Guiding IT Growth and Sustaining Performance in SMEs Through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management: A Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Research Questions
- What specific strategies in Enterprise Architecture (EA) are most effective for guiding IT growth and sustaining performance in organizations, and under what conditions?
- How does EA facilitate alignment between IT and business objectives in different organizational contexts (e.g., centralized vs. decentralized, and public vs. private sector), and what are the key mechanisms and success factors?
- What methodologies and frameworks exist for integrating EA with specific IT management frameworks like TOGAF (The Open Group Architecture Framework), ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library), COBIT (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology), or Agile, and how do they compare in terms of benefits, challenges, and suitability for different organizational needs?
- How do emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), cloud computing, and the Internet of Things (IoT) influence the evolution of EA best practices in areas such as architecture modeling, decision support, and stakeholder engagement, and what new capabilities do they enable?
- How do specific aspects of organizational culture, such as leadership support, changes in management practices, and employee digital skills, affect the adoption and success of EA initiative, and what cultural changes are needed to create a digital-savvy workforce that can effectively utilize EA?
1.2. Research Motivations (Rationale)
1.3. Objectives
- To systematically assess how the execution of EA and IM frameworks enhances operational efficiency in SMEs by identifying process inefficiencies and optimizing workflows, ultimately leading to reduced costs and improved service delivery.
- To investigate how effective IM enables SMEs to leverage data analytics for informed strategic decision-making, focusing on the alignment of tailored EA frameworks with business objectives to foster innovation and responsiveness to market changes.
- To explore the ways in which EA facilitates improved collaboration and communication within SMEs, assessing its impact on interdepartmental teamwork and its role in fostering innovation and continuous improvement while ensuring scalability and flexibility.
- To analyze the integration of EA into the strategic planning processes of SMEs, focusing on its effectiveness in enhancing risk management, fostering innovation, and aligning IT initiatives with business goals to maximize IT investments and support organizational objectives.
- To evaluate the existing EA frameworks and their application in SMEs with a focus on real-world case studies.
1.4. Research Contribution
1.5. Research Novelty
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Eligibility Criteria
2.2. Information Sources
2.3. Search Strategy
2.4. Selection Process
2.5. Data Collection Process
Data Quality Appraisal
2.6. Data Items
2.7. Study Risk of Bias Assessment
2.8. Effect Measures
2.9. Synthesis Methods
2.9.1. Tabulation and Visual Display Methods of Obtained Scholarly Papers
2.9.2. Methods Employed to Synthesize the Findings
2.9.3. Methods Used to Explore Possible Causes of Heterogeneity Among Study Results
2.9.4. Sensitivity Analysis
2.10. Reporting Bias Assessment
2.11. Certainty Assessment
3. Results
3.1. Results of Study Selection
3.1.1. Identification and Screening Process
3.1.2. Final Inclusion
3.1.3. Potential Studies for Exclusion
3.1.4. Flow Diagram of PRISMA
3.2. Study Characteristics
3.3. Risk of Bias in Studies
3.4. Results of Individual Studies
3.5. Results of Syntheses
3.5.1. Characteristics of Syntheses
3.5.2. Risk of Bias Assessment
3.6. Reporting Biases
3.7. Certainty of Evidence
4. Discussion
Q1. What specific strategies in Enterprise Architecture (EA) are most effective for guiding IT growth and sustaining performance in organizations, and under what conditions?
Q2. How does EA facilitate alignment between IT and business objectives in different organizational contexts (e.g., centralized vs. decentralized, and public vs. private sector), and what are the key mechanisms and success factors?
Q3. What methodologies and frameworks exist for integrating EA with specific IT management frameworks like TOGAF (The Open Group Architecture Framework), ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library), COBIT (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology), or Agile, and how do they compare in terms of benefits, challenges, and suitability for different organizational needs?
