Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide Editorial - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 29 Words: 8567 Downloads: 7 Date added: 2017/09/17 Category Management Essay Type Argumentative essay Did you like this example? Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide Editorial Writer: J. Schekkerman Version 5. 0 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide Preface Preface An enterprise architecture (EA) establishes the organization-wide roadmap to achieve an organization‘s mission through optimal performance of its core business processes within an efficient information technology (IT) environment. Simply stated, enterprise architectures are ? blueprints? or systematically and completely defining an organization‘s current (baseline) or desired (target) environment. Enterprise architectures are essential for evolving information systems and developing new systems that optimize their mission value. This is accomplished in logical or business terms (e. g. , mission, business functions, information flows, and systems environments) and technical terms (e. g. , software, hardware, communications), and includes a transition plan for transitioning from the baseline environment to the t arget environment. If defined, maintained, and implemented effectively, these blueprints assist in optimizing the interdependencies and interrelationships among the business operations of the enterprise and the underlying IT that support these operations. It has shown that without a complete and enforced EA (Strategic) Business Units of the enterprise run the risk of buying and building systems that are duplicative, incompatible, and unnecessarily costly to maintain and interface. For EAs to be useful and provide business value, their development, maintenance, and implementation should be managed effectively and supported by tools. This step-bystep process guide is intended to assist in defining, maintaining, and implementing EAs by providing a disciplined and rigorous approach to EA life cycle management. It describes major EA program management areas, beginning with: 1. suggested organizational structure and management controls 2. a process for development of a baseline and target architecture, 3. development of a transition plan. The guide is especially focusing on EA tool selection requirements, as well as showing an oversight over existing products today on the market Conclusion The items described in this guide presents fundamental requirements for good EA tool selections. An electronic version of this guide can be ordered at the following Internet address: https://www/enterprise-architecture. info If you have questions or comments about this guide, please contact Jaap Schekkerman at +31(0)627557467, by email at [emailprotected] info Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 i May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide Preface The Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments intended not to use any copyrighted material for this publication or, if not possible, to indicate the copyright or source of the respective object. The Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments has thoroughly checked all the references however could not trace out in all situations the original copyright owner; however it is never our intention to infringe anyone‘s copyrights. All Trade Marks, Service Marks and registered trademarks / service marks mentioned in this publication are the property of their respective organizations. The copyright for any material created by the author is reserved. The Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments (IFEAD) is using an open publication policy. Organizations can use IFEAD‘s materials for their own purposes with a reference notice to IFEADs copyrights. Organizations that want to use IFEAD‘s materials for commercial purposes can achieve a license from IFEAD. The Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments (IFEAD) shall retain ownership of all inventions, hether or not patentable, original works of authorship (whether written or visual), developments, improvements o r trade secrets developed by or licensed to IFEAD or developed by third parties on IFEAD‘s behalf, either prior to or outside of this IPR statement, including but not limited to methodologies, analysis/architectural frameworks, leading practices, specifications, materials and tools (? IFEAD Independent Materials? ) and all IPR therein. Organisations may use the IFEAD Independent Materials provided to Organisations by IFEAD only in furtherance of this IPR statement or with IFEAD‘s prior written consent. IPR? means intellectual property rights, including patents, trademarks, design rights, copyrights, database rights, trade secrets and all rights of an equivalent nature anywhere in the world.  © Copyrights Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments (IFEAD), 2001 – 2009, All Rights Reserved Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 ii May 2009 Table of Contents Preface 1. Introduction 1 1. 1. EA Tools Review Framework . 1 1. 2. Functionality Dimension . 2 1. 2. 1. Methodologies and Models 2 1. 2. 2. Model Development Interface . 1. 2. 3. Tool Automation .. . 3 1. 2. 4. Extendibility and Customization . 3 1. 2. 5. Analysis and Manipulation 4 1. 2. 6. Repository .. 4 1. 2. 7. Deployment Architecture .. 1. 2. 8. Costs and Vendor Support 5 1. 2. 9. Architecture Results 5 1. 3. Different Professionals Dimension . 6 1. 3. 1. Enterprise Architects .. 6 1. 3. 2. Solution Architects .. 1. 3. 3. Strategic Planners / Management . 6 1. 3. 4. Enterprise Program Managers . 7 1. 3. 5. Software Architects / Engineers 7 1. 3. 6. External Partners . 7 2. Enterprise Architecture Modelling TOGAF 8 2. 1. The ArchiMate Modelling Language 9 2. 2. TOGAF 9 . 10 3. Overview of Enterprise Architecture Tools(2) . 11 3. 1. Overview of vendors Tools. (3). 11 4. Candidate Tool Requirements Checklist . 12 4. . Candidate list of EA Tool Requirements Specifications 1 2 4. 2. The purpose of adopting an EA Tool? . 20 Appendix A: References . 21 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 iii May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 1. Introduction Enterprise Architectures are an emerging approach for capturing complex knowledge about organizations and technology. Enterprise Architectural approaches range from broad, enterprise focused approaches, through to approaches aimed at specific domains. The focus of enterprise architecture efforts is now shifting to become more holistic, thereby necessitating the use of comprehensive modeling tools to analyze and optimize the portfolio of business strategies, organizational structures, business processes / tasks and activities, information flows, applications, and technology infrastructure. Important to adoption of an enterprise architectural approach is the availability of tools to su pport the development, storage, presentation and enhancement of enterprise architecture representations. As with enterprise architecture methodologies, enterprise architecture tools to support the architectural development process are still emerging. High value is derived from consolidating this portfolio of business artifacts into a single repository in a standardized manner to support enterprise analysis and optimization. 1. 1. EA Tools Review Framework To consistently review enterprise architecture tools a review framework is defined. The review framework consists of two dimensions: the basic functionality of the tool, and the utility of the tool to different professionals. When reviewing an EA tool‘s basic functionality, the reviewer has to describe how well the tool performed the different functions needed for the enterprise architecture development activity. The tools basic functionality was examined in the following areas: Methodologies and Models; Model Development Interface; Tool Automation; Extendibility and Customization; Analysis and Manipulation; Repository; Deployment Architecture; Costs and Vendor Support; Architecture Results. The second dimension, the tool‘s utility to different professionals, captures the fitness for purpose of the tool, and describes how useful the tool would be to particular professionals. The types of professionals considered were: Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 1 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection Enterprise Architects; Solution Architects Strategic Planners / Management; Enterprise Program Managers Software Architects / engineers External Partners. EA Tools Review Framework Methodologies and Models Model Development Interface Tool Automation Enterprise Architects Solution Architects Strategic Planners / Management Requirements Enterprise Program Managers Requirements Software Architects / Engineers Requirements External Partners Overall Requirements List = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Extendibility Customization Analysis and Manipulation Repository Deployment Architecture Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. = †¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦. Costs and Vendor Su pport Architecture Results Weigh Factors Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements 1. 2. Functionality Dimension This dimension of the EA Tools review framework attempts to capture how well the tool performs the core functions needed to support the enterprise architecture development activity. This dimension breaks the functionality of an enterprise architecture tool into eight key areas. 1. 2. 