تحلیل کارکرد فنی معماری سازمانی بر عملکرد سازمانی اصلاح فرایندهای کسب وکار سازمان

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار و عضو هیئت علمی گروه مدیریت، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.

2 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد

چکیده

پژوهش حاضر به بررسی تأثیر کارکرد فنی معماری سازمانی بر عملکرد سازمانی با توجه به نقش میانجی‌گری اصلاح فرایندهای کسب‌وکار سازمان بر عملکرد سازمانی می‌پردازد. چارچوب نظری تحقیق، پیوندی را از استفاده مؤثر معماری سازمانی تا موفقیت سازمانی پیشنهاد می‌نماید. روش پژوهش از نظر هدف کاربردی و از جهت شیوه گردآوری داده‌ها توصیفی– همبستگی است. جامعه آماری شامل کلیه مدیران و کارکنان شرکت ملی نفت است، حجم نمونه با فرمول کوکران تعداد 356 نفر برآورد شد. پرسشنامه‌ها به روش نمونه گیری غیر تصادفی در دسترس، میان کارشناسان و مدیران توزیع و گردآوری گردید. روایی پرسشنامه قبل از توزیع با استفاده از نظرات خبرگان و پایایی آن از طریق ضریب آلفای کرونباخ محاسبه شد و مورد تایید قرار گرفت. به منظور تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌های تحقیق، از توصیف آماری و استنباطی با آزمون همبستگی و مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری به کمک نرم‌افزارهای SPSS و LISREL استفاده گردید. نتایج نشان داد، کارکرد فنی معماری سازمانی بر عملکرد سازمانی تأثیر مثبتی دارد. کارکرد فنی معماری سازمانی بر اصلاح فرآیند کسب‌وکار تأثیر مثبتی دارد. اصلاح فرآیند کسب‌وکار بر عملکرد سازمانی تأثیر مثبتی دارد. کارکرد فنی معماری سازمانی با نقش میانجی اصلاح فرآیند کسب‌وکار بر عملکرد سازمانی تأثیر مثبتی دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Technical benefits of Enterprise architecture over organizational performance by mediated of business process

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hamidreza Vazirigohar 1
  • Majid Khaleghi rad 2
1 Assistant Professor and Faculty Member, Department of Management, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran
2 Master of Management student
چکیده [English]

Aim and introduction: Today's businesses strongly influenced by environmental changes and change is always present as a constant parameter, what enables an organization or business to survive effectively and efficiently is its ability to respond in a timely manner, appropriate to developments and changes. One of the main concerns of managers in this turbulent and complex situation is how to minimize the effect of external stimuli on their organization, promote market share, customer satisfaction and ultimately steal the competition from competitors. Business owners have always sought appropriate responses to these stimuli, including reviewing the business and improving business processes, as well as the use of appropriate technology.
Enterprise Architecture is a set of business processes that help the organization in transforming its vision and mission of  business to effective change at the organizational level, through a clear understanding of the current situation and improving it to a better situation in the future.  Enterprise Architecture is more than just an organizational design; it takes into account all aspects of an organizational system. The process of Enterprise Architecture should done in a turbulent business environment with the least cost and the least time and in an optimal way.
In Enterprise Architecture, one of the main skills of an architect is to identify emerging technologies that have likely benefits for the business and embrace those technologies. Enterprise Architects also understand how business events, such as integration, acquisitions, etc, can lead to the development of new architecture. However, although less well known, Enterprise Architecture in general known as a tool to deal with the risks of the business environment and take a better performance.
The purpose of the present study is to investigate investigating the impact of Technical Benefits of Enterprise Architecture on Organizational Performance in respect to the mediating role of Business Process Benefits.
Methodology: The research method applied in terms of purpose and descriptive Correlational in terms of data collection. The statistical population consists of experts from NIOC. The sample size estimated at 356 by Cochran formula. Questionnaires were distributed and collected by unrandom sampling available among experts. The validity of the questionnaire confirmed using experts' opinions and its reliability confirmed by Cronbach's alpha coefficient before distributing. Structural Equation Modeling LISREL and SPSS software used for data analysis.
 Findings: The results showed that the technical benefits of Enterprise Architecture had a positive effect on organizational performance. The technical benefits of Enterprise Architecture have a positive impact on business process reform. Business process reform has a positive impact on organizational performance. The technical benefits of Enterprise Architecture with the mediating role of business process reform have a positive impact on organizational performance.