Q4. How do emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), cloud computing, and the Internet of Things (IoT) influence the evolution of EA best practices in areas such as architecture modeling, decision support, and stakeholder engagement, and what new capabilities do they enable?
Q5. How do specific aspects of organizational culture, such as leadership support, changes in management practices, and employee digital skills, affect the adoption and success of EA initiative, and what cultural changes are needed to create a digital-savvy workforce that can effectively utilize EA?
5. Practical Recommendations
6. Other Information—Registration and Protocol
6.1. Registration
6.2. Protocol Access
6.3. Amendments
7. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Adudu, C., Asenge, L. E., & Zannu, S. M. (2022). Strategy evaluation on performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Makurdi metropolis, Benue state. Sapientia Global Journal of Arts, Humanities and Development Studies, 5(4). Available online: http://sgojahds.com/index.php/SGOJAHDS/article/view/404 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Afarini, N., & Hindarto, D. (2023). The proposed implementation of enterprise architecture in E-government development and services. International Journal Software Engineering and Computer Science (IJSECS), 3(3), 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agostinho, C., Ducq, Y., Zacharewicz, G., Sarraipa, J., Lampathaki, F., Poler, R., & Jardim-Goncalves, R. (2016). Towards a sustainable interoperability in networked enterprise information systems: Trends of knowledge and model-driven technology. Computers in Industry, 79, 64–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahlemann, F., Legner, C., & Lux, J. (2021). A resource-based perspective of value generation through enterprise architecture management. Information & Management, 58(1), 103266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, N. A., Mohd Drus, S., & Kasim, H. (2022). Factors of organizational adoption of enterprise architecture in Malaysian public sector: A multi-group analysis. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 24(4), 331–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Momani, A. A., Sarram, M., Zighan, S. M., Al-Majali, R. T., Al-Shanableh, N., Saatchi, S. G., Shatnawi, T. M., Alajarmeh, N. S., Al-Hawary, S. I., & Mohammad, A. A. (2024). The influence of cybersecurity leadership on the resilience of Jordanian businesses: A study on the role of cybersecurity measures in entrepreneurial success. In Business analytical capabilities and artificial intelligence-enabled analytics: Applications and challenges in the digital era (Vol. 2, pp. 1–15). Springer Nature Switzerland. Available online: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-57242-5_1 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Al-Shukri, K. S. (2024). Strategic information planning and performance of SMEs: A structural equation modelling approach. Human Systems Management, 43(3), 341–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Somali, S. A., Saqr, R. R., Asiri, A. M., & Al-Somali, N. A. (2024). Organizational cybersecurity systems and sustainable business performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Saudi Arabia: The mediating and moderating role of cybersecurity resilience and organizational culture. Sustainability, 16(5), 1880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alam, M. K., Ibrahim, M. A., Almaslamani, M. J., Saeed, M. H., Siurkel, Y., Ronsivalle, V., Cicciù, M., & Minervini, G. (2024). Correlating estrogen replacement therapy and temporomandibular disorders: A comprehensive review following PRISMA principles and the cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. BMC Oral Health, 24(1), 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alghamdi, H. (2024a). Assessing the impact of enterprise architecture on digital transformation success: A global perspective. Sustainability, 16, 8865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alghamdi, H. (2024b). Sustainability in enterprise architecture: From optional to essential. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 13(3), 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alirezaie, M., Hoffman, W., Zabihi, P., Rahnama, H., & Pentland, A. (2024). Decentralized data and artificial intelligence orchestration for transparent and efficient small and medium-sized enterprises trade financing. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 17(1), 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alzoubi, Y. I., & Gill, A. Q. (2022). Can agile enterprise architecture be implemented successfully in distributed agile development? Empirical findings. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 23(2), 221–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andriyanto, A., & Doss, R. (2020). Problems and solutions of service architecture in small and medium enterprise communities. arXiv. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anthony Jnr, B., Petersen, S. A., Helfert, M., & Guo, H. (2021). Digital transformation with enterprise architecture for smarter cities: A qualitative research approach. Digital policy. Regulation and Governance, ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anthony Jnr, B., Petersen, S. A., & Krogstie, J. (2023). A model to evaluate the acceptance and usefulness of enterprise architecture for digitalization of cities. Kybernetes, 52(1), 422–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antunes, M., Maximiano, M., Gomes, R., & Pinto, D. (2021). Information security and cybersecurity management: A case study with SMEs in Portugal. Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy, 1, 219–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baptista, L. F., & Barata, J. (2021). Piloting Industry 4.0 in SMEs with RAMI 4.0: An enterprise architecture approach. Procedia Computer Science, 192, 2826–2835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barros, O. (2022). A management and enterprise architecture framework for comprehensive structure design of complex services. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology, 13(1), 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batmetan, J. R., Rawis, J. A., Lengkong, J. S., & Rotty, V. N. (2023). Future trends for direction in enterprise architecture: Systematic literature review. International Journal of Information Technology and Education, 2(3), 1–20. Available online: http://ijite.jredu.id/index.php/ijite/article/view/120 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Becker, W., & Schmid, O. (2020). The right digital strategy for your business: An empirical analysis of the design and implementation of digital strategies in SMEs and LSEs. Business Research, 13, 985–1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beese, J., Aier, S., Haki, K., & Winter, R. (2022). The impact of enterprise architecture management on information systems architecture complexity. European Journal of Information Systems, 32(6), 1070–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernaert, M., Poels, G., & Snoeck, M. (2016). CHOOSE: Towards a metamodel for enterprise architecture in small and medium-sized enterprises. Information Systems Frontiers, 18, 781–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernaert, M., Poels, G., Snoeck, M., & De Backer, M. (2014). Enterprise architecture for small and medium-sized enterprises: A starting point for bringing EA to SMEs, based on adoption models. In J. Devos, H. van Landeghem, & D. Deschoolmeester (Eds.), Information systems for small and medium-sized enterprises (pp. 43–60). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bourmpoulias, S., & Tarabanis, K. (2020, June 22–24). A systematic mapping study on enterprise architecture for the education domain: Approaches and challenges. 2020 IEEE 22nd Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), Antwerp, Belgium. [Google Scholar]
- Cahyono, B., Nurcholis, L., & Nugroho, M. (2022). Information technology implementation in SMEs: A comparison of Indonesia and Malaysia. Jurnal Manajemen Teori dan Terapan, 15(1). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chabalala, K., Boyana, S., Kolisi, L., Thango, B. A., & Matshaka, L. (2024). Digital technologies and channels for competitive advantage in SMEs: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaithanapat, P., & Rakthin, S. (2021). Customer knowledge management in SMEs: Review and research agenda. Knowledge and Process Management, 28(1), 71–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corbett, M. S., Higgins, J. P., & Woolacott, N. F. (2014). Assessing baseline imbalance in randomised trials: Implications for the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(1), 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Deny, D., Herlian, A., & Andry, J. F. (2021). Enterprise architecture design using TOGAF ADM framework (SME case study: Dormitory house). International Journal of Open Information Technologies, 9(1), 95–99. Available online: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/enterprise-architecture-design-using-togaf-adm-framework-sme-case-study-dormitory-house (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Dumitriu, D., & Popescu, M. A. (2020). Enterprise architecture framework design in IT management. Procedia Manufacturing, 46, 932–940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Espinosa, J. A., Boh, W. F., & DeLone, W. (2011, January 4–7). The organizational impact of enterprise architecture: A research framework. 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10), Kauai, HI, USA. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faruque, M. O., Sharmin, S., Talukder, T., & Chowdhury, S. N. (2024). Management information systems: Evaluating the adoption and impact of cloud computing in enterprise information systems. Journal of Asian Business Strategy, 14(1), 90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaskins, T. J. (2019). Strategies for small business survival for longer than 5 years [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. Available online: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8919&context=dissertations (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Gerber, A., le Roux, P., & van der Merwe, A. (2020). Enterprise architecture as explanatory information systems theory for understanding small- and medium-sized enterprise growth. Sustainability, 12, 8517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giachetti, R. (2016). Design of enterprise systems (1st ed.). CRC Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Granholm, A., Alhazzani, W., & Møller, M. H. (2019). Use of the GRADE approach in systematic reviews and guidelines. