Denisa Popescu et al.
operationalization is built upon a secure and trusted information‐sharing protocol( Pardo et al, 2012; dos Santos and Reinhard, 2012; Hellberg and Grönlund, 2013).
At the same time, the use of enterprise architecture frameworks has been seen as a practical approach to implementing interoperability, in both the private sector and public administrations, by providing a holistic view of looking at an enterprise( Janssen, 2012; Pardo et al, 2012; Vernadat, 2010; Guijarro, 2006; Hjort‐ Madsen, 2006). Broadly speaking, an enterprise architecture framework is simply defined as a blueprint defining the structure and operation of an organization based on a number of work streams, also commonly referred to as architecture views, for the analysis of the unique views of the architecture pertaining to specific disciplines( e. g., performance, business, information, and applications). There are many formalized enterprise frameworks available, such as the Zachmann EA framework, TOGAF, and the US Federal Enterprise Architecture.
Extant literature has pointed out a variety of challenges and the needed capabilities for improving government interoperability. It, however, has done little in providing practical models of the foundational aspects that should be in place to support interoperability, such as the need for a government‐wide information strategy and common shared services to support the technology aspects of information management across the government. In the next section, we will discuss some practical aspects we learned from our own experiences at the World Bank, which are relevant to intergovernmental information integration efforts.
4. Enterprise architectural framework
As discussed above, the current literature on interoperability extensively discusses the need for using enterprise architecture frameworks to address intergovernmental information integration. Interoperability is not just a technical issue. Political, organizational, and informational factors are also important. Today, most organizations have an‘ as‐is’ enterprise architecture which describes primarily the underlying technologies and applications of a vertical institution, e. g., one government ministry. This is one of the reasons why the core aspect of current Enterprise Architecture( EA) frameworks start with the analysis of the business, the nontechnology aspect of the organization, as the basis for designing and implementing systems. As such, the usual trend we have seen in the private sector is to first ensure that the organization has a comprehensive Business and ICT strategy followed by an EA framework and program that integrates the business processes, information, and technical resources into a cohesive whole. Implementing an EA program is not an easy endeavor. Operationalizing and embedding EA practices in the applications development lifecycle requires high‐level management commitment and the requisite architecture skills within an organization. Documenting the current architecture must be done at a good‐enough level as the focus should be in defining the target state architecture. IT Investment programs must be reviewed in light of achieving the envisioned target state architecture. EA practices should also address the relational capabilities, and social interactions among the stakeholders vis‐à‐vis the adoption and acceptance of EA where the pervasive role of EA should be in“ communications instead of creating frameworks and blueprints”( Janssen, 2012:34).
Further, the use of EA frameworks to address information integration needs is not an easy process. The assessment process requires interacting with diverse organizational structures that may not be willing, in the end, to“ collaborate” in both the definition and the implementation of the solution. From our point of view, this problem is more exacerbated in the government because the ministries and agencies have their own organizational structure, culture, incentives and IT budgets. Countries that have been successful in enabling cross ministry collaboration have instilled in place management mechanisms( e. g., presidential decrees, budget controls, government chief information officer position, technology boards) to facilitate cohesive whole of government architectures.
5. Government interoperability frameworks, enterprise information management and common shared services
E‐government interoperability frameworks are a more effective way of addressing problems in sharing information across government institutions. To attain interoperability, government institutions need to improve its internal capability in managing information and developing an integrated enterprise information management policy and reference architecture. Further, they need to operationalize such frameworks by centralizing provisioning of common shared services. They need to transition from the traditional technical infrastructure support( i. e., networks, servers, software platforms) to facilitating cross‐government
408