Discussion and Conclusion: Enterprise Architecture is one of the most important and widely used for strategic alignment of information technology with the business of the organization and a powerful tool for organizing complex information systems and achieving better performance. Obviously, the more agile the Enterprise Architecture can meet the needs of business stakeholders in complex and volatile conditions, surely the better the business goals will be achieved, and it means better performance.
Enterprise Architecture influenced by the principles defined for agile software development and agile management. With the difference, that agile Enterprise Architecture has its own characteristics. Classical Enterprise Architecture frameworks prescribe a framework for different types of business, and the documentation is done according to a specific format and a specific level of detail, and usually are produced a large volume of documentation, regardless of business needs and their prioritization.  Agile methods enable users and stakeholders to participate more actively and effectively in the process. Agile methods consider all architectural stakeholders, such as architects, developers and project managers, as part of the teamwork and try to strengthen and improve business processes by using innovative methods.
Agile Enterprise Architecture is able to use special models, techniques and methods to describe the status quo and the desired situation of the turbulent organization. In addition, the agile Enterprise Architecture contains a special plan called the transition plan, which determines how to achieve the desired state of a turbulent organization. Agile Enterprise Architecture is results-oriented and focuses more on creativity and initiative of individuals. The importance and necessity of Enterprise Architecture is when due to unforeseen changes in technology and mission on a turbulent organization, existing methods of Enterprise Architecture suffer from many problems. In practice, this framework seeks to improve the organization's resource management and performance, from the beginning of entering the organization and strategies, goals and processes.
Changes in business processes, due to rapid developments in technology, especially information technology, have created a competitive environment that inattention to it can lead to endangering the life of the organization, and this is where Enterprise technical Architecture will be critical to achieving higher business performance.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Technical Benefits of Enterprise Architecture
  • Organizational Performance
  • Business Process
  1. Abdi, H. (2016). A review of the importance of On-Time Delivery (OTD) index and review of practical and operational solutions to improve it, http://www.hosseinabdi.ir. (In Persian)
  2. Ahmadi, H. (2017). The position of evaluation in the process of enterprise architecture of information technology and analysis of qualitative evaluation methods of enterprise architecture, the first conference on the development of enterprise architecture of Shahid Beheshti University. (In Persian)
  3. Akhavan, P. & Yazdi Moghaddam, J. (2013). Investigating the combined role of ethical principles and knowledge management on organizational performance. Journal of Ethics in Science and Technology, 8(2). (In Persian).
  4. Akhavan Niaki, A. (2001). Comparison of methodologies for creating and developing information systems. Tehran: ISIran Institute. (In Persian)
  5. Alimadad, M. & Malek Araiy, N. (2015). Principles of accounting (Edition 33). Tehran: Auditing Organization, Volume I, 156. (In Persian)
  6. Allameh, M., Askari, N., & Khazaei, J. (2016). Investigating the effect of organizational culture on organization performance: Emphasis on the role of knowledge sharing and organizational agility with a balanced scorecard approach. Organizational Culture Management. 14(2), 453-474. (In Persian)
  7. Altuntaş, G., Semerciöz F., Mert, A., & Pehlivan, Ça. (2014). Industry forces, competitive and functional strategies and organizational performance: Evidence from restaurants in Istanbul, Turkey, Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 300-309. 
  8. Ashrafi, N., Xu, P., Sathasivam, M., Kuilboer, J. P., Heimann, D., & Waage, (2005). A framework for implementing business agility through knowledge management systems. In: Seventh IEEE International Conference on ECommerce Technology Workshops (CECW05), 116-121.
  9. Babazadeh Harzand H., Amirkhani, A. H., & Rasouli R. (2014). Investigating the effects of office automation systems on human resource productivity in the field of customs supervision in East Azerbaijan province. Master Thesis, Faculty of Management and Accounting, Payame Noor University, Tehran Province (In Persian).
