1001:
977:
1276:
1074:
1058:
1240:
1184:
193:
962:
1196:
554:
1046:
1157:
1304:
1264:
1086:
823:
1169:
1233:(VA) to develop and maintain its One-VA Enterprise Architecture in 2001. This methodology required defining all aspects of the VA enterprise from a business process, data, technical, location, personnel, and requirements perspective. The next step in implementing the methodology has been to define all functions related to each business process and identify associated data elements. Once identified, duplication of function and inconsistency in data definition can be identified and resolved, .
275:
392:
1252:
814:
supporting that answer are the detailed descriptions within the cell. Decomposition (i.e., drill down to greater levels of detail) takes place within each cell. If a cell is not made explicit (defined), it is implicit (undefined). If it is implicit, the risk of making assumptions about these cells exists. If the assumptions are valid, then time and money are saved. If, however, the assumptions are invalid, it is likely to increase costs and exceed the schedule for implementation.
66:
989:
25:
594:(Technology Physics) – The contractor must redraw the architect's plans to represent the builder's perspective, with sufficient detail to understand the constraints of tools, technology, and materials. The builder's plans correspond to the technology models, which must adapt the information systems model to the details of the programming languages, input/output (I/O) devices, or other required supporting technology.
123:
600:(Tool Components) – Subcontractors work from shop plans that specify the details of parts or subsections. These correspond to the detailed specifications that are given to programmers who code individual modules without being concerned with the overall context or structure of the system. Alternatively, they could represent the detailed requirements for various
534:
anything; especially complex things like manufactured goods (e.g., appliances), constructed structures (e.g., buildings), and enterprises (i.e., the organization and all of its goals, people, and technologies). The framework provides six different transformations of an abstract idea (not increasing in detail, but transforming) from six different perspectives.
582:(Business Concepts) – Next are the architect's drawings that depict the final building from the perspective of the owner, who will have to live with it in the daily routines of business. They correspond to the enterprise (business) models, which constitute the designs of the business and show the business entities and processes and how they relate.
588:(System Logic) – The architect's plans are the translation of the drawings into detail requirements representations from the designer's perspective. They correspond to the system model designed by a systems analyst who must determine the data elements, logical process flows, and functions that represent business entities and processes.
576:, which depicts in gross terms the size, shape, partial relationships, and basic purpose of the final structure. It corresponds to an executive summary for a planner or investor who wants an overview or estimate of the scope of the system, what it would cost, and how it would relate to the general environment in which it will operate.
433:
and Why columns were brought into public view, the notion of the four levels of metaframeworks and a depiction of integration associations across the perspectives were all outlined in the paper. Keri
Anderson Healey assisted by creating a model of the models (the framework metamodel) which was also included in the article.
939:. The Zachman Framework can be applied both in commercial companies and in government agencies. Within a government organization the framework can be applied to an entire agency at an abstract level, or it can be applied to various departments, offices, programs, subunits and even to basic operational entities.
467:
In the 1997 paper "Concepts of the
Framework for Enterprise Architecture" Zachman said that the framework should be referred to as a "Framework for Enterprise Architecture", and should have from the beginning. In the early 1980s however, according to Zachman, there was "little interest in the idea of
345:
of the enterprise, and the actors involved in the development of enterprise systems. While there is no order of priority for the columns of the
Framework, the top-down order of the rows is significant to the alignment of business concepts and the actual physical enterprise. The level of detail in the
623:
In summary, each perspective focuses attention on the same fundamental questions, then answers those questions from that viewpoint, creating different descriptive representations (i.e., models), which translate from higher to lower perspectives. The basic model for the focus (or product abstraction)
415:
for organizing architecture models. It provides a synoptic view of the models needed for enterprise architecture. Information
Systems Architecture does not define in detail what the models should contain, it does not enforce the modeling language used for each model, and it does not propose a method
1326:
However, this tool permitted defining entities and relationships and for defining properties upon both entities and relationships, which made it sufficient for building an EA repository, considering the technology available in early 2003. The personal motivation in selecting this tool was that none
898:
John
Zachman clearly states in his documentation, presentations, and seminars that, as framework, there is flexibility in what depth and breadth of detail is required for each cell of the matrix based upon the importance to a given organization. An automaker whose business goals may necessitate an
647:
In
Zachman's opinion, the single factor that makes his framework unique is that each element on either axis of the matrix is explicitly distinguishable from all the other elements on that axis. The representations in each cell of the matrix are not merely successive levels of increasing detail, but
533:
The basic idea behind the
Zachman Framework is that the same complex thing or item can be described for different purposes in different ways using different types of descriptions (e.g., textual, graphical). The Zachman Framework provides the thirty-six necessary categories for completely describing
813:
Since the product development (i.e., architectural artifact) in each cell or the problem solution embodied by the cell is the answer to a question from a perspective, typically, the models or descriptions are higher-level depictions or the surface answers of the cell. The refined models or designs
432:
John
Zachman's co-author John Sowa proposed the additions of the Scope perspective of the ‘planner’ (bounding lists common to the enterprise and its environment) and the Detailed Representation perspective of the ‘sub-contractor’ (being the out-of-context vendor solution components). The Who, When
881:
such as enterprises. It is also recursive in that it can be used to analyze the architectural composition of itself. Although the framework will carry the relation from one column to the other, it is still a fundamentally structural representation of the enterprise and not a flow representation.