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 123(5), 554–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grave, F., Van de Wetering, R., & Kusters, R. (2023). Enterprise architecture artifacts’ role in improved organizational performance. In Lecture notes in business information processing (pp. 214–224). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grisot, M., Hanseth, O., & Thorseng, A. (2014). Innovation of, in, and on infrastructures: Articulating the role of architecture in information infrastructure evolution. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 15(4), 197–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gumede, T. T., Chiworeka, J. M., Magoda, A. S., & Thango, B. (2024). Building effective social media strategies for business: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, H., Smite, D., Li, J., & Gao, S. (2021). Enterprise architecture and agility: A systematic mapping study. In Lecture notes in business information processing (pp. 296–305). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hadaya, P., Leshob, A., Marchildon, P., & Matyas-Balassy, I. (2020). Enterprise architecture framework evaluation criteria: A literature review and artifact development. Service Oriented Computing and Applications, 14(3), 203–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haki, K., & Legner, C. (2021). The mechanics of enterprise architecture principles. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 22(5), 1334–1375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hasanah, A. U., Shino, Y., & Kosasih, S. (2022). The role of information technology in improving the competitiveness of small and SME enterprises. IAIC Transactions on Sustainable Digital Innovation (ITSDI), 3(2), 168–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hermawan, R. T. S., Sandhyaduhita, P. I., Hidayanto, A. N., & Nazief, B. A. A. (2017). Analysis and formulation of green IT implementation strategy, its driving and inhibiting factors in organisations in Indonesia. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 22(2), 198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heyeres, M., Tsey, K., Yang, Y., Yan, L., & Jiang, H. (2019). The characteristics and reporting quality of research impact case studies: A systematic review. Evaluation and Program Planning, 73, 10–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Higgins, T. J., & Green, S. G. (Eds.). (2019). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. Available online: https://dariososafoula.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/cochrane-handbook-for-systematic-reviews-of-interventions-2019-1.pdf (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Huang, L. (2021). Applications of small and medium enterprise management system using edge algorithm. Mobile Information Systems, 2021, 8730413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, A., Wahab, S. A., & Latiff, A. A. (2022). Annexing a smart sustainable business growth model for small and medium enterprises (SMEs). World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 18(2), 185–209. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354034695 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Jasin, M., Anisah, H., Fatimah, C., Azra, F., Suzanawaty, L., & Junaedi, I. (2024). The role of digital literacy and knowledge management on process innovation in SMEs. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 8(1), 337–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, J., & Chen, J. (2021). Framework of blockchain-supported e-commerce platform for small and medium enterprises. Sustainability, 13, 8158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jnr, B. A., & Petersen, S. A. (2023). Validation of a developed enterprise architecture framework for digitalisation of smart cities: A mixed-mode approach. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 14(2), 1702–1733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jonkers, H., Lankhorst, M. M., ter Doest, H. W. L., Arbab, F., Bosma, H., & Wieringa, R. J. (2006). Enterprise architecture: Management tool and blueprint for the organisation. Information Systems Frontiers, 8(2), 63–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jørgensen, L., Paludan-Müller, A. S., Laursen, D. R., Savović, J., Boutron, I., Sterne, J. A., Higgins, J. P., & Hróbjartsson, A. (2016). Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials: Overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Judijanto, L., Hindarto, D., & Wahjono, S. I. (2023). Edge of enterprise architecture in addressing cyber security threats and business risks. International Journal Software Engineering and Computer Science (IJSECS), 3(3), 386–396. Available online: https://journal.lembagakita.org/ijsecs/article/view/1816 (accessed on 8 November 2024). [CrossRef]
