Expert answer:I have attached two documents. One will give you the instruction for the paper and the other is the case of study for the paper. Please follow the instruction and reach out to me if you have any additional questions.
enterprise_architecture_framework_research_paper.docx
zachman___the_framework_for_ea_background_description_and_utility.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Enterprise Architecture Framework Research Paper
Purpose of this Assignment
This assignment gives you the opportunity to apply your research skills, analysis, and
critical thinking skills to describe one of the enterprise architecture (EA) frameworks. This
will provide you an opportunity to gain an in-depth understanding of one of the frameworks
commonly used. This assignment specifically addresses the following course outcomes:
•
•
describe enterprise architecture (EA), the appropriate application of EA frameworks,
and an overall ongoing EA program
analyze and examine how enterprise architecture and enterprise systems influence,
support, and enable an organization’s ability to contribute to strategic decision
making and to respond and adapt to the business environment
Assignment
Select one of the enterprise architecture frameworks listed below:
•
•
•
•
•
Zachman Framework
The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF)
DoD Architecture Framework (DODAF)
Treasury Enterprise Architecture Framework (TEAF)
Research and write a paper that describes the chosen framework. Your description should
include the framework’s purpose, scope, principles, and the kinds of structures it uses, as
appropriate to the framework. Then, explain the framework’s strengths and weaknesses.
You should find at least two examples of organizations that have used the framework and
briefly discuss them. (NOTE: More than two examples are required to receive all possible
points; see Grading Rubric below.) Apply critical thinking, especially when describing the
structure and its strengths and weaknesses.
Your paper will be graded on both the accuracy and completeness of your description; it
needs to clearly and completely define the framework and its strengths and weaknesses.
Illustrations will enhance your paper if they contribute to an understanding of the
framework.
Your paper should be 3-5 pages in length (not counting any cover sheet or reference
pages). The use of at least three external scholarly resources (other than class
materials) is required. (NOTE: More than three external resources are required to receive all
possible points; see Grading Rubric below.) You should use scholarly journals (rather
than Wikipedia and authorless website postings). If you need assistance with determining
what a scholarly journal is, the UMUC library is a very good source of information, accessed
via the following link: http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/articles.cfm. Remember to
correctly cite and reference all sources using APA format.
Submit your paper in Word format via your Assignments Folder as an attached document
with your last name included in the filename.
Grading Rubric
6/28/2017
Use the rubric below to be sure you have covered all aspects of this assignment.
Criteria
Introduction
Description
of
Framework Quality
Description
of
Framework Coverage
Strengths
and
Weaknesses
of
Framework
90-100%
Far Above
Standards
80-89%
Above
Standards
70-79%
60-69%
Meets Standards Below
Standards
< 60%
Well Below
Standards
Possible
Points
5 Points
4 Points
3.5 Points
3 Points
0-2 Points
5
A sophisticated
introduction sets
the stage for the
paper.
A well-written
introduction sets
the stage for the
paper.
The introduction
adequately sets
the stage for the
paper.
The introduction
does not
adequately set
the stage for the
paper.
No
introduction
included.
18-20 Points
16-17 Points
14-15 Points
12-13 Points
0-11 Points
Description of
framework is
clear and
thorough and
demonstrates
sophisticated
understanding of
course concepts.
Description of
framework is
clear and
complete and
demonstrates
good
understanding
of course
concepts.
Description of
framework
includes the main
points, and
demonstrates
adequate
understanding of
course concepts.
Description of
framework may
be incomplete,
and/or may not
demonstrate
adequate
understanding
of course
concepts.
Description of
framework is
not included
or little is
presented.
27-30 Points
24-26 Points
21-23 Points
18-20 Points
0-17 Points
Sophisticated
description
covers purpose,
scope,
principles, types
of structures
used, as
appropriate to
the selected
framework.
Clear and
complete
description
covers purpose,
scope,
principles, types
of structures
used, as
appropriate to
the selected
framework.
Description
adequately covers
purpose, scope,
principles, and
types of
structures, as
appropriate to the
selected
framework.
Description may
not adequately
cover purpose,
scope,
principles,
and/or types of
structures, as
appropriate to
the selected
framework.
Little or no
coverage of
these areas is
provided.
9-10 Points
8 Points
7 Points
6 Points
0-5 Points
Strengths and
Weaknesses
identified are
clear,
compelling, and
directly related
to the
framework,
demonstrating a
sophisticated
understanding of
course concepts,
analysis, critical
Strengths and
Weaknesses
identified are
clear, and are
directly related
to the
framework,
demonstrating a
good
understanding
of course
concepts,
analysis, critical
Description of
strengths and
weaknesses are
related to the
framework;
demonstrate
adequate
understanding of
course concepts,
analysis, and
critical thinking.