545:
Each row represents a total view of the solution from a particular perspective. An upper row or perspective does not necessarily have a more comprehensive understanding of the whole than a lower perspective. Each row represents a distinct, unique perspective; however, the deliverables from each
333:
and with the columns the aspects of the architecture. The framework does not define a methodology for an architecture. Rather, the matrix is a template that must be filled in by the goals/rules, processes, material, roles, locations, and events specifically required by the organization. Further
1345:
The diagram emphasizes the importance of the often-neglected
Zachman Row-Six (the Integrated, Operational Enterprise View). Representations in Zuech's interpretation of Zachman row-six consist, largely, of measurable service improvements and cost savings/avoidance that result from the business
894:
that can be addressed by enterprise architecture. Some feel that following this model completely can lead to too much emphasis on documentation, as artifacts would be needed for every one of the thirty cells in the framework. Zachman, however, indicates that only the facts needed to solve the
399:
In the 1987 article "A Framework for
Information Systems Architecture" Zachman noted that the term "architecture" was used loosely by information systems professionals, and meant different things to planners, designers, programmers, communication specialists, and others. In searching for an
549:
Each perspective must take into account the requirements of the other perspectives and the restraint those perspectives impose. The constraints of each perspective are additive. For example, the constraints of higher rows affect the rows below. The constraints of lower rows can, but do not
624:
remains constant. The basic model of each column is uniquely defined, yet related across and down the matrix. In addition, the six categories of enterprise architecture components, and the underlying interrogatives that they answer, form the columns of the Zachman Framework and these are:
231:
for organizing architectural artifacts (in other words, design documents, specifications, and models) is used to take into account both who the artifact targets (for example, business owner and builder) and what particular issue (for example, data and functionality) is being addressed.
656:
The Zachman Framework typically is depicted as a bounded 6 x 6 "matrix" with the Communication Interrogatives as Columns and the Reification Transformations as Rows. The framework classifications are repressed by the Cells, that is, the intersection between the Interrogatives and the
384:
220:. The second is derived from the philosophical concept of reification, the transformation of an abstract idea into an instantiation. The Zachman Framework reification transformations are: identification, definition, representation, specification, configuration and instantiation.
374:
and managing data into the realms of strategic business planning and management science in general. It may be employed in the (in that time considered more esoteric) areas of enterprise architecture, data-driven systems design, data classification criteria, and more.
550:
necessarily affect the higher rows. Understanding the requirements and constraints necessitates communication of knowledge and understanding from perspective to perspective. The Framework points the vertical direction for that communication between perspectives.
1394:
A detailed scrutiny demonstrates that the Zachman Framework is actually based only on purely speculative arguments, promoted with fictional promises, has no practical use cases and, from the historical perspective, didn't introduce any innovative ideas missing
1030:
Zachman Framework is also used as a framework to describe standards, for example standards for healthcare and healthcare information system. Each cell of the framework contains such a series of standards for healthcare and healthcare information system.
321:
Beside the frameworks developed by John Zachman, numerous extensions and/or applications have been developed, which are also sometimes called Zachman Frameworks, however they generally tend to be graphical overlays of the actual framework itself.
648:
actually are different representations—different in context, meaning, motivation, and use. Because each of the elements on either axis is explicitly different from the others, it is possible to define precisely what belongs in each cell.
1358:. Without row-six the Framework only identifies sunk-cost, but the row-six ROI permits it to measure benefits and to be used in a continuous improvement process, capturing best practices and applying them back through row-two.
1327:
of the commercial repository tools then available provided a true Zachman Framework representation, and were highly proprietary, making it difficult to incorporate components from other vendors or from open source.
861: : The combination of 2,3 & 4 must produce unique cells where each cell represents a particular case. Example: A2 represents business outputs as they represent what are to be eventually constructed.
1381:
In 2004 John Zachman admitted that the framework is theoretical and has never been fully implemented: "If you ask who is successfully implementing the whole framework, the answer is nobody that we know of
1370:
The framework is purely speculative, non-empirical and based only on the conceptual argument that the "equivalency would strengthen the argument that an analogous set of architectural representations is
251:
The title "Zachman Framework" refers to The Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture with version 3.0 being the most current. The Zachman Framework has evolved in its thirty-year history to include:
282:
In other sources the Zachman Framework is introduced as a framework, originated by and named after John Zachman, represented in numerous ways, see image. This framework is explained as, for example:
404:, and a variety of complex engineering projects in industry. He saw a similar approach and concluded that architectures exist on many levels and involves at least three perspectives: raw material or
1000:
976:
350:, however it can apply equally to physical material (ball valves, piping, transformers, fuse boxes for example) and the associated physical processes, roles, locations etc. related to those items.
216:
and defining an enterprise. The ontology is a two dimensional classification schema that reflects the intersection between two historical classifications. The first are primitive interrogatives:
458:
and has one of the most successful methods for converging the business needs with information technology engineering implementation, and determining a logical build sequence of the pieces.
849: : The basic model of each column, the relationship objects and the structure of it is unique. Each relationship object is interdependent but the representation objective is unique.
1296:
This VA Zachman Framework Portal is still in use as a reference model for example in the determination of EA information collected from various business and project source documents.
537:
It allows different people to look at the same thing from different perspectives. This creates a holistic view of the environment, an important capability illustrated in the figure.
1744:
Emerging Information Technologies for Competitive Advantage and Economic Development: Proceedings of 1992 Information Resources Management Association International Conference
1214:(FEAF) is based on the Zachman Framework but only addresses the first three columns of Zachman, using slightly different names, and focuses in the top of the three rows. (see
907:
columns. By contrast, a travel agent company, whose business is more concerned with people and event-timing, could find it beneficial to focus their documentation efforts on
952:
498:(vol. 34, no.1, January 1995, pp.22-38) "A Framework for Real-Time Systems Architecture," an extension of the original Zachman Framework that applies to real-time systems.
1315:
it used, to describe the One-VA Enterprise Architecture and to build an EA Repository without the use of Commercial EA Repository Software. It was developed using an
491:
Matthew & McGee (1990) extended the three initial perspectives "what", "how" and "where", to event (the "when"), reason (the "why") and organization (the "who").
227:
in that it does not imply any specific method or process for collecting, managing, or using the information that it describes; rather, it is an ontology whereby a
1073:
412:
2099:
1300:
Eventually, an enterprise architecture repository was created at the macro level by the Zachman framework and at a cell level by the meta-model outlined below.
1286:
The Department of Veterans Affairs at the beginning of the 21st century planned to implement an enterprise architecture fully based on the Zachman Framework.