  10. Bandarian, R. (2016). Presenting a conceptual model of strategic agility in research and technology organizations, 12(46), 9-14. (In Persian)
  11. Bartoli, A., & Blatrix, C. (2015). Management dans les organizations publiques (4rd). Dunod, Paris.
  12. Bernard, S. A. (2012). An introduction to enterprise architecture (3rd), AuthorHouse, Bloomington. http://spots.augusta.edu/tschultz/resources/eBooks/IntroEntArch/FrontMatter.pdf
  13. Bharadwaj, S., Chauhan, S., & Raman, A. (2015). Achieving business agility through service-oriented architecture in recovering markets. Springer Proceeding in Business and Economics, 23(5), 15-26.
  14. Biriaei, H. (2008). Providing a framework for evaluating the maturity of Enterprise architecture, Master Thesis in Information Technology Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran. (In Persian)
  15. Blevins, T., Spencer, J.J., & Waskiewicz, F. (2004). Togaf ADM and MDA Open Group OMG.
  16. Blevins, T., Dandashi, F., & Tolbert, M. (2010). The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF™9) and the US Department of Defense Architecture Framework 2.0 (DoDAF 2.0).
  17. Bygstad, B., & Fallmyr, T. (2014). Enterprise architecture practice and organizational agility: An exploratory study. In 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 3788-3797.
  18. Cameron, B. H., & McMillan, E. (2013). Analyzing the current trends in enterprise architecture frameworks. Journal of Enterprise Architecture, 9(1), 60-71.
  19. Cameron, B. H. (2015). Methods for defining and analyzing key ea performance metrics. Business & Enterprise Architecture, 18(2).
  20. Camisón, C., & Villar-López, A. (2014). Organizational innovation as an enabler of technological innovation capabilities and firm performance. Journal of business research, 67(1), 2891-2902.
  21. Campbell, P. (2019). What is revenue growth and how to calculate it. Retrieved from https://www.profitwell.com/blog/revenue-growth
  22. Chang, J. (2005). Business process management systems: strategy and implementation. Taylor & Francis Group.
  23. Davodi, E. & Rahnavard, F. (2005). Comparison of Enterprise architecture in petrochemical and gas subsidiaries, 18(1). (In Persian)
  24. Davoodnia, D., Abbaspour, F., & Farzin Mehr, B. (2016). Investigating the effect of technology readiness on organization performance through technology acceptance. Development Management Process Quarterly, 29(1). (In Persian)
  25. Davoodnia, B. & Zarei Zavaraki, A. (2016). A comparative study of educational management and intelligent technology program in Australia, Malaysia and Iran. New Educational Thoughts, 10(2), 59-91. (In Persian)
  26. Dietz, J., & Hoogervorst, J. (2008). Enterprise architecture in enterprise engineering. DOI: 18417/ emisa.3.1.1
  27. Ebrahim Isfahani, A. (2018). Software development and construction. http://mediasoft.ir. (In Persian)
  28. Espinosa, J.A., Boh, W.F., & DeLone, W. (2011).The organizational impact of enterprise architecture: a research framework, 44th Hawaii International Conference on System SciencesJanuary, 1–10.
  29. Felipe Llanos, C.M., Leidner D.E., Roldán J.L., & Leal Rodríguez, A.L. (2019). Impact of IS capabilities on firm performance: the roles of organizational agility and industry technology intensity. DOI: 10.1111/deci.12379.
  30. Forozandeh, B., Cutler, Ph., & Armstrong, G. (2014). Marketing principles. Tehran: Atropat. (In Persian)
  31. Ghadrdan, A., Davari, A., & Shahbaz Moradi, S. (2012). Evaluation of enterprise architecture with the perspective of human resources experts in National Iranian Oil Company. Exploration and Production Monthly, 92 (In Persian)
  32. Gligor, D. M., Esmark, C. L., & Holcomb, M. C. (2015). Performance outcomes of supply chain agility: When should you be agile? Journal of Operations Management, 33, 71-82.
  33. Grosbois, J.F. (2011). The impact of knowledge management practices on nuclear power plant organization performance. Thesis of PhD, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
  34. Habibollahi, M. & Nabiollahi, A. (2016). Alignment of the organization's business with information technology: with the approach of integration of enterprise architecture and management of organizational processes and service-oriented architecture Case study: Islamic Azad University, International Conference on Computer Engineering and Science. (In Persian)
  35. Haes, S., & Grembergen, W.V. (2015). Enterprise governance of information technology. Switzerland: Springer.
  36. Haghighat Hosseini, A., Bobershad, H., & Saghafi, F. (2016). Identifying the best enterprise architecture framework of the hospital with the implementation approach in Iran. Scientific Journal of the Medical System Organization of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 34(1), 31-44. (In Persian)
  37. Haj Mohammad Hassani, M. (2017). Presenting a solution in the field of combining e-government interoperability and enterprise architecture to improve the organizational dimension of interoperability, the first conference on enterprise architecture advances of Shahid Beheshti University. (In Persian)
  38. Harraf, A., Wanasika, I., Tate, K., & Talbott K. (2015). Organizational agility. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 31(2), 675-86.
