Keywords: , , , , , , , , , ,

Anders Jensen-Waud


This purpose of this article is to investigate the systemic properties of Enterprise Architecture Planning (EAP) in the Australian government sector. Based on a case study of the Land and Property Management Authority of New South Wales, the article examines and outlines the crucial necessity for including systems thinking, systems learning, and organizational sense-making in Enterprise Architecture (EA) theory and planning. The main argument is based on qualitative research into the limitations of capturing and modeling organizations using EA methodologies and modeling approaches. The EA discipline, including its tools and methodologies, relies on the metaphor of engineering the enterprise and building stable taxonomies of knowledge and process. The practical reality that e-government programs are facing is technical, sociological, and messy. However, EA tends to operate within an engineering metaphor that assumes stability, predictability, and control. Here, the author highlights the necessity of an alternative, less positivist approach to EA planning in order to understand and articulate the tacit knowledge dimensions and messy, wicked problems of organizational life. Soft systems thinking, socio-technical theory, and sense-making are introduced as theoretical and practical frames to overcome these limitations and produce a better, more viable and realistic model of planning in government enterprises. These concepts are finally amalgamated into a general, integrative model of EA planning.

pp 8-18


S.A. Bernard: Evaluating Clinger-Cohen Act Compliance on Federal Agency Chief Information Officer Positions, in: Public Administration/Public Affairs, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, 2001.

S.A. Bernard: An Introduction to Enterprise Architecture (2nd Edition), Authorhouse, Falls Church, VA, 2005.

P. Checkland: From Optimizing to Learning: A Development of Systems Thinking for the 1990s, The Journal of the Operational Research Society (36:9), 1985, p.757-767.

P. Checkland & J. Scholes: Soft Systems Methodology in Action, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.,1990.

W.E. Deming: Out of the Crisis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Cambridge, MA, 1986, p.xiii, 507.

J.L.G. Dietz & J.A.P. Hoogervorst: Enterprise Ontology in Enterprise Engineering, in ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, ACM, Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, 2008.

H.G Gadamer: Truth and Method, Sheed & Ward, London, 1975, p.xxvi, 3-551.

B. Gustavsson: Vidensfilosofi Forlaget Klim, Copenhagen, DK, 2001.

M. Janssen & G. Kuk: A Complex Adaptive System Perspective of Enterprise Architecture in Electronic Government, 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICCS’06) Track 4, Kauai, Hawaii, 2006, p.71b.

D. Katz & R.L. Kahn: The Social Psychology of Organizations, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1962.

S. Madsen, K. Kautz & R. Vidgen: A Framework for Understanding how a Unique and Local IS Development Method Emerges in Practice, Eur. J. Inf. Syst. (15:2) 2006, p.225-238.

M. Polanyi: The Tacit Dimension, Anchor Books, Garden City, NY, 1967.

H.A. Simon: Models of Bounded Rationality, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1982, p.v, 1-3.

A. Strati: (Mis)Understanding Cognition in Organization Studies, Scandinavian Journal of Management (14:4), 1998, p.309-329.

K.E. Weick: The Social Psychology of Organizing (2nd Edition), Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Reading, MA, 1979, p.ix, 294.

K.E. Weick: Making Sense of the Organization, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK; Malden, MA, 2001, p.xii, 483.

J. Zachman: A Framework for Information Systems Architecture, IBM Systems Journal (26:3), 1987, p.16.

Journal of Enterprise Architecture

Leave a Comment