Assignment - EA Framework
Word limit:
2000 - 3000 words(+/- 10%)
The following unit learning outcomes are assessed:
·
Appraise the constituents of enterprise architecture.
-
You need to first understand the constituents of EA framework before your evaluation.
·
Evaluate global frameworks used for enterprise architecture and their application in different sectors including private and government.
-
The assignment allows you to evaluate how a certain EA framework is applied in a specific context.
·
Assess how governance frameworks support the strategic alignment of enterprise architecture.
-
The assignment allows you to evaluate how a certain EA framework helps promote the alignment between strategy and technology (or not).
·
Create enterprise architecture using standard notations to support strategy and business driven views of the enterprise.
-
The assignment requires to model the framework with ArchiMate
Instructions
·
Assignment
(Instruction Attached)
·
Framework document (Framework Attached)
Hints and Tips (Very important)
·
APA 7threferencing standards will apply to all parts of this assessment.
Students are instructed to include the page number in both in-text and end-of-text referencing.Failure to do this may result in an academic integrity enquiry being made on your latest assignment submission(s). e.g: (Crothers & Santella, p. 6, 2018)
Assignment 1 1 MAN6936 ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURES Assignment Weighting: 60% Instructions During the class we have discussed that there are different types of EA frameworks, with various assumptions, structures, etc. In this assignment you will compare the framework in one case (i.e., organization) with the EA3 cube framework from the textbook, and evaluate how they are similar to or different from each other. The link of the framework is provided below: https://www.forgov.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/322607/queensland- government-enterprise-architecture-framework-2-0-v-1-0-0.pdf Completing this assignment will help you achieve Course Learning Outcome (CLO) 2 Apply critical thinking and technical skills to solve authentic business problems [AQF S2, S3]: 2.1. Conceptualise problems or situations (critically investigate, analyse, synthesize and evaluate). 2.2. Apply technical skills to authentic situations. 2.3. Solve complex problems. In addition to the above following unit learning outcomes are assessed: • Appraise the constituents of enterprise architecture. o You need to first understand the constituents of EA framework before your evaluation. • Evaluate global frameworks used for enterprise architecture and their application in different sectors including private and government. o The assignment allows you to evaluate how a certain EA framework is applied in a specific context. • Assess how governance frameworks support the strategic alignment of enterprise architecture. o The assignment allows you to evaluate how a certain EA framework helps promote the alignment between strategy and technology (or not). • Create enterprise architecture using standard notations to support strategy and business driven views of the enterprise. o The assignment requires to model the framework with ArchiMate 2 Structure of your report Your report could follow the structure below (though you do not have to): Part I: Introduction – provide the background and purpose(s) of this report. The background need to let readers understand the importance of EA. The purpose needs to be clearly stated to help readers understand what this report is about. Case Description – briefly introduce the organization which implemented the framework. This part needs to give readers reasonable information of the organization, such as which industry it is from, whether it is a large or a small-to- medium organization, products/services provided, etc. Architecture in the case – Discuss the EA framework in the case. In this part you need to discuss different levels (or sections) of the framework, as well as EA components in different levels (or sections). Comparison – Discuss how the EA framework in the case is different from the EA3 cube framework in the textbook (table/figure can be used). In this part you need to compare the levels (or sections) of the case framework with the EA3 cube framework, and describe how these levels (or sections) are similar to or different from each other. Conclusion – State the benefits of the EA framework implemented in the case; Discuss if the EA framework in the case is more appropriate in the context of the case than the EA3 cube framework (if so, why; if not, why not). It is possible that the EA framework in the case is quite similar to the EA3 cube framework. You could argue that it is just an adapted version of the EA3 cube framework. It is preferred that you use the literature to support your argument. Improvement based on the feedback from Studiosity: Studiosity (Canvas > Student Support > Connect to Studiosity is a free service to ECU students. About one week before the deadline, please submit Part A to Studiosity and get feedback regarding how to improve assignment. In this part, you need to provide a screenshot of your Studiosity submission, list feedback received and changes you made. Failure to do so will let you fail this section (please refer to the marking rubric). Part II: You need to use ArchiMate to model a certain service (https://www.wa.gov.au/services). You can pick one which you are familiar with, and model the business layer based upon the information from the site as long as your personal experiences. Then you can make your own assumptions to model the application and the technology layer. Your modeling do not need to cover 100% details (which may not available online), but need to include major services based upon the service you selected. You do not need to provide detailed explanation of the service. You may state your assumptions, and provide explanations for certain business functions/processes in the modeling. https://www.wa.gov.au/services imrin You can pick : Fines Enforcement Registry 3 A very useful guide as to how to plan and write your report can be found at https://www.monash.edu/student-academic-success/excel-at-writing/annotated- assessment-samples/information-technology/it-report To better understand how to write with references