  39. Heckler, J., & Powell, A. (2016). IT and organizational agility: A review of major findings IT and organizational agility: A review of major findings. Proceedings of the
  40. Eleventh Midwest Association for Information Systems Conference, 19-20.
  41. Hosseini, A. Tabibi, M.R. & Nattaj Parisa, A. (2018). The Effect of Competitive Intensity on Organization Performance with the Mediating Role of Strategic Human Resource Management and Brand Image: A Study of Mazandaran Hotels, 7(24), 82-101. (In Persian)
  42. Iranzadeh, S., Mesbahi Jahromi, N., Shokri, A., & Ebrahimi, R. (2016). Investigating the relationship between organizational agility and productivity of Dana insurance company employees in east azarbaijan province. Productivity management, 10(38), 117–145. (In Persian)
  43. Jafarzadeh Zarandi, M., Sharifian, A., & Ghahraman Tabrizi, K. (2018). Presenting an organizational agility model based on information technology in Iranian sports organizations. Sports Management Studies, 10(52), 137-160. (In Persian)
  44. Jairak, K., Praneetpolgrang, P., & Subsermsri, P. (2015). Information technology governance practices based on sufficiency economy philosophy in the Thai university sector. Information Technology & People, 28(1), 195-223.
  45. Ji, W., & Xia, A. (2007). Federal enterprise architecture framework, Comput. Integr. Manuf. Syst. BEIJING, 13(1), 57.
  46. Kaisler, S. H., Armour, F., & Valivullah, M. (2005). Enterprise architecting: critical problems proc. of the 38th Hawaii Int'l Conf. System Sciences, 8(8), 224.2
  47. Kaisler, S.H., Armour, F.J., & Valivullah, M. (2006).Enterprise architecting: critical problems. In 39th Hawaiian International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). Poipu, Kauai, Hawaii: IEEE.
  48. Karami, R. (2015). Proposing a research program: Identifying and modeling applicative scenarios of Enterprise Architecture. Informatics Report, (In Persian)
  49. Kasemsap, K. (2018). The role of information system within enterprise architecture and their impact on business performance. In Global Business Expansion: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, 1078-1102.
  50. Keshavarz, S., Mahnaz Q., Sahraeian, K., & Taheri, Sh. (2018). Investigating the relationship between ict understanding and organization performance with the mediating role of supply chain management and business process management of Shiraz industrial town companies, 2nd International Conference on New Developments in Management, Economics and Accounting, Tehran. (In Persian)
  51. Khayami, R., degree, A., & Parvin Nia, A. (2016) Enterprise architecture in practice (principles, concepts and perspectives in enterprise architecture thinking), deputy of urban planning and development, District 16, Department of Organization and Improvement of Methods. (In Persian)
  52. Khayyam Shahraki, M., Alavi, S., Yazd Khasti, A., & Davarpanah Jazi, M. (2017). The Role of information technology in enterprise architecture, International Conference on Information Engineering and Technology, Tehran. (In Persian)
  53. Khashi, A., Khajeh Ali Jahantighi, Z., & Okati, S. (2017). Cybernetics, information management and document management case study, 2nd International Conference on Management and Accounting. (In Persian)
  54. Khodabakhshi, M., Tavalayii, R., & Taybi Abolhassani, A. (2016). Investigating the effect of information technology on the agility of production and service organizations. Science and Technology Policy, 6(4), 13-22. (In Persian)
  55. Khodami, S., Khodadad Hosseini, H., Meshbaki, A., & Azar, A. (2012). Designing a Customer Agility Model with a Dynamic Organizational Capabilities Approach: Investigating the Role of IT Competence, Entrepreneurial Awareness and Market Wisdom. Scientific Journal of Modern Marketing Research, 2(1), 1-24. (In Persian)
  56. Khosravi Pour, A. (2017). The effect of ICT internal variables on organizational agility in public universities in Khuzestan province (Case study: Ramin Khuzestan University of Agriculture and Natural Resources). Quarterly Journal of Educational Management Innovations, 12(2), 52-64. (In Persian)
  57. Khosravi Pour, A., & Amirnejad, Q. (2014). The effect of information and communication technology on organizational agility in public universities in Khuzestan province (Case study: Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz). Social Development, 8(4), 47-66. (In Persian)
    Krishnan, S. (2018). What is au tomation in information technology? Retrieved from https://www.quora.com/What-is-automation-in-information-technology.