- Kareem, H. M., Dauwed, M., Meri, A., Jarrar, M., Al-Bsheish, M., & Aldujaili, A. A. (2021). The role of accounting information system and knowledge management to enhancing organizational performance in Iraqi SMEs. Sustainability, 13, 12706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kgakatsi, M., Galeboe, O. P., Molelekwa, K. K., & Thango, B. A. (2024). The impact of big data on SME performance: A systematic review. Businesses, 4, 632–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khairudin, S. M., & Amin, M. (2019). Towards economic growth: The impact of information technology on performance of SMEs. Journal of Security & Sustainability Issues, 9(1). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kitsios, F., & Kamariotou, M. (2018). Business strategy modelling based on enterprise architecture: A state of the art review. Business Process Management Journal, 25(4), 543–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knezović, E., Bušatlić, S., & Riđić, O. (2020). Strategic human resource management in small and medium enterprises. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 20(2), 114–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kornyshova, E., & Deneckère, R. (2022). A proposal of a situational approach for enterprise architecture frameworks: Application to TOGAF. Procedia Computer Science, 207, 3499–3506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotusev, S., & Alwadain, A. (2024). Modeling business capabilities in enterprise architecture practice: The case of business capability models. Information Systems Management, 41(2), 201–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lebaea, R., Roshe, Y., Ntontela, S., & Thango, B. A. (2024). The role of data governance in ensuring system success and long-term IT performance: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levstek, A., Pucihar, A., & Hovelja, T. (2022). Towards an adaptive strategic IT governance model for SMEs. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 17, 230–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levy, M., & Bui, Q. N. (2019). How field-level institutions become a part of organizations: A study of enterprise architecture as a tool for institutional change. Information and Organization, 29(4), 100272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z., Sampaio, P., Pishchulov, G., Mehandjiev, N., Cisneros-Cabrera, S., Schirrmann, A., Jiru, F., & Bnouhanna, N. (2022). The architectural design and implementation of a digital platform for Industry 4.0 SME collaboration. Computers in Industry, 138, 103623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mankge, F., Pogiso, K., Ndaba, Z., & Thango, B. (2024). A systematic review of success factors and failure reasons in enterprise systems for executive, managerial, and operational support. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manyaga, M. B., Goldman, G. A., & Thomas, P. (2024). Sustaining SMEs through indigenous knowledge systems: Exploring opportunities and challenges. Southern African Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management, 16(1), 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maswanganyi, N. G., Fumani, N. M., Khoza, J. K., Thango, B. A., & Matshaka, L. (2024). Evaluating the impact of database and data warehouse technologies on organizational performance: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merín-Rodrigáñez, J., Dasí, À., & Alegre, J. (2024). Digital transformation and firm performance in innovative SMEs: The mediating role of business model innovation. Technovation, 134, 103027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mkhize, A., Mokhothu, K., Tshikhotho, M., & Thango, B. (2024). Evaluating the impact of cloud computing on SMEs performance: A systematic review. Preprints, 2024090882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohlala, T. T., Mehlwana, L. L., Nekhavhambe, U. P., Thango, B., & Matshaka, L. (2024). Strategic innovation in HRIS and AI for enhancing workforce productivity in SMEs: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molete, O. B., Mokhele, S. E., Ntombela, S. D., & Thango, B. A. (2025). The impact of IT strategic planning process on SME performance: A systematic review. Businesses, 5(1), 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Montgomery, P., Movsisyan, A., Grant, S. P., Macdonald, G., & Rehfuess, E. A. (2019). Considerations of complexity in rating certainty of evidence in systematic reviews: A primer on using the GRADE approach in global health. BMJ Global Health, 4(Suppl. S1), e000848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moreira, R., Alves, E., & Deschamps, F. (2023). Digital transformation from planning to execution: A strategic framework based on ambidexterity and enterprise architecture and interoperability. Journal of Industrial Integration and Management, 8, 521–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mothapo, M., Thango, B., & Matshaka, L. (2024). Tracking and measuring social media activity: Key metrics for SME