Back to top

Master Thesis Markus Bauer

Last modified Apr 30, 2015

A guide for enterprise-specific design of EA models

(Ein Leitfaden zur unternehmensspezifischen Ausgestaltung von EA Modellen)



Prevalent EAM-Frameworks, as analyzed in [BS11], usually acknowledge the need to adapt the EA model to the company’s concerns. But when it comes to actual adaptation methods, the provided descriptions are often abstract, focusing on deliverables instead of defining the process in detail (see the analyses in [BS11]). The Building Blocks for EA Management Solutions (BEAMS) developed at TU München are a notable exception from this schema (see [Bu10] and [Sc11a]). BEAMS provides a general adaptation method for EA models; this method grounds in an organized library of best-practice building blocks derived from a research project at TU München.

More coarse-grained “use cases” for EAM, relating to particular stakeholders and organizational maturity, are described in [Ha13]. The therein presented best-practices are based on the experience gained in consulting projects, and are applied in such projects to deliver organization-specific EAM-Frameworks, encompassing a tailored EA model. The adaptation method presented in [Ha13] is general, too, but also abstract, and heavily depends on the experience of the responsible consultant.

In this work, we further and apply the central idea behind BEAMS and extend the conceptual model of BEAMS’ organized library, towards more coarse-grained concepts like “use cases”, as described by [Ha13] and related work. This provides the foundation to refine the general information model configuration process from [Ha13] into an adaptation method, which combines best-practice solutions with a rigorous perspective on EA models.

In particular, we develop four major artifacts in this work:

  • Firstly, we derive a conceptual model covering the use cases and contingency factors for EA Models as described by [Ha13]
  • Secondly, we collect a catalogue of instances of these concepts, containing detailed information about relationships among one another.
  • Thirdly, we design a design method that is able to transform stakeholders’ use-cases and contingency factors into an enterprise-specific EA information model.
  • Lastly, we describe a knowledge management approach, enabling the introduction and permanent advancement of the knowledge base, as encompassed within the adaptation method.

In order to realize these artifacts, we start by revisiting literature. In a first step, we identify and systematically describe all concepts as defined by [Ha13] or related work. Secondly, we derive the appropriate context of these concepts, modeling their relationships and thereby deriving the conceptual model. In addition, occurrences of the described concepts are collected in a third step, by simultaneously identifying any correlations and dependencies among these elements. Based on these findings, we derive an adaptation method, proposing a process for eliciting EA-Modeling requirements, and how to translate these requirements into an enterprise-specific EA model. After that, we evaluate different forms of knowledge representations, resulting in a proposed knowledge management approach, ensuring accessibility and extensibility of the knowledge for EA consultants at iteratec GmbH.




[Al01] Alavi, M.; Leidner, D.: Review: Knowledge Management and Knowldege Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quaterly, Vol. 25, 2001.
[Ai09] Aier, S.; Riege, C.: A Contingency Approach to Enterprise Architecture Method Engineering. Service-Oriented Computing – ICSOC 2008 Workshops. Springer Berlin, 2009.
[Bo08] Bodishevskaya, V.: Evaluation of Document-Centric Collaboration at a Supplier of Integrated Circuit Products. Bachelor’s Thesis in Wirtschaftsinformatik. TU München, 2008.
[Bu07] Buckl, S.; Ernst, A.; Lankes, J.; Schweda, C.; Wittenburg, A.: Generating Visualizations of Enterprise Architectures using Model Transformations. 2nd International Workshop on Enterprise Modeling and Information Systems Architectures - Concepts and Applications, St. Goar/Rhine, Germany, 2007.
[Bu08] Buckl, S.; Ernst, A. M.; Lankes, J.: Prof. Dr. Matthes, F.: EAM Pattern Catalog 1.0. TU München, 2008.
[Bu10] Buckl, S.; Dierl, T.; Matthes, F.; Schweda, C.: Building Blocks for Enterprise Architecture Management Solutions. TU München, 2010.
[Bu10] Buckl, S.; Dierl, T.; Matthes, F.; Schweda, C.M.: Building Blocks for Enterprise Architecture Management Solutions. TU München, 2010.
[Bu13] Buckl, S.; Matthes, F.; Schneider, A.; Schweda, C.: Pattern-based Design Research in Enterprise Architecture Management. Advanced Information Systems Engineering Workshops (pp. 30-42). Springer Berlin, 2013.
[BS11] Buckl, S.; Schweda, C. M.: On the State-of-the-Art in Enterprise Architecture Management Literature.
[De92]            DeLone, W.; McLean, E.: Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research 3, 1992.