1. Methodologies and Models The most important feature of an enterprise architecture tool the methodologies and modeling the approaches it supports. The approaches the tool supports dictate the types of enterprise architectures the tool is capable of supporting, and to an extent, the type of analysis and manipulation functions the tool is capable of performing. As well as reviewing the methodologies and modeling approaches, this functional area also reviews how well, or how completely, the tool implements the methodologies and modeling approaches it claims to support. For tools that are capable of supporting multiple methodologies and modeling approaches, this functional area also examines how well the different approaches are integrated. For example, when complementary methodologies and modeling approaches (for example process modeling and data modeling) are used, how well can the different approaches be used together in an overall enterprise architectural approach? Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 2 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection When a tool supports competing approaches (for example two approaches to data modeling) how well can the data being modeled be moved between the different perspectives offered by the competing approaches? 1. 2. 2. Model Development Interface The model development interface is the mos t obvious part of an enterprise architecture development tool. It is the interface used to design, build, maintain and often manipulate, the models that make up the architecture. Generally, models are built and maintained graphically, by manipulating cons and the connections between them. The tool‘s model development interface may also use textual interfaces to allow additional information to be appended to the graphical models. The overall quality of the model development interface is an important characteristic of any enterprise architecture development tool. The interface must support the modeling activity well, for example by automating some of the drawing functions, by automatically laying out models, or by providing pick lists of alternative values at the appropriate places during the modeling activity. The model development interface must also be intelligently structured, make good use of limited screen space, be logical and consistent to use and navigate. The tool s hould ideally follow the graphical user interface conventions and guidelines that apply to its host operating system. 1. 2. 3. Tool Automation Developing and populating enterprise architecture models is often the most time consuming part of the enterprise architecture development activity. By providing support for automating parts of the enterprise architecture development processes, a tool can help speed up the overall development activity. A tool may support the creation of macros or scripts, to automate common functions or actions, or to group several functions together into one action. These may be used to automate parts of the model development activity. This feature is closely related to the tool‘s ability to be customized, which is described in the next section. The tool may also provide the ability to automatically generate enterprise architecture models based on data held within the tool‘s repository, or have the ability to generate enterprise architecture mo dels as a result of data manipulation functions. . 2. 4. Extendibility and Customization This functional group captures how well an enterprise architecture tool can be modified to meet the unique enterprise architectural requirements of a unique organization. Enterprise Architecture tools may support customization by allowing users to add new modeling approaches or to modify the modeling approaches already supported by the tool. A tool may also support modification by providing a programming interface, allowing the functions of the tool to be modified, or allowing the tool to be integrated with other software products. Most enterprise architecture tools that support high levels of customization allow the underlying meta-models of the tool to be modified, and new meta-models added. Metamodels are literally models about models. They describe what entities can exist Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments , 2001-2009 3 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection within particular models, the legal relationships between the different entities, and their properties. By modifying the existing meta-models, or adding completely new meta-models, a tool can be customized to support new modeling approaches. The ability to modify the tool via a programming interface allows the functionality and behavior of the tool to be customized to meet the unique requirements of the organization. Programming customization may be achieved though the use of an application scripting language, for example Visual Basics for Applications (VBA), or through support for adding external components, for example, Active X/DCOM components. Enterprise Architecture tools may be extended by integrating them with other software products. This may be achieved via direct integration through an exposed API within the tool, or via a middleware layer, for example ActiveX/DCOM, CORBA, and so on . Integration may also be supported via importing and exporting data into and out of the tool via standard file types; for example, character delimited or fixed width delimited text files, HTML, or SYLK files and so on. 1. 2. 5. Analysis and Manipulation As well as supporting the development of enterprise architecture models, an enterprise architecture tool may also provide support for analysis and manipulation of the developed models. The type of analysis and manipulation support provided by the tool is often tied to the particular modeling approaches supported by the tool. For example, Flow Analysis is often tied to process/workflow modeling. Analysis support provided by a tool may simply examine how correct or complete the model is, relative to a particular modeling approach used. More sophisticated analysis support may allow the model to be interrogated in some way, or be subjected to particular analysis methods. Analysis support may include the ability to compare different v ersions of models, allowing current and to-be enterprise architectures to be compared. Manipulation functions capture a tool‘s ability to change the way the models are represented and viewed. This may include the ability to view models from particular perspectives, for example showing only particular classes of entities, or the ability to amalgamate separate models into a single model. 1. 2. 6. Repository Most of the tools on the market make use of some kind of data repository to hold the developed models. The functions provided by the tool‘s repository have a significant impact on the overall functionality, scalability and extendibility of an enterprise architecture tool. Some tools make use of commercial relational database management systems, or commercial Object Orientated or Object/Relational database systems, while others use proprietary repository systems. A tool‘s repository often dictates the way users can collaborate. A repository may provide suppor t for collaboration by supporting multiple, concurrent, users on the one repository, or by providing the ability to combine models developed by different modelers into one model. Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5.  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 4 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection The repository may also provide many different data management functions, including the ability to support model versioning, the ability to roll back to previous versions, the ability to lock parts of the model against change, and the ability to control access to part or the entire model. 1. 2. 7. Deployment Architecture A tool‘s deployment architecture describes the tool‘s software structure and software implementation. Generally, enterprise architecture tools tend to adopt one of two deployment architectures: either a single user/single client structure, or a simple two-tier client/server str ucture. Single user/single client structured tools are designed to operate on one workstation, and can generally only be used by one user at a time. Tools that implement this style of deployment architecture generally have a very tight coupling between the tool and its repository. In this type of deployment architecture, only one modeler can have access to the repository at any one time. The second common deployment architecture found within the enterprise architecture tool domain is a simple two tier client/server structure. Tools that implement this style of deployment architecture generally have looser coupling between the tool and the repository. Generally, the repository is stored on a network server, and can often be accessed by multiple concurrent users. This deployment architecture allows multiple modelers to work on the same models concurrently. 1. 2. 8. Costs and Vendor Support The final functional group considered is the cost of the tool and after sales support prov ided by the vendor. The cost of enterprise architecture tool licenses can range anywhere from â‚ ¬ 1,500 to â‚ ¬ 7,000 per license, and optional extras are often available for an additional cost. Given the high costs of this type of tool, the types of licensing agreements offered by the vendor, and how they may lower the overall cost, is important. For example, does the vendor support floating licenses, allowing expensive licenses to be shared among a large group of users? Does the vendor offer discounts for bulk purchases, or site licenses? Does the vendor offer discounts to government or non-profit organizations? Also important in the overall cost of adopting an enterprise architecture tool, are the cost and type of maintenance and/or after sales support contracts offered by the vendor. Is the vendor able to offer comprehensive, in-house training? If the vendor is a foreign company, do they have an Australian representative available to provide training? Does the vendor o ffer free technical support? Is the vendor able to offer free or heavily discounted upgrades? How does the vendor address software faults discovered by the user? What is the yearly maintenance costs associated with the tool? 1. 