![](bg5.png)
e) Review the model and assessment when
business objectives and focus areas change.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Most available value models focus on the efficiency
of the EA function. Ross (Ross, 2004) has
highlighted that greater business benefit comes from
increased level of maturity. Ragowsky et al. (Rag,
2012) emphasize in their OITM (Organizational IT
Maturity) model the need for an organization-wide
integrated approach to derive maximum benefit from
IT. The OITM presents a 5 level maturity model
with increasing benefit as organizations progress to
higher levels.
Other authors evaluate EA contributions using
the balanced scorecard approach. De Vries (De
vries, 2012) has argued that intangible assets such as
EA programs do not have a value isolated from the
organizational context and strategy. EA, used in
conjunction with a balanced scorecard creates the
strategic context to enable intangible assets, such as
value creating processes as EA, to integrate with
other intangible assets.
The EA Value Model presented in this paper is
designed to evaluate the EA contribution in the
context of the organization. The maturity
assessments are focused on this. The strategic
context of the organization is enabled through the
business objectives alignment. The EA Value Model
is based on the validated assumption (Ross, 2004)
that EA delivers a greater value as its maturity
increases. The value delivered is assessed in the
context of the business objectives to be achieved by
the IT function. The model provides a high level
view of the EA value and provides management
with insight into how the value is being delivered,
which EA activity makes the contribution, what
progress has been made and where focus needs to be
in the future. The model can also be used to
highlight the current and future strategy needs.
Achievements of the current strategy are highlighted
by the assessment, and strategy can be adjusted
based on investment needs. The overall goal of the
Value Model is to provide top IT management with
a tool and a method for evaluating the business value
of the EA and for making informed decisions about
future investments into the EA program based on
business needs. Future work will directed towards
validation of the choice of dimensions that
characterize various EA activities and determining
the magnitude of impact of EA activities on business
objectives.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was supported by GAČR (Grant
Agency, Czech Republic) grant No. P403/11/0574
and the Research Centre for Human Centered
Technology Design at the University of Technology,
Sydney.
REFERENCES
Bernard, S. A. 2012. An introduction to enterprise
architecture. AuthorHouse.
Bente, S., Bombosch, U., Langade, S. 2012. Collaborative
Enterprise Architecture. Morgan Kaufmann
De Vries, M, Van Rensburg, A.C. 2012. Enterprise
Architecture – New Business Value Perspectives.
South African Journal of Industrial Engineering,
2012, Vol.19(1)
Kearns G, Lederer, A. 2004. The impact of industry
contextual factors on IT focus and the use of IT for
competitive advantage. Inform Manage 41(7):899–919
Gammelgård, M. 2006. Dimensions of benefits from
IS/IT. EARP Working papers series. Dept. of
Industrial Information and Control Systems, Royal
Institute of Technology. Available online at
http://www.ics.kth.se
Gammelgård M, Ekstedt M, Gustafsson, P. 2006. A
categorization of benefits from IS/IT investments. In:
Proceedings of the 13th European conference on IT
evaluation (ECITE)
Gammelgård M, Närman P, Ekstedt M, Nordström L
2006. Business value evaluation of IT systems:
developing a functional reference model. In:
Proceedings at the Conference on Systems
Engineering Research, Los Angeles, USA
OMB FEA Program Management Office, 2004: OMB
Enterprise Architecture Assessment v1.0 Guidelines.
The Office of Management and Budget, The Executive
Office of the President, USA
Office of Management and Budget(OMB) 2005. "Federal
Enterprise Architecture Program EA Assessment
Framework 2.0"
The OpenGroup 2009. TOGAF version 9.
http://www.opengroup.org/togaf.
Ragowsky, A, Licker P.S. & Geeen, D. 2012.
Organizational IT Maturity (OITM): A Measure of
Organizational Readiness and Effectiveness to Obtain
Value from Its Information Technology. Information
Systems Management, 29:2, 148-160
Ross, J. W., Weill, P., & Robertson, D. 2006. Enterprise
architecture as strategy: Creating a foundation for
business execution. Harvard Business Press.
Ross, J. W., & Beath, C. M. 2006. Sustainable IT
outsourcing success: Let enterprise architecture be
your guide. MIS Quarterly Executive, 5(4), 181-192
Ross, J. 2004. Maturity Matters: How Firms Generate
Value From Enterprise Architecture. Research
ICEIS2013-15thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
380