strategic success—A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Möhring, M., Keller, B., Schmidt, R., Sandkuhl, K., & Zimmermann, A. (2023). Digitalization and enterprise architecture management: A perspective on benefits and challenges. SN Business & Economics, 3(2), 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mudau, M. C., Moshapo, L. W., Monyela, T. M., & Thango, B. A. (2024). The role of manufacturing operations in SMEs performance: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muniz-Rodriguez, N. M., Rego, A. Z., Navajas-Romero, V., & Ceular-Villamandos, N. (2024). Exploring the role of organizational learning and knowledge management in the acceleration of current small business’s digital transformation. In Knowledge management and knowledge sharing: Business strategies and an emerging theoretical field (pp. 117–146). Springer Nature Switzerland. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muraba, J., Mamogobo, M., & Thango, B. (2024). The Balanced Scorecard methodology: Performance metrics and strategy execution in SMEs: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mustafa, R. M., Restianto, Y., Dinanti, A., Krisnaresanti, A., Rifda, L., Naufalin, N. C., & Iskandar, D. (2024). Information technology dynamic: Portraying Indonesian SMEs for quality financial report. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Research, 8(02), 40–50. Available online: https://ijebmr.com/uploads/pdf/archivepdf/2024/IJEBMR_1306.pdf (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Myataza, A., Mafunga, M., Mkhulisi, N. S., & Thango, B. A. (2024). A systematic review of ERP, CRM, and HRM systems for SMEs: Managerial and employee support. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naranjo, D., Sánchez, M., & Villalobos, J. (2014, October 12–16). PRIMROSe—A tool for enterprise architecture analysis and diagnosis. International Conference on Enterprise Architecture Analysis and Design, Lisbon, Portugal. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ndzabukelwako, Z., Mereko, O., Sambo, T. V., & Thango, B. (2024). The impact of Porter’s Five Forces Model on SMEs performance: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nethanani, R., Matlombe, L., Vuko, S., & Thango, B. (2024). Customer relationship management (CRM) systems and their impact on SMEs performance: A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ngcobo, K., Bhengu, S., Mudau, A., Thango, B., & Matshaka, L. (2024). Enterprise data management: Types, sources, and real-time applications to enhance business performance—A systematic review. Preprints. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikpay, F., Ahmad, R. B., Rouhani, B. D., Mahrin, M. N., & Shamshirband, S. (2017). An effective enterprise architecture implementation methodology. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 15(4), 927–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Odukoya, O. (2024, May 28–30). The transformative impact of cloud computing on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): A comprehensive analysis. 2024 International Conference on Smart Applications, Communications and Networking (SmartNets) (pp. 1–5), Washington, DC, USA. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oguanobi, V. U., & Joel, O. T. (2024). Scalable business models for startups in renewable energy: Strategies for using GIS technology to enhance SME scaling. Engineering Science & Technology Journal, 5(5), 1571–1587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Page, M. J., Page, M. J., E McKenzie, J., E McKenzie, J., Bossuyt, P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Tetzlaff, J. M., A Akl, E., A Akl, E., E Brennan, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 134, 178–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Purwaningsih, E., Muslikh, M., Suhaeri, S., & Basrowi, B. (2024). Utilizing blockchain technology in enhancing supply chain efficiency and export performance, and its implications on the financial performance of SMEs. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 12(1), 449–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, S., & Hossain, M. Z. (2024). Cloud-based management information systems opportunities and challenges for small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Pacific Journal of Business Innovation and Strategy, 1(1), 28–37. Available online: https://scienceget.org/index.php/pjbis/article/view/14 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Ramírez, M. J. G. (2023). Incorporating information architecture (IA), enterprise engineering (EE), and artificial intelligence (AI) to improve business plans for small businesses in the United States. Journal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology, 2(1), 115–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reichstein, C., Sandkuhl, K., & Härting, R. C. (2019). How companies can benefit from enterprise architecture management in the digital transformation process. Enterprise Modelling and Information Systems Architectures (EMISAJ), 14, 1–22. [Google Scholar]
