A Complex Adaptive System Perspective of Enterprise Architecture in Electronic Government

Abstract

Within the public sector, the deployment of enterprise architecture is often an attempt to address the decentralization/centralization relationships to improve the links between the central and the local governments. The underlying aim is to provide a better structure to manage the diverse, independent and local IT-related projects and development activities. In this paper we propose a novel approach to analyzing and understanding the requirements and limitations for enterprise architectures in government. We use the perspective of a complex adaptive system as a metaphor to examine 11 e-government projects with each involved the development of enterprise architecture in the Netherlands (1980s - 2004). Through analyzing the key interaction points between the central and the local governments, we identify architectural design principles that will increase inter-organizational jointness and IT implementation success.

Full text

Page 1

A Complex Adaptive System Perspective of Enterprise Architecture in
Electronic Government

Marijn Janssen
School of Technology, Policy and
Management
Delft University of Technology
Jaffalaan 5, NL-2600 GA, Delft
The Netherlands
Tel. +31 (15) 278 1140
Marijnj@tbm.tudelft.nl
George Kuk
Nottingham University Business School,
Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road,
Nottingham, NG8 1BB,
United Kingdom
Tel. +44(115)8466611
g.kuk@nottingham.ac.uk

Abstract
Within the public sector, the deployment of
enterprise architecture is often an attempt to address
the decentralization/centralization relationships to
improve the links between the central and the local
governments. The underlying aim is to provide a better
structure to manage the diverse, independent and local
IT-related projects and development activities.
In this paper we propose a novel approach to
analyzing and understanding the requirements and
limitations for enterprise architectures in government.
We use the perspective of a complex adaptive system
as a metaphor to examine 11 e-government projects
with each involved the development of enterprise
architecture in the Netherlands (1980s - 2004).
Through analyzing the key interaction points between
the central and the local governments, we identify
architectural design principles that will increase inter-
organizational jointness and IT implementation
success.

1. Introduction

It is often stated that the implementation of
enterprise architecture offers a way forward in
integrating independent IT silos across inter-
organizational agencies (e.g. [7],[20]). Within the
public sector, the joining-up remains at the top of e-
government agenda of most of the Western countries.
As part of the modernization plan, governments seek
to offer their citizens a seamless service delivery by
linking various independently developed systems and
applications. Yet the development and implementation
of enterprise-wide technologies is a massive and
complex undertaking [17].
One of the key obstacles is the legal issues may
constrain the extent of business transformation and IT-
related development work that can be undertaken for
enterprise integration [23]. For example, at the local
level, governmental agencies have the autonomy to
design their own information architecture so long as
they adhere to the existing laws and financial
regulations. This autonomy can lead to massive local
differences as the centrally advocated architectural
design principles and standards may not be adopted
[16].
Due to the local diversity in terms of IT-based
architectures and the number of vendors involved in
the design and development of IT-based systems,
increasingly central administrators and managers are
finding it difficult to manage and effect the needed
transformation and modernization [33]. Specifically,
they are struggling in dealing with the complexity and
problems associated with independently developed and
managed projects at the local level. As local
governmental agencies have a large degree of
autonomy, they are often outside the central purview
and control. Inevitably, systems developed and
decisions taken in local governments are often out of
sync with the central government. Also the ways in
which the central government interacts with the central
governments can increase the final complexity that
enterprise architecture has to deal with. Simon [31] (p.
486) asserted that a complex system is one “made up a
large number of parts that interact in a nonsimple
way.” Hence, a key objective for using architectural
concepts is to manage the complexity and contain the
increasing rate of change [5].
As targets are increasingly difficult to formulate and
the path to a long-term strategy can change as the
target shifts [1], enterprise architecture needs to adapt
to the change-on-change element that characterizes the
surrounding environments. The large number of actors
involved both at the central and local levels, and the
dynamic and nonsimple interactions can hamper the
Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2006
1
0-7695-2507-5/06/$20.00 (C) 2006 IEEE

