Towards Adoption of Government Enterprise Architecture: The Cases of Egypt and Syria
Mohamed Ali Mohamed 1, Galal Hassan Galal‐Edeen 2 and Hesham Ahmed Hassan 1 1 Cairo University, Egypt
2 The American University in Cairo, Egypt
mohamed. egov @ gmail. com galal @ acm. org drhesham2007 @ gmail. com
Abstract: The development of e‐Government in developing countries faces multiple challenges, including the limited coordination between various projects and difficulties of interoperability. Enterprise architecture has been considered as an efficient approach to support the implementation of e‐Government, and to serve as an umbrella for explaining the relationships between various projects, reducing complexity and achieving a higher level of integration. however; although there are many successful experiences by developed countries in the adoption of Government Enterprise Architecture( GEA) as a main driver to improve service delivery and overall performance, governments of developing countries still face many challenges in their efforts to launch enterprise architecture programs. This paper analyzes the cases of two developing countries( Egypt and Syria), which have not been previously the context for such studies. We followed a qualitative research approach using semi‐structured interviews with stakeholders of e‐Government and analysis of their observations and available documents; with the objective to get a better understanding of the adoption of GEA programs in the two countries. The suggested approach for analysis includes the identification of strategic drivers, challenges of development and assessment of the maturity of current GEA activities; after analysis, we presented our findings and the success factors that can contribute to a successful establishment and management of GEA programs in developing countries.
Keywords: enterprise architecture, e‐government, GEA, interoperability, developing countries, G2G, Egypt, Syria
1. Introduction
In the last decade, e‐Government has been at the center of attention for governments worldwide to improve the quality of service delivery, increase effectiveness and efficiency of the public sector organizations; However; e‐Government today face complex challenges at the organizational, technical and semantic levels( Janssen et al., 2011), where current systems were developed using architectures that do not readily support enterprise‐wide integration, without having in mind the big picture of the whole government, and this led to the existence of isolated and fragmented systems, and major problems of interoperability( Weerakkody et al., 2007).
Enterprise Architecture( EA) has been considered as a solution to facilitate interoperability, coordination between government agencies, and strategic planning. EA was adopted by many governments to provide a holistic view of systems development and to serve as a tool for public management reform and transformation( Hjort‐Madsen and Pries‐Heje, 2009); The role and criticality of enterprise architecture in e‐Government initiatives cannot be underestimated and countries with mature and effective e‐Government programs attribute their success to effective enterprise architecture programs( Saha, 2009).
1.1 Problem statement
A careful review of the research that addressed the role of enterprise architecture in the e‐Government shows that a large percent of the published researches were conducted in developed countries, and a little was written about its adoption in developing countries. This knowledge gap is particularly apparent in the Arab world, where Egyptian government has already issued an initial document that aims to develop enterprise architecture to enhance e‐Government implementation( MSAD, 2006); however, previous studies pointed that such document had no impact until now( Klischewski, 2011). In Syria, e‐Government strategy also referred to the role of enterprise architecture, but there is still slow progress in such development. In a nutshell, there is no evidence that a proper situation analysis has been conducted to address the role and the challenges of enterprise architecture within e‐Government in the two countries.
345