  58. Kuo, Y. L. (2013). Technology readiness as moderator for construction company performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 113(4), 558–572. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02635571311322793
  59. Lange, M., Mendling, J., & Recker, J. (2015). An empirical analysis of the factors and measures of enterprise architecture management success. European Journal of Information Systems, 1–
  60. Lange, ,  Mendling, J., & Recker, J. (2012). Realizing benefits from enterprise architecture: a Measurement Model, ECIS. 
  61. Lankhorst, M. (2005). Enterprise architecture at work-modeling, Communication and analysis. SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg, © Printed in Germany.
  62. Lankhorst, M. (2009). Enterprise architecture at work: Modelling, communication and analysis (2nd ed). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
  63. Levis, A. H., & Wagenhals, L. W. (2000). C4ISR architectures: Developing a process for C4ISR architecture design, Syst. Eng., 3(4), 225–247.
  64. Longbottom, C., &  Bigelow, S. (2017).Https://searchdatacenter.techtarget.com/definition/infrastructure
  65. Long, G., Rosser, B., & Stanley, C. (2003). Gartner 360°: enterprise architecture, U.S. Symposium/ IT, 23–27 March, San Diego Convention Center, San Diego, California.
  66. Lopez-Nicolas, C., & Merono-Cerdan, A. (2011). Strategic knowledge management, innovation and performance. Information Management, 31(3), 502 –509.
  67. Mahjoorian, A. (2016). Workshop: Business Process Management System, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Iran Information Technology Organization. (In Persian)
  68. Mahjoorian, A. (2017). Enterprise architecture from the perspective of managers. KarizSystem.ir, Soea.sbu.ac.ir. (In Persian)
  69. Masoudi, M. (2015). Investigating the impact of establishing an integrated management system (ims) on organization performance with organizational excellence model (EFQM) approach, the Second International Conference on New Research in Management, Economics and Accounting. (In Persian)
  70. Nazemi, A. (2015). Business process reengineering workshop (Profession), Shahid Beheshti University, Faculty of Computer Engineering and Sciences. (In Persian)
  71. Minoli, (2008). Enterprise architecture A to Z: frameworks, business process modeling, SOA, and infrastructure technology. CRC Press: Auerbach Publications.
  72. Mirsalari, R., Ranjbarfard, M., & Khadivar, A. (2016). Investigating the role of enterprise architecture in creating organizational agility through the capability of information technology, Master's thesis in Information Technology Management, majoring in advanced information systems, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Al-Zahra University. (In Persian)
  73. Mithas, S., Ramasubbu, N., & Sambamurthy, V. (2011). How information management capability influences firm performance. MIS quarterly, 35(1), 237-256.
  74. Moein Najafabadi, A. (2015). Approaches and models in business process management (BPM), e-book collection of practical booklets in the field of integrated and comprehensive strategic change management. (In Persian)
  75. Moghaddam, A. & Shafizadeh, A. (2016). Book of accounting principles I (17th edition). Publication of Payame Noor University. 104. (In Persian)
  76. Mohammadi, A. & Amiri, Y. (2012). Providing an interpretive structural model of achieving agility through information technology in manufacturing organizations. Information Technology Management, 4(13), 115-134. (In Persian)
  77. Montilva, J., Barrios, J., Besembel, I., & Montilva, W. (2014). A Business Process Model for IT Management Based on Enterprise Architecture. Clei electronic journal, 17(2).
  78. Morais, R. M., Kazan, S., Pádua, S. D., & Costa, A. L. (2014) .An analysis of BPM lifecycles: from a literature review to a framework proposal. Business Process Management Journal, 20(3), 412-432.