Page 2

decentralization and improvement of links between the
central and local government. In this regard, public
organizations not only have to stay adaptive to the
constant change but also manage complexity attributed
to the interactions between the central and the local
governments.
To understand the underlying interactions, we use
the perspective of a complex adaptive system (CAS) as
our empirical lens to examine the interactions between
the central and the local governments. The essence of
CAS is the study of systems built of individual agent
that are capable of adapting as they interact with each
other and with an environment, and especially the
attempt to understand how the individual affect the
system-level responses [2]. Most work in CAS has
been conduct in highly abstract and artificial systems,
like cellular automata
algorithms, and in the fields of economics, sociology,
microbiology and medicine [26]. In recent years, CAS
has attracted much interest in management and
organizational related literature (e.g. [9],[10]). It has
been successfully applied to explain the adaptive
behavior of biological systems, optimization tasks and
inductive learning [10].
We use the general definition of CAS as a system
that emerges over time into a coherent form, and
adapts and organizes itself without any singular entity
deliberately managing or controlling it [18]. Through
the CAS lens, we examine the types of interaction
points afforded by
implementation of enterprise
intention is that by conceptualizing enterprise
architecture as CAS, public administrators and
managers can acquire a better understanding of
interactions, and implement design principles that
increase inter-organizational
implementation success. As such we use CAS as a
metaphor to analyzing the key interaction points
between the central and the local governments, and to
identify architectural design principles.
This paper analyzes 11 e-government initiatives
with each involved the development towards enterprise
architecture in the Netherlands between 1980s and
2004. The rest of the paper is structured as follows. In
section 2, we review the literature about the
relationship between enterprise architecture and the
complex adaptive system theory. In section 3, we
discuss our research approach. In section 4, we
introduce and describe the developments and key
interaction points within enterprise architecture for the
public administration in the Netherlands. In section 5,
we derive architectural design principles and
guidelines based on the logic of CAS. In section 6, we
discuss our findings. Lastly, we discuss future research
directions in section seven.
and genetic computer
the development
architecture.
and
Our
jointness and IT
2. Theoretical Background

2.1. Enterprise architecture

Enterprise architecture lacks a universally accepted
definition [30]. It is a kind of city plans that detail
policies and standards for the design of infrastructure
technologies, databases,
Architecture aims at creating some kind of structure in
a chaotic environment using systematic approaches
[1]. The term “enterprise” refers to the scope of the
architecture, dealing with the organization as a whole
or multiple agencies rather than with a certain
organizational part or individual components and/or
projects [8]. The architecture is based on statements of
how an enterprise wants to use IT, not on what and
how information has to be made available. The
strategic aspects of IT systems provide the contexts for
the architectural design choices and decisions.
Enterprise architecture models provide ways to deal
with the complexity including work (who, where),
function (how), information (what) and infrastructure
(how to) [5]. The enterprise framework formula, in
general terms, specifies how information technology is
related to the overall business processes and outcomes
of organizations, describing relationships among
technical, organizational, and institutional components
of the enterprise [12] [29].
The idea of enterprise architecture is that it can be
used to guide design decisions and limits the solution
space by setting constraints. Architectural principles
are textual statements that describe the constraints
imposed upon the organization, and/or the decisions
taken in support of realizing the business strategies.
Principles restrict architectures and set the direction for
the future. Architectural descriptions can form the
basis for the implementation and transformation of
existing structure into the desired architecture.

2.2. Complex Adaptive System Theory

Desai [10] introduces the term adaptive complex
enterprise (ACE) to differentiate from Holland’s [18]
complex adaptive systems. This new term depicts that
many human-designed systems and processes are not
complex and the focus should be on the complexity of
non-designed processes, interactions and relationships
in addition to systems. They argue that a key
managerial task is to design adaptive systems or
processes that bring back or push forward conditions
that are far from equilibrium into state of equilibrium.
According to Lewin and Regine [22], the best-run
organizations function much like a flock of birds, in
which individuals follow simple rules, interact with
and applications [14].
Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2006
2

Page 3

others to form a cohesive and dynamic whole. They
further assert that complex adaptive systems emerge as
a result of the interactions among members. A CAS
has the following emergent characteristics [13]:
1. Emergence: Agents in the system interact in
apparently random ways. From all these interactions,
patterns emerge, and inform the behavior of the agents
within the system and the behavior of the system itself.
2. Co-evolution: All systems exist within their own
environment, and they are also part of that
environment. As their environment changes, they need
to change to ensure best fit. But because they are part
of their environment, when they change, they change
their environment, and so it goes on as a constant
process.
3. Sub optimal: A complex adaptive system does not
have to be perfect in order for it to thrive within its
environment. Once a complex adaptive system reaches
the state of being good enough, it will trade off
efficiency with greater effectiveness.
4. Requisite Variety: The greater the variety within
the system, the stronger it is. Complex adapt systems
rely on ambiguity, paradox and contradictions to create
new possibilities.
5. Connectivity: The ways in which the agents in a
system connect and relate to one another is critical to
the survival of the system, because it is from these
connections that the patterns are formed and the
feedback disseminated. The relationships among the
agents are generally more important than the agents
themselves.
6. Simple Rules: Complex adaptive systems are not
complicated. The emerging patterns may have a rich
variety, but like a kaleidoscope the rules governing the
function of the system are quite simple.
7. Iteration: Small changes in the initial conditions
of the system can have significant impacts after they
have passed through the emergence of feedback loops.
8. Self-organizing: There is no hierarchy of
command and control in a complex adaptive system.
There is no planning or managing, but there is a
constant re-organizing to find the best fit with the
environment. The ability of the agencies to intervene
in the course of events is a key characteristic of CAS
[9].
9. Edge of Chaos: Complexity theory is not the same
as chaos theory, which is derived from mathematics.
But chaos does have a place in complexity theory in
that systems exist on a spectrum ranging from
equilibrium to chaos. The most productive state to be
in is at the edge of chaos where there is maximum
variety and creativity, leading to new possibilities.
Controls, such as rules and regulations or institutional
and budgetary restrictions, ensure that an agent’s
behaviors is limited, in this way changing the
aggregate behavior and helping the CAS to behave in a
predictable way [9].
10. Nested Systems: Most systems are nested within
other systems and many systems are systems of
smaller systems.
If the organizations want to harness the benefits of a
complex adaptive system, then the design of enterprise
architecture has to balance between excessive and no
controls, and allow flexibility and adaptability such
that systems are not frozen because they are tightly
constrained or disintegrate due to little order [10].
Often the behavior of complex adaptive systems can be
predicted using a few simple rules [9]. In this respect,
using simple rules, enterprise architectures should
constrain the actions that can be taken and give
guidance for taking the right direction, in such a way
that it is still possible to adopt and evolve as the
environment changes.

3. Research approach

To explore the nature and background of enterprise
architecture in the public administration of the
Netherlands, we conducted comparative case studies.
We gathered data primarily through semi-structured
interviews. Following the
Eisenhardt [11], we used a theoretical sampling
approach to guide our case selection and to refine our
research questions. With an emphasis on cross-case
diversity, we selected 11 e-government projects with
each involved in the development of enterprise
architecture.
Each case involved a retrospective, in-depth
examination of at least 2 key informants’ account of
the contexts and rationales of how the enterprise
architecture was developed. Many interviews were
directly involved or experienced the results of multiple
projects. In total, we interviewed 25 informants, and
each interview lasted between 1 and 3.5 hours.
Especially the interviews involving multiple projects
lasted for more than one and a half hour. The interview
transcripts were then analyzed to identify the contexts
underpinning the key interaction and contact points
between the central and the local governments, the key
actors involved in the development, and the business
and technical logics behind the design choices and
solutions. To validate any claims and factual
information, we also collected data from multiple
sources including follow-up phone interviews, internal
memos, website research,
information and other relevant consultancy reports.

recommendation of
publicly available
Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2006
3

Page 4

4. Case
enterprise architecture

Figure 1 displays the networks of agencies: the
national agencies at the top and the municipalities at
the bottom. The focus of the present study was on the
key interactions between the Ministry of Interior and
the municipalities.

study: development of an
National level
local
level
constituents
other
governmental
agencies

Figure 1. The network of agencies

4.1. Background

Within the existing laws and financial regulations
of the Netherlands, the local governments enjoy a high
degree of autonomy in making their own decisions.
They have their own budgetary control and can make
independent IT investment decisions. The local
governments are hierarchically organized with varying
degrees of coupling and autonomous coordination.
Despite all the good intentions and efforts, the
existing efforts to direct IT investment and
developments are often ineffective. This has resulted in
a highly fragmented and heterogeneous architecture
within the organization with disparate business
processes, applications and operating systems. The
systems in place have different capabilities, data
formats, content, and user-interfaces. There is no
uniformity and interoperability is limited.
System development projects can be characterized
by the silos-like behavior including redundancy and
duplication of efforts, and the lack of reuse and
information sharing. The silos can be attributed to the
autonomy that individual municipalities have in
exaggerating their unique business requirements and
therefore demanding for unique systems. And the
systems got out of hand as there exists no structure in
place to monitor and govern the development at the
municipality level.
Although the central government tries to guide this
process by setting national targets, the top-down
approach is often criticized for not taking the local
realities into consideration; and the unrealistic
timescales for the realizing those targets often result in
a rushing mentality, which in turn has led to poor
quality and substandard implementation. With the
advent of e-government, the Ministry of Interior has
decided that they want to have more grip on the system
architecture of local municipalities. Against this
backdrop, the Ministry has started since 1980s to
develop enterprise architecture as a means of directing
and constraining the architectures among the Dutch
municipalities.

