken efficiently and accurately. These are the essential part of an organization to guide the management and staff.Therefore key to BPR process is to understand current systems and redesign them, often as Davenport (1993) highlights, new processes are enabled by new technology which ultimately engages employees to hold new techniques. 2. 2 Structures- After the key processes are redefined, the next step would be to restructure the organization to match along these processes. The new form of organizational structure that aims to break the traditional types of structure, particularly bureaucratic and divisional structures is required.Hammer & Champs (2003) recommend a move to much flatter structures organized around the processes, whereas Davenport (1993) recommends a multidimensional matrix structure, with process responsibility as a key dimension (p 160). To achieve this, Johansson et al (1993) states the new organization must accommodate a balance between functional expertise and process involvement and goes on to maintain it is essential to remove functional barriers (IPPP). 3 staff- As per Henley (1991) Staff is the quality and quantity of people utilize and manager has the role of motivation, reward systems, the structure of Jobs and team work (pop). Davenport (1993) expresses gain-sharing (Pl 10), squinty promotion, upgrade from role title to process title (Pl 1 1), and interesting and challenging through work role rotation, he believes encourages employees to redesign the processes to eliminate their own Job. In contrast to Davenports musing BPR to some extent will be involved in down-sizing and right-sizing the workforce. 2. Skills- Henley (1991) defines skills as The arguences the organization needs in its people in order to perform difficult tasks to a high standard (pop). The BPR redefines the roles that should enhance and provide length for skills development where Hammer & Champs (1993) add New World of Work where Jobs change from simple tasks to multi-dimensional work. This meaner Job preparation changes from prep to education, from rule adjacent to exercising Judgment and managers change from supervisors to coaches and executives change from scorekeepers to leaders(p 169). . 5 Strategy- The main task in BPR is to discover the organizations strategy and of what drives competitive advantage in a particular industry the industrys value chain and the posterior for competition, and how a particular company seeks to gain competitive edge Monsoon et al 1993, pop). BPR decisions and strategic decisions involving new processes new structure and new staff brain is extremely difficult to achieve but managers should be trained to order their Process vision driven by Business Strategy Davenport (1993, Pl 27). 2. Style- By style Henley (1991) meaner the philosophy, values and shared flavours adopted y managers in their use of power (pop). BPR should be able to change the way things are done in the organization and behavioral changes. Process innovation involves broad change, not only in process flows and the culture surrounding them, but also in organizational power and controls (Davenport, 1993, Pl 3). 2. 7 Shared Values- Andrews & Stack (1994) state that in successful reengineering business operations, individual belief systems become aligned with the stated beliefs of the organization (Pl 15).Reengineering will definitely have a big impact on the cultural specs of an organization under new processes, structure, staff role, management strategy and style but re-engineering demands that employees deeply believe they work for their customers, not for their bosses(Hammer & Champs, 1993, pop). BP R should establish new process teams linked by common values where employees must believe in self empowerment, self management and rewards based on skills must be used.Following this structure would provide me path to develop perfect strategy that would enable me to lead my team to successful re-engineering process at MEG international that would significantly improve the performance of the equines processes. Change is inevitable in an organization, the organizations inefficient to keep up with the change cannot match up with the fast changing market and their survival will be in question. There are many things, events, or situations that occur in an organization or its out-of-door environment that affect the way a business operates, either that can be positive or negative.To cope with these occurrences, situations or events every organization has to fundamentally alter the way they do business. Thus we can say the statement Change is an ever-present feature of organizational life , both at an operational and strategic level. Therefore, there should be no doubt regarding the splendor to any organization of its ability to identify where it needs to be in the future, and how to manage the changes required getting there. Consequently, organizational change cannot be spaced from organizational strategy, or vice versa is very true.There are mainly four reasons that organizations need to changes that can be market changes, increased competition, external forces, and intrinsic forces. 3. 1 Market changes The international demand for quality products, low prices, better service and increased level of client satisfaction are the key for the organizations change the way they do business in current orbicular economy. To match these ever changing needs companies are forced to form collaborative arrangements, cooperative ventures and even alliances.Social and political pressures have al shipway been there for the organizations. Employee values, needs, priorities and t heir motivations are always influenced by the political and social events. To match up with their needs its essential for managers to adjust their management styles and arrange comfortable environment for employees. . 2 Increased competition In past where there were technology was not advance enough and there was less global competition with slower moving business environment where change occurred incrementally and in oftentimes.But now challenges organizations face is different, globalization has created both opportunities and challenges forcing firms to make drastic changes not only to compete but to survive in the market. Globalization is basically driven by technological advances, international economic integration and domestic market pus (cotter 1996). Even companies operating in beautiful entries can feel the impact of global competition. 3. 3 External forces External driving forces are those kinds of situations or events that occur outside of the company and they are beyond the control of an organization.External forces can be expressed under these sub-classifications Demographic Characteristics The change in universe of discourse and their density come under this classification that can trigger organizational changes. This mainly includes changes in age, gender, race, and increase in diversity. Technological developments In current business environment technology plays vital role in any organization. The Internet has revolutionized the way in which information is exchanged, communication facilitated and commerce conducted.Technology is rapidly changing and effective management demands more knowledge in these areas in order for companies to manage their resources and develop, maintain or keep their competitive edge. It is essential for organizations to adapt technology to improve productivity and market competitiveness. Since technology is double-quick changing entity, any business missing to follow the technological changes efficacy loose their co mpetitiveness or wiped off completely from the market. . 4 inbred Forces Internal driving forces are those kinds of situations or events that occur inside the company and they controlled if there is proper initiative taken.Internal forces can be expressed under these sub Human resource factors -classifications People change more frequently and they bring in their changed perceptions in the organizations. Their perceptions about the work and work environment, their expectations from their managers and colleagues, flexibleness and balance between work and their life etc could act as important factor for organizational change. To increase employee motivation, and improve their commitment and education towards work, their stresses, sources of conflict, work overload, and ambiguity need to be identified and eliminated.Managerial behavior/decisions Excessive social conflict is often a clear sign that change is needed. cod to the important role of the manager in introducing and managing change in the organization, skills training and capacity building programmed for both manager and employee might be necessary. It is suggested that a better strategic approach to change is where organizations and heir people continually monitor, sense and respond to external and internal environment in small steps as an ongoing process (Burners, 2004).Early model of change was developed by Lenin (cited in Burners 2004, p. 985) consisting of three- stage process. First stage is unfreezing which is mainly aimed at overcoming or dismantling the existing mind set that are resisting change. second the change implementation which can be of lot of confusions where old ways are challenged and new ideas have not been fully stable. Final stage he called is refreezing stabilizing hanged within organizational culture, norms, policies and practices in order to ensure the new behavior is sustained in individuals.The unfreezing process is extremely important when introducing new technology with m ost failures occurring at this stage due to two factors a lack of effective communication at the beginning and a failure to involve affected individuals in the change process. Therefore cottar (1996) identifies that successful transformational change requires all of the steps in (Figure 5) and that the total time for the change is considerable. Skipping a step never reduces a satisfactory result and critical mistakes in any of the phases can have a ruin impact (Cotter, 199, p. 7). 4. Re-engineering Implementation In an organization there are various business processes which are usually fragmented into sub-processes and tasks. Re-engineering should identify these individual fragmented processes and tasks. Re-engineering should start with assessment of the organizations mission, strategic goals, and customer requirements main questions to be asked are who are the customers? What are our strategic goals and are they aligned with our mission? . According to (Hall, et al, 1993) pentad keys to re-