The failure of success factors: Lessons from success and failure cases of enterprise architecture implementation

Hope, T; Chew, E; Sharma, R

The failure of success factors: Lessons from success and failure cases of enterprise architecture implementation

Hope, T Chew, E

Sharma, R

Permalink

Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: SIGMIS-CPR 2017 - Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGMIS Conference on Computers and People Research, 2017, pp. 21 - 27
Issue Date:: 2017-06-21

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	The Failure of Success Factors.pdf	Published Version	762.42 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Hope, T	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Chew, E https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5850-2455	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Sharma, R	en_US
dc.date.available	2016-11-03	en_US
dc.date.issued	2017-06-21	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	SIGMIS-CPR 2017 - Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGMIS Conference on Computers and People Research, 2017, pp. 21 - 27	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	9781450350372	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/117410
dc.description.abstract	Copyright © 2017 ACM. Many Enterprise Architecture programmes fail to meet expectations. While much has been written about the factors influencing the success of EA programmes, there are few empirical investigations of the role of critical success factors (CSFs) in the success of EA programmes. This study condensed the very broad literature on CSFs for EA identifying six key CSFs that share a broad consensus in the literature. A qualitative case study was conducted to test the hypothesis that the six key CSFs would distinguish between the successful and the unsuccessful programmes. Analysis of the case study data reveals that three key CSFs associated with the use of EA tools did not distinguish between successful and unsuccessful cases while three key CSFs related to the process of EA programme implementation did so. The study concludes that success in EA programmes comes more from how architecture is practiced than what is practiced. The findings have important implications for EA suggesting that the methodological skills of architects need to be supplemented with an understanding of practice.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	SIGMIS-CPR 2017 - Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGMIS Conference on Computers and People Research	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1145/3084381.3084392	en_US
dc.title	The failure of success factors: Lessons from success and failure cases of enterprise architecture implementation	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.for	0806 Information Systems	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building/School of Built Environment
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - HCTD - Human Centred Technology Design
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US

Abstract:

Copyright © 2017 ACM. Many Enterprise Architecture programmes fail to meet expectations. While much has been written about the factors influencing the success of EA programmes, there are few empirical investigations of the role of critical success factors (CSFs) in the success of EA programmes. This study condensed the very broad literature on CSFs for EA identifying six key CSFs that share a broad consensus in the literature. A qualitative case study was conducted to test the hypothesis that the six key CSFs would distinguish between the successful and the unsuccessful programmes. Analysis of the case study data reveals that three key CSFs associated with the use of EA tools did not distinguish between successful and unsuccessful cases while three key CSFs related to the process of EA programme implementation did so. The study concludes that success in EA programmes comes more from how architecture is practiced than what is practiced. The findings have important implications for EA suggesting that the methodological skills of architects need to be supplemented with an understanding of practice.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/117410