Zeszyt 33/2014

Kolegium Analiz Ekonomicznych oświadcza, że wersją pierwotną czasopisma jest wersja papierowa.

Michał Bijata

Opis i porównanie wybranych ram architektonicznych pod kątem przydatności w administracji publicznej


Description and comparison of chosen enterprise architecture frameworks with focus on possibility of their application in public administration

This paper provides a comparative analysis with focus on possibility of applying enterprise architecture (architecture frameworks) to the problems and challenges of public administration.
The 2005 act on the IT development of entities performing public tasks (including amendments and further executive acts) set the Polish Plan of Computerization, which introduced rules (minimal requirements) towards the creation of IT systems in public administration. The act also imposed the duty of adjusting the existing IT systems to those rules.
Despite the fulfilment of the above described strategic goals focused on inter‐department coordination, prioritisation and cooperation which was evaluated 8 years following the act, a number of the projects carried out, although they achieved their goals and benefits, created solutions characteristic of a silos­ based architecture. Such an architecture disabled broader cooperation of the systems and often led to storing duplicated data in the registries. It means that the result was opposite to the assumptions - despite the provided requirements (which weren’t complete and relevant in some areas, but provided sufficient guidelines).
Enterprise architecture is a tool which can change such a situation in a major way. Its concepts are broadly used in order to ensure the achievement of assumptions, coherent IT solutions and avoidance of wasting public resources resulting from uncoordinated IT projects realised in silos organisations, i.e. public departments.
The article presents a comparative analysis of two chosen enterprise architecture frameworks – FEAF (Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework) and TOGAF (The Open Group Architecture Framework); selection criteria: the frameworks’ popularity and their application in foreign governmental bodies. The main conclusion of the analysis (3 criteria selected for analysis: definition of architectural requirements, requirements management, evaluation of requirements fulfilment) is that neither of these concepts is a comprehensive tool addressing the needs of public administration. Therefore, considering that these concept are complementary, the best solution appears to be a hybrid one - consisting of a set of elements from each of the frameworks the best fitted to public administration.

Artykuł: PDF

spis treści zeszytu 33

Copyright © Kolegium Analiz Ekonomicznych Szkoły Głównej Handlowej w Warszawie 2011-2017   ISSN 1232-4671