an investigative assessment of the role of enterprise architecture in

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation


Leonidas G. Anthopoulos Assistant Professor

Project Management Department, Technological Education Institute (TEI) of Larissa 41110 Larissa, Greece

[email protected] tel:+306932100198


An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in

Realizing E-Government Transformation

Abstract

Major e-strategies around the world are being implemented for more than a decade

and they have resulted in digital public service delivery and in internal efficiency for further

transformation. Most of these strategies have or are being updated and their current versions

focus on cross-departmental service delivery and on Connected Government. Enterprise

Architecture (EA) offers the ability to determine and close departmental gaps, and in this

context it can support the migration to Connected Government.

In this chapter some important e-strategies are being investigated concerning the

existence and the contribution of an EA to strategic implementation and transformation.

Different EAs are compared, and architectures are aligned to strategic and to transformation

objectives, in means of Connected Government. Moreover, the necessity of the alignment of

an EA to the strategic update is underlined, and an EA maturity roadmap to Connected

Government is considered.

Keywords: Enterprise Architecture, e-Government, e-Strategies, Connected Government,

transforming Government.


1. Introduction

Ambitious e-strategies lead e-Government development around the world more than a

decade. Major e-strategies shared common challenges and difficulties in the delivery of

online public services, and on the implementation of a friendlier, more effective and more

efficient public Administration. Most of the major e-strategies have closed their initial life

cycles and after review processes they updated their targets or kept some for further

improvement. Strategic visions were updated too, while strategic missions were reconsidered

before re-launching.

Most of the updated e-strategies were incremental (Lysons, Farrington, 2006) or

followed forward integration (Lysons, Farrington, 2006) to define their new targets without

documenting or determining the reasons of success or failures of their previous versions.

They all realize that the future of e-Government concerns cross-departmental service

delivery, citizen satisfaction, social inclusion and participation, perspectives that put

“openness” and “connected” at the centre of the strategic vision. With respect to “openness”

Obama (US OMB, 2009) envisioned an accountable and open public administration, where

all citizens have access to well organized public information. Concerning “connected”, Saha

(2009) described United Nations’ (UN) vision for the Connected Government as a networked

approach to operations and structure: the concept of connected government is derived from

the whole-of-government (WOG) approach which is increasingly looking towards technology

as a strategic tool and as an enabler for public service innovation and productivity growth.

On the other hand, the Enterprise Architecture (EA) standardizes and aligns e-

Government projects to strategic vision (Anthopoulos, 2009; FEA Group, 2005), and encodes

e-Government elements in a form that can be understood by its stakeholders (for example

politicians, political parties, councils, heads of departments etc) (Adigun and Biyela, 2003).

All major e-strategies are accompanied by centrally defined EAs that can supply e-

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation Government projects with common standards and operation principles. However, central EA

has to deal with problems similar to the ones that central strategic planning faces

(Anthopoulos et. al., 2007): “smooth transition” of the public Agencies from traditional

procedures to e-Government, change acceptance by all target groups, and the treatment of

individual, local and peripheral needs.

Major e-Strategies seek for their updated forms after of a more than a decade

implementation. Most of them present different review results, and are being directed mainly

on citizen satisfaction and on service simplification (Fitsilis et al. 2009), while the cross-

departmental service execution is becoming a common pillar of their transformation. The

demand for business process reengineering (BPR) and management (BPM) in order to align

business processes to IT implementation for cross-departmental service delivery, suggests the

existence of an architecture framework (Embrahim and Irani, 2005). In this context, it is

questioned whether a close connection exists between the WOG approach and the availability

of an architecture framework.

In this chapter the existence and the contribution of an EA to e-strategic

implementation and transformation is investigated. Different EAs are compared, and

architectures are aligned to strategic and to transformation objectives that relate to Connected

Government. Moreover, the necessity of the alignment of an EA to the strategic update is

underlined, and an EA maturity roadmap to Connected Government is considered.

This chapter is structured in four sections. In the primary section 2, various

transformed e-strategies are briefly presented and compared to Connected Government

vision. In the following section 3, the main thrust of this chapter is presented according to the

key findings from section 2: the existence and of an EA in all the examined e-strategies is

concluded, and the particular role that the EA played in the strategic transformation to the

principles of the Connected Government is justified. Moreover, an EA roadmap to the

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation Connected Government is proposed, which consists from the alignment degree of an EA to

the transformation requirements and from the maturity level of the EA. Finally, in section 4

the conclusions of this chapter are discussed.

2. Background

Various strategic analysis methods such as the strategy map (Barrows, Frigo, 2008),

the strategic life cycle (Lysons, Farrington, 2006) and the balanced scorecard (Creamer,

Freund, 2010; Huang, 2009; Kaplan, Norton, 1996) are used for understanding,

communicating and visualizing a strategic plan, and making decisions for planning. For the

purposes of this chapter the strategic life cycle is used for the analysis of the investigated e-

strategies. The strategic life cycle consists of the following phases: a) analysis, b)

composition, c) evaluation of alternatives, d) implementation, and e) control and review.

Each of the strategic phases provides useful information about the strategic priorities and the

implementation methodology that was followed. For the purposes of this chapter, we analyze

some important e-Strategies in order to identify the existence of an EA and the particular role

that EA plays in strategic transformation to Connected Government. The strategic life cycle

was applied in this analysis: the composition phase provides the vision and mission

statements, and the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of the e-Strategy. The control and review

phase returns the updated vision and mission statements of the transformed e-Strategy. The

investigation was performed geographically and approached the United States (U.S.) from

North America; the British, the German and the European Union’s strategies from Europe;

the Japanese, the Australian, the South Korean and the Indian e-strategies from Asia and the

Pacific areas. The outcomes of the above analysis are summarized on Table 1.

