IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v21y2019i4d10.1007_s10796-017-9779-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lack of Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture Development

Author

Listed:
  • Negin Banaeianjahromi

    (Lappeenranta University of Technology)

  • Kari Smolander

    (Aalto University)

Abstract

Enterprise architecture (EA) is widely employed to reduce complexity and to improve business–information technology (IT) alignment. Despite the efforts by practitioners and academics in proposing approaches to smoothen EA development, it is not easy to find a fully successful EA. Because EA development is a complex endeavour, it is important to understand the obstacles that practitioners face during EA development. With the grounded theory, we studied how obstacles during EA development emerged from practitioners’ point of view in 15 large enterprises. The study identifies lack of communication and collaboration as the core obstacle that can explain many other obstacles. Communication and collaboration were also harmed by other perceived EA development obstacles, including lack of knowledge and support inside organization and issues imposed by external parties, hesitation in training personnel, setting too ambitious goals, constant change of management, (lack of) clarity in EA development process, lack of budget, forcing personnel to adopt EA, lack of motivation, organizational culture, and organizational structure deficiencies. The lack of communication and collaboration caused several undesired effects to organizations, such as being unable to set common goals and achieve a shared understanding, personnel’s distrust, endangered EA governance, lack of innovation capability, lost competitive edge, and ineffective EA outputs. The study highlights that organisations should improve their communication and collaboration before embarking on EA to encounter fewer obstacles. We provide four recommendations for practitioners to improve communication and collaboration in EA development.

Suggested Citation

  • Negin Banaeianjahromi & Kari Smolander, 2019. "Lack of Communication and Collaboration in Enterprise Architecture Development," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 877-908, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:21:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s10796-017-9779-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-017-9779-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-017-9779-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-017-9779-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank G. Goethals & Monique Snoeck & Wilfried Lemahieu & Jacques Vandenbulcke, 2006. "Management and enterprise architecture click: The FAD(E)E framework," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 67-79, February.
    2. Ralph Foorthuis & Marlies Steenbergen & Sjaak Brinkkemper & Wiel A. G. Bruls, 2016. "A theory building study of enterprise architecture practices and benefits," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 541-564, June.
    3. Ralf Abraham & Stephan Aier & Robert Winter, 2015. "Crossing the Line: Overcoming Knowledge Boundaries in Enterprise Transformation," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 57(1), pages 3-13, February.
    4. Schmidt, C. & Buxmann, Peter, 2011. "Outcomes and success factors of enterprise IT architecture management: empirical insight from the international financial services industry," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 48401, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    5. Maxime Bernaert & Geert Poels & Monique Snoeck & Manu Backer, 2016. "CHOOSE: Towards a metamodel for enterprise architecture in small and medium-sized enterprises," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 781-818, August.
    6. Davide Nicolini & Jeanne Mengis & Jacky Swan, 2012. "Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 612-629, June.
    7. Morteza Alaeddini & Sepideh Salekfard, 2013. "Investigating the role of an enterprise architecture project in the business-IT alignment in Iran," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 67-88, March.
    8. F. Goethals & W. Lemahieu & M. Snoeck & J. Vandenbulcke, 2006. "Management and enterprise architecture click," Post-Print hal-00322787, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yiwei Gong & Marijn Janssen, 2023. "Why Organizations Fail in Implementing Enterprise Architecture Initiatives?," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 1401-1419, August.
    2. Banafo Akrong, Godwin & Yunfei, Shao & Owusu, Ebenezer, 2022. "Development and validation of an improved DeLone-McLean IS success model - application to the evaluation of a tax administration ERP," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Vaida Zemlickienė & Indrė Lapinskaitė & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "Internal Communication in R&D: Decision-Making Methods Based on Expert Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-13, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gong, Yiwei & Janssen, Marijn, 2019. "The value of and myths about enterprise architecture," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-9.
    2. Rogier van de Wetering & Tom Hendrickx & Sjaak Brinkkemper & Sherah Kurnia, 2021. "The Impact of EA-Driven Dynamic Capabilities, Innovativeness, and Structure on Organizational Benefits: A Variance and fsQCA Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Yiwei Gong & Marijn Janssen, 2023. "Why Organizations Fail in Implementing Enterprise Architecture Initiatives?," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 1401-1419, August.
    4. Mirsalari, Seyedeh Reyhaneh & Ranjbarfard, Mina, 2020. "A model for evaluation of enterprise architecture quality," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    5. Farrukh Saleem & Bahjat Fakieh, 2020. "Enterprise Architecture and Organizational Benefits: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-23, October.
    6. Ayed Alwadain, 2020. "Enterprise Architecture: A Business Value Realization Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    7. Rogier van de Wetering & Sherah Kurnia & Svyatoslav Kotusev, 2020. "The Effect of Enterprise Architecture Deployment Practices on Organizational Benefits: A Dynamic Capability Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    8. Chulhwan Chris Bang, 2015. "Information systems frontiers: Keyword analysis and classification," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 217-237, February.
    9. Ralf Abraham & Stephan Aier & Robert Winter, 2015. "Crossing the Line: Overcoming Knowledge Boundaries in Enterprise Transformation," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 57(1), pages 3-13, February.
    10. Seogjun Lee & Seung Woon Oh & Kichan Nam, 2016. "Transformational and Transactional Factors for the Successful Implementation of Enterprise Architecture in Public Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Smita Prashant Chattopadhyay & Madhuchhanda Das Aundhe, 2021. "Vendor boundary spanning in Indian Information Technology (IT) companies," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 1139-1177, September.
    12. Zhaojun Yang & Jun Sun & Yali Zhang & Ying Wang, 2018. "Peas and carrots just because they are green? Operational fit between green supply chain management and green information system," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 627-645, June.
    13. Deana Pennington & Gabriele Bammer & Antje Danielson & David Gosselin & Julia Gouvea & Geoffrey Habron & Dave Hawthorne & Roderic Parnell & Kate Thompson & Shirley Vincent & Cynthia Wei, 2016. "The EMBeRS project: employing model-based reasoning in socio-environmental synthesis," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 278-286, June.
    14. Alberto Franco, L., 2013. "Rethinking Soft OR interventions: Models as boundary objects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 720-733.
    15. Mary Moore & Paul O’ Leary & Derek Sinnott & Jane Russell O’ Connor, 2019. "Extending communities of practice: a partnership model for sustainable schools," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1745-1762, August.
    16. Haibo Liu & Jürgen Mihm & Manuel E. Sosa & Manuel E. Sosa, 2018. "Where Do Stars Come From? The Role of Star vs. Nonstar Collaborators in Creative Settings," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1149-1169, December.
    17. Douglas Cumming & Sofia Johan & Denis Schweizer, 2017. "Information systems, agency problems, and fraud," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 421-424, June.
    18. Siedlok, Frank & Hibbert, Paul & Sillince, John, 2015. "From practice to collaborative community in interdisciplinary research contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 96-107.
    19. Karimikia, Hadi & Bradshaw, Robert & Singh, Harminder & Ojo, Adegboyega & Donnellan, Brian & Guerin, Michael, 2022. "An emergent taxonomy of boundary spanning in the smart city context – The case of smart Dublin," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    20. Ralph Foorthuis & Marlies Steenbergen & Sjaak Brinkkemper & Wiel A. G. Bruls, 2016. "A theory building study of enterprise architecture practices and benefits," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 541-564, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:21:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s10796-017-9779-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.