  79. Morgan, R. E. P. (2008). Managing business transformation to deliver strategic agility. Strategic Change, 17, 155-168.
  80. Morganwalp, J. M., & Sage, A. P. (2004). Enterprise architecture measures of effectiveness.  International Journal of Technology Policy and Management, 4(1).
  81. Musa Khani, M., Manian, A., Mahmoudi, J., & Kargar, M. (2017). Providing a comprehensive framework for IT management and localization for the Iranian automotive industry (Atlas Automobile). Information Technology Management, 9(1), 65-143. (In Persian)
  82. Niemi, E. (2016). Enterprise architecture benefit realization, thesis for the degree of doctor of philosophy to be presented with due permission for public examination and criticism in festia building, Auditorium Pieni Sali 1, at Tampere, University of Technology, on the 18th.
  83. Niemi, E., & Pekkola, S. (2016). Enterprise architecture benefit realization: review of the models and a case study of a public organization. The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems, 47(3), 55-80. https://doi.org/10.1145/2980783.2980787
  84. Overby, E., Bharadwaj, A. S., & Sambamurthy, V. (2006). Enterprise Agility and the Enabling Role of Information Technology. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(2), 120-131.
  85. Pulkkinen, M. (2006). Systemic management of architectural decisions in enterprise architecture planning. Four dimensions and three abstraction levels. In Sprague, R.H.Jr. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
  86. Queiroz, M., Tallon P., Sharma, R., & Coltman, T. (2017). The role of IT application orchestration capability in improving agility and performance. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(1), 4-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsis.2017.10.002
  87. Ranjbar Fard, M. & Jangju, Z. (2017). An overview of maturity models in the field of business process management. Journal of Standard and Quality Management, 7(24), 32-46. (In Persian)
  88. Rangiha, M. E. (2016). A framework for social BPM based on social tagging (Doctoral dissertation). City University London.
  89. Ravichandran, T. (2018). Exploring the relationships between IT competence, innovation capacity and organizational agility. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(1), 22-42.
  90. Rezvani, H. (2015). Research method in management. Tehran: Mehraban Book Publishing. (In Persian)
  91. Rummler, G. A., & Brache, A. P. J. (2012). Improving performance: how to manage the white space in the organization chart, 2nded (1995), 3nded (2012).
  92. Saint-Louis, P., & Lapalme, J. (2018). An exploration of the many ways to approach the discipline of enterprise architecture. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 10, 1–26. DOI:10.1177/1847979018807383,journals.sagepub.com/home/enb
  93. Salimiyan, A., & Chang, J. (2014). Business process management systems, translation of business process management systems, Chapter 2, bpms.rayvarz.com. (In Persian)
  94. Sarlak, M., Del Angizan, S., & Kakeh Barai, A. (2016). Investigating the effective factors on creating agile organizations based on Goldman and Nagel model. Journal of Development and Transformation Management, 24, 1-10. (In Persian)
  95. Sarmad, Z., Bazargan, A., & Hejazi, E. (2009). Research methods in behavioral sciences.Tehran: Agah Publication. (In Persian)
  96. Sasa, A., & Krisper, M. (2011). Enterprise architecture patterns for business process support analysis. Journal of Systems and Software, 84(9), 1480-1506. Doi:10.1016/j.jss.2011.02.043
  97. Sepahvand, R., Saedi, A., & Shariatnejad, A. (2017). Designing an architectural model of human capital in government organizations using grounded theory. Journal of Human Resource Management and Support Development, No. 44. (In Persian)
  98. Shahsavaripour, N., Rezvan Doost, Sh., Mirzaei, A., & Heidarbigi, Sh. (2017). The relationship between the alignment of IT strategy and business strategy with organizational agility in software companies. Quarterly Journal of Information Technology Management Studies, 5(19), 75-103. (In Persian)
  99. Shao, B.M., & Lin, W.T. (2016). Assessing output performance of information technology service industries: productivity, innovation and catch-up. International Journal of Production Economics, 172(1), 43-53.
  100. Siminica, M. (2008). The performances of industrial firms from Romania. Correlation dimension indicators of results, Theoretical and Applied Economics
  101. Singh, S.K., Darwish, T., Costa, A. C., & Anderson, N. (2012). Measuring HRM and organizational performance: concepts, issues, and framework. Management Decision, 50(4), 651-667.