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation 2.1 Key Findings from major e- Strategies

2.1.1 North America

United States (U.S.) Federal Government identified e-Government challenges early, it

developed several action plans by 1993, and it composed its initial e-Government strategy in

2002 entitled “Expanding Government” (U.S. OMB, 2002), (U.S. Congress, 2002). The

strategic vision prioritized the development of a citizen-centered and results oriented public

administration, which could be achieved by (1) capital planning and investment control for

information technology (IT); (2) the development of enterprise architectures; (3) information

security; (4) privacy; (5) access to, dissemination of, and preservation of Government

information; and (6) accessibility. The U.S. strategy has delivered some important e-

Government systems such as the one-stop e-Government portal (www.usa.gov), the e-

Authentication system for secure public transactions, the ezTaxFilling for tax form

submission, the Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE) (www.acquisition.gov) and the

smartBUY initiatives for public procurement services etc., which cover all the individual

priorities of the strategy. The U.S. strategic mission has been implemented under the

supervision of the Office of Electronic Government, established in the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB), headed by an Administrator appointed by the U.S. President. The

mission required an amount of $71 billion (U.S. OMB, 2009) annually, strategic progress was

monitored annually with reports published by the supervisor. A clear organizational chart

(U.S. OMB, 2002) allocated duties at various managerial levels in order to lead and manage

implementation and change. In this context, EA development had a leading role in organizing

and standardizing projects’ portfolios for the various U.S. strategic priorities.

Annual reports underline good and less performances in strategic progress, both at

federal and at departmental levels. However, without the declaration of a particular failure

but with a cue for transparency and accountability by the Government, the U.S. Federal

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation Government updated its strategy by 2009 to the one entitled the “Open Government

Initiative”, which was launched in 2009 (U.S. OMB, 2010). The updated vision statement

declared transparency, participation, and collaboration as the primary objectives, and

organized its mission in a number of areas of precedence: (a) cost savings and avoidance, (b)

transparency, participation, and collaboration, and (c) information and IT management.

Various actions supported the strategic mission: the Open Government Directive (U.S. OMB,

2009) provided guidelines for action concerning public sector’s “openness”; the Regulation

Identifier Number (RIN) tracks the regulation life cycle and support openness in the

rulemaking; the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) provides instructions to the civil servants to

eliminate paper use; Social media use is encouraged and it is associated with the PRA.

Moreover, the IT Dashboard (http://www.itdashboard.gov) offers public information about IT

spending by the Governmental Agencies, and it is used both for making Government

accountant but as a tool to control and to enhance IT spending management.

The CSFs for the new mission statement define a roadmap until 2015, and they were

declared by the Forum on Modernizing Government (White House, 2010): a) best practices

from the private sector will improve productivity; b) effective managerial methods such as

visionary leadership, strong day-to-day management, detailed reporting, thorough evaluation

of processes, and ongoing review of customer needs will guarantee project implementation

and the maximization of return of investment; c) public customer service transformation is

required, in terms of improving customer satisfaction measuring and monitoring, and in terms

of better delivery of citizen-facing services; d) Government accountability will support large-

scale project success and public trust. The U.S. e-strategic update aims in service

transformation under a customer service culture (White House, 2010). However, it did not

focus on a WOG environment, and the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF)

has been used to provide with shared target architectures among Federal agencies (U.S.

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation OMB, 2010). Shared target segment architectures are used as alignment targets, and they

provide agencies with detailed guidance to implement their investments and their IT projects.

The development of the “Segment Architecture” as an extension of the FEAF has been

observed, in order to manage various segment architectures’ deployment and to create

linkages from agency strategies to EA to segment architecture to IT investment.

2.1.2 Europe

The British Government developed its Modernizing Government strategy in 1999

(UK Modernizing Government Secretariat Cabinet Office, 1999), which is one of the most

important European e-strategies. It envisioned the improvement of citizens’ and businesses’

life via public services’ digitization, and it had to ensure that Government is both inclusive

and integrated. British CSFs concerned the delivery of high quality and efficient public

services; the alignment of services to citizens’ needs; the development of joined up and

strategic policy making. A total spending of £1.7 billion was put on ICT infrastructures and

on literature, in order to simplify citizen access to public information and services.

Modernizing Government aligned to European directives and strategies, and it is

supervised by the Modernizing Government Secretariat in the Cabinet Office and by the

Office of the e-Envoy. British Government launched a set of national, group-focused and area

based programs –with cross-departmental budgets- to improve joined up delivery of services.

Moreover, e-GIF (e-Government Interoperability Framework) provides a range of standards

for data formats and protocols, in order to establish interoperability between different ICT

solutions in British public Administration. By complying with the technical standards, all

public Agencies access central solutions and principles. Moreover, the British Government

developed its EA on 2005 (UK CIO, 2005) called the “cross-Government Enterprise

Architecture (xGEA)”, describing the common “business-led vision” and procedures for

British Administration.


The British Government updated its strategy in 2005, entitled “Transformational

Government Enabled by Technology” (UK Cabinet Office, 2005), which envisioned

economic productivity, social justice and public service reform as asset tools against

globalization challenges. Both the transformation of public services and the efficiency of the

corporate services were CSFs of the updated strategy, where service transformation led the

quality services to personalized ones, and efficiency freed resources for the front line.

Effective policy making was another CSF, and it focused on the development and delivery of

innovative policy outcomes -inspired by technology- that affect citizens’ daily lives.

“Transformational Government” visionary targets were approached with three key

transformations (UK Cabinet Office, 2005), (Irani et al., 2007): service design around citizens

and businesses against design around the provider; shared services’ development with

standardization and with the support of the xGEA, simplification and sharing across the

public sector; professionalism in terms of planning, delivery, management skills and

governance of IT enabled change. These activities were funded by an unlocking of a 10

percent (£1.4 billion) from the annual spending for legacy systems, for investments on new

technology enabled reforms in public services, and they have a timetable of completion by

2011. Today, UK e-strategy shifts towards personalized services versus the “one-fits-for all

services”. This modern vision is called “MyGov” (Brown, 2010) and also promises more

public involvement and cost savings for the Government.