and sources of information you should go to http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/ Referencing style: the preferred style for this report is APA. Length: Approximately 2000-3000 words (+/- 10%) not including references or appendices. Marking Guide: The following rubric will be used: Part I: 40% HD D C P N 8-10 7-7.9 6-6.9 5-5.9 0-4.9 Introduction and case description (25%) The introduction provides a strong motivation (with strong support from both academic and practical sources), and clearly state the purpose of this report. Report clearly describes the background of the case. The introduction provides good motivation (with some support), and clearly state the purpose of this report. Report clearly describes the background of the case. The introduction provides some background, and state the purpose of this report. Report describes some background of the case. The introduction state the purpose of this report. Report describes some background of the case. The introduction does not state the purpose of this report. Report provides little background of the case. 8-10 7-7.9 6-6.9 5-5.9 0-4.9 Architecture in the case and comparison (25%) (CLO 2.1, 2.3) Report clearly describes the framework in the case and comprehensive compare it with EA3 (comprehensive and completed understandings of EA is demonstrated). Report clearly describes the framework in the case and highlight its main differences with EA3 (broad and strong understandings of EA is demonstrated). Report clearly describes the framework in the case and discuss some differences with EA3 (reasonably and strong understandings of EA is demonstrated). Report provides some descriptions regarding the framework in the case and its main differences with EA3 (moderated understandings of EA is demonstrated). Report provides insufficient descriptions regarding the framework in the case and its main differences with EA3 (little understanding of EA is shown). 8-10 7-7.9 6-6.9 5-5.9 0-4.9 Conclusion (25%) (CLO 2.1, 2.3) Report critically and deeply evaluates the framework in the case regarding its appropriateness, with support from the literature. Adequately discusses changes made based upon the feedback from Studiosity. Report evaluates the framework in the case regarding its appropriateness, with support from the literature. Reasonably discusses changes made based upon the feedback from Studiosity. Report evaluates the framework in the case regarding its appropriateness. Discusses some changes made based upon the feedback from Studiosity. Report states the appropriateness of the framework in the case. Discusses only few changes made based upon the feedback from Studiosity. Report provides little discussions regarding the appropriateness of the framework in the case. Did not show evidence of submitting Part A to Studiosity, or did not discuss any changes made based upon the feedback. 2-2.5 1.75-1.95 1.5-1.70 1.25-1.45 0-1.2 Flow (6.25%) The organisation logical and the content cohesive. The organisation is logical, and there is cohesion throughout the report. The organisation is logical, however some areas need further development. There is some repetition between sections. Organisation is generally clear, but lacks cohesion which makes the ideas difficult to follow. Some unnecessary duplication of ideas or Organisation seems disorganised, and there is almost no cohesion between different sections. Repetition of ideas may also be frequent. https://www.monash.edu/student-academic-success/excel-at-writing/annotated-assessment-samples/information-technology/it-report https://www.monash.edu/student-academic-success/excel-at-writing/annotated-assessment-samples/information-technology/it-report http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/ 4 information may be present. 2-2.5 1.75-1.95 1.5-1.70 1.25-1.45 0-1.2 Word choice, punctuation, grammar and spelling (6.25%) Writing is error free There is only the occasional error in word choice, grammar, spelling and punctuation. There may be some errors in word choice, grammar, spelling and punctuation, but these mostly do not interfere with meaning. The number of errors in word choice, grammar, spelling and punctuation make it difficult at times to understand the ideas, and/or effect cohesion of the text. Report has serious and persistent errors in word choice, grammar, spelling and punctuation which significantly interferes with meaning. 2-2.5 1.75-1.95 1.5-1.70 1.25-1.45 0-1.2 Presentation (6.25%) Professional physical layout and attention to detail. Well designed physical layout and attention to detail. Only the occasional formatting error. Clear layout with work neatly presented. Maybe occasional formatting errors. Acceptable physical layout, but not consistently applied to each part of the report. Some errors. Physical layout detracts from the content of the report. May be inconsistent design, or inappropriate design. Significant number of formatting errors. 2-2.5 1.75-1.95 1.5-1.70 1.25-1.45 0-1.2 Reference (6.25%) Cited appropriate in the body of the report No mistake in the reference list. Most in-text citations are correct. A few mistakes in the reference list. Most in-text citations are correct. Some problems with the reference list. Some in-text citations are not correct. Some problems with the reference list. Most in-text citations are not correct. Lots of mistakes in the reference list. Part II 20% HD D C P N 16-20 14-15.9 12-13.9 10-11.9 0-9.9 ArchiMate modelling (CLO 2.2) The modelling is fully consistent with the framework. The modelling is mostly consistent with the framework. The modelling is reasonably consistent with the framework (have some minor inconsistencies). The modelling is similar to the framework, but have major inconsistencies. The modelling is quite different from the framework Submission instructions: You should submit your assignment using Canvas. Please note that you need to submit Part I and Part II separately through a different portal. Late submissions will be penalised at the rate of 5 marks per day late or part thereof unless prior approval for an extension has been gained. Where the assignment is more than 7 calendar days late, a mark of zero shall be awarded. You should submit your assignment as a one word-processed document. So your work doesn't get mixed up with others’, use a filename which follows