  102. Swafford, P.M., Ghosh, S., & Murthy, N. (2008). Achieving supply chain agility through IT integration and flexibility. International Journal of Production Economics, 116, 288–297.
  103. Surbhi, S. (2017). Difference between Cost Control and Cost Reduction. Retrieved from https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-cost-control-and-cost-reduction.html
  104. Taqwa, M., Hosseini Bamkan, M., & Fallah Lajimi, H. (2013). The effect of using information technology on organizational performance and competitive advantage. Quarterly Journal of Information Technology Management Studies, 2(5), 1-17. (In Persian)
  105. Tamm, T., Seddon, P.B., Shanks, G., & Reynolds, P. (2011). How does enterprise architecture add value to organisations? Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 28(1), 141–
  106. Taleghani, M., Nourbakhsh, M., & Langroudi, M. (2014). The effect of using information technology on the productivity of Gilan Regional Electricity Company. Development and Transformation Management Quarterly, 6(19), 67-76. (In Persian)
  107. Tallon, P., Queiroz, M., Coltman, T., & Sharma, R. (2019). Information Technology and the Search for Organizational Agility: A Systematic Review with Future Research Possibilities. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 218-237, DOI: 10.1016/j.jsis.2018.12.002
  108. Taouab, O. & Issor, Z. (2019). Firm Performance: Definition and Measurement Models.European Scientific Journal, 15(1).
  109. The Open Group. (2011). TOGAF® Version 9.1, an Open Group Standard.
  110. Tseng, Y. H., & Lin, C. T. (2011). Enhancing enterprise agility by deploying agile drivers, Capabilities and Providers. Information Sciences, 181, 3693–3708.
  111. Vaezzadeh Dahaghi, F. & Nabiollahi, A. (2018). SAFe Framework: A scalable and agile approach to implementing large enterprise architecture projects. The Second National Conference on Organizational Architecture Advances, Shiraz (In Persian)
  112. Vahdat, D. & Nazemi, A. (2017). A Comparison of the relationship between enterprise architecture development maturity and individual satisfaction and examining the reasons for organizations' approach to architectural solutions, The First National Conference on Organizational Architecture Advances, Tehran. (In Persian)
  113. Valipour Khatir, M., Mohammadpour Imran, M., & Akbarzadeh, Z. (2015). Indicators of organizational agility with using technique decision making evaluation of multi-fuzzy criteria (Electricity Development Organization). Innovation and Value Creation, 7, 1-18. (In Persian)
  114. Van der, D., & Van zee, M. (2015). Insights from a study on decision making in enterprise architecture, CEUR workshap peroceeding, 1497, 21-30.
  115. Van Zijl, Ch., & Van Belle, J.P. (2014). Organisational Impact of Enterprise Architecture and Business Process Capability in South African Organisations. International Journal of Trade, Economics and Finance, 5(5).
  116. Wertman, C. (2000). History and background of C4I-to-Simulation interoperability, C4ISR Track Invited Speaker Presentation, 2000 Spring Simulation Interoperability Workshop.
  117. Yamamoto, S., Olayan, N. I., & Morisaki, S. (2018). Another Look at Enterprise Architecture Framework. Journal of Business Theory and Practice, 6(2). www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/jbtp
  118. Yazdanpanah, A., Mohammadi, F., Nezami, N., Sharafi, R., & Keshavarz, M. (2017). Development of a communication model of organizational agility and competitive intelligence mediated by information technology in the staff of the Ministry of Sports and Youth. Journal of Educational Sciences and Psychology, 4(3), 81-93. (In Persian)
  119. Youssuf, Y. Y., Gunasekaran, A., Adeleye, E.O., & Sivayoganathan, K. (2005). Agile supply chain capabilities: Determinants of competitive objectives. European journal of operational research, Elsevier.
  120. Zachman, J. A. (1987). A Framework for Information Systems Architecture. IBM Systems Journal, 26(3), 276-292. https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.263.0276
  121. Zandi, F., & Tavana, M. (2012). A fuzzy group multi-criteria enterprise architecture framework selection model. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 1065-1073.
  122. Zargar, M. (2018). From implementing service-oriented architecture to organizational agility with a system dynamics modeling approach. Journal of Information Processing and Management, 33(4), 94. (In Persian)