Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Towards a Knowledge Base of Terms on Enterprise Architecture Debt

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing. EDOC 2023 Workshops (EDOC 2023)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 498))

  • 387 Accesses

Abstract

The term Enterprise Architecture (EA) Debt has been coined to grasp the difference between the actual state of the EA and its hypothetical, optimal state. Since its first definition in 2019, different theses have been conducted on the topic, and different articles have been published working on and with the term EA Debt. Consequently, using different terms has evolved to describe different phenomena within the domain. Due to the different authors involved in this development, perceiving these terms might differ. To avoid misunderstandings and to ease common understanding of the domain, we propose an ontology for the domain of EA Debt. We rely on a lightweight methodology for rapid ontology engineering (UPON light) and the Unified Foundational Ontology (UFO) to engineer our ontology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    We used the following parameters: \(NGRAM = 3, Keywords\_Number = 50, Deduplication\_Threshold = 0.5\).

  2. 2.

    https://github.com/simonhacks/ead_ontology/blob/main/Keywords.xlsx.

  3. 3.

    https://github.com/simonhacks/ead_ontology/blob/main/Definitions.xlsx.

  4. 4.

    https://github.com/simonhacks/ead_ontology/blob/main/Taxonomy.xlsx.

  5. 5.

    https://github.com/simonhacks/ead_ontology/blob/main/ead-ontology.vpp.

  6. 6.

    https://github.com/simonhacks/ead_ontology.

References

  1. Al Hadidi, F., Baghdadi, Y.: Ontology for enterprise interactions: extended and virtual enterprises. In: Baghdadi, Y., Harfouche, A. (eds.) ICT for a Better Life and a Better World. LNISO, vol. 30, pp. 365–379. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10737-6_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Alexander, P., Hacks, S., Jung, J., Lichter, H., Steffens, U., Uludağ, Ö.: A framework for managing enterprise architecture debts - outline and research directions. In: CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 2628 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alves, N.S., Ribeiro, L.F., Caires, V., Mendes, T.S., Spínola, R.O.: Towards an ontology of terms on technical debt. In: 2014 Sixth International Workshop on Managing Technical Debt, pp. 1–7 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/MTD.2014.9

  4. Amaral, G., Sales, T.P., Guizzardi, G., Almeida, J.P.A., Porello, D.: Modeling trust in enterprise architecture: a pattern language for ArchiMate. In: Grabis, J., Bork, D. (eds.) PoEM 2020. LNBIP, vol. 400, pp. 73–89. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63479-7_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Antunes, G., Bakhshandeh, M., Mayer, R., Borbinha, J., Caetano, A.: Using ontologies for enterprise architecture integration and analysis. Complex Syst. Inform. Model. Q. 1, 1–23 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Antunes, G., Bakhshandeh, M., Mayer, R., Borbinha, J., Caetano, A.: Using ontologies for enterprise architecture analysis. In: 2013 17th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops, pp. 361–368 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2013.47

  7. Azevedo, C.L., Iacob, M.E., Almeida, J.P.A., van Sinderen, M., Pires, L.F., Guizzardi, G.: An ontology-based well-founded proposal for modeling resources and capabilities in archimate. In: 2013 17th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference, pp. 39–48 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOC.2013.14

  8. Azevedo, C.L., Iacob, M.E., Almeida, J.P.A., van Sinderen, M., Pires, L.F., Guizzardi, G.: Modeling resources and capabilities in enterprise architecture: a well-founded ontology-based proposal for ArchiMate. Inf. Syst. 54, 235–262 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2015.04.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bakhshandeh, M., Antunes, G., Mayer, R., Borbinha, J., Caetano, A.: A modular ontology for the enterprise architecture domain. In: 2013 17th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops, pp. 5–12 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW.2013.8

  10. Bente, S., Bombosch, U., Langade, S.: Collaborative Enterprise Architecture: Enriching EA with Lean, Agile, and Enterprise 2.0 Practices. Morgan Kaufmann (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Campos, R., Mangaravite, V., Pasquali, A., Jorge, A.M., Nunes, C., Jatowt, A.: YAKE! Collection-independent automatic keyword extractor. In: Pasi, G., Piwowarski, B., Azzopardi, L., Hanbury, A. (eds.) ECIR 2018. LNCS, vol. 10772, pp. 806–810. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76941-7_80

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Cunningham, W.: The WyCash portfolio management system. ACM SIGPLAN OOPS Messenger 4(2), 29–30 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1145/157710.157715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Daoudi, S., Larsson, M., Hacks, S., Jung, J.: Discovering and assessing enterprise architecture debts. Complex Syst. Inform. Model. Q. (2023)