1457:
This diagram is the exclusive work of Albin Martin Zuech of Annapolis Maryland, who placed it in the public domain in 2001. Al Zuech maintains the original
1275:
1378:
Practical feedback shows that the general idea of creating comprehensive descriptions of enterprises as suggested by the Zachman Framework is unrealistic
855: : Each row describes the view of a particular business group and is unique to it. All rows are usually present in most hierarchical organizations.
1239:
428:
and John Zachman present the framework and its recent extensions and show how it can be formalized in the notation of conceptual graphs. Also in 1992:
1932:
2250:
546:
perspective must provide sufficient detail to define the solution at the level of perspective and must translate to the next lower row explicitly.
141:
867: : For the same reason as for not adding rows and columns, changing the names may change the fundamental logical structure of the Framework.
472:
and the use of formalisms and models was generally limited to some aspects of application development within the Information Systems community".
1391:
Jason Bloomberg argues that "enterprise isn't an ordinary system like a machine or a building, and can't be architected or engineered as such"
400:
objective, independent basis upon which to develop a framework for information systems architecture, Zachman looked at the field of classical
2238:
1507:
329:
involved in enterprise architecture. These perspectives are represented in a two-dimensional matrix that defines along the rows the type of
1462:
1230:
1201:
2227:
Method Engineering in Practice: A Case of Applying the Zachman Framework in the Context of Small Enterprise Architecture Oriented Projects
1461:
diagram in numerous stages of its development between 2000 and present. Al Zuech was the Director, Enterprise Architecture Service at the
2317:
1045:
2170:, before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Committee on Veterans' Affairs U.S. House of Representatives. March 13, 2002.
961:
2262:
2127:
1388:
EA practitioner Stanley Gaver argues that "the analogy to classical architecture first made by John Zachman is faulty and incomplete"
1211:
1039:
Another application of the Zachman Framework is as reference model for other enterprise architectures, see for example these four:
519:
Vladan Jovanovic et al. (2006) presents a Zachman Cube, an extended of the Zachman Framework into a multidimensional Zachman's Cube.
1057:
1156:
1330:
This diagram emphasizes several important interpretations of the Zachman Framework and its adaptation to information technology
1522:
1428:
865:
Rule 6 The composite or integration of all cell models in one row constitutes a complete model from the perspective of that row
877:
The framework is generic in that it can be used to classify the descriptive representations of any physical object as well as
1770:
1263:
1122:
2213:
2123:
2082:
1085:
1139:
932:
38:
1183:
2056:
1751:
1592:
1418:
1320:
1135:
509:
301:
177:
159:
104:
52:
1742:
Jackson, Durward P. (1992). Khosrowpour, Mehdi (ed.). "Process-Based Planning in Information Resource Management".
1423:
1195:
2168:
Statement of Dr. John A. Gauss, Assistant Secretary for Information and Technology, Department of Veterans Affairs
1251:
334:
modeling by mapping between columns in the framework identifies gaps in the documented state of the organization.
2143:
Mapping the models onto the Zachman framework for analysing products information traceability : A case Study
2119:
82:
1773:. Presented at the 12th IEEE International EDOC Conference (EDOC 2008), München, Germany, September 15–19, 2008.
2322:
1375:
to be produced during the process of building any complex engineering product, including an information system"
1339:
205:
75:
2295:
370:
of organizations. In 1982 Zachman had already concluded that these analyses could reach far beyond automating
2298:: overview of the evolution of the Zachman Framework by John P. Zachman at Zachman International, April 2009.
2142:
2035:
Adapted from: Sowa, J.F. & J.A. Zachman, 1992, and Inmon, W.H, J.A. Zachman, & J.G. Geiger, 1997.
270:
One of the later versions of the Zachman Framework, offered by Zachman International as industry standard.
1290:
The Zachman Framework was used as a reference model to initiate enterprise architecture planning in 2001.
278:
Collage of Zachman Frameworks as presented in several books on Enterprise Architecture from 1997 to 2005.
1118:
Mapping the IEC 62264 models onto the Zachman framework for analysing products information traceability.
1016:
346:
Framework is a function of each cell (and not the rows). When done by IT the lower level of focus is on
1910:
2275:"Fake and Real Tools for Enterprise Architecture: The Zachman Framework and Business Capability Model"
1559:
2301:
1715:
1112:
899:
inventory and process-driven focus, could find it beneficial to focus their documentation efforts on
2274:
1168:
1316:
1105:
605:
601:
424:
In the 1992 article "Extending and Formalizing the Framework for Information Systems Architecture"
367:
363:
192:
1399:
This criticism suggests that the Zachman Framework can hardly reflect actual best practice in EA.
1385:
There are no detailed examples demonstrating the successful practical application of the framework
1134:
Less obvious are the ways the original Zachman framework has stimulated the development of other
931:
Since the 1990s the Zachman Framework has been widely used as a means of providing structure for
890:
One of the strengths of the Zachman Framework is that it explicitly shows a comprehensive set of
330:
326:
209:
1311:
This diagram has been incorporated within the VA-EA to provide a symbolic representation of the
2180:
1828:
1494:
455:
347:
86:
44:
553:
1981:
1331:
1215:
608:, or components of modular systems software being procured and implemented rather than built.
502:
1877:
1771:"Augmenting the Zachman Enterprise Architecture Framework with a Systemic Conceptualization"
1694:
1622:
The Business Analyst as Strategist: Translating Business Strategies Into Valuable Solutions
1355:
1351:
311:
137:
1852:
Concepts of the Framework for Enterprise Architecture: Background, Description and Utility
1366:
While the Zachman Framework is widely discussed, its practical value has been questioned:
317:
a two-dimensional schema, used to organize the detailed representations of the enterprise.
8:
1303:
936:
469:
2167:
2036:
1585:
Data Stores, Data Warehousing, and the Zachman Framework: Managing Enterprise Knowledge
988:
287:
1791:
2052:
1747:
1588:
1408:
878:
822:
660:
The cell descriptions are taken directly from version 3.0 of the Zachman Framework.
451:
1346:
process and technology innovations that were developed across rows two through five.
337:
The framework is a logical structure for classifying and organizing the descriptive
2115:
1946:
1893:
1806:
1576:
1539:
923:
column's importance as it provides the business drivers for all the other columns.