Gadamer, H.: Wahrheit und Methode – Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik. J.C.B. Mohr. Tübingen, Germany. 3rd edition. 1975.

[Ha12] Hanschke, I.: Enterprise Architecture Management. Einfach und Effektiv. Hanser, München 2012.
[Ha13] Hanschke, I.: Strategisches Management der IT Landschaft. Hanser, München 2013.
[Kr10] Krcmar, H.; Schwarzer, B.: Wirtschaftsinformatik: Grundlagen betrieblicher In- formationssysteme. Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart, 2010.
[Ku06] Kurkarni, U.; Ravindran, S.; Freeze, R.: A knowledge management success model: theoretical development and empirical validation. Journal of Management Information Systems 23, 2006.
[Kü04] Kühn, H.: Methodenintegration im Business Engineering. Dissertation, Wien, 2004.
[Le07] Leppänen, M.; Valtonen, K; Pulkkinen, M.: Towards a Contingency Framework for Engineering an Enterprise Architecture Planning Method. Information Systems Research Seminar, 2007.
[No95] Nonaka, I.; Takeuchi, H.: The knowledge-creating company. Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.
[Pe95] Pearlson, K.; Saunders, C.: Managing and Using Information Systems. A strategic Approach. 2nd edition., Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, 2004.
[Ro09] Roos-Frantz, F.: A preliminary comparison of formal properties on orthogonal variability model and feature models. Third International Workshop on Variability Modelling of Software-Intensive Systems, Seville, 2009.
[Sc11a] Schweda, C.: Development of Organization-Specific Enterprise Architecture Modeling Languages Using Building Blocks. Dissertation, TU München, 2011.
[Sc11b] Schweda, C.: Development of Organization-Specific Enterprise Architecture Modeling Languages Using Building Blocks. Rigorosum, TU München, 2011.
[St73] Stachowiak, H.: Allgemeine Modelltheorie. Springer, New York, 1973.
[St10] Steenbergen, M. et. al.: The Design of Focus Area Maturity Models. 5th International Conference on Design Science Research in Information Systems and Technology (DERIST), St. Gallen, 2010.
[To09] The Open Group: TOGAFTMVersion 9. 1. Auflage. Van Haren Publishing, 2009.
[Wa09] Wang, J.M.; Wang, Y.: Examining the dimensionality and measurement of user-perceived knowledge and information quality in the KMS context. Journal of Information Sciene 35, 2009.
[Wi07] Wittenburg, A: Softwarekartographie: Modelle und Methoden zur systematischen Visualisierung von Anwendungslandschaften. Dissertation, TU München, 2007.
[Wu06] Wu, J.; Wang, Y.: Measuring KMS success: A respecification of the DeLone and McLean’s model. Information / Manaagement 43, 2006.
[Za87] Zachman, J.: Framework for Information Systems Architecture. In: IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 26, No. 3, 1987.

Files and Subpages

Name Type Size Last Modification Last Editor
20130708_antritt_ma_bauer.pdf 2,00 MB 09.07.2013
Ba13_pub.pdf 2,90 MB 14.11.2013
master_thesis_bauer_final_presentation.pdf 2,75 MB 11.11.2013