Germany launched its BundOnline 2005 strategic plan (German Federal Government,

2003) for its Information Society framework program, which was aligned to the European

strategies and identified specific targets for e-government, such as the delivery of more than

400 different public services from more than 100 agencies via the portal Bund

(www.bund.de). German Federal Government envisioned a citizen-centered and open

environment, and its strategic mission was based on common basis components for service

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation and information delivery (payment transactions, content and workflow management etc.), on

fifteen (15) one-for-all (OFA) services and on central coordination for service transformation.

Central coordination used the SAGA EA Framework (KBSt Publication Series, 2003), that

contains -centrally selected- common solutions and standards for ICT projects in German

Administration. Furthermore, the framework presents different perspectives that the ICT

architecture designers in public Administration must follow for e-Government projects.

German e-strategy was updated by 2006 to the “Deutschland Online” and by 2007 to

the “Federal IT strategy” (ePractice, 2011). Both of them envisioned the optimization of

inter-departmental service delivery and IT innovation’s promotion, and they prioritized

infrastructure development and delivery of specific public services. This updated strategy was

extended by 2009 when the “Broadband Strategy of the Federal Government” was adopted.

At supranational level across Europe, European member states agreed on a common

strategy for a European Information Society in 1998, called the eEurope 2002 (Commission

of the European Communities, 2000). This e-strategy was launched on 2000 and it envisioned

a knowledge based economy, and the capitalization of the internet and of the ICT for better

jobs and for quality public services. The eEurope 2002 was followed by the eEurope+ for the

candidate countries (Commission of the European Communities, 2001), and by the eEurope

2005 (Commission of the European Communities, 2003) ones. All of them allocated funds

and obliged European Governments to achieve in common CSFs on specific timetables:

broadband use growth and national communication markets’ deliberation across Europe; ICT

skills for students and civil servants; twenty (20) common primary public services’ delivery

online and interoperable processes’ deployment across Europe. Lots of deliverables were

implemented by strategic deadlines by most of the European countries, while supranational

projects were launched such as the Europa (http://europa.eu) portal, the Interchange of Data

between Administrations (IDABC) framework for interoperable services across Europe etc.


The e-Europe strategies ended on 2005, when the European Committee launched the

i2010 strategy for an Information Society for growth and employment (Commission of the

European Communities, 2005), which envisioned a) a common European information space;

b) an Inclusive European Information Society; c) Innovation and Investment in ICT research

for growth and for more and better jobs. The strategic mission focused on common CSFs for

member states. The Digital convergence across Europe until 2010 was aimed by the i2010

strategy, an amount of €728 million was allocated (according to http://www.2007-

2013.eu/by_scope_ict.php), and a number of key objectives –similar to the e-Europe ones-

were funded concerning broadband diffusion, reach digital content creation, interoperability

and security. E-Government was related with the priority of the improvement of “Quality of

Life”. Specific key enablers for digital public services were identified and promoted: citizen

common digital identity, rights management, ease of use, interoperability and open source

software. The i2010 strategy was co-funded with an amount of €1.8 billion annually by the

Seventh European Research Framework Programme (FP7).

“The Digital Agenda for a flourish digital economy by 2020” (European Commission,

2010) is the current updated European Strategy. The Digital Agenda has prioritized the

development of a European digital single market, interoperability and standardization, trust

and security, the development of ultra fast networks, research and innovation on the ICT,

digital literacy, and the contribution of the ICT to various social challenges. It is obvious that

the current European strategy follows the objectives of its previous ones, with the recognition

of the economic crisis, the ageing society, the global competition and of the evolutions on the

ICT. E-Government lies under the “ICT-enabled benefits for the European Society” priority

and it tries to commit Member States’ to increase service penetration by deploying user-

centric, personalized, multiplatform services until 2015 (European Union Member States’

Ministers, 2009). CSFs for e-Government in the Digital Agenda concern common e-

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation identification and e-authentication across the European countries, the definition of White

Paper for common interconnected procurement services by the Member States deployed via

the Pan-European Public Procurement Online (PEPPOL) environment

(http://www.peppol.eu), and a common list of key cross-border public services available

online by 2015.

2.1.3 Asia and the Pacific

Asia attracts the international attention steadily over the last decade, due to its

continuous economic and demographic growth. Asian countries perform significantly in IT

area too, and important e-Government cases have or are being developed, delivering useful

outcomes and experiences.

The Australian Government released its first e-Government Strategy on 2000

“Government Online” (Australian Government, 2000), which envisioned a friendly and

efficient Government. Government Online declared clear CSFs concerning 400 digital public

services’ and public information delivery by 2001, electronic payments’ establishment by

2000, and a government-wide intranet installation for secure online communications. These

objectives were achieved in only a two-year period, by 2002, when the Australian

Government proceeded to its updated strategy entitled “Better Services, Better Government”.

The National Office for the Information Economy of the Australian Government (NOIE)

defined the strategic key objectives for public service transformation concerning greater

administrative efficiency; convenient access to information and services; responsive public

services; related service integration; strengthening user trust; and enhancing citizen

engagement. The Australian Government Architecture (AGA) -based on U.S. EA- supports

the delivery of more consistent and cohesive cross-agency services to citizens (AGIMO,

2007).


In Japan the Prime Minister Office launched the national e-strategy on 2001 called e-

Japan (Japanese Government, 2001), which envisioned a “knowledge-emergent society” in

Japan. The Japanese strategic mission concerned the establishment of ultra high-speed

networks and of relative competition policies; the facilitation of e-commerce; the realization

of e-Government in means of service and information provision by 2003; the improvement of

information literacy in order to capitalize national human resources. E-Japan succeeded in

significant raise of broadband penetration and in Government reform, it was updated to the

“e-Japan II” strategy by 2003 and defined IT policy by 2005 (Japanese Government, 2005).

These two structural documents gave priority to citizen satisfaction, to e-local Government

with shared outsourcing efforts, and to standardization.

