IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/syseng/v16y2013i1p45-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

First steps in the development of a Program Organizational Architectural Framework (POAF)

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffery L. Williams
  • Jerrell T. Stracener

Abstract

The target audiences for this paper are systems engineers and architects involved in the design of complex systems such as program organizations. This is the first in a series exploring how the design of program organizations developed for the purpose of designing and developing aerospace and defense systems can be optimized. The objective of this paper is to lay the groundwork for an architecture framework for the development of a program organization. The draft standard ISO/IEC 42010 is used to define the structural requirements of the architecture framework. In addition, we use the Zachman Architecture Framework™ to organize the framework and the Department of Defense Architecture Framework Version 2.0 (DoDAF 2.0) to create the model environment for the Program Organizational Architecture Framework (POAF). This approach to defining the POAF ensured that we would have the data needed to support our objective to optimize the design of the program organization and hopefully reduce the number of defects inherent in the design. We also believe that we have sufficiently defined the characteristics of a POAF to spur more research in this area. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffery L. Williams & Jerrell T. Stracener, 2013. "First steps in the development of a Program Organizational Architectural Framework (POAF)," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 45-70, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:syseng:v:16:y:2013:i:1:p:45-70
    DOI: 10.1002/sys.21218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21218
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sys.21218?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tyson R. Browning, 2009. "The many views of a process: Toward a process architecture framework for product development processes," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 69-90, March.
    2. Lyra J. Colfer & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2010. "The Mirroring Hypothesis: Theory, Evidence and Exceptions," Harvard Business School Working Papers 10-058, Harvard Business School, revised Jun 2010.
    3. Galbraith, Jay R., 1971. "Matrix organization designs How to combine functional and project forms," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 29-40, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Maria Guadalupe & Hongyi Li & Julie Wulf, 2014. "Who Lives in the C-Suite? Organizational Structure and the Division of Labor in Top Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 824-844, April.
    2. Marta Gancarczyk & Jacek Gancarczyk & Joanna Bohatkiewicz, 2017. "SME Roles in Modular Value Chains: Perspectives for Growth and Innovativeness," Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, Centre for Strategic and International Entrepreneurship at the Cracow University of Economics., vol. 5(3), pages 95-117.
    3. Luigi Mosca & Martina Gianecchini & Diego Campagnolo, 2021. "Correction to: Organizational life cycle models: a design perspective," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 10(3), pages 139-139, December.
    4. Peter B. Doeringer & Pacey Foster & Stephan Manning & David Terkla, 2013. "Project-based industries and craft-like production: structure, location and performance," Chapters, in: Frank Giarratani & Geoffrey J.D. Hewings & Philip McCann (ed.), Handbook of Industry Studies and Economic Geography, chapter 4, pages 99-151, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Marlo Raveendran & Phanish Puranam & Massimo Warglien, 2016. "Object Salience in the Division of Labor: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 2110-2128, July.
    6. Christopher M. Schlick & Soenke Duckwitz & Sebastian Schneider, 2013. "Project dynamics and emergent complexity," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 480-515, December.
    7. Vincent FRIGANT & Martin ZUMPE, 2014. "The persistent heterogeneity of trade patterns: A comparison of four European Automotive Global Production Networks," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2014-24, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    8. Rahul Kapoor, 2013. "Persistence of Integration in the Face of Specialization: How Firms Navigated the Winds of Disintegration and Shaped the Architecture of the Semiconductor Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1195-1213, August.
    9. Vikas A. Aggarwal & Brian Wu, 2015. "Organizational Constraints to Adaptation: Intrafirm Asymmetry in the Locus of Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 218-238, February.
    10. Jiang Wei & Yang Yang & Sali Li, 2021. "Mirror or no mirror? Architectural design of cross-border integration of Chinese multinational enterprises," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 1399-1430, December.
    11. Cabigiosu, Anna & Zirpoli, Francesco & Camuffo, Arnaldo, 2013. "Modularity, interfaces definition and the integration of external sources of innovation in the automotive industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 662-675.
    12. Krzysztof Gos, 2015. "The Key Advantages and Disadvantages of Matrix Organizational Structures (Kluczowe zalety i ograniczenia macierzowych struktur organizacyjnych)," Research Reports, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 2(19), pages 66-83.
    13. Zoe Szajnfarber & Ademir Vrolijk, 2018. "A facilitated expert‐based approach to architecting “openable” complex systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 47-58, January.
    14. Joachim Henkel & Alexander Hoffmann, 2019. "Value capture in hierarchically organized value chains," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 260-279, April.
    15. Thinley Tharchen & Raghu Garud & Rebecca L. Henn, 2020. "Design as an interactive boundary object," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-34, December.
    16. Baldwin, Carliss & MacCormack, Alan & Rusnak, John, 2014. "Hidden structure: Using network methods to map system architecture," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1381-1397.
    17. Hobday, Mike, 2000. "The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 871-893, August.
    18. Bahram Hamraz & Nicholas H. M. Caldwell & P. John Clarkson, 2013. "A Holistic Categorization Framework for Literature on Engineering Change Management," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 473-505, December.
    19. Karen Stephenson, 1995. "The Formation and Incorporation of Virtual Entrepreneurial Groups," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 19(3), pages 35-52, April.
    20. O'Malley, Eoin & Scott, Susan & Sorrell, Steve, 2003. "Barriers to Energy Efficiency: Evidence from Selected Sectors," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number PRS47, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:syseng:v:16:y:2013:i:1:p:45-70. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6858 .

    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.