write about an entreprise architecture based on the Zachman Framework

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

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
write about an entreprise architecture based on the Zachman Framework
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

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

Order a unique copy of this paper
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

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.

Money-back guarantee

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 more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each 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 more

Free-revision policy

Thanks 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 more

Privacy policy

Your 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 more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By 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

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency

Order your essay today and save 15% with the discount code ESSAYHELP