    Google Scholar 

  14. De Nicola, A., Missikoff, M.: A lightweight methodology for rapid ontology engineering. Commun. ACM 59(3), 79–86 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2818359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. De Nicola, A., Missikoff, M., Navigli, R.: A software engineering approach to ontology building. Inf. Syst. 34(2), 258–275 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. D’Antonio, F., Missikoff, M., Taglino, F.: Formalizing the OPAL eBusiness ontology design patterns with owl. In: Gonçalves, R.J., Müller, J.P., Mertins, K., Zelm, M. (eds.) Enterprise Interoperability II, pp. 345–356. Springer, London (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-858-6_38

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Fowler, M.: Technical debt quadrant (2009). https://martinfowler.com/bliki/TechnicalDebtQuadrant.html

  18. Fowler, M.: Refactoring: improving the design of existing code. In: 11th European Conference, Jyväskylä, Finland (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gampfer, F., Jürgens, A., Müller, M., Buchkremer, R.: Past, current and future trends in enterprise architecture-a view beyond the horizon. Comput. Ind. 100, 70–84 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Glaser, P.L., Ali, S.J., Sallinger, E., Bork, D.: Model-based construction of enterprise architecture knowledge graphs. In: Almeida, J.P.A., Karastoyanova, D., Guizzardi, G., Montali, M., Maggi, F.M., Fonseca, C.M. (eds.) EDOC 2022. LNCS, vol. 13585, pp. 57–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17604-3_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Guizzardi, G., Botti Benevides, A., Fonseca, C.M., Porello, D., Almeida, J.P.A., Prince Sales, T.: UFO: unified foundational ontology. Appl. Ontol. 17(1), 167–210 (2022)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hacks, S., Hofert, H., Salentin, J., Yeong, Y.C., Lichter, H.: Towards the definition of enterprise architecture debts. In: 2019 IEEE 23rd EDOCW, pp. 9–16. IEEE (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hacks, S., Jung, J.: A first validation of the enterprise architecture debts concept. In: van der Aa, H., Bork, D., Proper, H.A., Schmidt, R. (eds.) BPMDS EMMSAD 2023. LNBIP, vol. 479, pp. 17–226. Springer, Cham (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34241-7_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Haendler, T., Neumann, G.: Ontology-based analysis of game designs for software refactoring. In: CSEDU (1), pp. 24–35 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hinkelmann, K., Gerber, A., Karagiannis, D., Thoenssen, B., van der Merwe, A., Woitsch, R.: A new paradigm for the continuous alignment of business and it: combining enterprise architecture modelling and enterprise ontology. Comput. Ind. 79, 77–86 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2015.07.009. Special Issue on Future Perspectives On Next Generation Enterprise Information Systems

  26. Hinkelmann, K., Maise, M., Thönssen, B.: Connecting enterprise architecture and information objects using an enterprise ontology. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Enterprise Systems: ES 2013, pp. 1–11 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/ES.2013.6690088

  27. Janulevičius, J., Marozas, L., Čenys, A., Goranin, N., Ramanauskaitė, S.: Enterprise architecture modeling based on cloud computing security ontology as a reference model. In: 2017 Open Conference of Electrical, Electronic and Information Sciences (eStream), pp. 1–6 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/eStream.2017.7950320

  28. Jung, J., Hacks, S., De Gooijer, T., Kinnunen, M., Rehring, K.: Revealing common enterprise architecture debts: conceptualization and critical reflection on a workshop format industry experience report. In: Proceedings - IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop, EDOCW, pp. 271–278 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOCW52865.2021.00058

  29. Kaisler, S., Armour, F.: 15 years of enterprise architecting at HICSS: revisiting the Critical Problems. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2017, pp. 4807–4816 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kang, D., Lee, J., Choi, S., Kim, K.: An ontology-based enterprise architecture. Expert Syst. Appl. 37(2), 1456–1464 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.06.073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kanji, S., Alexander, P., Lichter, H.: Reporting framework for enterprise architecture debts. Master’s thesis (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Kotusev, S.: Enterprise architecture: what did we study? Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 26(4) (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lankhorst, M.: Enterprise Architecture at Work. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  34. Lapalme, J.: Three schools of thought on enterprise architecture. IT Prof. 14(6), 37–43 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lehmann, B.D., Alexander, P., Lichter, H., Hacks, S.: Towards the identification of process anti-patterns in enterprise architecture models. In: 8th International Workshop on Quantitative Approaches to Software Quality in conjunction with the 27th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC 2020), vol. 2767, pp. 47–54 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Lenarduzzi, V., Fucci, D.: Towards a holistic definition of requirements debt. In: 2019 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), pp. 1–5 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2019.8870159