228:
1850:
561:
The current version (3) of the Zachman Framework categorizes the rows as follows:
2289:
1695:"Business Systems Planning and Business Information Control Study: A comparisment
1458:
338:
81:
It may require cleanup to comply with Knowledge's content policies, particularly
1125:
Architecture Development Method (e.g. the methodology) to the Zachman Framework.
1675:
1319:
within the Caliber-RM Software Product. Caliber-RM is intended to be used as a
371:
1996:
called this image "A simple example of The Zachman Framework" in the article
1792:"Extending and Formalizing the Framework for Information Systems Architecture"
2311:
2229:. In: Information, Knowledge, Systems Management, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 189-209.
1968:
1766:
391:
274:
1846:
1787:
1783:
1711:
1580:
1312:
573:
569:
425:
401:
359:
236:
1997:
873: : The logic is relational between two instances of the same entity.
487:
Since the 1990s several extended frameworks have been proposed, such as:
378:
260:, by John Zachman published in a 1987 article in the IBM Systems journal.
224:
1810:
837: : The columns are interchangeable but cannot be reduced or created
1993:
1438:
1413:
1338:
Progressing through the rows from top to bottom, one can trace-out the
1115:(MDA) models used in software development map to the Zachman Framework.
891:
557:
The Veterans Affairs Zachman Framework with an explanation of its rows.
342:
213:
2049:
Migrating to Object Technology: the semantic object modelling approach
440:
Enterprise Convergence in Our Lifetime, from The Enterprise Newsletter
1293:
Somewhere in between the VA Zachman Framework Portal was constructed.
1006:
TEAF Work Products for EA Direction, Description, and Accomplishment.
982:
Framework for EA Direction, Description, and Accomplishment Overview.
513:
2100:"Using the Zachman Framework to Assess the Rational Unified Process"
1342:(SDLC) which is a de facto standard across the Information Industry;
1129:
267:, an update of the 1987 original in the 1990s extended and renamed .
1934:
Enterprise Architecture: Strategy, Governance, & Implementation
1229:
The Zachman Framework methodology has for example been used by the
1898:
How to Survive in the Jungle of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks
1512:, Roger Sessions, Microsoft Developer Network Architecture Center,
1509:
A Comparison of the Top Four Enterprise Architecture Methodologies
947:
Zachman Framework is applied in customized frameworks such as the
1635:
Information Security Management Handbook, Sixth Edition, Volume 2
1433:
1174:
1143:
1064:
383:
217:
1484:
John Zachman's Concise Definition of the Zachman Framework, 2008
387:
The original 1987 "Information Systems Architecture Framework".
2216:, Interview with John Zachman by Dan Ruby, visited 19 May 2016
1909:
Vladan Jovanovic, Stevan Mrdalj & Adrian Gardiner (2006).
1515:
2204:. In: Information & Management, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1-11.
2202:
Building an IS architecture: Collective wisdom from the field
2129:
The Zachman Framework and the OMG's Model Driven Architecture
1147:
1092:
2083:"Zachman ISA Framework for Healthcare Informatics Standards"
1947:
The government information factory and the Zachman Framework
1495:"John Zachman's Concise Definition of The Zachman Framework"
1025:
967:
948:
405:
291:
1224:
2011:
1609:
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality
1354:
for Individual Projects and, potentially, for the entire
454:
refocused on the top two framework rows which he labeled
411:
The Information Systems Architecture is designed to be a
366:(BSP), a method for analyzing, defining and designing an
240:
853:
Rule 4 Each row describes a distinct, unique perspective
568:(Scope Contents) – The first architectural sketch is a "
462:
2239:"Why Doesn't the Federal Enterprise Architecture Work?"
1079:
DoD Products Map to the Zachman Framework Cells, 2003.
2290:
The Zachman Framework: The Official Concise Definition
1015:
The TEAF matrix is called a customization sample, see
74:
A major contributor to this article appears to have a
1969:
Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework Version 1.1
2302:
UML, RUP, and the Zachman Framework: Better together
1937:
report Department of Veterans Affairs, August, 2001.
1607:
Pete Sawyer, Barbara Paech, Patrick Heymans (2007).
847:
Rule 3 The basic model of each column must be unique
1949:
by W. H. Inmon, 2003. p. 4. Accessed July 14, 2009.
1931:VA Enterprise Architecture Innovation Team (2001).
1648:
Enterprise Architecture Using the Zachman Framework
482:
408:, function of processes, and location or networks.
132:
may be too technical for most readers to understand
2292:by John A. Zachman at Zachman International, 2009.
1716:"A Framework for Information Systems Architecture"
1575:
1540:"A framework for information systems architecture"
477:Zachman Framework: The Official Concise Definition
239:, who first developed the concept in the 1980s at
2263:"Fake and Real Tools for Enterprise Architecture"
2141:Hervé Panetto, Salah Baïna, Gérard Morel (2007).
1245:Integrated Process Flow for VA IT Projects (2001)
1130:Base for other enterprise architecture frameworks
885:
325:The Zachman Framework summarizes a collection of
2309:
2122:, Mukerji, J., Odell, J., Owen, M., Rivitt, P.,
1998:John Zachman - One of the Best Architects I Know
1982:A Tutorial on the Zachman Architecture Framework
1281:A Tutorial on the Zachman Architecture Framework
843: : Every column can have its own meta-model
341:of an enterprise. It is significant to both the
258:A Framework for Information Systems Architecture
196:The Zachman Framework of enterprise architecture
2251:"Is Enterprise Architecture Completely Broken?"
1967:The Chief Information Officers Council (1999).
362:had been involved at IBM in the development of
926:
494:Schoch & Laplante (1995) published in the
419:
212:which provides a formal and structured way of
841:Rule 2 Each column has a simple generic model
265:Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture
1664:A Practical Guide to Enterprise Architecture
1545:. IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 26. No. 3. 1987.