Description of
strengths and
weaknesses may
not be clear,
may not be
directly related
to the
framework;
and/or may not
demonstrate
adequate
understanding
of course
Few or no
strengths or
weaknesses
identified and
explained.
6/28/2017
20
30
10
Criteria
Examples of
Use
External
Research
Conclusion
90-100%
Far Above
Standards
80-89%
Above
Standards
< 60%
Well Below
Standards
Possible
Points
thinking, and
synthesis.
thinking, and
synthesis.
9-10 Points
8 Points
7 Points
6 Points
0-5 Points
10
More than two
examples of
organizations
that have used
the framework
are identified
and clearly
pertinent points
are included in
the discussion,
using
sophisticated
writing.
More than two
examples of
organizations
that have used
the framework
are identified
and pertinent
points are
included in the
discussion,
using clear
writing.
Two examples of
organizations that
have used the
framework are
identified and their
use of the
framework is
adequately
discussed.
Two or fewer
examples of
organizations
are identified
and/or their use
of the
framework may
not be
adequately
discussed.
No examples
of use of the
framework
are identified
or minimal
effort is
demonstrated.
9-10 Points
8 Points
7 Points
6 Points
0-5 Points
More than three
scholarly sources
other than the
class resources
are incorporated
and used
effectively,
contextualized,
appropriately
researched and
supported, and
synthesized with
original
arguments.
Sources used
are credible,
relevant, and
timely. Proper
APA style is used
for citations and
references.
More than three
scholarly
sources other
than the class
resources are
incorporated
and used
effectively,
appropriately
researched and
supported, and
support original
arguments.
Sources used
are credible,
relevant, and
timely. Proper
APA style is
used for
citations and
references.
Three scholarly
sources other than
the class resources
are properly
incorporated and
used. Uses APA
format for
references and
citations.
Three or fewer
sources other
than the class
resources may
be used; may
not be scholarly
sources; may
not be properly
incorporated or
used to support
arguments; may
rely too heavily
on the reporting
of external
sources, and/or
are not effective
or appropriate;
and/or are not
credible,
relevant, or
timely. May not
use APA format.
No external
research is
incorporated
or reference
listed is not
cited within
text.
5 Points
4 Points
3.5 Points
3 Points
0-2 Points
Conclusion is
convincing,
effective and
relevant.
Demonstrates
Conclusion is
effective and
relevant.
Demonstrates
Conclusion is
provided and is
relevant.
Conclusion is
somewhat
effective and/or
relevant.
No conclusion
provided, or
minimal effort
demonstrated.
6/28/2017
70-79%
60-69%
Meets Standards Below
Standards
concepts,
analysis, and
critical thinking.
10
5
Criteria
Format
90-100%
Far Above
Standards
80-89%
Above
Standards
sophisticated
analysis and
critical thinking.
analysis and
critical thinking.
9-10 Points
Paper reflects
effective
organization and
sophisticated
writing; follows
instructions
provided; is
written in third
person; uses
correct
structure,
grammar, and
spelling; doublespaced and
presented in a
professional
format using
Word.
70-79%
60-69%
Meets Standards Below
Standards
< 60%
Well Below
Standards
Possible
Points
8 Points
7 Points
6 Points
0-5 Points
10
Paper reflects
effective
organization;
follows
instructions
provided; is
written in third
person; has few
errors in
sentence
structure,
grammar, and
spelling;
double-spaced,
and presented
in a
professional
format.
Paper has some
organization; may
have some errors
in sentence
structure,
grammar and
spelling. Is double
spaced and
written in third
person.
Paper is not well
organized,
and/or contains
several
grammar
and/or spelling
errors; and/or is
not doublespaced and
written in third
person.
Paper is
extremely
poorly
written, has
many
grammar
and/or
spelling
errors, or
does not
convey the
information.
TOTAL
Points
Possible
6/28/2017
100
THE FRAMEWORK FOR
ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE:
Background, Description and Utility
by
John A. Zachman
Copyright 1996 Zachman International
In the early ‘80’s, there was little interest in the idea of Enterprise Reengineering or
Enterprise Modeling and the use of formalisms and models was generally limited to some
aspects of application development within the Information Systems community. The
subject of “architecture” was acknowledged at that time, however, there was little
definition to support the concept. This lack of definition precipitated the initial
investigation that ultimately resulted in the “Framework for Information Systems
Architecture.” Although from the outset, it was clear that it should have been referred to
as a “Framework for Enterprise Architecture,” that enlarged perspective could only now
begin to be generally understood as a result of the relatively recent and increased, worldwide focus on Enterprise “engineering.”
