DIGITAL
TRANSFORMATION
& ARCHITECTURE
Artisanal summaries
Exam summary
Version: 1.1
26-01-2026
,Organizational Change Philosophies
Verhoef [1] defines three phases of digital transformation:
• Digitization, the encoding of analog information into a digital format.
• Digitalization, using IT to alter existing business processes.
• Digital transformation (DX), organization-wide change philosophy, that uses digital
technologies for major business improvements and developing new business models.
Besides DX, several organizational change philosophies exist:
• Business Process Change, redesigning business processes based on revolutionary
and evolutionary organizational change concepts to achieve performance gains.
• IT-enabled Organizational Transformation, using IT to enable major change creates
high-risk, potentially high-reward situations, whereas merely overlaying IT on the as-is
may only yield marginal results.
• Business Process Reengineering (BPR), radical transformation approach that uses a
greenfield approach, redesigning business processes from the ground up [2]. Currently
BPR is outdated and rarely used because of:
o Over-radicalism – Used in cases where redesign would be more appropriate,
leading to resentment and misleading results.
o Culture shock – Existing paradigms were challenged too abruptly, causing
resistance and negative effects such as lay-offs due to sudden FTE reduction.
o Operationalization issues – The creative element of process reengineering was
not understood, which is needed to realize the to-be situation.
o Long cycle-time – BPR projects took too long before delivering results.
o Overemphasis on quality– BPR projects valued process quality over virtually
anything else, leading to scope creep and high costs.
Riasanow [3] categorizes change philosophies into content, order and improvement goals.
Riasanow – Organizational Change Philosophy categorization
Business Process IS-enabled Digital
Organizational Change Transformation
Reengineering Change
Configuration Process change is central IT change is central Business model
change is central
Coordination Intra-organizational Intra-organizational Inter-organizational
Culture Empowerment of Digital mindset Customer first
personnel
IT Supporting role IT as business partner IT as business
owner
Order Second First Second Third
Improvement Economic-driven Both Capability-driven
goals
2
, Enterprise Architecture
Enterprise Architecture (EA): coherent framework of principles, methods, and models used to
design and implement an organization’s structure, goals, processes, information systems. EA
comes with several recognized benefits:
- Accomplishes enterprise-wide goals
- Provides insight into the complexity
- Unifies duplicate processes
- Sets out a clear future situation
- Enables effective communication between stakeholders
Besides EA, other architectural perspectives include [4]:
• Domain Architecture (DA) is defined based on one
group of products, services, processes or functions. EA
combines multiple domain architectures.
• Project Architecture (PA) describes how a solution is
implemented, designs the fundamental elements of an
IT-system and the core processes it will support,
adhering to the relevant EA or DA prescriptions. PA is
more detailed and concrete, as it is on project level.
• Project Start Architecture (PSA): captures the whole
organization at a high level around the project scope
and goals. It gives an overview of all architectural
elements that will be part of a project.
• System Architecture (SA), lowest level description of
the (technical) architecture for a single system.
Lankhorst – EA Architectures
5 myths of EA
The value of and myths about enterprise architecture, Gong 2019 [5]
Myth 1: EA creates value
In itself EA does not create value. If this is the case the scope is probably too large and the
architecture too detailed. The use of EA can create value, EA itself cannot.
Myth 2: EA reduces complexity
EA is an instrument to deal with complexity, but it can increase complexity through overhead.
Myth 3: EA Evaluates all aspects of an enterprise
It does, but not all aspects of an enterprise with the same level of detail.
Myth 4: EA should only capture the situation envisioned
To design a future situation that fits, the current situation should be mapped in detail.
Myth 5: EA is a one-time effort
It is a continuous effort as the organization itself continuously changes as well.
3
TRANSFORMATION
& ARCHITECTURE
Artisanal summaries
Exam summary
Version: 1.1
26-01-2026
,Organizational Change Philosophies
Verhoef [1] defines three phases of digital transformation:
• Digitization, the encoding of analog information into a digital format.
• Digitalization, using IT to alter existing business processes.
• Digital transformation (DX), organization-wide change philosophy, that uses digital
technologies for major business improvements and developing new business models.
Besides DX, several organizational change philosophies exist:
• Business Process Change, redesigning business processes based on revolutionary
and evolutionary organizational change concepts to achieve performance gains.
• IT-enabled Organizational Transformation, using IT to enable major change creates
high-risk, potentially high-reward situations, whereas merely overlaying IT on the as-is
may only yield marginal results.
• Business Process Reengineering (BPR), radical transformation approach that uses a
greenfield approach, redesigning business processes from the ground up [2]. Currently
BPR is outdated and rarely used because of:
o Over-radicalism – Used in cases where redesign would be more appropriate,
leading to resentment and misleading results.
o Culture shock – Existing paradigms were challenged too abruptly, causing
resistance and negative effects such as lay-offs due to sudden FTE reduction.
o Operationalization issues – The creative element of process reengineering was
not understood, which is needed to realize the to-be situation.
o Long cycle-time – BPR projects took too long before delivering results.
o Overemphasis on quality– BPR projects valued process quality over virtually
anything else, leading to scope creep and high costs.
Riasanow [3] categorizes change philosophies into content, order and improvement goals.
Riasanow – Organizational Change Philosophy categorization
Business Process IS-enabled Digital
Organizational Change Transformation
Reengineering Change
Configuration Process change is central IT change is central Business model
change is central
Coordination Intra-organizational Intra-organizational Inter-organizational
Culture Empowerment of Digital mindset Customer first
personnel
IT Supporting role IT as business partner IT as business
owner
Order Second First Second Third
Improvement Economic-driven Both Capability-driven
goals
2
, Enterprise Architecture
Enterprise Architecture (EA): coherent framework of principles, methods, and models used to
design and implement an organization’s structure, goals, processes, information systems. EA
comes with several recognized benefits:
- Accomplishes enterprise-wide goals
- Provides insight into the complexity
- Unifies duplicate processes
- Sets out a clear future situation
- Enables effective communication between stakeholders
Besides EA, other architectural perspectives include [4]:
• Domain Architecture (DA) is defined based on one
group of products, services, processes or functions. EA
combines multiple domain architectures.
• Project Architecture (PA) describes how a solution is
implemented, designs the fundamental elements of an
IT-system and the core processes it will support,
adhering to the relevant EA or DA prescriptions. PA is
more detailed and concrete, as it is on project level.
• Project Start Architecture (PSA): captures the whole
organization at a high level around the project scope
and goals. It gives an overview of all architectural
elements that will be part of a project.
• System Architecture (SA), lowest level description of
the (technical) architecture for a single system.
Lankhorst – EA Architectures
5 myths of EA
The value of and myths about enterprise architecture, Gong 2019 [5]
Myth 1: EA creates value
In itself EA does not create value. If this is the case the scope is probably too large and the
architecture too detailed. The use of EA can create value, EA itself cannot.
Myth 2: EA reduces complexity
EA is an instrument to deal with complexity, but it can increase complexity through overhead.
Myth 3: EA Evaluates all aspects of an enterprise
It does, but not all aspects of an enterprise with the same level of detail.
Myth 4: EA should only capture the situation envisioned
To design a future situation that fits, the current situation should be mapped in detail.
Myth 5: EA is a one-time effort
It is a continuous effort as the organization itself continuously changes as well.
3