1231:United States Department of Veterans Affairs
919:columns. However, there is no escaping the
379:"Information Systems Architecture" framework
1876:R. W. Matthews. &. W. C. McGee (1990).
1782:
1658:
1656:
1034:
951:, built around the similar frameworks, the
523:
243:. It has been updated several times since.
53:Learn how and when to remove these messages
1822:
1820:
895:problem under analysis need be populated.
475:In 2008 Zachman Enterprise introduced the
2070:Managing Information in the Public Sector
2012:"Official Home of The Zachman Framework™"
1980:US Department of Veterans Affairs (2002)
1963:
1961:
1959:
1957:
1955:
1690:
1688:
1212:Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework
1051:EAP mapped to the Zachman Framework, 1999
830:The framework comes with a set of rules:
817:
501:Evernden (1996) presented an alternative
235:The framework is named after its creator
178:Learn how and when to remove this message
160:Learn how and when to remove this message
144:, without removing the technical details.
105:Learn how and when to remove this message
2304:, by Vitalie Temnenco, IBM, 15 Nov 2006.
1878:"Data Modeling for Software Development"
1829:"Enterprise Convergence in Our Lifetime"
1737:
1735:
1733:
1653:
1534:
1532:
1302:
1026:Standards based on the Zachman Framework
821:
552:
390:
382:
297:a framework for enterprise architecture.
273:
191:
2241:, Stanley B. Gaver, visited 19 May 2016
1974:
1927:
1925:
1923:
1845:
1817:
1741:
1710:
1633:Harold F. Tipton, Micki Krause (2008).
1554:
1552:
1307:VA EA Meta-Model Cell Details Enlarged.
1225:Example: One-VA Enterprise Architecture
2310:
2253:, Jason Bloomberg, visited 19 May 2016
2225:Ylimaki, T. and Halttunen, V. (2006).
2000:Originally published 17 November 2005.
1952:
1839:
1776:
1704:
1685:
1669:
1429:FDIC Enterprise Architecture Framework
307:a matrix, often in a 6x6 matrix format
2132:White paper. Business Process Trends.
2126:... & Soley, R. M. et al. (2003)
1826:
1730:
1529:
479:as a new Zachman Framework standard.
463:Framework for enterprise architecture
395:Simple example of the 1992 Framework.
142:make it understandable to non-experts
16:Structure for enterprise architecture
2200:Kim, Y.G. and Everest, G.C. (1994).
1920:
1549:
1525:. Zachman International. April 2009.
1269:VA EA Repository Introduction (2008)
218:What, How, When, Who, Where, and Why
116:
59:
18:
2009:
1162:NIST Enterprise Architecture Model.
826:Example of Zachman Framework Rules.
803:(Who) Responsibility Instantiations
800:(Where) Distribution Instantiations
728:(Who) Responsibility Representation
725:(Where) Distribution Representation
678:(Who) Responsibility Identification
675:(Where) Distribution Identification
618:
208:and is a fundamental structure for
13:
2318:Enterprise architecture frameworks
2214:"Erecting the Framework, Part III"
1917:. Vol VII, No. 2, 2006 p. 257-262.
1827:Locke, Stan (September 16, 2008).
1646:O'Rourke, Fishman, Selkow (2003).
1140:NIST Enterprise Architecture Model
1136:enterprise architecture frameworks
933:information technology engineering
778:(Who) Responsibility Configuration
775:(Where) Distribution Configuration
753:(Who) Responsibility Specification
750:(Where) Distribution Specification
651:
14:
2334:
2283:
1523:"The Zachman Framework Evolution"
1419:Enterprise Architecture framework
1321:software configuration management
970:Matrix of Views and Perspectives.
510:Integrated Architecture Framework
34:This article has multiple issues.
1424:Enterprise Architecture Planning
1274:
1262:
1250:
1238:
1194:
1182:
1167:
1155:
1084:
1072:
1056:
1044:
999:
987:
975:
960:
942:
835:Rule 1 The columns have no order
637:Responsibility Assignments – Who
540:
483:Extended and modified frameworks
304:system, or classification scheme
121:
85:. Please discuss further on the
64:
23:
2296:The Zachman Framework Evolution
2268:
2256:
2244:
2232:
2219:
2207:
2194:
2173:
2161:
2148:
2135:
2109:
2092:
2075:
2062:
2041:
2029:
2003:
1987:
1940:
1903:
1887:
1870:
1760:
1726:(3). IBM Publication G321-5298.
1701:, vol 21, no 3, 1982. p. 31-53.
1680:Enterprise Architecture at Work
1640:
1627:
1560:"ADM and the Zachman Framework"
1451:
1323:tool; not as an EA repository.
809:(Why) Motivation Instantiations
794:(What) Inventory Instantiations
734:(Why) Motivation Representation
719:(What) Inventory Representation
703:(Who) Responsibility Definition
700:(Where) Distribution Definition
689:Business Management Perspective
684:(Why) Motivation Identification
669:(What) Inventory Identification
606:government off-the-shelf (GOTS)
602:commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS)
580:Business Management Perspective
223:The Zachman Framework is not a
42:or discuss these issues on the
1662:James McGovern et al. (2003).
1614:
1601:
1583:; Geiger, Jonathan G. (1997).
1569:
1501:
1497:. Zachman International. 2008.
1487:
1478:
1463:Department of Veterans Affairs
1340:systems development life cycle
886:Flexibility in level of detail
784:(Why) Motivation Configuration
769:(What) Inventory Configuration
759:(Why) Motivation Specification
744:(What) Inventory Specification
1:
1915:Issues in Information Systems
1472:
871:Rule 7 The logic is recursive
634:Distribution Networks – Where
256:The initial framework, named
1558:The Open Group (1999–2006).
1361:
806:(When) Timing Instantiations
797:(How) Process Instantiations
731:(When) Timing Representation
722:(How) Process Representation
681:(When) Timing Identification
672:(How) Process Identification
468:Enterprise Reengineering or
7:
2277:, Kotusev, S., August 2019
2154:Roland Traunmüller (2004).