The Framework as it applies to Enterprises is simply a logical structure for classifying
and organizing the descriptive representations of an Enterprise that are significant to the
management of the Enterprise as well as to the development of the Enterprise’s systems.
It was derived from analogous structures that are found in the older disciplines of
Architecture/Construction and Engineering/Manufacturing that classify and organize the
design artifacts created over the process of designing and producing complex physical
products (e.g. buildings or airplanes.)
The Framework graphic in its most simplistic form depicts the design artifacts that
constitute the intersection between the roles in the design process, that is, OWNER,
DESIGNER and BUILDER; and the product abstractions, that is, WHAT (material) it is
made of, HOW (process) it works and WHERE (geometry) the components are, relative
to one another. Empirically, in the older disciplines, some other “artifacts” were
observable that were being used for scoping and for implementation purposes. These
roles are somewhat arbitrarily labeled PLANNER and SUB-CONTRACTOR and are
included in the Framework graphic that is commonly exhibited. The Framework, as it is
applied to an Enterprise, depicting Enterprise design artifacts (models,) using Enterprise
terminology appears below.
1
ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE - A FRAMEWORK
DATA
OBJECTIVES/
SCOPE
What
List of Things Important
to the business
FUNCTION
How
NETWORK
Where
List of Processes the
Business Performs
List of Locations in which
the Business Operates
ENTITY = Class of Business
Thing
Process = Class of Business
Process
Node = Major Business
Location
e.g. Semantic Model
e.g. Business Process Model
e.g. Business Logistics
System
Ent = Business Entity
Reln = Business Relationship
Proc = Bus Process
I/O = Bus Resources
Node = Business Location
Link = Business Linkeage
e.g. Logical Data Model
e.g. Application Architecture
e.g. Distributed System
Architecture
Ent = Data Entity
Reln = Data Relationship
e.g. Physical Data Model
Proc = Application Function
I/O = User Views
e.g. System Design
Ent = Segment/Table/etc.
Reln =Pointer/Key/etc.
Proc = Computer Function
I/O = Data Elements/Sets
e.g. Data Definition
e.g. Program
Node = Hardware/Systems
Software
Link = Line Specifications
e.g. Network Architecture
Ent = Field
Reln = Address
Proc = Language Statement
I/O = Control Block
Node = Address
Link = Protocol
e.g. DATA
e.g. FUNCTION
e.g. NETWORK
(CONTEXTUAL)
Planner
BUSINESS
MODEL
(CONCEPTUAL)
Owner
SYSTEM
MODEL
(LOGICAL)
Designer
Node = I/S Function
(Processor, Storage, etc)
Link = Line Characteristics
e.g. Technology Architecture
TECHNOLOGY
CONSTRAINED
MODEL
(PHYSICAL)
Builder
DETAILED
REPRESENTATIONS
(OUT-OFCONTEXT)
SubContractor
FUNCTIONING
ENTERPRISE
The older disciplines of Architecture and Manufacturing have accumulated considerable
bodies of product knowledge through disciplined management of the “product definition”
design artifacts. This has enabled enormous increases in product sophistication and the
ability to manage high rates of product change over time. Similarly, disciplined
production and management of “Enterprise definition” (i.e. the set of models identified in
the Framework for Enterprise Architecture) should provide for an accumulation of a body
of Enterprise knowledge to facilitate enormous increases in Enterprise sophistication and
accommodation of high rates of Enterprise change over time.
From the very inception of the Framework, some other product abstractions were known
to exist because it was obvious that in addition to WHAT, HOW and WHERE, a
complete description would necessarily have to include the remaining primitive
interrogatives: WHO, WHEN and WHY. These three additional interrogatives would be
manifest as three additional columns of models that, in the case of Enterprises, would
depict: WHO does what work, WHEN do things happen and WHY are various choices
made. The state of the art in terms of modeling formalisms, as well as the inclination to
devote energy to produce these additional artifacts is still somewhat limited, certainly in
the case of Enterprises. Because experience in modeling is so limited, the examples of
models for the cells in the “other three columns” are much more hypothetical and much
less empirical. However hypothetical they may be, the remaining three columns of
models appear below.
2
ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE
THE "OTHER THREE COLUMNS"
TIME
PEOPLE
List of Organizations
Important to the Business
People = Major Organizations
e.g. Work Flow Model
MOTIVATION
List of Events Significant
to the Business
Time = Major Business Event
e.g. Master Schedule
List of Business Goals/
Strategies
Ends/Means = Major Bus
Goals/Critical Success Factors
e.g. Business Plan
E
1
E
2
E1.1
3
E
1
.