2. 9. Architecture Results Essential results are those required for all enterprise architectures, while supporting results may be necessary to fulfill specific informational needs. Only those supporting results that portray the desired characteristics should be created. The required results should help formulate the selection of a framework and associated toolset. Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5.  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 5 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection It is essential that the Chief Enterprise Essential results — the graphics, models, and/or narratives that every Architect guide the development of the enterprise architecture description mu st EA views and landscapes to meet the include, to support the scope and needs of the Business IT, characteristics of the EA. especially in the desired level of detail Supporting results — the graphics, needed in the EA results. If the content models, and /or narratives that may be is at too high level of abstraction, it may needed to further elaborate on essential not be sufficiently useful to guide products or to address particular domain decision-making. If the content is too or scope extensions (e. g. outsourcing or transformation considerations). detailed, it may be difficult to oversee the impact and the risks. Define and select your own visualization / modelling techniques to visualise the context, landscape models and diagrams to meet your stakeholder‘s demands. Our experience is that visualizing the EA results in the format of large photographic / picturized posters that are coloured in line with the organizations house style is very effective. So define upfront what kind of models, languages and visualizations do you expect from the support of a tool. 1. 3. Different Professionals Dimension The evaluation of the tools considered their suitability for use by different professionals. The needs of other groups, such as software architects, are not considered in this EA tools selection framework. . 3. 1. Enterprise Architects Enterprise Architects investigate all aspects of enterprise architectural approaches and methodologies. This can involve researching different representations and enterprise architectural structures, including the development and investigation of alternative modeling approaches. As such, the requirements for a tool to support enterprise architectural research are quite challenging. The over-arching requirement is flexibility in defining and adapting modeling approaches. However, a robust tool is also required to develop large-scale demonstrators to investigate, and promote these alternative approaches. 1. 3. 2 . Solution Architects Solution Architects are focused at the Solution level and working with the developing vendor to design and implement the Solution. Solution Architects report frequently to Project Managers, but have a dotted-line responsibility to the Enterprise Architects in order to maintain consistency and interoperability across Business IT. Therefore their needs for tooling support are different from the Enterprise Architect. 1. 3. 3. Strategic Planners / Management Strategic planners, including executive management and innovating staff, use the enterprise architectures results for strategic decision making. They need to be assembled and modified quickly, and should be based on current (or planned) future capability. Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 6 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection Strategic planners need a tool that is easy to use. It is highly desirable that local support is available when required. The tool should have strong drawing and reuse facilities including support for multiple, related, configurations within a single architecture. Quick, automated, analysis and consistency checking is highly desirable. Integration with existing data sources is essential, particularly when implementing planning facilities. 1. 3. 4. Enterprise Program Managers Enterprise Program Managers as well as domain program managers and often project managers supports the enterprise architecture program in order to support the implementation and transformation phase. The enterprise architecture tools should be able to capture current and future resources (such as platforms, assets and components), organizations, people, information exchanges, tasks or activities, and processes and their relationships as well as program planning facilities. Enterprise Program managers need a tool that is easy to use, with support available w hen required. Local support is desirable, but probably not essential providing it is very responsive. The tool should have a strong planning and analysis capability and allow reuse between enterprise architectures for different activities undertaken at different times. . 3. 5. Software Architects / Engineers A Software Architecture relates requirements, fixed system hardware, and infrastructure (i. e. , COTS or GOTS) to software structures in order to demonstrate software effectiveness, therefore their needs for tooling support are different from the Enterprise and Solution Architect. 1. 3. 6. External Partners As earlier mentioned Solution Architects and Software Architects are often working together with Vendors / Partners. Sometimes these partners have different demands from results supported by tools. Therefore it is interesting to know their specific needs / demands. Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Dev elopments, 2001-2009 7 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 2. Enterprise Architecture Modelling TOGAF A coherent description of enterprise architectures provides insight, enables communication among different stakeholders and guides complicated (business and IT) change processes. Unfortunately, so far no enterprise architecture description language exists that fully enables integrated enterprise modelling. In this chapter the focus is on the requirements and design of such a language. This language defines generic, organization-independent concepts that can be specialized or composed to obtain more specific concepts to be used within a particular organization. It is not the intention to re-invent the wheel for each enterprise architectural domain: wherever possible there will be a conformation to existing languages or standards such as UML. Then these standards will be complemented with missing concepts, for example focusing on concepts to mod el the relationships among enterprise architectural domains. The concepts should also make it possible to define links between models in other languages. The relationship between enterprise architecture descriptions at the business layer and at the application layer (business-IT alignment) plays a central role. Changes in an organizations strategy and business goals have significant consequences for the organization structure, processes, software systems, data management and technical infrastructures. Organizations have to adjust processes to their environment, open up internal systems and make them transparent to both internal and external parties. Enterprise architectures are a way to chart the complexity involved. Many enterprises have recognized the value of architectures and to some extent make use of them during system evolution and development. Depending on the type of enterprise or maturity of the architecture practice, in most cases a number of separate enterprise arc hitectural domains are distinguished such as business, information, application and technology infrastructure domain. For each enterprise architectural domain architects have their own concepts, modelling techniques, tool support, visualization techniques and so on. Clearly, this way of working does not necessarily lead to a coherent view on the enterprise. Enterprises want to have insight into complex change processes. The development of coherent views of an enterprise and a disciplined enterprise architectural working practice significantly contribute to the solution of this complex puzzle. Coherent views provide insight and overview, enable communication among different stakeholders and guide complicated change processes. Unfortunately there is a downside to this euphoria. So far no enterprise architecture description language exists that fully enables integrated enterprise modelling. There is a need for an enterprise architecture language that enables coherent enterprise m odelling. Enterprise architects need proper instruments to constructs architectures in a uniform way. The next figure illustrates the scope of such an integrated set of enterprise architecture results. Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 8 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection Contextual Reflection Aspect Reflection Business Reflection Model based Enterprise (Concepts) Reflection Transformation Reflection Technological Reflection Model Based Domain Reflection Overview of possible Enterprise Architecture Results Relations Scope of Enterprise Architecture Results Important elements of such an approach include: o The development of a coherent enterprise modelling language. o Development of specialized views and visualization techniques in order to provide insight for different stakeholders. o Development of analysis techniques that aid in understanding the complex models. By using a uniform modelling language enterprise architects can avoid a Babellike confusion. At the same time an architectural modelling language should allow the development of specialized visualization techniques for different stakeholders, such as business managers, end-users, project managers, system developers, etc. After all, enterprise architectures are the means by which enterprise architects communicate with the different stakeholders, and this communication works best if it is tailored towards the specific concerns and information needs that they have. Additionally, analysis techniques, for example, impact-of- change analysis, provide ways to study the properties of an integrated model in more detail. In this way enterprise architecture provides the desired insight and overview, which allows a well-organized change process. 2. 1. The ArchiMate Modelling Language1 By realizing that multiple languages and dialects will always exist, striving for one un ique language would be like chasing windmills. Therefore, the flexibility to use other languages is recognized, and is addressed by means of a specialization and generalization requirement of the language itself. In the view of the ArchiMate project a well-defined enterprise architecture language forms the core of such an architecture approach. In this chapter the focus is on the requirements and a first design of such a language. It is not the intention to re-invent the wheel for each architecture domain. When possible standards will be followed, such as UML, as closely as possible. The focus is on the identification of specific relationship concepts and the definition of cross-domain relations. In order to arrive at a 1 https://www. pengroup. org/archimate/ The ArchiMate Forum of The Open Group is the platform for everyone involved with the use and evolution of ArchiMate. Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture D evelopments, 2001-2009 9 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection coherent architectural description, several architectural domains and layers as well as their relations must be modelled. This chapter describes the first steps towards a language to support this. The relations between the business and application layer, which play a central role in this version of the language, are a first contribution to the solution of the business-ICT alignment problem that ArchiMate try to tackle. For the state of the art in enterprise modelling, languages have to consider for organisation and process modelling and languages for application and technology modelling. Although there is a trend towards considering the relationship between the organisational processes and the information systems and applications that support them (often referred to as ? business-IT alignment), modelling echniques to really express this relationship hardly exist yet. A wide variety of organisation and process modelling languages are currently in use: there is no single standard for models in this domain. The conceptual domains that are covered differ from language to language. In many languages, the relations between domains are not clearly defined. Also, most languages are not really suitable to describe architectures: they provide concepts to model, e. g. , detailed business processes, but not the high-level relationship. Some of the most popular languages are proprietary to specific software tools. Relevant languages in this category include: o The Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) is a standard for business process modeling, and provides a graphical notation for specifying business processes in a Business Process Diagram (BPD), based on a flowcharting technnique very similar to activity diagrams from Unified Modeling Language (UML). The objective of BPMN is to support business process management for both technical users and business users by provi ding a notation that is intuitive to business users yet able to represent complex process semantics. IDEF originating from the US Ministry of Defence is a collection of 16 (unrelated) diagramming techniques, three of which are widely used: IDEF0 (function modelling), IDEF1/IDEF1x (information and data modelling) and IDEF3 (process description). ArchiMate as an Enterprise Architecture modelling language, originally developed as an initiative of a consortium of Dutch organisations and the Telematica Institute, today ArchiMate is part of the Open Group set of Standards. o o 2. 2. TOGAF 9 TOGAF Version 9 Enterprise Edition (TOGAF 9 for short) is a detailed method and set of supporting resources for developing an Enterprise Architecture. Developed and endorsed by the membership of The Open Groups Architecture Forum, TOGAF 9 represents an industry consensus framework and method for Enterprise Architecture. As a comprehensive, open method for Enterprise Architecture, TOGAF 9 compleme nts, and can be used in conjunction with, other frameworks that are more focused on specific aspects of architecture or for vertical sectors such as Government, Defense, and Finance, therefore the support of tools is important. Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 10 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 3. Overview of Enterprise Architecture Tools(2) 3. 1. Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments Your, Return On Information Your, Return On Information Overview of vendors Tools. (3) Risk / Strategy / Enterprise / Solution Architecture Tools Overview 2009 Governance, Risk, Compliancy Enterprise/ITPo rtfolio Business/I management T Strategy 5. 0 (C) Copyrights IFEAD 2001 2009 Modelling Languages Support (BPMN, Archimate, UML) Not Specified Not Specified Supplier Aam tech Acceptsoftware Tool SAMU Accept 360 Adaptive EA Manager, IT Portfolio Mana ger, Metadata Manager, Project Portfolio Manager Program Management Enterprise Architecture Solution Architecture Software Engineering Togaf 9 Support Not Specified Not Specified Adaptive Not Specified Not Specified Agilense Altova Alfabet ASG Software Solutions Avolution EA Webmodeler Altova Enterprise Suite Planning IT ASG-Rochade Abacus BiZZdesign Architect, BiZZdesigner, Riskmanager Corporate Modeler Enterprise Edition SimProcess Not Specified Not Specified Togaf 9 Not Specified Togaf 9 Not Specified UML Not Specified Not Specified Archimate, BPMN, UML Bizzdesign Casewise CACI International Togaf 9 Togaf 9 Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Togaf 9 Togaf 9 Togaf 9 Not Specified Togaf 9 Not Specified Not Specified Togaf 9 Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Not Specified Togaf 9 Not Specified Togaf 9 Not Specified Archimate Archimate, BPMN, UML BPMN UML BPMN BPMN Not Specified UML Archimate, BPMN Not Specified Not Speci fied UML BPMN, UML Not Specified Not Specified BPMN Not Specified Not Specified BPMN, UML Not Specified BPMN, UML Archimate, BPMN, UML Archimate, BPMN, UML Not Specified Enterprise Elements Elements Repository Modeling Validation Forsight Tool set Future Tech Systems, Inc ENVISION ® VIP GoAgile MAP Product GoAgile Suite IBM Rational Software IBM Architect ARIS Business IDS Scheer Performance Edition Intelligile Corporation MAP Suite + ITAA Knotion Consulting LogicLibrary Mega International CA Palisade Metastorm Qualiware Salamander Organisation Select Business Solutions Simon Labs Sparx Systems IBM TeleLogic Troux Visible UDEF Explorer Logidex Mega (Process, Architect, Designer) NetViz Suite Risk Decision Analysis Metastorm Enterprise Products Qualiware Product Suite MooD Transformation Technology Select Solution Factory SimonTool Enterprise Architect System Architect Family + Rhapsody Troux 8 Visible Advantage Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyr ights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 11 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 4. Candidate Tool Requirements Checklist First and foremost, objectives for acquiring and using a comprehensive modeling tool must be articulated and agreed to by all stakeholders. Since this tool is to support enterprise architecture, enterprise-level objectives must be included. Once that is accomplished, the objectives must be translated into requirements for both vendor presence and performance. Also, architectural principles both high-level conceptual and domain-level detailed must be included as screening criteria. Principles can either be converted into requirements or left as-is, requiring vendors to demonstrate their support of such principles. The functional requirements of a tool must be understood prior to embarking on a selection. Only the functionality that is currently required of the tool or that which will be realisticall y necessary in the future should be selected. The next list is a candidate listing of requirements and specifications. Enhance this list for your own specific situation. Only the functionality that is currently required of the EA tool, or that which will be realistically necessary in the future, should be selected. 4. 1. Candidate list of EA Tool Requirements Specifications 1 1. 1 1. 1. 1 1. 1. 2 1. 1. 3 1. 1. 4 1. 1. 5 1. 1. 6 1. 1. 7 1. 1. 8 1. 1. 9 1. 1. 10 1. 1. 11 1. 2 1. 2. 1 1. 2. 2 1. 2. 3 1. 2. 4 1. 2. 5 1. 2. 6 1. 2. 