By 2006 (Japanese Government, 2006) a strategic reform was launched, which

provided updated priorities and a modern implementation framework. In this new framework,

a panel of IT Strategic Headquarters was structured under the Prime Minister that designed

and coordinated the strategy, and cooperated with other national councils, while an

assessment model was established for strategic progress measurement. Concerning e-

Government, focus moved to a smaller and more effective administration, and to e-

Government penetration. In order to achieve in these targets, more than 50 percent of form

applications should be filled electronically by 2010. Moreover, activities were undertaken in

respect to interoperability and standardization, since most of the previous programs ran

autonomously. In this context, Japanese Enterprise Architecture (JEA) was structured to lead

cross-organizational initiatives and service deployment, and public process re-engineering

(Hashimoto et al., 2007; Finnish Ministry of Finance, 2007; ICA, 2006; Ganesan & Paturi,

2008).

Two recent updates have been applied on Japanese e-Strategy, by 2009 with the “i-

Japan 2015” and by 2010 with the “New Strategy in Information and Communications

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation Technology (IT)”. The “i-Japan 2015” (Japanese Government, 2009) envisioned an inclusive

and innovative society, which is being approached with user-centric design and ease of use,

while innovation in IT will support social cohesion, growth and business competitiveness.

Three groups of e-Government reforming activities are included in this strategy, concerning

a) points-of-contact to administration via multi-channel and via three-“mouse clicks”

services. b) Government offices in order to oblige paperless transactions. The national e-Post

Office (e-PO) box is another leading initiative of this reform, and it is planned to be

implemented by 2013. c) Transparency with service execution tracking.

In only one year period, the “i-Japan 2015” was updated –not extended- to the “New

Strategy in Information and Communications Technology (IT)” (Japanese Government,

2010), which envisions the potential contribution of IT to the Japanese society and growth by

2020 and contains e-Government, IT for local communities and innovative new markets areas

of objectives. E-Government mission statement suggests the elimination of paper certificate

issuing for citizens by 2020, the launching of administrating booths for service execution by

2013 -with a target of installation in the 50 percent of local administrations by 2020-, while

digital identities, service tracking and multi-channel services will be enabled by 2013.

In South Korea (Hwang, 2005), (Yoon, 2007), (Kim, 2010) IT investment has been

increased from 2.4 percent to 6.1 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) during last 20

years, while IT spending from 3.9 percent to 11.7 percent during the same period. Moreover,

the average annual IT spending was estimated to $2 billion during the past decade, from

which the 20 percent referred to e-Government activities. E-Government evolution in Korea

passed from three different phases: the first during 1987 and 1995 with Government

information digitization and networking. The second phase was executed during 1995 and

2001, and emphasized on digital public service deployment across administration. In this

period it developed its EA framework called Government Enterprise Architecture Framework

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation (GEAF) (National Computerization Agency, 2006; Schekkerman, 2005) to standardize cross-

agency service deployment. The third that was launched on 2001 and contains 11 key

activities for administration’s reform -lots of which were funded under public-private-

partnership (PPP) contracts-, such as for transparency, for service quality, for integrated

procurement, for advanced infrastructures, for social participation, and for ubiquitous data

collection and services. Strategic planning and implementation is being supervised by the e-

government Headquarters in MOGAHA, which consists of seven teams for various

supervision areas, and the e-Government Learning Center. Korean fourth e-Strategy was

launched in 2003, called “e-Korea Vision 2006” (Lallana, 2004), which envisioned national

productivity and quality of life growth, and doubling Korea’s IT exports to $100 billion by

2007. CSFs in Korean mission statement concerned the national ‘Broadband convergence

Network’ (BcN), the educational programmes on ICT in order to Maximize the ability of

citizens to actively participate in the information society, the promotion of e-business, the

Government transparency and productivity, a leading role in global information society.

Strategy Vision Statement Mission Statement

USA - 2002: Expanding Government

Citizen centered, results oriented and market based public administration

Supervisor: Office of Electronic Government CSFs: a) capital planning / investment control: Integrated

Acquisition Environment (IAE), SmartBUY b) service integration: Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) c) information security d) privacy e) Accessibility: usa.gov

Update: 2009 Open Government Initiative

Updated vision statement: transparency, participation, and collaboration Cost: $71 billion/year

Updated CSFs: a) best practices from the private sector to increase

productivity; b) managerial methods: Open Government Directive, RIN c) public service transformation: Paper Reduction Act (PRA),

customer satisfaction d) Government accountability: Federal IT Dashboard

UK - 1999: Modernizing Government

Improvement of citizens’ and enterprises’ everyday life via digital

Supervisor: the Modernizing Government Secretariat, Office of the e-Envoy, Cabinet Office CSFs:



services, inclusive and integrated Government Cost: £1.7 billion

a) high quality and efficient public services: directgov.uk a) citizen-centered services b) strategic policy making c) Joined up delivery of services: Government Secure Intranet

(GSI) d) Interoperability: e-GIF interoperability framework e) Standardization: xGEA Enterprise Architecture

Update:2007 Transformational Government Enabled by Technology

Updated vision statement: accountability, economic productivity, social justice and public service reform, UK’s leading role in Globalized Economy Updated Cost: £1.4 billion

Updated CSFs: a) service design around citizens and businesses b) shared services c) professionalism in terms of planning, delivery,

management skills and governance of IT enabled change d) Public involvement e) Cost savings

Germany – 2001: Bund Online 2005

Citizen-centered and open environment

Supervisor: Federal Ministry of Interior, IT Planning council (2010)

Update: 2006 - Deutschland Online Update: 2007 – Federal IT Strategy Update: 2009 - Broadband Strategy of the Federal Government

Updated vision statement: inter-departmental service delivery and IT innovation’s promotion

CSFs: a) Service digitization and availability b) Common basic components for payment transactions, data

security, content management as well as workflow management, processes and organization

c) Central coordination for service transformation: SAGA Enterprise Architecture

d) Fifteen (15) One For All (OFA) services Updated CSFs: a) One-for-all (OFA) services b) Broadband diffusion c) Cross-agency service delivery

