Three of our readings in this unit describe the evolution of the Zachman Framework
1 – Zachman Framework
Three of our readings in this unit describe the evolution of the Zachman Framework. The 1987 article represented the initial version of the framework at a time when the information systems field was very immature. The levels of the framework, as well as its three perspectives was considered a revolutionary way to look at the process for defining and building information systems. Weaknesses in the framework became apparent over time to the more mature organizations using the model, and the 1992 version of the complete framework followed.
The Framework gave practitioners a way to understand what engineering deliverables were needed by an IS or MIS project, how those deliverables differed based on the stakeholders involved, and how those deliverables evolved over the project lifecycle. Most importantly, the Framework presented the entire engineering project as a single conceptual architecture. No one had effectively done that prior to Zachman. The term architecture is used throughout the IT world today, but this use of the term was revolutionary at the time.
Discuss why an industrial engineer might value all six dimensions (columns) of the Framework compared to a software engineer who might value the three left dimensions from 1987 but feel that the three right dimensions added later weren’t really needed in software (a feeling expressed by many software engineers at the time). Additionally, how might a systems engineer focus on the various representations (rows) compared to a software engineer? How might this Framework aid in your performance of future systems engineering duties when working with teams of people that include software engineers?
Response Guideline
Post your response of 1-3 paragraphs (about 200-300 words) early in the week, and then reply to at least two initial responses of your peers, particularly focusing on responses that might differ from your own. Also respond appropriately to anyone who posts questions against your own postings.
2 – Aspects of IT Outsourcing
Information systems functional and organizational structures are evolving. A key element of IT staffing today involves the use of outside contractors to complement, or even substitute for, internal human resources. The use of outsourcing, sometimes to other countries, has risen to a level where even politicians are paying attention and expressing opinions. Outsourcing today include many service jobs like software or systems engineering rather than earlier scenarios where typically just manufacturing jobs were being regularly outsourced.
Discuss the benefits and pitfalls of the move toward outsourcing information technology jobs, both domestically and internationally. Discuss whether these factors affect the organization doing the outsourcing, or whether they actually accrue to the economy or society at large. When benefits accrue to the organization but pitfalls accrue to the society, what are the ethics to which the organizations should feel responsible? What roles do or should regulators play in balancing these perspectives?
Response Guideline
While you are likely to hold a personal opinion on this topic, this discussion is not about your opinion. It’s fine to allow you opinion to influence your analysis, but keep your response fact-based and analytical. Post your response of 1-3 paragraphs (about 200-300 words) early in the week, and then reply to at least two initial responses of your peers, particularly focusing on responses that might differ from your own. Also respond appropriately to anyone who posts questions against your own postings.
3 – Evolution of CRM and SCM Strategies
Much has been written about the need for, and implementation of, enterprise-level systems for the management of customer, suppliers, and partners as part of an effective business strategy. (see p. 22-25 in Peppard & Ward) These discussions tend to take the traditional viewpoint of an organization that has those systems. As industrial engineers, we need to potentially look at a much broader systems perspective. We have to recognize that our customers view us as a supplier, so our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system overlaps their Supply Chain Management (SCM) systems. Our suppliers see us as their customer, so our SCM system overlaps their CRM systems. Given this broader perspective, CRM and SCM systems would benefit from being highly integrated, and might mature in the future to actually be the same systems. CRM and SCM might then be considered two sides of the same coin rather than as separate enterprise systems.
(If you have not had much exposure to enterprise systems, feel free to conduct some quick web-based research into CRM and SCM systems in order to become more familiar with the basic functionality of these kinds of enterprise systems. For this purpose of this discussion thread, you do not need to cite those sources in your response.)
Discuss your thoughts on what this possible evolution could mean in terms of integrating these two enterprise systems capabilities in the future. What would such an evolution mean in terms of the functionality of those two enterprise systems as they today exist? What aspects of their functionality might seem to offer the best integration points? What might it mean to an organization to have an enterprise system that would be used to manage both customers and suppliers rather than have those two types of relationships managed in different systems? What might be the major advantages or disadvantages of such an evolution?
Response Guideline
Post your response of 1-3 paragraphs (about 200-300 words) early in the week, and then reply to at least two initial responses of your peers, particularly focusing on responses that might differ from your own. Also respond appropriately to anyone who posts questions against your own postings
Answer preview Three of our readings in this unit describe the evolution of the Zachman Framework
APA
731 words