1402:
1257:VA Zachman Framework Portal
927:Applications and influences
781:(When) Timing Configuration
772:(How) Process Configuration
756:(When) Timing Specification
747:(How) Process Specification
709:(Why) Motivation Definition
694:(What) Inventory Definition
643:Motivation Intentions – Why
420:Extension and formalization
416:for creating these models.
246:
10:
2341:
2265:, Kotusev, S., April 2018
1350:Row-six provides measured
859:Rule 5 Each cell is unique
528:
353:
2181:"Meta-Model Cell Details"
1833:The Enterprise Newsletter
1620:Kathleen B. Hass (2007).
1113:Model-driven architecture
614:or (Operations Instances)
1566:. Accessed 31 July 2024.
1444:
1317:object oriented database
1146:AE, the DOE AE, and the
1106:Rational Unified Process
1035:Mapping other frameworks
706:(When) Timing Definition
697:(How) Process Definition
524:Zachman Framework topics
368:information architecture
364:business system planning
290:to organize and analyze
2106:Rational Software 2001.
2098:DJ de Villiers (2001).
1984:. Accessed 06 Dec 2008.
1858:. Zachman International
446:Later during the 1990s
210:enterprise architecture
1308:
1091:Mapping a part of the
827:
818:Framework set of rules
789:Enterprise Perspective
764:Technician Perspective
612:Enterprise Perspective
598:Technician Perspective
558:
456:Enterprise Engineering
444:
396:
388:
348:information technology
279:
197:
2323:Management frameworks
2156:Electronic Government
2068:Jay D. White (2007).
2016:Zachman International
1465:from 2001 until 2007.
1332:investment management
1306:
825:
714:Architect Perspective
664:Executive Perspective
628:Inventory Sets – What
586:Architect Perspective
566:Executive Perspective
556:
503:Information FrameWork
430:
413:classification schema
394:
386:
314:or an analytic model.
277:
195:
83:neutral point of view
1356:investment portfolio
1352:return on investment
739:Engineer Perspective
640:Timing Cycles – When
592:Engineer Perspective
450:Methodologists like
2047:Ian Graham (1995).
2037:University of Omaha
1882:IBM Systems Journal
1811:10.1147/sj.313.0590
1799:IBM Systems Journal
1720:IBM Systems Journal
1699:IBM Systems Journal
937:enterprise modeling
631:Process Flows – How
496:IBM Systems Journal
470:Enterprise Modeling
2051:. Addison-Wesley,
1884:29(2). pp. 228–234
1564:TOGAF 8.1.1 Online
1309:
879:conceptual objects
828:
559:
397:
389:
310:a two-dimensional
280:
198:
2104:The Rational Edge
2010:Zachman, John A.
1577:Inmon, William H.
1409:Conceptual schema
1138:, such as in the
657:Transformations.
452:Clive Finkelstein
204:is an enterprise
202:Zachman Framework
188:
187:
180:
170:
169:
162:
115:
114:
107:
78:with its subject.
57:
2330:
2278:
2272:
2266:
2260:
2254:
2248:
2242:
2236:
2230:
2223:
2217:
2211:
2205:
2198:
2192:
2191:
2189:
2187:
2177:
2171:
2165:
2159:
2152:
2146:
2139:
2133:
2116:David S. Frankel
2113:
2107:
2096:
2090:
2089:
2087:
2079:
2073:
2066:
2060:
2045:
2039:
2033:
2027:
2026:
2024:
2022:
2007:
2001:
1991:
1985:
1978:
1972:
1971:. September 1999
1965:
1950:
1944:
1938:
1929:
1918:
1907:
1901:
1894:Jaap Schekkerman
1891:
1885:
1874:
1868:
1867:
1865:
1863:
1857:
1847:Zachman, John A.
1843:
1837:
1836:
1824:
1815:
1814:
1796:
1788:Zachman, John A.
1780:
1774:
1764:
1758:
1757:
1739:
1728:
1727:
1712:Zachman, John A.
1708:
1702:
1692:
1683:
1673:
1667:
1660:
1651:
1644:
1638:
1631:
1625:
1618:
1612:
1605:
1599:
1598:
1581:Zachman, John A.
1573:
1567:
1556:
1547:
1546:
1544:
1536:
1527:
1526:
1519:
1513:
1505:
1499:
1498:
1491:
1485:
1482:
1466:
1455:
1278:
1266:
1254:
1242:
1198:
1186:
1171:
1159:
1104:Analysis of the
1100:Other examples:
1088:
1076:
1060:
1048:
1003:
991:
979:
964:
619:Focus of columns
442:
183:
176:
165:
158:
154:
151:
145:
125:
124:
117:
110:
103:
99:
96:
90:
76:close connection
68:
67:
60:
49:
27:
26:
19:
2340:
2339:
2333:
2332:
2331:
2329:
2328:
2327:
2308:
2307:
2286:
2281:
2273:
2269:
2261:
2257:
2249:
2245:
2237:
2233:
2224:
2220:
2212:
2208:
2199:
2195:
2185:
2183:
2179:
2178:
2174:
2166:
2162:
2153:
2149:
2140:
2136:
2114:
2110:
2097:
2093:
2085:
2081:
2080:
2076:
2067:
2063:
2046:
2042:
2034:
2030:
2020:
2018:
2008:
2004:
1992:
1988:
1979:
1975:
1966:
1953:
1945:
1941:
1930:
1921:
1908:
1904:
1900:. page 139-144.
1892:
1888:
1875:
1871:
1861:
1859:
1855:
1844:
1840:
1825:
1818:
1794:
1781:
1777:
1769:et al. (2008).
1765:
1761:
1754:
1740:
1731:
1709:
1705:
1693:
1686:
1678:et al. (2005).
1674:
1670:
1661:
1654:
1645:
1641:
1632:
1628:
1619:
1615:
1606:
1602:
1595:
1587:. McGraw-Hill.
1574:
1570:
1557:
1550:
1542:
1538:
1537:
1530:
1521:
1520:
1516:
1506:
1502:
1493:
1492:
1488:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1470:
1469:
1456:
1452:
1447:
1405:
1364:
1282:
1279:
1270:
1267:
1258:
1255:
1246:
1243:
1227:
1205:
1199:
1190:
1187:
1178:
1172:
1163:
1160:
1132:
1096:
1089:
1080:
1077:
1068:
1061:
1052:
1049:
1037:
1028:
1011:Other sources:
1007:
1004:
995:
992:
983:
980:
971:
965:
945:
929:
888:
820:
654:
652:Models of cells
621:
543:
531:
526:
485:
465:
443:
437:
422:
381:
356:
339:representations
249:
184:
173:
172:
171:
166:
155:
149:
146:
138:help improve it
135:
126:
122:
111:
100:
94:
91:
80:
69:
65:
28:
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
2338:
2337:
2326:
2325:
2320:
2306:
2305:
2299:
2293:
2285:
2284:External links
2282:
2280:
2279:
2267:
2255:
2243:
2231:
2218:
2206:
2193:
2172:
2160:
2147:
2134:
2108:
2091:
2074:
2061:
2040:
2028:
2002:
1986:
1973:
1951:
1939:
1919:
1911:A Zachman Cube
1902:
1886:
1869:
1838:
1816:
1805:(3): 590–616.
1775:
1759:
1752:
1729:
1703:
1684:
1676:Marc Lankhorst
1668:
1652:
1639:
1626:
1613:
1600:
1593:
1568:
1548:
1528:
1514:
1500:
1486:
1476:
1474:
1471:
1468:
1467:
1449:
1448:
1446:
1443:
1442:
1441:
1436:
1431:
1426:
1421:
1416:
1411:
1404:
1401:
1397:
1396:
1392:
1389:
1386:
1383:
1379:
1376:
1363:
1360:
1348:
1347:
1343:
1298:
1297:
1294:
1291:
1284:
1283:
1280:
1273:
1271:
1268:
1261:
1259:
1256:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1237:
1226:
1223:
1222:
1221:
1207:
1206:
1200:
1193:
1191:
1188:
1181:
1179:
1173:
1166:
1164:
1161:
1154:
1131:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1119:
1116:
1109:
1098:
1097:
1090:
1083:
1081:
1078:
1071:
1069:
1062:
1055:
1053:
1050:
1043:
1036:
1033:
1027:
1024:
1023:
1022:
1009:
1008:
1005:
998:
996:
994:TEAF Products.
993:
986:
984:
981:
974:
972:
966:
959:
944:
941:
928:
925:
887:
884:
875:
874:
868:
862:
856:
850:
844:
838:
819:
816:
811:
810:
807:
804:
801:
798:
795:
791:
790:
786:
785:
782:
779:
776:
773:
770:
766:
765:
761:
760:
757:
754:
751:
748:
745:
741:
740:
736:
735:
732:
729:
726:
723:
720:
716:
715:
711:
710:
707:
704:
701:
698:
695:
691:
690:
686:
685:
682:
679:
676:
673:
670:
666:
665:
653:
650:
645:
644:
641:
638:
635:
632:
629:
620:
617:
616:
615:
609:
595:
589:
583:
577:
542:
539:
530:
527:
525:
522:
521:
520:
517:
506:
499:
492:
484:
481:
464:
461:
460:
459:
435:
421:
418:
380:
377:
372:systems design
355:
352:
319:
318:
315:
308:
305:
302:classification
298:
295:
272:
271:
268:
261:
248:
245:
186:
185:
168:
167:
129:
127:
120:
113:
112:
72:
70:
63:
58:
32:
31:
29:
22:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2336:
2335:
2324:
2321:
2319:
2316:
2315:
2313:
2303:
2300:
2297:
2294:
2291:
2288:
2287:
2276:
2271:
2264:
2259:
2252:
2247:
2240:
2235:
2228:
2222:
2215:
2210:
2203:
2197:
2182:
2176:
2169:
2164:
2157:
2151:
2144:
2138:
2131:
2130:
2125:
2121:
2117:
2112:
2105:
2101:
2095:
2084:
2078:
2071:
2065:
2058:
2057:0-201-59389-0
2054:
2050:
2044:
2038:
2032:
2017:
2013:
2006:
1999:
1995:
1990:
1983:
1977:
1970:
1964:
1962:
1960:
1958:
1956:
1948:
1943:
1936:
1935:
1928:
1926:
1924:
1916:
1912:
1906:
1899:
1895:
1890:
1883:
1879:
1873:
1854:
1853:
1848:
1842:
1834:
1830:
1823:
1821:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1800:
1793:
1789:
1785:
1784:Sowa, John F.
1779:
1772:
1768:
1767:Alain Wegmann
1763:
1755:
1753:1-878289-17-9
1749:
1745:
1738:
1736:
1734:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1713:
1707:
1700:
1696:
1691:
1689:
1681:
1677:
1672:
1666:. p. 127-129.
1665:
1659:
1657:
1649:
1643:
1636:
1630:
1623:
1617:
1610:
1604:
1596:
1594:0-07-031429-2
1590:
1586:
1582:
1578:
1572:
1565:
1561:
1555:
1553:
1541:
1535:
1533:
1524:
1518:
1511:
1510:
1504:
1496:
1490:
1481:
1477:
1464:
1460:
1454:
1450:
1440:
1437:
1435:
1432:
1430:
1427:
1425:
1422:
1420:
1417:
1415:
1412:
1410:
1407:
1406:
1400:
1393:
1390:
1387:
1384:
1380:
1377:
1374:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1359:
1357:
1353:
1344:
1341:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1333:
1328:
1324:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1305:
1301:
1295:
1292:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1277:
1272:
1265:
1260:
1253:
1248:
1241:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1232:
1219:
1218:
1213:
1209:
1208:
1203:
1197:
1192:
1189:DOE AE, 1998.
1185:
1180:
1176:
1170:
1165:
1158:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1149:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1124:
1120:
1117:
1114:
1110:
1108:as a Process,
1107:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1094:
1087:
1082:
1075:
1070:
1066:
1059:
1054:
1047:
1042:
1041:
1040:
1032:
1020:
1019:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1002:
997:
990:
985:
978:
973:
969:
963:
958:
957:
956:
954:
950:
943:Customization
940:
938:
934:
924:
922:
918:
914:
910:
906:
902:
896:
893:
883:
880:
872:
869:
866:
863:
860:
857:
854:
851:
848:
845:
842:
839:
836:
833:
832:
831:
824:
815:
808:
805:
802:
799:
796:
793:
792:
788:
787:
783:
780:
777:
774:
771:
768:
767:
763:
762:
758:
755:
752:
749:
746:
743:
742:
738:
737:
733:
730:
727:
724:
721:
718:
717:
713:
712:
708:
705:
702:
699:
696:
693:
692:
688:
687:
683:
680:
677:
674:
671:
668:
667:
663:
662:
661:
658:
649:
642:
639:
636:
633:
630:
627:
626:
625:
613:
610:
607:
603:
599:
596:
593:
590:
587:
584:
581:
578:
575:
571:
567:
564:
563:
562:
555:
551:
547:
541:Views of rows
538:
535:
518:
515:
512:developed by
511:
507:
504:
500:
497:
493:
490:
489:
488:
480:
478:
473:
471:
457:
453:
449:
448:
447:
441:
434:
429:
427:
417:
414:
409:
407:
403:
393:
385:
376:
373:
369:
365:
361:
358:In the 1980s
351:
349:
344:
340:
335:
332:
328:
323:
316:
313:
309:
306:
303:
299:
296:
293:
289:
285:
284:
283:
276:
269:
266:
262:
259:
255:
254:
253:
244:
242:
238:
233:
230:
226:
221:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
194:
190:
182:
179:
164:
161:
153:
150:February 2012
143:
139:
133:
130:This article
128:
119:
118:
109:
106:
98:
88:
84:
79:
77:
71:
62:
61:
56:
54:
47:
46:
41:
40:
35:
30:
21:
20:
2270:
2258:
2246:
2234:
2226:
2221:
2209:
2201:
2196:
2186:December 25,
2184:. Retrieved
2175:
2163:
2155:
2150:
2137:
2128:
2111:
2103:
2094:
2077:
2069:
2064:
2048:
2043:
2031:
2021:February 14,
2019:. Retrieved
2015:
2005:
1989:
1976:
1942:
1933:
1914:
1905:
1897:
1889:
1881:
1872:
1860:. Retrieved
1851:
1841:
1832:
1802:
1798:
1778:
1762:
1743:
1723:
1719:
1706:
1698:
1679:
1671:
1663:
1647:
1642:
1634:
1629:
1621:
1616:
1608:
1603:
1584:
1571:
1563:
1517:
1508:
1503:
1489:
1480:
1453:
1398:
1372:
1365:
1349:
1329:
1325:
1310:
1299:
1285:
1228:
1216:
1133:
1121:Mapping the
1099:
1063:Mapping the
1038:
1029:
1021:, p. 22
1017:
1010:
946:
930:
920:
916:
912:
908:
904:
900:
897:
889:
876:
870:
864:
858:
852:
846:
840:
834:
829:
812:
659:
655:
646:
622:
611:
597:
591:
585:
579:
574:Venn diagram
570:bubble chart
565:
560:
548:
544:
536:
532:
495:
486:
476:
474:
466:
445:
439:
438:Stan Locke,
431:
426:John F. Sowa
423:
410:
402:architecture
398:
360:John Zachman
357:
336:
331:stakeholders
327:perspectives
324:
320:
281:
264:
257:
250:
237:John Zachman
234:
222:
201:
199:
189:
174:
156:
147:
131:
101:
92:
73:
50:
43:
37:
36:Please help
33:
1862:January 19,
1637:. page 263.
1611:. page 191.
953:TEAF matrix
516:since 1996.
225:methodology
2312:Categories
2120:Harmon, P.
1994:Bill Inmon
1624:. page 58.
1473:References
1439:View model
1414:Data model
343:management
95:March 2015
39:improve it
2072:. p. 254.
2059:. p. 322.
1650:. page 9.
1362:Criticism
1313:metamodel
1177:AE, 1997.
514:Capgemini
288:framework
87:talk page
45:talk page
2124:Rosen, M
1896:(2003).
1849:(1997).
1835:(TEN42).
1790:(1992).
1714:(1987).
1682:. p. 24.
1403:See also
1111:How the
1095:, 2007.
436:—
247:Overview
206:ontology
2088:. 1997.
1697:. In:
1434:Five Ws
1204:, 2003.
935:-style
529:Concept
354:History
214:viewing
136:Please
2102:, In:
2055:
1913:. In:
1880:. in:
1750:
1591:
1395:before
1373:likely
1142:, the
1067:, 1999
915:, and
229:schema
2158:p. 51
2086:(PDF)
1856:(PDF)
1795:(PDF)
1543:(PDF)
1459:Visio
1445:Notes
1202:DODAF
1175:C4ISR
1148:DoDAF
1144:C4ISR
1123:TOGAF
1093:DoDAF
1065:C4ISR
917:Where
892:views
572:" or
312:model
2188:2009
2053:ISBN
2023:2015
1864:2009
1748:ISBN
1589:ISBN
1562:in:
1382:yet"
1217:here
1210:The
1018:here
968:TEAF
949:TEAF
913:When
903:and
901:What
508:The
406:data
292:data
263:The
200:The
1807:doi
1334:.
921:Why
911:,
909:Who
905:How
241:IBM
140:to
2314::
2118:,
2014:.
1954:^
1922:^
1831:.
1819:^
1803:31
1801:.
1797:.
1786:;
1746:.
1732:^
1724:26
1722:.
1718:.
1687:^
1655:^
1579:;
1551:^
1531:^
1150::
955:.
604:,
300:a
286:a
48:.
2190:.
2145:.
2025:.
1866:.
1813:.
1809::
1756:.
1597:.
1220:)
505:.
294:,
181:)
175:(
163:)
157:(
152:)
148:(
134:.
108:)
102:(
97:)
93:(
89:.
55:)
51:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