SCOPE
Planner
BUSINESS
MODEL
(CONCEPTUAL)
2
E
1
.
A
1
People = Organization Unit
Work = Work Product
e.g. Human Interface
Architecture"
Time = Business Event
Cycle = Business Cycle
e.g. Processing Structure
E
End = Business Objective
Means = Business Strategy
e.g. Business Rule Model
1
E
2
E1.1
Owner
SYSTEM
MODEL
(LOGICAL)
E1.3
E1.2
A
1
People = Role
Work = Deliverable
Time = System Event
Cycle = Processing Cycle
e.g. Presentation Architecture
e.g. Control Structure
End = Structural Assertion
Means = Action Assertion
e.g. Rule Design
E
1
E
2
1
E
1
.
Designer
TECHNOLOGY
MODEL
(PHYSICAL)
E1.3
E1.2
A
People = User
Work = Screen Format
1
Time = Execute
Cycle = Component Cycle
e.g. Security Architecture
e.g. Timing Definition
End = Condition
Means = Action
e.g. Rule Specification
People = Identity
Work = Job
Time = Interrupt
Cycle = Machine Cycle
End = Sub-condition
Means = Step
e.g. ORGANIZATION
e.g. SCHEDULE
e.g. STRATEGY
Builder
DETAILED
REPRESENTATIONS
(OUT-OFCONTEXT)
SubContractor
FUNCTIONING
ENTERPRISE
The Framework is a generic classification scheme for design artifacts, that is, descriptive
representations of any complex object. The utility of such a classification scheme is to
enable focused concentration on selected aspects of an object without losing a sense of
the contextual, or holistic, perspective. In designing and building complex objects, there
are simply too many details and relationships to consider simultaneously. However, at
the same time, isolating single variables and making design decisions out of context
results in sub-optimization with all its attendant costs and dissipation of energy.
Restoration of integrity or retrofitting the sub-optimized components of the resultant
object, such that they might approximate the purpose for which the object was originally
intended, may well be financially prohibitive.
This is the condition in which many Enterprises find themselves after about fifty years of
building automated systems, out-of-context. They have a large inventory of “current
systems,” built out-of-context, not integrated, not supporting the Enterprise, that are
consuming enormous amounts of resource for “maintenance” and are far and away too
costly to replace. As a matter of fact, the inventory of existing systems has come to be
referred to as “the legacy,” a kind-of “albatross,” a penalty to be paid for the mistakes of
the past.
A balance between the holistic, contextual view and the pragmatic, implementation view
can be facilitated by a Framework that has the characteristics of any good classification
scheme, that is, it allows for abstractions intended to:
a. simplify for understanding and communication, and
b. clearly focus on independent variables for analytical purposes, but at
the same time,
3
b. maintain a disciplined awareness of contextual relationships that are
significant to preserve the integrity of the object.
It makes little difference whether the object is physical, like an airplane, or conceptual,
like an Enterprise. The challenges are the same. How do you design and build it pieceby- piece such that it achieves its purpose without dissipating its value and raising its cost
by optimizing the pieces, sub-optimizing the object.
Although the Framework for Enterprise Architecture is an application of Framework
concepts to Enterprises, the Framework itself is generic. It is a comprehensive, logical
structure for descriptive representations (i.e. models, or design artifacts) of any complex
object and is neutral with regard to the processes or tools used for producing the
descriptions. For this reason, the Framework, as applied to Enterprises, is helpful for
sorting out very complex, technology and methodology choices and issues that are
significant both to general management and to technology management.
In summary, the Framework is:
a. SIMPLE - it is easy to understand ... not technical, purely logical. In its
most elemental form, it is three perspectives: Owner, Designer, Builder ...
and three abstractions: Material, Function, Geometry. Anybody (technical
or non-technical) can understand it.
c. COMPREHENSIVE - it addresses the Enterprise in its entirety. Any
issues can be mapped against it to understand where they fit within the
context of the Enterprise as a whole.
d. a LANGUAGE - it helps you think about complex concepts and
communicate them precisely with few, non-technical words.
e. a PLANNING TOOL - it helps you make better choices as you are never
making choices in a vacuum. You can position issues in the context of the
Enterprise and see a total range of alternatives.
f. a PROBLEM-SOLVING TOOL - it enables you to work with
abstractions, to simplify, to isolate simple variables without losing sense
of the complexity of the Enterprise as a whole.
g. NEUTRAL - it is defined totally independently of tools or methodologies ...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more