  37. Li, Z., Avgeriou, P., Liang, P.: A systematic mapping study on technical debt and its management. J. Syst. Softw. 101, 193–220 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.12.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Liss, L., Kämmerling, H., Alexander, P., Lichter, H.: Towards a catalog of refactoring solutions for enterprise architecture smells. In: Joint Proceedings of SEED 2021 & QuASoQ 2021 Co-located with 28th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference 2021, Taipei [Virtual], 6 December 2021, vol. 3062, pp. 60–69 (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Morakanyane, R., Grace, A., O’Reilly, P.: Conceptualizing digital transformation in business organizations: a systematic review of literature. In: 30th Bled eConference: Digital Transformation - From Connecting Things to Transforming our Lives, BLED 2017, pp. 427–444 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Prince Sales, T., Almeida, J.P.A., Santini, S., Baião, F., Guizzardi, G.: Ontological analysis and redesign of risk modeling in ArchiMate. In: 2018 IEEE 22nd International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC), pp. 154–163 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/EDOC.2018.00028

  41. Salentin, J., Hacks, S.: Towards a catalog of enterprise architecture smells. In: WI2020 Community Tracks, pp. 276–290. GITO Verlag (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Sales, T.P., Roelens, B., Poels, G., Guizzardi, G., Guarino, N., Mylopoulos, J.: A pattern language for value modeling in ArchiMate. In: Giorgini, P., Weber, B. (eds.) CAiSE 2019. LNCS, vol. 11483, pp. 230–245. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21290-2_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. Schütz, J., Gómez, J.M.: Towards collaborative technical debt management in systems of systems. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Technical Debt, TechDebt 2020, pp. 87–91. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3387906.3388620

  44. Slupczynski., A., Alexander., P., Lichter., H.: A process for evaluating the prudence of enterprise architecture debts. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems - Volume 2: ICEIS, pp. 623–630. INSTICC, SciTePress (2023). https://doi.org/10.5220/0011971400003467

  45. Slupczynski, A.M.: Towards a framework for evaluating the prudence of enterprise architecture debts. Masterarbeit, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen (2022). https://doi.org/10.18154/RWTH-2022-01253, https://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/840789. veröffentlicht auf dem Publikationsserver der RWTH Aachen University 2022; Masterarbeit, RWTH Aachen University, 2021

  46. Smajevic, M., Hacks, S., Bork, D.: Using knowledge graphs to detect enterprise architecture smells. In: Serral, E., Stirna, J., Ralyté, J., Grabis, J. (eds.) PoEM 2021. LNBIP, vol. 432, pp. 48–63. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91279-6_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  47. Tabrizi, B., Lam, E., Girard, K., Irvin, V.: Digital transformation is not about technology. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2–7 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tieu, B., Hacks, S.: Determining enterprise architecture smells from software architecture smells. In: 2021 IEEE 23rd Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), vol. 02, pp. 134–142 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/CBI52690.2021.10064

  49. Uludağ, Ö., Kleehaus, M., Xu, X., Matthes, F.: Investigating the role of architects in scaling agile frameworks. In: 2017 IEEE 21st International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference (EDOC), pp. 123–132. IEEE (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Uludag, Ö., Reiter, N., Matthes, F.: What to expect from enterprise architects in large-scale agile development? A multiple-case study. In: 25th AMCIS (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Weske, M.: Business Process Management-concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer, Berlin (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73522-9

    Book  Google Scholar 

  52. Wierda, G.: Chess and the Art of Enterprise Architecure. R&A (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Wierda, G.: Mastering ArchiMate, 2 edn. R&A (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  54. Winter, R., Fischer, R.: Essential layers, artifacts, and dependencies of enterprise architecture. In: 2006 10th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops (EDOCW 2006), p. 30. IEEE (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Yeong, Y., Hacks, S., Lichter, H.: Prioritization of EA debts facilitating portfolio theory. In: CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 2511 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

    Ada Slupczynski

  2. Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden

    Simon Hacks

Authors
  1. Ada Slupczynski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simon Hacks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon Hacks .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Tiago Prince Sales

  2. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Sybren de Kinderen

  3. Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria

    Henderik A. Proper

  4. Technical University of Munich, Heilbronn, Germany

    Luise Pufahl

  5. University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Dimka Karastoyanova

  6. University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Marten van Sinderen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Slupczynski, A., Hacks, S. (2024). Towards a Knowledge Base of Terms on Enterprise Architecture Debt. In: Sales, T.P., de Kinderen, S., Proper, H.A., Pufahl, L., Karastoyanova, D., van Sinderen, M. (eds) Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing. EDOC 2023 Workshops . EDOC 2023. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 498. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54712-6_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54712-6_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-54711-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-54712-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy