Developing best information management practices for business results
Developing an enterprise information architecture information architecture
Information architecture is a term, used primarily by system designers, signi~ing an enterprise
approach for developing an information environment that supports organization-wide data
management and integration. The architecture must systematically document all the
organization's key data entities, attributes and their relationships. The goal is to create a
comprehensive map of all the organization's data, and then build IT solutions based on this map.
Sometimes efforts to create this environment fall short of the goal. One of the common mistakes
made during these activities is assuming that an organization's key information is automated and
structured properly. This is clearly not the case, since no more than 20 to 30 percent of the
information in most organizations is automated. The remaining information required to conduct
daily business reside in manual form, such as paper files, or in the minds of executives and
employees.
There is another reason for the lack of success with this technical approach; often, when it is
focused solely on data elements and data entities, the end product is too granular to hold the
attention of the managers who could benefit most from an explicit and shared information model
of the organization and its business processes. Without the related business processes integrated
into the model, the data elements and entities infrequently become transformed into usable
information to support the broader need for enterprise data management and integration.
A common practice within the IT community is to redesign the information architecture in
response to problems caused by the proliferation of islands of technology and data within
organizations. In the past, as organizations built IT solutions to meet specific business functions,
they created a patchwork of redundant and inconsistent databases focused on the immediate
needs of one particular business function or process, without regard to other practices or
processes. Even when done well, these efforts create data models that are far too large and
cumbersome to be of much practical value to end-users or managers.
No matter how poorly past information architecture development efforts may have turned out,
the desired result is too important to be allowed to languish as a technical exercise by its
designers. If used to articulate a richer and more meaningful picture of information, it can be an
essential tool for establishing information management strategically. As a result, if the
information architecture is understandable by both technical staff and management, these
solutions will be able to bridge the gap between new technologies and the business needs of the
organization.
Information Architecture Concepts
The term hjiwnmtion Architecture is a confusing term, as it combines two words, both of which
have a wide range of connotations. This often increases the challenges of developing a shared
definition understood by both technical staff and management. Even without an established
definition, experience shows that senior information system managers are seriously concerned
with the issue of information architecture within their organization. Moreover, these same
system managers often indicate that information architecture is their foremost issue. Arriving at a
common definition of what an information architecture really is, and realizing its potential value,
goes a long way towards bridging the gap between these two groups.
Both management and technical consultants have been talking about the importance and
advantage of information in organizations for many years. The creation of a properly defined,
commonly agreed-upon, and consistently managed information architecture allows all groups to
speak the same language and use information to make meaningful business decisions.
Two Target Audiences to Consider
The outcome of the information architecture effort should be a structure that uses available
technologies to shape the environment so a specified set of activities can be accomplished by
technical staff and management. While the deliverable structure is the implementation of
particular technology solutions, there are two levels of intermediate design outcomes that should
be derived to guide the transition from architectural vision to actual technology. These outputs
help the communication process between the designer of the information architecture and the
designer's two key audiences-non-technical individuals (users and managers) and technical
staff. The first level of outputs describes the architectural vision in user and manager-centered
terms. The second articulates the details of the architectural vision for the technical staff who
will be charged with implementing it. Given its origins in "techno-speak," the current practice of
developing an information architecture fails to offer user/manager-centered outcomes. This
presents a fundamental challenge in creating effective organizational information architecture.
Adapting available technical tools, such as Computer Aided Software Engineering (CASE)
technology, to serve the user and manager-centered needs is fraught with risk. Technical tools
assume communication among technical staff who share professional terminology and technical
experience and these tools support the physical implementation of the technology. User and
manager-centered tools serve an entirely different purpose. They are primarily used to assist
non-technical individuals, who have completely different levels of understanding, with the clear
definition of their requirements in sufficient detail to meet functional requirements of the tool.