- Rouhani, B. D., Ahmad, R. B., Nikpay, F., & Mohamaddoust, R. (2019). Critical success factor model for enterprise architecture implementation. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science, 32(2), 133–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rouvari, A., & Pekkola, S. (2024). Improving communication and collaboration in enterprise architecture projects: Three propositions from three public sector EA projects. In Lecture notes in business information processing (pp. 77–91). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- San Martín, L., Rodríguez, A., Caro, A., & Velásquez, I. (2021). Obtaining secure business process models from an enterprise architecture considering security requirements. Business Process Management Journal, ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santosa, I., & Mulyana, R. (2023). The IT services management architecture design for large and medium-sized companies based on ITIL 4 and TOGAF framework. JOIV: International Journal on Informatics Visualization, 7(1), 30–36. Available online: https://www.joiv.org/index.php/joiv/article/view/1590 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Sastryawanto, H., Hariputra, A., & Siswati, E. (2024). An empirical study on the impact of organizational culture and information technology on SMEs’ competitive advantage and performance. Journal of System and Management Sciences, 14(3), 146–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shah, S., Long, M., & Ganji, E. N. (2017, 15–18 December). Achieving strategic growth in microenterprises through information technology: UK microenterprise case study. IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM) (pp. 1133–1137), Bangkok, Thailand. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shea, B. J., Hamel, C., Wells, G. A., Bouter, L. M., Kristjansson, E., Grimshaw, J., Henry, D. A., & Boers, M. (2009). AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), 1013–1020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simon, D., Fischbach, K., & Schoder, D. (2013). Enterprise architecture management and its role in corporate strategic management. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 12(1), 5–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siregar, M., Lubis, A., Absah, Y., & Gultom, P. (2024). Increasing the competitive advantage and the performance of SMEs using entrepreneurial marketing architectural innovation capability in North Sumatera, Indonesia. Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 12(2), 965–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soomro, M. A., & Khan, A. N. (2024). Reimagining resilience: Visionary leadership, digital transformation, and strategic flexibility in small and medium enterprises in the construction sector. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 15070–15083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srećković, M. (2018). The performance effect of network and managerial capabilities of entrepreneurial firms. Small Business Economics, 50, 807–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srisawat, S., Wannapiroon, P., & Nilsook, P. (2024). Distributed digital enterprise architecture for transformation of educational organizations. Tem Journal, 13(2). Available online: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=1244886 (accessed on 4 November 2024).
- Surbakti, F. P. S., Wang, W., Indulska, M., & Sadiq, S. (2019). Factors influencing effective use of big data: A research framework. Information & Management, 57(1), 103146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sytnik, N., & Kravchenko, M. (2021). Application of knowledge management tools: Comparative analysis of small, medium, and large enterprises. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 17(4), 121–156. Available online: https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=992094 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Takeuchi, H., Husen, J. H., Tun, H. T., Washizaki, H., & Yoshioka, N. (2024). Enterprise architecture-based metamodel for machine learning projects and its management. Future Generation Computer Systems, 161, 135–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tamm, T., Seddon, P. B., & Shanks, G. (2022). How enterprise architecture leads to organisational benefits. International Journal of Information Management, 67, 102554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tatoglu, E., Bayraktar, E., Golgeci, I., Koh, S. L., Demirbag, M., & Zaim, S. (2016). How do supply chain management and information systems practices influence operational performance? Evidence from emerging country SMEs. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 19(3), 181–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tell, A. W., & Henkel, M. (2023). Enriching enterprise architecture stakeholder analysis with relationships. In Lecture notes in business information processing (pp. 71–85). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tshwete, L. (2020). Strategies for the growth and survival of small and medium-sized businesses [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. Available online: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10731&context=dissertations (accessed on 4 November 2024).
