Towards Strategic Information Systems Change Management

Rūta Pirta


Information systems (IS) are changing continuously accordingly the changes in enterprise business and operating models and other internal and external factors that influence the enterprise. To manage IS changes, engineering change management (ECM) process is performed. The one of the major problem in ECM process is that changes are not planned, evaluated, controlled and implemented (i.e. governed) appropriately, what frequently results with sub-optimal architectural decisions causing a number of problems to the enterprise. In this paper, an initial idea of approach to evaluate and control IS changes using Enterprise Architecture (EA) landscapes is proposed. The envisioned approach compares different EA landscapes to evaluate changes, their impact to related processes and data flows and generates architectural recommendations about implementation of the change in EA to meet the “ideal” or envisioned EA landscape. The main focus of this paper is the problem domain analysis, what include an overview of related research and empirical analysis of architectural change management in private sector companies and state institutions.


  1. Pulkkinen, M. (2006). Systemic Management of Architectural Decisions in Enterprise Architecture Planning. Four Dimensions and Three Abstraction Levels. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06), p179-188.
  2. Diefenthaler, P. & Bauer, B. (2013). Gap Analysis in Enterprise Architecture Using Semantic Web Technologies. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), in print.
  3. Hanschke, I (2009). Strategic IT Management. A Toolkit for Enterprise Architecture Management. München: Hanser Fachburch.
  4. Lautenbacher, F. et al. (2013). Planning Support for Enterprise Changes. In: Grabis, al. (eds.), The Practice of Enterprise Modeling, 6th IFIP WG 8.1 Working Conference, PoEM 2013, Riga, Latvia, 2013, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Riga: IFIP International Federation for Information Processing. p54-68.
  5. Armour, F. J., Kaisler, S. H. and Liu, S. Y. (1999). A bigpicture look at enterprise architectures. IT professional. 1 (1), p35-42.
  6. Armour, F. J., Kaisler, S. H. and Liu, S. Y. (1999). Building an Enterprise Architecture Step by Step. IT professional.1(4), p31-39.
  7. Armour, F. J., Kaisler, S. H. (2001). Enterprise Architecture: Agile Transition and Implementation. IT professional. 3(6), p30-37.
  8. Meta Group Inc. (2002) Enterprise Architecture Desk Reference. [Online] Available from: Architecture_Report. [Accessed: 27th June 2014].
  9. Spewak, S. H. (1993). Enterprise Architecture Planning: Developing a Blueprint for Data, Applications, and Technology. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
  10. Wegmann, A. (2003). On the Systemic Enterprise Architecture Methodology (SEAM). In: CAMP, O. et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems 2003 (ICEIS 2003). Angers.
  11. Buckl, S. and Schweda, C. M. (2011). On the State-of theArt in Enterprise Architecture Management Literature. Technical Report. [Online] Available from: BS11-On-the-State-of-the-Art-in-EnterpriseArchitecture-Management... [Accessed: 25th July 2014].
  12. The Open Group. (2009). TOGAF Version 9 Personal PDF Edition [Online] Available from: GAF_Manual_G091.pdf. [Accessed: 25th July 2014].
  13. Gringel, P. and Postina, M. (2010). I-pattern for gap analysis. In Engels, G., Luckey, M., Pretschner, A., and Reussner, R., (eds), Software engineering 2010, Lecture Notes in Informatics. Bonn, p281-292.
  14. Hamraz, B., Caldwell, N. H. M. and Clarkson, P. J. (2013) A Holistic Categorization Framework for Literature on Engineering Change Management. Systems Engineering (16). p473-505.
  15. Jarratt, T. A. W., Eckert, C. M. and Clarkson, P. J. (2004). Engineering change. In: Clarkson, P.J. and Eckert, C.M. (eds), Design process improvement Springer. New York: Springer, p262-285.
  16. Wright, I. C. (1997). A review of research into engineering change management: Implications for product design, Design Studies 18, p33-39.
  17. Jarratt, T. A. W. et al. (2011). Engineering change: An overview and perspective on the literature, Reseach in Engineering Design 22(2), p103-124.
  18. Postina, M., Sechyn, I., and Steffens, U. (2009). Gap analysis of application landscapes. Proceedings of 13th Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops, p274-281.
  19. Erlikh, E. (2000). Leveraging Legacy System Dollars for E-Business. IT Professional, 2(3), p17-23.
  20. Goknil, A. et al., (2014). Change Impact Analysis for Requirements: a Metamodeling Approach, Information and Software Technology, in press
  21. Tang, A., Lau, M. G. (2014) Software architecture review by association. Journal of Systems and Software 88, February 2014, p87-101.
  22. Wieringa, R. (2009). Design science as nested problem solving. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology. Pennsylvania.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Pirta R. (2015). Towards Strategic Information Systems Change Management . In Doctoral Consortium - DCEIS, (ICEIS 2015) ISBN Not Available, pages 3-11

in Bibtex Style

author={Rūta Pirta},
title={Towards Strategic Information Systems Change Management},
booktitle={Doctoral Consortium - DCEIS, (ICEIS 2015)},
isbn={Not Available},

in EndNote Style

JO - Doctoral Consortium - DCEIS, (ICEIS 2015)
TI - Towards Strategic Information Systems Change Management
SN - Not Available
AU - Pirta R.
PY - 2015
SP - 3
EP - 11
DO -