Europe - 1998, 2003: e-Europe 2002, e-Europe+, e-Europe 2005

Europe’s transition towards a knowledge based economy, and the capitalization of the internet and of the ICT for better jobs and for quality public services

Supervisor: DG of the Information Society CSFs: a) Broadband diffusion, b) communication markets’ deliberation c) ICT skills d) twenty (20) public services e) interoperable processes



Update: 2005 i2010 Update: 2010 - Digital Agenda

Updated vision statement: Common information space; Inclusive Information Society, ICT Innovation and Investment, effective, efficient, and transparent public administration, a flavor environment for communication between citizens and politicians, cross European services

Updated CSFs: a) digital convergence, b) digital single market, c) interoperability and standardization, d) trust and security, e) ultra-fast networks, f) research and innovation g) digital literacy and social challenges, h) digital e-identity, i) e-authentication, j) rights management, k) open source software

Australia-2000: Government Online

Better services for citizens and enterprises

Supervisor: National Office for the Information Economy of the Australian Government (NOIE) CSFs: a) 400 digital services online b) Enterprise Architecture (AGA) c) Government-wide Intranet d) Electronic payments

Update:2002: Better Services, Better Government

Updated vision statement:

e-Government for economic growth

Updated CSFs: a) greater administrative efficiency, b) convenient access to information and services, c) responsive public services d) service integration e) user trust f) citizen engagement

Japan-2001: e-Japan 2003: e-Japan II

“knowledge-emergent society” with ICT

Supervisor: Prime Minister Office, IT Strategy Headquarters CSFs: a) ultra-high-speed networks b) e-commerce c) service and information provision d) information literacy e) enterprise architecture program (2004)

Update: 2006 - New IT Reform Strategy

Update: 2009 i-Japan 2015

Updated vision statement: Inclusive and Innovative Society

Updated CSFs: a) citizen satisfaction b) e-local Government and standardization c) health and environmental challenges d) IT contribution to a decreasing and ageing society e) 50 percent of form applications by 2010 f) Elimination of paper certificate by 2020 g) multi-channel and via three-“mouse clicks” services h) Government offices i) e-PO box j) Digital ID



South Korea – 1987: Cyber Korea

Leading role in ICT industry

Supervisor: Headquarters in MOGAHA CSFs: a) Government Information Digitization b) Networking c) cross departmental service delivery

Update: 2003 e-Korea

Updated vision statement:

leading role in global information society

Updated CSFs: a) national ‘Broadband convergence Network’, b) educational programs on ICT c) promotion of e-business, d) Government transparency and productivity e) National Enterprise Architecture (GEAF) (2003)

India: 2006 National e-Governance Plan (NeGP)

Integration of Governance initiatives across the country, e-Governance acceleration

Supervisor: Department of Information Technology (DIT) of the Indian Ministry for Communications and Information Technology CSFs: 21 Mission Mode Projects (MMPs) and 8 components that deliver massive countrywide infrastructure and large-scale digitization of public records in order to bring public services closer to citizens

Table 1: analysis of some important e-strategies with their updated versions

The case of South Korea is the most well-focused and well-organized among the

analyzed strategies, and it appears as an ongoing long-term strategy with clear phases and

clear objectives. In South Korea each strategic update appears to be a sequence to the

previous versions, without tremendous political differences and priorities’ rearrangement.

Although it followed U.S., Japan, and Europe in recognizing its Information Society

challenges, it moved rapidly and on 2010 it was ranked 1st by the United Nations e-

Government Development and the e-Participation indexes (Korean National Society Agency,

2010 (a)), (Korean National Society Agency, 2010 (b)). In spite of the huge funding for IT

and e-Government –a phenomenon that appears in all the analyzed cases-, the most

significant factors that support this continuous IT evolution are the leading role of the

Information and Communications Ministry, together with the strategy’s supervising

Headquarters team, which consists of several task groups of experts with discrete authorities

and areas of actions.


According to the World Bank, India holds a huge IT service industry, where many

national and international IT vendors occupy a significant number of employees, while it is a

leading software exporter among all developing countries (Cieslikowski et al., 2009). India

agreed on a specific strategy called the “National e-Governance Plan (NeGP)” by 2006, in

order to structure a holistic view of e-Governance initiatives across the country, to integrate

these initiatives into a collective vision, and to realize the Prime Minister’s Announcement of

2002 for e-Governance acceleration. Previous approaches included various projects that tried

to digitize Government procedures. The NeGP demands a $750 million annual funding, and

consists of 21 Mission Mode Projects (MMPs) and 8 components that deliver massive

countrywide infrastructure and large-scale digitization of public records in order to bring

public services closer to citizens. Leading role of the strategic implementation has the

Department of Information Technology (DIT) of the Indian Ministry for Communications

and Information Technology (www.mit.gov.in), while the strategic coordination and

management is assigned to the apex Committee who has the Cabinet Secretary as a chairman.

Useful information about the NeGP is given by (Mathur et al., 2009), who present the

mission priorities: efficiency, transparency and accountability for public administration,

together with the key strategic objectives as e-procurement, e-government adoption by

citizens and businesses, common service centers for service delivery, service development’s

outsourcing, private investments, connectivity, and research projects for Government

systems. Digital public services approach the Indian citizen as a “common man” at his

locality, and aim to be efficient and reliable at a low cost. Strategic implementation is based

on a three tier e-Governance Framework (front-end, middleware, back-end layers), and on the

MMPs that secure ubiquitous connectivity at a state-level; nine departmental national

services one of which is the implementation of the national identity (ID); eleven state area

services; and seven cross-departmental projects, one of which is the one-stop e-Government

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation portal (www.india.gov.in). India appears active in EA area (Schekkerman, 2005; Mahapatra,

Perumal, 2007) and its EA framework is based on Zachman’s and leads standardization in

key projects. The MMPs leading role, together with the selection criteria that defined them,

and with the organizational structures for strategic management suggest a unique managerial

approach compared to the other cases.