7 Operational Technical Fit Platform Environment Can the client software be installed on MS Windows XP? Can the client software be installed on MS Windows Vista? Can the client software be installed on Linux? Can the server component be set up on MS Windows 2003 Server? Can the server component be set up on SunSolaris? Can the server component be set up on Linux Servers? Can the server component be set up on Unix Servers? Can the repository be set up u sing the latest versions of Oracle DB? Which Versions? Can the repository be set up for SQL Server? Which Versions? Can the web client be set up for MS Internet Explorer? Which Versions? Are there specific requirements or specifications to setup the repository? Which? Performance Availability Can additional licenses be added dynamically without the need to affect users PCs? Can the tool still operate for a period of time if the server holding the licenses fail, e. g. crashes? Does the tool handle extreme amounts of data e. g. millions of records? Does the tool operate at the same performance if there are 100 users accessing the same repository? Offers the tool facilities to monitor its performance? Is remote access feasible and practical (e. g. via GPRS/notebook)? Can the tool perform several tasks at the same time? (e. g. run a report in the background)? Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001- 2009 2 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 1. 2. 8 1. 3 1. 3. 1 1. 3. 2 1. 3. 3 1. 3. 4 1. 3. 5 1. 3. 6 1. 3. 7 1. 3. 8 1. 3. 9 1. 3. 10 1. 3. 11 1. 3. 12 1. 3. 13 1. 3. 14 1. 3. 15 1. 3. 16 1. 4 1. 4. 1 1. 4. 2 1. 4. 3 1. 4. 4 1. 4. 5 1. 4. 6 1. 4. 7 1. 4. 8 1. 5 1. 5. 1 1. 5. 2 1. 5. 3 1. 6 1. 6. 1 1. 6. 2 1. 6. 3 1. 6. 4 1. 7 1. 7. 1 1. 7. 2 1. 7. 3 1. 7. 4 2 2. 1 2. 1. 1 2. 1. 2 2. 1. 3 2. 1. 4 2. 1. 5 Does the tool have a simultaneous update of open views without user interaction? Security (User Admin) Is the user required to log on every time he uses the tool? Is it possible to authorize the user at the level of objects? Is it possible to authorize the user at the level of class properties? Does the tool support role based user management? Does the tool support check-in/check-out items of repository? Does the tool support read only access? Does the tool support management of user groups? Does the tool support more than 100 simultaneously logged on users? Assuming there are licenses, can any number of users access the repository at the same time? Are there at least four different user profiles which can have hierarchical relationships to each other? Does the tool record the full history of changes to objects? Does the tool run reports on utilization of its licenses? Does the tool support external Accountancy Audits? Does the tool stamp all changes done to objects with a time-user stamp? Is it possible to define own user profiles? Is it possible to (explicitly) lock models or parts of models? Software Distribution Is a central shared installation possible, which allows users to access the tool without local installation procedures? Does the tool support shared installation of upgrades? Are upgrades possible without a system (esp. server) shutdown? Does the tool support shared initial installation? (I. e. can the tool be site-installed and the installation shared by users)? Are bug fixes distributed in the form o f patches? Are patches freely available? Can patches be downloaded from the Internet? Do you have less than three releases a year with well before published release plans? Release Management Does the tool support rollback? Does the tool support replication/synchronization mechanisms? Is it possible to replicate parts of the repository to local repositories? Tool Architecture Does the tool have a client / server architecture? Does the tool provide a thin client? Does the tool provide a thick client? Does the tool provide standalone usage? Technical and Operational Requirements Does the tool have below or average requirements on operational memory? Please define. Does the tool have below or average requirements on CPU? Please define. Does the tool have below or average requirements on external memory (disks)? Please define. Does the tool use a standard RDBMS? Please define. Vendor Support Help Desk Support Can help desk support be offered in English or other languages? Can you offe r time to repair guarantee? Do you provide standard escalation procedures for problem resolution? Is a log of all known bugs, including date of first occurrence, status and date of closure, available online for at least the last 6 months? Can these resources be contacted by phone and e-mail? Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 13 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 2. 1. 6 2. 1. 7 2. 1. 8 2. 1. 9 2. 1. 10 2. 1. 11 2. 1. 12 2. 1. 13 2. 2 2. 2. 1 2. 2. 2 2. 2. 3 2. 2. 4 2. 2. 5 2. 2. 6 2. 2. 7 2. 2. 2. 3 2. 3. 1 2. 3. 2 2. 4 2. 4. 1 2. 4. 2 2. 4. 3 2. 4. 4 2. 4. 6 2. 5 2. 5. 1 2. 5. 2 2. 6 2. 6. 1 2. 6. 2 2. 6. 3 2. 6. 4 3 3. 1 3. 1. 1 3. 1. 2 3. 1. 3 3. 1. 4 3. 1. 5 3. 1. 6 3. 1. 7 3. 1. 8 3. 1. 9 3. 1. 10 3. 1. 11 Does the help desk have a list of all customizations/work carried out by consultants on the clients site? Can the tool be installed without training? Does the tool provide interactive help? Is the interactive help comprehensive and easy to navigate? Does the tool have an online tutorial? Does the tool have tutorial/help on features? Does the tool have online documentation? Do you run a global bulletin board for raising bug enquiries? Training Do you have dedicated in-house product trainers? Do you provide training specifically for Enterprise Modellers? Can the training be conducted in other languages then English? Which languages? Do you publish regular training schedules? Do you provide formal training of the product? Is courseware available for purchase? Do you provide web based training /e-learning? Do you offer on-site trainings all over the world? Professional Services (Migration) Do you provide consulting services? Do you offer tools or (assistance with) a one-off conversion of documents from Excel, Visio, Word or other format to your tool? Documentation Will you provide us with a full comprehensive set of docu mentation covering all aspects of the tool? Are changes made available on the Web? Are all documents made available in both hard and soft format? Is the documentation available other languages than English? Define Is there additional documentation available for purchase? Local Support Do you offer local support in Europe? Do you offer guaranteed reaction times? Newsgroups Is there a user group for your product? Do they meet regularly? Do they have a website? Do you run a global newsgroup for discussion? Functional Fit (Specific) Support Analysis Does the tool search enterprise architecture design patterns in order to suggest a possible solution? Does the tool support the process of enterprise architecture requirement analysis and the process of generating architecture design? Does the tool offer consistency checking and quality checks for designed architectures in accordance to architecture principles and rules? Does the tool support impact analysis at all levels? Does the tool s upport delta analysis at all levels? Are there syntax checks through the given data? Are there semantic checks through the given data? Can new consistency checks be defined at any time? Does the tool support bottleneck analysis? Does the tool offer a common meta-model? Does the tool offer mean to force mandatory inputs? Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 14 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 3. 1. 12 3. 2 3. 2. 1 3. 2. 2 3. 2. 3 3. 2. 4 3. 2. 5 3. 2. 6 3. 2. 7 3. 2. 8 3. 3 3. 3. 1 3. 3. 2 3. 3. 3 3. 4 3. . 1 3. 4. 2 3. 4. 3 3. 4. 4 3. 4. 5 3. 4. 6 3. 4. 7 3. 4. 8 3. 4. 9 3. 5 3. 5. 1 3. 5. 2 3. 5. 3 3. 5. 4 3. 5. 5 3. 5. 6 3. 5. 7 3. 5. 8 3. 5. 9 Does the tool support the structured access to stored objects and attributes (trees, hierarchy)? Support of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks Delivers the tool Support for Zachman Framework? Delivers the to ol Support for FEAF (Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework)? Delivers the tool Support for E2AF (Extended Enterprise Architecture Framework)? Delivers the tool Support for DoDAF (C4ISR)? Delivers the tool Support for TOGAF v9 EA Framework? Delivers the tool Support for a custom or proprietary enterprise architecture framework? Can the tool handle references to an external custom enterprise architectural framework? Does the tool aid user with navigation in a custom enterprise architecture framework? Support of Enterprise Architecture Program (Time) Does the tool have a timeline marking of objects (e. g. objects valid from.. to.. )? Does the tool handle different stages of existence of objects (e. g. under discussion, valid, in operation, discarded)? Can the tool produce time-related output? (e. g. o show the enterprise architectural landscape at a specific date (to any freely chosen date)? Simulation Does the tool support simulation of alternative enterprise architecture scena rios? Can the tool generate landscapes of (selected) objects of one or more classes? Can the tool generate a landscape of objects which existed on a certain date or over a certain period if time in the past? Is it possible to generate a to-be landscape of objects planned for certain dates? Does the tool simulate impact of changes in a scenario? Does the tool support hierarchy? Has the tool the ability to support discrete simulation? Has the tool the ability to perform Monte Carlo simulation? Have the tool facilities to graphical simulation of processes to demonstrate bottlenecks? Repository management Does the tool support Enterprise Architecture Diagrams? Does the tool have Domain Architecture Diagrams? Does the tool have Application Architecture Diagrams? Does the tool have Information Architecture Diagrams? Does the tool have IT Architecture Diagrams? Does the tool fully support Custom Type Diagrams (e. g. Management Dashboard View)? Does the tool support workflow? Does the to ol have process modeling functionality i. e. process decomposition and process charts? Does the tool support enterprise architecture design diagrams as standard or can be customized to support this, with the ability to reuse applications and system interfaces from the application architecture diagrams? Does the tool support logical models? Does the tool support physical models (system level)? Does the tool support data flow diagrams? Can the user reuse all objects/definitions (metadata items)? Can the user define and reuse applications within the tool? Can the user define and reuse system interfaces? Can the user define and reuse data flows? Can the user define and reuse functions? Can the user define and reuse technology? Can the user define and reuse requirements? Can the user define and reuse business processes? Can the user define and reuse goals? 