4.2. Overview of developments

Starting from the eighties, the emphasis was on
automating the citizens’ records by enabling
municipalities to process and authenticate information
in relation to applications for passports and social
security. The most important initiative in this regard
was the creation of standards for the GBA (in Dutch:
Gemeentelijk Basis Administratie). The GBA is the
Dutch vital record registration of data about all
residents living in a particular city or village.
Also due to mergers and consolidation of the
software market, two software vendors became the
dominant suppliers and had effectively created a
duopoly for the municipality market. The technical
dependency and the contractual lock-in had made
switching to another vendor very costly. One of the
architectural aims was to reduce this duopoly by
opening up the technical lock-in through the use of
modular components and standardizing interfaces
among the components.
In the mid-nineties, public managers became aware
of the need for directing developments towards e-
government. This has resulted in a number of plans
and revised plans of the ministry of interior and
kingdom relationships (e.g. [5][6][15][25]). Table 1
provides an overview of the projects initiated at the
national level and the municipalities’ responses. This
table is limited to the main projects at the national
level, as the number of projects is far greater
considering that the number of local agencies is almost
500 and the number of municipality departments is
even higher.




Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2006
4

Page 5

Table 1. Overview of national initiatives and local-level responses
National level initiated project Local government response Year IT implementation
Outcome/Performance
Upside: Clear data ownership
resulting in higher data
quality, improved
interoperability and additional
functionalities.

Downside: An increase in the
level of technical and strategic
lock-in, and the number of
systems in place.
Upside: Standardized products
and services catalogues.

Downside: Customization
deviated from the standards.
1980s Standardization by founding a
citizenry authentication registry.
This registry defined the data to be
stored in the registry but not the
system modules and functionalities.
Municipalities developed and started operating
the citizenry registry.
development and maintenance was shifted to
commercial software vendors and all kinds of
extensions were developed to provide services
based on data. The software market for
municipalities is characterized by the duopoly
lock-in.
Overtime the
1995-
2000
OL2000:
standardized product and service
catalogue to enable the creation of
one-stop shop by municipalities
development of a
Local customization and deviation among
agencies of the use standardized product and
service catalogues.
extended this catalogue, as it did not contain
policy-making or law-enforcement related
product and services
Local governments start developing websites
on a one-to-one basis. A number of software
vendors developed web information systems
for use by government agencies. The number
and variety of systems increased to meet this
target.
Some organizations
1998 The parliament set the target that
30% of the content and services
should be available online by 2001.
Upside: Clear targets.

Downside: Duplication of
development projects;
creating of interoperability
problems, no fostering of
reuse; and no sharing of
experience
Upside: Clear data ownership
resulting in higher data quality
and additional functionalities.

Downside: An increase in
lock-in and the number of
systems in place.

Upside: Fostering local
development.

Downside: limited reuse for
other municipalities, not
dealing with interoperability
problem.
Upside: Clear targets.

Downside: Duplication of
development projects,
creating of interoperability
problems, and no reuse and/or
learning transfer.
Upside: Clear focal point for
e-government enterprise
architectures.

Downside: For municipalities
it is not clear how the results
and reports of the ICTU can
be used
Improved interoperability,
clear data ownership resulting
in higher data quality.
2000- Re-development of business registry
that previously operated by over
500 municipalities. The aim was to
connect all the municipalities by
2004 and to enable to access all
basic information at a national level.
Municipalities
development of the business registry, yet
currently there is still no consensus how the
interface should look like. The tendency seems
to be to define the building blocks and
interfaces, and let multiple software vendors
build a registry.
were involved in the
2001- Selecting and support of ‘super
pilots’. A limited number of large
municipalities were given a large
amount of money to develop certain
components of the architecture (e.g.
authentication,
integration, etc.)
The parliament set the target that
55% of the transaction service
should be available in 2005, and
65% of the services should be
available online by 2007.
back-office
The evaluation of these pilots was very
disastrous. The developed components were
not suitable to reuse, the reports describing the
experiences remained too vague and the
“super pilots” were lagging behind on other
municipalities who did not get any funding.
2004-
As with the target set discussed in the row
above, this resulted in an increase in the
variety of systems in place.
2002- Founding the ICTU, an over-
coupling architecture
office running all the nation-wide
programs including: open source
and standards, and infrastructure
component developments.
program
Municipalities find it difficult to adopt the
reports, systems and concepts provided by the
ICTU. They have a lack of knowledge to
interpret the reports and translate them to their
own situation.
2004 Data cannot be easily exchanged as
various definitions are used and
could be of low quality. Founding
Municipalities will be forced to obtain
business data from the business registry,
which will be operated by the chambers of
Proceedings of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences - 2006
5