2.2 Key Findings from the Investigated Cases

According to Schekkermann (2004) the EA is a collaborative force between business

planning, aspects of business operations, aspects of automation, and the enabling

technologies. Frameworks define architectures that support the EA to capture the strategic

vision in all its dimension and complexity, while according to Handley (2008) they act as the

roadmap to transition from current to strategic state.

EA is a “tool” that supports the central implementation of a Strategic Plan, by setting

targets, principles and methods able to be followed by all public Agencies. According to

(CIO, 2001) “Enterprise Architecture (EA) is a strategic information asset base, which

defines the mission, the information necessary to perform the mission and the technologies

necessary to perform the mission, and the transitional processes for implementing new

technologies in response to the changing mission needs. EA includes baseline architecture,

target architecture and a sequence plan”. EA is accompanied with a specific framework

(CIO, 1999) containing the proper procedures, that each public Agency has to follow in order

to implement the EA.

Moreover, various vendors have developed and deployed architecture frameworks,

which have been associated with a holistic view on Connected and Transformational

Government. Microsoft (2011) for instance approaches the Connected Government issue with

a four layer architecture framework that contains key challenges, people and processes,

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation application capabilities and technologies as the appropriate architectures that can deal with

recent e-Government missions. OASIS (2011) proposes a framework for the

Transformational Government with four components: guiding principles, CSFs, service

delivery processes, and benefit realization framework. CISCO (2007) realizes a three-stage

maturity model from basic capability to transforming Government, and proposes a framework

for next generation public services that relates change drivers with key-enablers. All of the

abovementioned frameworks consider an ecosystem for the public administration, where

citizens and enterprises cooperate and participate in the Connected Government.

Our investigation describes the e-strategic evolution across different continents and

public administrations. Strategic priorities and CSFs show that digital public service delivery

and infrastructure deployment were aimed under the first phase of the strategic

implementation. During this initial period of all cases, the EA was applied for business

process mapping and for IT project standardization. The European Union did not adopt EA

and instead it used e-Government Interoperability Frameworks (e-GIFs) to standardize

service deployment in member states. Additionally, India implements mission-mode projects

in order to establish standardization.

On the contrary, the updated e-strategies prioritized different pillars: U.S. and U.K.

paid significant attention on accountability, while U.S. approached it with openness and U.K.

via service transformation and simplification. European e-Strategy mainly “re-arranged” its

priorities after 2007, while Australia relates IT with economic growth, and Japan and Korea

with innovation and inclusion. Moreover, the WOG vision is not clearly adopted by the U.S.

and the Japanese cases, while the other strategies approached it with different means: U.K.,

South Korea and European Union talks about shared, cross-departmental and cross-country

service deployment, Germany considers the one-for-all services and Australia the integrated

services.


Our analysis in combination with the (Schekkermann, 2004; Saha, 2007; Finnish

Ministry of Finance, 2007) determine many similarities regarding the existing applied EA

frameworks: the U.S. FEAF, the South Korean and Indian frameworks follow Zachman’s

one, while the Japanese and the Australian follow the U.S. FEAF. Moreover, similarities in

architectures and perspectives are observed among the investigated EAs, and their impact in

strategic review is considered for the purposes of this chapter (Table 2). The investigation’s

findings determine a strong relation between the existence of an EA and the strategic

mission’s objectives, especially where cross-agency service delivery and standardization is

required.

EA Architectures / Perspectives

Updates related to the Connected Government

Related Architecture/Perspective

Effect on Transformation

USA - FEA (follows Zachman’s Framework)

Architectures: data/application/technology Perspectives: Planner/owner/designer/builder/subcontractor

a) capital planning / investment control: Integrated Acquisition Environment (IAE)

b) service integration: Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA)

Segment Architecture

Effective managerial methods

UK – xGEA Architectures (Domains): Strategy/channel/business process/business information/application/infrastructure/service management/integration/security Perspectives: Business function / exemplar / EA landscape

Joined-up service delivery

Integration Architecture

Shared Services deployment

Germany – SAGA

Architectures: process/data/infrastructure/modules/standards Perspectives (viewpoints): Enterprise/computation

Central coordination for service transformation


EA Architectures / Perspectives

Updates related to the Connected Government

Related Architecture/Perspective

Effect on Transformation

al/technology/engineering/information

Europe – no EA available

a) Cross-European services

b) Standardization

e-GIF interoperability framework

Australia-AGA (follows FEAF)

Reference Models: Performance/Business/Service/Data/Technical

Service Integration

Business Reference Model

Service Integration

Japan- enterprise architecture program (JEA)

Architectures: Business/ data/ application/ technical Perspectives: Policy, objective, function, operation, boundary, environment, information store and flow/wok-flow/BPR/resource

e-local Government and standardization

Optimization Plans for re-engineered services

South Korea – GEAF

Architectures: Business/data/application/infrastructure Perspectives: Planner/owner/designer/builder

cross departmental service delivery

India – EA Framework (follows Zachman’s Framework)

Architectures: data/application/technology Perspectives: Planner/owner/designer/builder/subcontractor

Integration of Governance initiatives across the country

21 Mission Mode Projects (MMPs) and 8 components

Table 2: EAs and strategic review

3. Main Thrust of this Chapter

This chapter seeks for a “strong relation” between transforming e-strategies –in

means of Connected Government- and EA. It expects that strategic transformation would lead

to appropriate alignments of the EA, and this chapter investigates architectural or perspective

changes in EAs that are being performed coincidently to the transformational efforts.


The analysis that was performed under the above investigation of the particular cases

delivers some important outcomes: a) it is proved that all major e-strategies have closed their

initial life-cycles and most of them have been or are being transformed with means that can

deploy cross-agency public services. b) Most of the examined cases focus on the WOG

vision, and they approach shared services, integrated services or cross-agency service

delivery. c) All the examined cases -except from the European supranational strategies-

incorporated and applied EA frameworks. d) Existing frameworks are mostly inspired by the

Zachman’s and they try to define architectures and perspectives to lead strategic missions,

and to introduce reference models for standardization in project implementation.