15 May 2009 3. 5. 10 3. 5. 11 3. 5. 12 3. 5. 13 3. 5. 14 3. 5. 15 3. 5. 16 3. 5. 17 3. 5. 18 3. 5. 19 3. 5. 20 3. 5. 21 Enterpr ise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 3. 5. 22 3. 5. 23 3. 5. 24 3. 5. 25 3. 5. 26 3. 5. 27 3. 5. 28 3. 5. 29 3. 5. 30 3. 5. 31 3. 5. 32 3. 5. 33 3. 5. 34 3. 5. 35 3. 5. 36 3. 5. 7 3. 5. 38 3. 5. 39 3. 6 3. 6. 1 3. 6. 2 3. 6. 3 3. 6. 4 3. 6. 5 3. 6. 6 3. 6. 7 3. 6. 8 3. 6. 9 3. 6. 10 3. 6. 11 3. 6. 12 3. 6. 13 3. 6. 14 3. 7 3. 7. 1 3. 7. 2 3. 7. 3 3. 7. 4 3. 7. 5 3. 7. 6 3. 7. 7 3. 7. 8 3. 7. 9 3. 7. 10 3. 7. 11 3. 7. 12 3. 7. 13 3. 7. 14 Is the user able to view the architecture through a function view? Is the user able to view the architecture through an information view? Is the user able to view the architecture through an integration view? Is the user able to view the architecture through a distribution view? Can the user define and reuse location? Can the user define and reuse roles? Does the tool support organization models? Can the user have an is-a relationship between a class of objects and its objects within the tool? Can the user have a belong to relationship between some defined object class? Does the tool support extensibility of repository? Does the tool support different abstraction levels (level of detail)? Can the tool generate diagrams using objects, their properties and relationships out of the repository? Has the tool the ability to create / design network hardware systems diagrams / models? Has the tool the ability to create / design communication diagrams / models? Has the tool the ability to scan networks and build network systems topology? Has the tool the ability to create an enterprise meta data dictionary? Does the tool support the incorporation of service level agreements? Has the tool the ability to support Business IT strategy definitions? Validation of Models Does the tool support a goal model, showing business goals? Does the tool support hierarchy and linking of goals? Does the tool support linking of goals to other categories of objects? Does the tool support polymorphism? Does the tool support inheritance? Does the tool support encapsulation? Does the tool have automatic parsing of requirements? (e. g. by keywords Note: Requirement means anything to comply with , e. g. business rules, IT Strategy etc. ) Does the tool have a text and graphical interface to follow the links? Does the tool support versioning of requirements, history of requirement changes, log of modifications etc? Does the tool ensure compliance to defined meta model at all levels? Does the tool ensure that involved responsible users for certain objects (e. g. systems) must agree when changes to interfaces between objects will be done? (workflow) Has the tool the ability to do impact analysis? Has the tool the ability to trace inconsistencies over models? Has the tool the ability to trace incompleteness? Support of Standard modeling languages, methods and techniques Does the tool support UML? Delivers the tool Support for MDA (i. e.. , Model Driven Architecture, OMG)? Delivers the tool Support for BPML (i. e. , Business Process Modeling Language)? Delivers the tool Support for BPEL 2. 0 (i. e.. , Business Process Execution language)? Delivers the tool Support for BPMN (i. e. , Business Process Modeling Notation)? Delivers the tool Support for ADML (i. e. , Architecture Description Markup Language, Open Group)? Does the tool support the Yourdon methodology? Does the tool support the Archimate Modeling language? Does the tool support SSADM (i. e. , Structured Systems Analysis Design Methodology)? Does the tool support modeling processes with a swim-lane diagramming approach? Has the tool the ability to develop IDEF0 diagrams? Has the tool the ability to develop IDEF1 diagrams? Has the tool the ability to perform IDEF 1X data modeling? Has the tool the ability to develop IDEF 3 diagrams? 16 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © C opyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 3. 7. 15 3. 7. 16 3. 7. 17 3. 7. 18 3. 7. 19 3. 7. 20 3. 7. 21 3. 7. 22 3. 7. 23 3. 7. 24 3. 7. 25 3. 7. 26 3. 8 3. 8. 1 3. 8. 2 4 4. 1 4. 1. 1 4. 1. 2 4. 1. 3 4. 1. 4 4. 1. 5 4. 1. 6 4. 1. 7 4. 1. 8 4. 1. 9 4. 1. 10 4. 1. 11 4. 1. 12 4. 1. 13 4. 1. 14 4. 1. 15 4. 1. 16 4. 1. 17 4. 1. 18 4. 1. 19 4. 1. 20 4. 2 4. 2. 1 4. 2. 2 4. 2. 3 4. 2. 4 4. 2. 5 4. 2. 6 4. 2. 7 4. 2. 8 4. 2. 9 4. 2. 10 Does the tool support for IDL (IDEF Interchange Definition Language)? Does the tool support a Six Sigma approach? Does the tool support ISO 900x methodology? Has the tool the ability to develop ANSI standard flowcharts? Does the tool Support for ABC (i. e. , activity based costing)? Hast the tool the ability to create UML v 2. 0 diagrams (e. q. , use cases, state diagrams sequence diagrams, etc)? Has the tool the ability to create IE entity relationship (ER) diagrams? Does the tool support for cardinal notation to create up to fifth normal form ER diagrams? Has the tool the ability to associate multiple attributes per entity (e. q.. , ;25)? Has the tool the ability to generate physical data models (e. q.. , DDL)? Has the tool the ability to create DFDs (i. e. , data flow diagrams)? Does the tool support for Jackson use cases? Support for Enterprise Architecture Review Management Does the tool support identification of components where counter steering is required? Does the tool provide information objects to store, access review reports and results in a structured manner? Functional Fit (General) User Interface Can the user decide on what level to navigate through the tool? Does the tool navigate through a browser? Does the tool support drill down/drill up between levels of detail? Does the tool support undo/redo functionality? Can any number, without a limit, of levels of diagrams be attached to a top level diagram? Does the too l support navigation between the graphical tool and the database in both directions? Does the tool have a search engine for structured and unstructured information? Does the tool have a database of patterns? Does the tool have a database of customizable examples / solutions? Does the tool have a framework of orientation within the whole projects? Is there a common look and feel across all products? Do all elements of your product employ similar usability functions? Can the system use graphical and non-graphical user interfaces? Is the use of either interchangeable? Can drag drop be used in the graphical user interface? Does the tool support the definition of specific views for defined objects through all levels? Does the tool model connection between objects as own objects with attributes? Can attributes of connections be displayed automatically? Can the visualization of connections be changed manually/automatically? Has the tool the ability to mine for patterns within multiple models? Customization Can the user create new diagram types? Can the user create new definitions? Can the user create custom visualizations (symbols) for objects? Can the user create new matrices (relations)? Can the user create new properties for existing definitions? Is possible to create custom queries/filters? Is there no limit to the amount of diagrams, definitions, objects and matrices that can be created? Are the reports easy configurable (i. e. with little coding or very little with the help of examples and tutorials)? Can the user define custom views? Does the tool support aggregation of information in order to create one big picture (Overview)? Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 17 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 4. 2. 11 4. 2. 12 4. 4. 3. 1 4. 3. 2 4. 3. 3 4. 3. 4 4. 3. 5 4. 3. 6 4. 3. 7 4. 3. 8 4. 3. 9 4. 3. 10 4. 3. 11 4. 3. 12 4. 3. 13 4. 3. 14 4. 3. 15 4. 4 4. 4. 1 4. 4. 2 4. 4. 3 4. 4. 4 4. 4. 5 4. 4. 6 4. 4. 7 4. 4. 8 4. 4. 9 4. 4. 10 4. 4. 11 4. 4. 12 4. 4. 13 4. 4. 14 4. 4. 15 4. 5 4. 5. 1 4. 5. 2 4. 5. 3 4. 5. 4 4. 5. 5 4. 5. 6 4. 5. 7 4. 5. 8 4. 6 4. 6. 1 4. 6. 2 4. 6. 3 4. 6. 4 4. 7 4. 7. 