However, although an EA has its own life-cycle that consists of separate phases (e.g.

planning, developing, use and maintain) (National Computerization Agency, 2006), this life-

cycle is not executed simultaneously to the strategic life-cycle. On the other hand, the

Australian AGA moved to Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) early, while the U.S. FEAF

and the British xGEA have later been updated properly to integrated services: they

incorporated particular architectures –the segment and the integration architectures

respectively- in order to streamline integrated services.

The alignment of an EA to the e-strategic updates could be necessary for further

evolution and guidance. Inspired from the private sector, an Enterprise Architecture Roadmap

(Kawakami, 2005) seems to be useful for Governments. This roadmap is different for each

strategy, and must present the maturity level of an EA. Nissan for instance (Kawakami,

2005), defines the migration from the initial EA level where information is capitalized, to the

optimized EA level where common services are managed and software is capitalized across

the enterprise. In Government cases, EA maturity could be measured in means of coherency

and agility (Doucet, Gøtze, Saha & Bernard, 2008), and its roadmap to Connected

Government could be defined (Table 3) by allocating cross-departmental service delivery to

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation “extended EA”, and productivity growth to the “embedded EA” where close collaboration

between EA and daily operation is observed. In Table 3, the investigation outcomes were

assigned to particular cells and to EA maturity levels, in order to visualize the international

Government EA progress. It is proved that a lot of work has to be done in means of EA

migration to support the productivity growth.

Prior 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Embedded (suitable for

productivity growth)

Extended (suitable for

integrated services)

Australia UK USA

Foundation (suitable for

information capitalization)

USA, UK,

Australia,

S. Korea,

Germany

Japan India

Table 3: EA maturity roadmap to Connected Government

4. Conclusion

In this chapter a strong relation between EA and strategic transformation was

determined. The strategic migration to Connected Government is investigated, in terms of

strong contribution by an EA, and in this context some significant e-strategies from different

continents were analyzed. Particular roadmaps were extracted as a means to show the

underlying maturity and willing for cross-departmental service delivery and for productivity

growth in public administration. The investigation’s outcomes show that e-strategies have

completed their initial life cycles, and they have updated both their vision and mission

statements in forms with many similarities amongst each other. EA appears to play leading

role in most of the examined cases, but only some architectures from the investigated cases

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation have been updated and aligned their architectures or perspectives to the transformed mission.

This observation led authors to use a roadmap tool to visualize the EA progress to maturity

levels that align to the Connected Government principles.

References

Adigun, M. O., & Biyela, D. P. (2003). Modelling and Enterprise for re-Engineering: A Case Study. In the proceedings of the 2003 annual research conference of the South African institute of computer scientists and information technologists on Enablement through technology (SAICSIT 2003), ACM.

Anthopoulos, L., Siozos, P., & Tsoukalas, I. A. (2007). Applying Participatory Design and Collaboration in Digital Public Services for discovering and re-designing e-Government services. Government Information Quarterly, Volume 24, Issue 2, April 2007, Pages 353-376, ElSevier.

Anthopoulos, L. (2009). Applying Enterprise Architecture for Crisis Management: A Case of Hellenic Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Chapter for the book “Coherency Management: Architecting the Enterprise for Alignment, Agility and Assurance”, AuthorHouse Publishing, July 2009 (ISBN: 9781438996066).

Australian Government (2006). Responsive Government: A New Service Agenda. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/2006-e-government-strategy/docs/e-gov_strategy.pdf

Australian Government (2002). Better Services, Better Government. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.agimo.gov.au/archive/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/35503/Better_ Services-Better_Gov.pdf

Australian Government (2000). Government Online. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.agimo.gov.au/archive/publications_noie/2000/04/govonline.html

Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) (2007). Cross-Agency Services Architecture Principles. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/cross-agency-services-architecture-principles/ docs/CAS_Architecture_Principles.pdf

Barrows, E.A., & Frigo, M.L. (2008). Using the Strategy Map for Competitor Analysis. Harvard Business Review, Jul. 15, 2008. Retrieved, August 2011 from http://hbr.org/product/using-the-strategy-map-for-competitor-analysis/an/B0807E-PDF-ENG

Chief Information Officer (CIO) Council (1999). Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.cio.gov/Documents/fedarch1.pdf

Chief Information Officer (CIO) Council (2001). A Practical Guide to Federal Enterprise Architecture. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.gao.gov/bestpractices/ bpeaguide.pdf

CISCO, (2007). Connected Government: Creating a Springboard for Transformation and Innovation Retrieved, August 2011 from http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ ac79/docs/wp/ctd/Connected_Govt_PoV_1030_finalCB.pdf

Creamer, G., & Freund, Y., (2010). Learning a board Balanced Scorecard to improve corporate performance. Decision Support Systems 49, pp. 365–385.

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation Doucet, G., Gøtze, J., Saha, P., & Bernard, S. (2008). Coherency Management: Using

Enterprise Architecture for Alignment, Agility and Assurance. Journal of Enterprise Architecture, May 2008

Ebrahim, Z., & Irani, Z. (2005). E-government adoption: architecture and barriers. Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 5, 2005, pp. 589-611, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

ePractice.eu (2011). eGovernment Factsheet – Germany – Strategy. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.epractice.eu/en/document/288242

European Commission (2010). A Digital Agenda for Europe. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0245:FIN:EN:PDF

Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Working Group (2002). E-Gov Enterprise Architecture Guidance (Common Reference model). Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.feapmo.gov/resources/E-Gov_Guidance_Final_Draft_v2.0.pdf

Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Working Group (2005). Enabling Citizen-Centered Electronic Government. 2005-2006 FEA-PMO Action Plan. Retrieved, January 2011 from www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/2005_FEA_PMO_Action_Plan _FINAL.pdf)

Federal Statistical Office, Germany (2002). E-strategy, process analysis and design at the Federal Statistical Office. A practical example. Retrieved, May 2011 from https://www.bsi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/BSI/Egovernment/5_StBA_en_pdf.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

Finnish Ministry of Finance (2007). Overview of Enterprise Architecture work in 15 countries. Finnish Enterprise Architecture Research Project. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.vm.fi/vm/en/04_publications_and_documents/01_publications/04_ public_management/20071102Overvi/name.jsp

Fitsilis, P., Anthopoulos L., & Gerogiannis, V (2009). An evaluation framework for e-government projects. Chapter of the Book “Citizens and E-Government: Evaluating Policy and Management”, IGI Global, ISBN:978-1-61520-931-6.