1 Has the tool the ability to spell-check? Has the tool the ability to find and replace? Import/Integration Are there interfaces to other DB programs like: OracleX, MS SQL Server, MS Access, DB2, other? Does the tool import/export using XML? Does the tool integrate with BEA Workshop? Does the tool integrate with Oracle Designer? Does the tool integrate with Rational Rose? Has the tool the ability to support/export to a certain ERP solution? Has the tool the ability to support/export to certain CRM solution? Has the tool the ability to support/export to a certain SCM solution? Has the tool the ability to generate WFSL? Has the tool the ability to import models and diagrams from other tools (e. q. , Visio, etc)? Has t he tool the ability to import from CSV (i. e. , comma delimited ASCII)? Has the tool the ability to import from XML files)? Has the tool the ability to publish models in Microsoft Word Has the tool the ability to maintain model relationships in HTML via hyperlinks Has the tool the ability to export to Microsoft Project? Reporting Is it possible to generate, to save and to export user defined reports and graphics? Is it possible to generate HTML output, including diagrams? Is it possible to export to MS WinWord? Is it possible to export to MS Excel? Can the tool produce a summary in MS WinWord to give a summary of the architecture landscape? Can the tool produce a summary in MS WinWord or Excel to give a picture of the mappings and how it fits together? Can the MS WinWord templates/reports be changed through GUI ? Does the tool support drill down reporting? Does the tool support summary reporting? Does the tool support queries? Is it possible to export to MS Visio? Is it possib le to import from MS Visio? Is it possible to export to MS Powerpoint? Is it possible to print all generated reports, graphics to standard output formats (DIN A0-A4), PDF? Is it possible to publish defined information automatically based on predefined states, events or time? Version Management Is there a version mechanism within the tool? Can the tool provide several versions of one metadata object? Is it possible to compare models within a repository? Can the tool handle conflicts on import and merge commands? Does the tool allow multiple versions of an object? Does the tool support comparisons between versions of objects? Does the tool support migration of individual objects/components through development phases? Does the tool support resolution of migration conflicts during the migration of multiple releases? Documentation Management Does the tool produce documents in industry standard formats (ISO, IEEE †¦)? Does the tool support generating of presentations? Does the too l support WYSWIG preview of output documents and presentations? Does the tool support concurrent review, markup and comment of documents, designs, etc? Help and Tutorials Installation: Can the tool be installed without vendor‘s assistance? Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide v5. 0  © Copyrights, Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments, 2001-2009 18 May 2009 Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide EA Tool Selection 4. 7. 2 4. 7. 3 4. 7. 4 4 Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Enterprise Architecture Tool Selection Guide Editorial" essay for you Create order

Youth Gangs Push and Pull Factors - 1899 Words

Youth Gangs Push and Pull Factors Arjun Sharma SOC101Y Friday, November 23, 2012 Ms. Fulton Youth Gangs Push and Pull factors in America What influences youth to join and leave gangs in America? This essay strives to seek and inquire an answer or explanation to this question. I will try to approach the answer to this question by analyzing the biggest factors of it such as the influence of social institutions, psychological behaviour, media and many more to determine the push and pull factors of a gang. Understanding that the dynamics of gang membership can be separated into formation amp; joining which will allow theories amp; methods of gang-related research to be refined. My first scholarly source â€Å"Understanding Youth Street†¦show more content†¦Surveys of youth and/or young adults (hereafter, surveys of youth) also assess parameters of gang phenomena. Estimates of prevalence rates of gang membership ranging from 5% to 25% have been reported from major projects initiated by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Also by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (the National Evaluation of the Gang Resistance Education and Training; Bjerregaard amp; Smith, 1993). Gang and non-gang comparisons, primarily of at-risk minority youth drawn from institutionalized and non- institutionalized settings, consistently reveal an association between admitted gang membership and self-reported crime or delinquency. Although female youth are shown to be relatively underrepresented in gangs and gang activity, they self-report gang membership at a rate up to 4 ½ times higher (20% to 46%) than typically indicated in surveys of law enforcement (Esbensen amp; Huizinga, 1993). Qualitative descriptions suggest that, for many, gang membership represents 104 Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice / May 2005an opportunity to enhance social capital as a means to cope with a multitude of problems. Although on balance gang life appears to be neither very rewarding nor satisfying (Hagedorn, 1988), identification with the gang is solidified in response to conflict—often with other gangs—as members pursue their individual and collective interests. Many youthShow MoreRelatedResearch On Disengagement From Gangs779 Words   |  4 PagesDesistance Research on disengagement from gangs has not been widely looked at, yet most research conducted has been so from within the United States (Gormally, S. 2015). The common term utilized throughout research on this topic is ‘desistance’. According to Kazemian (2009), desistance generally defines the cessation or termination of offending or other delinquent behavior. Two types of desistance occur, both primary desistance and secondary desistance. Furthermore a suggestion in upcoming researchRead MoreA Research Study At Hand Aimed1737 Words   |  7 PagesThe study at hand aimed to investigate the aspects that lead individuals to join a gang, the reasons as to why they decided to part ways with it, and the consequences that resulted from their affiliation. Through the analysis of interviews and observations, several themes were noticeable such as the initiation to the gang, desistance, consequences, and services offered to help reintegrate into society. Former gang members expressed and constantly mentioned their childhood having a major part in theRead MoreGang Membership : Social And Psychological Factors That Influence Becoming A Gang Member Essay1766 Words   |  8 PagesGang membership accounts for the rising number of youth and street gangs since the 1950’s, since the development of gangs globally, especially in New Zealand there are significant factors that influences becoming a gang member. There is a range of social and psychological factors that underpin and gain insight into the dynamic gang structure of gangs and how this influences others to become involved in gangs. Research has noted there are push and pull factors that are associated with the theory ofRead MoreSocial And Psychological Factors Of Gang Membership Essay1859 Words   |  8 PagesGang membership has accounted for the increase in the number of youth and street gangs since the 1950’s. The development of gangs globally, especially in New Zealand, exhibits the f act that there are significant influences pushing people towards becoming a gang member. There is a range of social and psychological factors that underpin the dynamics of a gang’s structure in which they help outsiders gain insight into how gang involvement is evoked. Research has established that there are push and pullRead MoreThe Chicago Tribune By James Howell3111 Words   |  13 Pagesdown on gang recruitment by supporting legislation that specifically targets those who try to recruit students. The Chicago Tribune (2015) explains, â€Å"Kifowit s House Bill 247 would extend the areas where individuals can be charged with street gang recruitment beyond school grounds to include areas within 1,000 feet of school buses, school bus stops, and public parks†. The emphasis is on prevention and how important it is to stop recruitment of students who are vulnerable to joining gangs. InRead MoreThe Factors That Lead An Individual Towards Gang Involvement2571 Words   |  11 Pagessurface, the criminogenic factors that can lead an individual towards gang involvement are similar amongst Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal gang members. However, upon closer inspection, it is the experience of colonization that drastically sets these two groups apart. That is, the impact and the trauma caused by the colonization of the Aboriginal people of Canada is the predominant factor that exacerbates and intensifies criminogenic factors associated with Aboriginal gang participation (Totten, 2009Read MoreLife As A Social Worker1574 Words   |  7 Pagesthings we considered to be socially acceptable. My community is predominantly filled with Latino and African American culture. Though, both come from two different ethnic groups, beliefs and practices, they share a common socioeconomic factor. I remember observing the gang violence, prostitution, drug and alcohol abuse, and children w andering the streets. Most people coming from a higher income status would be uncomfortable and appalled by the events that take place in my community. I stress over gettingRead MoreThe practises, beliefs and values of Christianity and Islam have an impact on Australia society;1600 Words   |  7 Pagesof the leader, for example we have had five Christian Prime Ministers, John Howard being one of them. Howard quoted in a rant about Muslims adapting in Australia, â€Å"Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our Schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider anotherRead MoreEssay on An Ex-Mas Feast Summary1878 Words   |  8 Pagesthey refer to as Baby. Their mother, Mama, seems to be kind of a mess, which could be the result of sleep and alcohol, and their father, Baba, was a lowly pick pocket who could barely provide for his family. However low the parents are, they always push Jigana to go to school, but they do not give him any reasons as to why he should strive to achieve that goal. As the narrator of the story, Jigana states in the beginning that unlike most street families, their family had stayed together, but onlyRead More War Protest Songs Essays4092 Words   |  17 Pagespoliticians sending th em into harm’s way. Today’s soldiers are a voluntary military force, yet they too are questioning the purpose of the killing they are asked to commit. The songs of both eras portray expression of freedom of speech which allows the youth of the country to question the politicians who make the decision to go to war yet place the burden of executing the war on the backs of our young men and women. With just a few insightful lyrics, these songs underscore the reality of war. People die