Ganesan, E., & Paturi, R. (2008). A unified meta-model for elements can lead to effective business analysis. Infosys Technologies Limited. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.infosys.com/offerings/IT-services/architecture-services/white-papers/ Documents/enterprise-business-architecture.pdf

German Federal Government (2003). BundOnline 2005. 2003 Implementation Plan. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.epractice.eu/files/media/media_266.pdf

Handley, J. (2008). Enterprise Architecture Best Practice Handbook: Building, Running and Managing Effective Enterprise Architecture Programs - Ready to use supporting documents bringing Enterprise Architecture Theory into Practice. Emereo Pty Ltd 2008-11-19, ISBN: 1921573112

Hashimoto, D., Tanaka, A., & Yokoyama, M. (2007). Case study on RM-ODP and Enterprise Architecture. Edocw, pp.216-223, 2007 Eleventh International IEEE EDOC Conference Workshop, 2007.

Huang H.C. (2009). Designing a knowledge-based system for strategic planning: A balanced scorecard perspective. Expert Systems with Applications 36, pp. 209–218.

Hwang, J.S. (2005). e-Government in Korea. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.apiicc.org/apiicc/Lecture/Special/IT_Study_Visit_Program_for_Vietnam/020103.pdf

ICA (2006). Country Report - Japan’s e-Government. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan027268.pdf

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation Japanese Government (2010). A New Strategy in Information and Communications

Technology (IT). Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/policy/it/100511_full.pdf

Kaplan, S.R., & Norton, P.D. (1996). Translating strategy into action. The Balanced Scorecard. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data, pp. 8-12, 30-32.

Kawakami, T. (2005). Direction of Global Enterprise Architecture. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.n2services.net/Local/Files/4_File_DirectionofGlobalEnterprise Architecture_Kawakami.pdf

KBSt Publication Series (2003). SAGA: Standards and Architectures for e-government Applications, Version 2.0. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://egovstandards.gov.in/egs/eswg5/ enterprise-architecture-working-group-folder/standards-and-architectures-v2.pdf/ download

Lallana, C.E. (2004). An Overview of ICT Policies and e-Strategies of Select Asian Economies. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.apdip.net/publications/ict4d/ict4dlallana.pdf

Lysons, K., & Farrington, B. (2006). Purchasing and Supply Chain Management. Chapter 2, Prentice Hall Publishing, ISBN:0273694383

Mahapatra, R., & Perumal, S. (2007). Enterprise Architecture as an Enabler for E-Governance: An Indian Perspective. Chapter in the book Handbook of Enterprise Systems Architecture in Practice, edited by Pallab Saha, Idea Group Publishing.

Microsoft (2011). Connected Government Framework: Strategies to Transform Government in the 2.0 World. Retrieved, August 2011 from http://www.microsoft.com/ download/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&id=8295

National Computerization Agency (2006). Government-wide Enterprise Architecture In KOREA. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.opengroup.org/architecture/ 0310wash/presents/SungBum_Park_GEAF.pdf

OASIS, 2011. Transformational Government Framework, Primer Version 1.0. Retrieved, August 2011 from http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tgf/

Saha, P. (2007). Handbook of Enterprise Systems Architecture in Practice. IGI Global, ISBN: 978-1-59904-189-6

Saha, P. (2009). Architecting the Connected Government: Practices and Innovations in Singapore. In the proceedings of the ICEGOV2009, ACM.

Schekkerman, J. (2004). How to Survive in the Jungle of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks: Creating or Choosing an Enterprise Architecture Framework, 2nd Ed., Trafford Publishing, Victoria, British Columbia.

Schekkerman, J. (2005). Trends in Enterprise Architecture 2005: How are Organizations Progressing?. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://www.ea-consulting.com/Reports/ Enterprise%20Architecture%20Survey%202005%20IFEAD%20v10.pdf

UK Cabinet Office, Office of the e-Envoy (2002). e-Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF). Part two: Technical Policies and Specifications. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.govtalk.gov.uk/documents/e-GIF4Pt2_2002-04-25.pdf)

UK Cabinet Office (2005). Transformational Government Enabled by Technology. Retrieved, September 2010 from http://archive.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/e-government/strategy/

UK Chief Information Officers Council (UK CIO) (2005). Enterprise Architecture for UK Government. An overview of the process and deliverables for Release 1. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://tna.europarchive.org/20080727001118/http:/www.cio.gov.uk/ documents/cto/pdf/enterprise_architecture_uk.pdf

United Nations (2008). Connected Government Survey 2008. Retrieved, May 2011 from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan028607.pdf

An Investigative Assessment of the Role of Enterprise Architecture in Realizing E-Government Transformation U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (2009). Open Government Directive.

Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. Retrieved, December 2010 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/memoranda_2010/m10-06.pdf

U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (2010). FY 2009 Report to Congress on the Implementation of The E-Government Act of 2002. Retrieved, August 2011 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/egov_docs/2009_egov_report.pdf

White House (2010). White House forum on modernizing government overview and next steps. Retrieved, August 2011 from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/ default/files/omb/assets/modernizing_government/ModernizingGovernmentOverview.pdf

Zachman, J. A. (1987). A Framework for Information Systems Architecture. IBM Systems Journal, vol. 26, No. 3, 1987. Retrieved, January 2011 from http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/sj/263/ibmsj2603E.pdf