Study the Role of Hacker-Free-Samples for Students-Myassignment

Question: Discuss about the role of the hacker in different in different aspect of life bringing into consideration the ethical aspect as well as the non-ethical aspect of the hackers. Answer: Introduction The main aspect of the case study is to study the role of the hacker in different in different aspect of life bringing into consideration the ethical aspect as well as the non-ethical aspect of the hackers. The role of the hacker can be justified on various fields ranging from personal need like spying on someone to breaking into a companys database in order to access their client list and other important informations (Ibrahim, Hamlyn-Harris Grundy, 2016). Utilitarianism Theory Putting emphasis on the case study it can be stated that the role of hacker is playing a vital role in every aspect of life is it for their benefit or for the benefit of other person. It was noted that people across the world ranging from Sweden to Australia were using anonymously request of the hacking service. Some of the job related to it very legal and the other were not clear for example an Australian wanted to hack his rivals customer database. The white hat hackers are categorized in the good hackers zone, they are the computer expert who are mainly specialized in testing and other mythological aspects which is done mainly to ensure that the companys information system are secured from any breaches (Maqbool, Pammi Dutt, 2016). The job description that the hacker used in the description did not match or could not be linked to the information that would directly or indirectly reveal their identity. As stated by (Hausken, 2017) the different sites was in fact leaking information that was linked to the buyer in the prospective of their name and address to the job description. This would reveal the identity and their main motive behind hiring a hacker. This would make a potentially embarrassing effect on anyone and it made them think twice before hiring a hacker online. The people wanted to hire a hacker for many roles in order for their own benefit ranging from gaining access to their own account, some wanted to change their grade and some surprisingly wanted to spy on their spouses (Maqbool, Pammi Dutt, 2016). Deontology Theory A wife stated that she thinks that her husband is cheating on her as a result of which she wanted to hire a hacker in order to hack into her husbands Watsapp account. As a respond of which one person notability a hacker offered between $300 and $500 for the job and listed a username and a NSW home address (Berger Jones, 2016). An enterprise user from the Western Australia sought a semi unethical hacker to hack into the database behind the tertiary institute service centre for $100 to $1000. It was not clear that the hacking the web site was ever carried out or not. Virtue Theory The hacker itself is not related to the cost of anyone and thus hackers should be considered to be ethical, it was simply in order to help someone beat a flawed system to advance in the field of education was the common aspect according to the common people (Hausken, 2017). Hackers can be categorized as bad and good hackers (Ibrahim, Hamlyn-Harris Grundy, 2016). The white hat hackers are categorized in the good hackers zone, they are the computer expert who are mainly specialized in testing and other mythological aspects which is done mainly to ensure that the companys information system are secured from any breaches. These It security personals depend highly on the evolution of the technology in order to match with the battle of hacking (Maqbool, Pammi Dutt, 2016). A black hat hacker is a bad boy who is typically termed as just a plain hacker. The term is used in some part with respect to the hacker who breaks into a personal network or computer or is involved in creating computer viruses. The hackers in this category often manage different paths of least resistance whether due to laziness or human error. They can be further being divided into two parts or categories as active hackers and passive attackers. An active hacker is someone who takes the i nformation and modifies it according to their own requirement on the other hand a passive attacker just reads or obtains the message and uses it for its own benefit. The difference between an active hacker and a passive hacker is that an active attacker can be detected quite easily and a passive attacker is very difficult to detect because they do not do any sort of modification on the message and thus remain unnoticed.] Contract Theory According to the Australian law a person who commits the crime of hacking faces imprisonment between two and ten years depending upon the offence committed. If someone hires a hacker in order to do something but the person does not do anything or play any role in the activity both are liable for the punishment (Abbasi, Bahramian Salami, 2016). The type of job which is offered on the hackers list wont be of surprise to the professional IT security contractors who eventually draw the line at customer testing with the permission as opposed to their customers rivals. The threat intelligence team always gets a handful of calls each year from different individuals who put their query as to whether their account is being hacked or someone else is in the verge of doing so. Their put their request of investigation and on the other hand some want to break into others account as they believe that they are being targeted for reasons that can be personal as well as business related aspects (Youn g et al., 2017). Conclusion In some cases the information which is given to the hacker is not at all safe for safe. The hacker can retain the information and make use of the information in order to achieve their personal benefit (Brakerski Rothblum, 2017). The role which is played by the hacker can be varies in many instances depending upon the task they are appointed and the role they have to play in each context. The data which is given to the hacker can be used in the near future in order to detect the person (Trabelsi McCoey, 2016). It has been already been stated that if a person hires a hacker for some personal reason or to achieve a goal and the person does not play any role in it, but by the law the person is also liable for punishment and would be convicted of the crime. There are many hackers who play the role of a so called term ethical hacker. They are usually appointed by an organization in order to prevent their data and their system from the hand of the hacker. They play a vital role in every a spect of the organization (Abbasi, Bahramian Salami, 2016). References Abbasi, E., Bahramian, R., Salami, S. (2016). Ranking multidisciplinary industrial investment firms' performance Hierarchical method (AHP)(Case Study: Shasta companies, Ghadir, Omid, Social Security and National Development). Management, 3(8), 1-14. Abu-Shaqra, B., Luppicini, R. (2016). Technoethical Inquiry into Ethical Hacking at a Canadian University. International Journal of Technoethics (IJT), 7(1), 62-76. Berger, H., Jones, A. (2016, July). Cyber Security Ethical Hacking For SMEs. In Proceedings of the The 11th International Knowledge Management in Organizations Conference on The changing face of Knowledge Management Impacting Society (p. 12). ACM. Brakerski, Z., Rothblum, G. N. (2017). Adaptive security is a strong security notion that captures additional security threats that are not addressed by static corruptions. For instance, it captures real-world scenarios where hackers actively break into computers, possibly while they are executing secure protocols. Studying this setting is interesting from both theoretical and practical points of view. A primary building block in designing... Journal of Cryptology, 30(1), 289-320. Hausken, K. (2017). Security Investment, Hacking, and Information Sharing between Firms and between Hackers. Games, 8(2), 23. Ibrahim, A. S., Hamlyn-Harris, J., Grundy, J. (2016). Emerging security challenges of cloud virtual infrastructure. arXiv preprint arXiv:1612.09059. Manes, E. (2016). U.S. Patent Application No. 15/268,065. Maqbool, Z., Pammi, V. C., Dutt, V. (2016). Influence of Motivational Factors on Hackers and Analysts Decisions in Dynamic Security Games. In Advances in Human Factors in Cybersecurity (pp. 239-251). Springer International Publishing. Trabelsi, Z., McCoey, M. (2016). Ethical hacking in information security curricula. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education (IJICTE), 12(1), 1-10. Young, J., Campbell, K., Fanti, A., Johnson, S., Sells, Z., Sutter, A. (2017). The Development of an Applied Ethical Hacking and Security Assessment Course