- Ullah, F., Degong, M., Anwar, M., Hussain, S., & Ullah, R. (2021). Supportive tactics for innovative and sustainability performance in emerging SMEs. Financial Innovation, 7, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van de Wetering, R. (2022). The role of enterprise architecture-driven dynamic capabilities and operational digital ambidexterity in driving business value under the COVID-19 shock. Heliyon, 8(11), e11484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Van de Wetering, R., Kurnia, S., & Kotusev, S. (2021). The role of enterprise architecture for digital transformations. Sustainability, 13, 2237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Wessel, R. M., Kroon, P., & De Vries, H. J. (2021). Scaling agile company-wide: The organizational challenge of combining agile-scaling frameworks and enterprise architecture in service companies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 3489–3502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Zyl, W. R., Henning, S., & van der Poll, J. A. (2022). A framework for knowledge management system adoption in small and medium enterprises. Computers, 11, 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargas, D., & Fontoura, L. M. (2024). Problems and solutions in adopting information and communication technology in micro and small enterprises. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 12(1), 43–73. Available online: https://aisel.aisnet.org/ijispm/vol12/iss1/4 (accessed on 8 November 2024).
- Verhagen, M., de Reuver, M., & Bouwman, H. (2021). Implementing business models into operations: Impact of business model implementation on performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 70(1), 173–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vilas-Boas, J., & Simões, J. (2018, September 17–19). Innovative enterprise architectures for deploying product-service systems in SMEs. Collaborative Networks of Cognitive Systems: 19th IFIP WG 5.5 Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises, PRO-VE 2018 (pp. 637–649), Cardiff, UK. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vu, N. H., & Nguyen, N. M. (2022). Development of small-and medium-sized enterprises through information technology adoption persistence in Vietnam. Information Technology for Development, 28(3), 585–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Widadi, S., & Fajrin, H. R. (2021, October 15–16). Business architecture accounting information system of village-owned enterprises with TOGAF. 2021 1st International Conference on Electronic and Electrical Engineering and Intelligent System (ICE3IS) (pp. 149–153), Virtual. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ref. | Aspect | Technology-Centric Approach | Business Process-Centric Approach |
---|---|---|---|
(Tshwete, 2020; Gaskins, 2019; Reichstein et al., 2019; Naranjo et al., 2014; Grave et al., 2023; Kitsios & Kamariotou, 2018; Giachetti, 2016; Alam et al., 2024; Granholm et al., 2019; Page et al., 2021) | Focus | Prioritizes technological solutions and innovations | Emphasizes optimizing business processes and workflows |
(Kitsios & Kamariotou, 2018; Grisot et al., 2014; Hermawan et al., 2017; Takeuchi et al., 2024; Ahlemann et al., 2021; Tell & Henkel, 2023; San Martín et al., 2021; Levy & Bui, 2019) | Benefits | Can enhance operational efficiency and speed | Ensures alignment with business objectives and customer needs |
(Reichstein et al., 2019; Grisot et al., 2014; Alam et al., 2024; Shea et al., 2009; Beese et al., 2022; Shah et al., 2017) | Risks | Potential misalignment with broader business goals | May overlook technological advancements and innovations |
(Rouvari & Pekkola, 2024; Agostinho et al., 2016; Alam et al., 2024; Montgomery et al., 2019) | Governance | Advocates for stringent governance frameworks | Supports flexible governance to foster innovation |
(Tshwete, 2020; Gaskins, 2019; Nikpay et al., 2017; Shea et al., 2009; Corbett et al., 2014; Faruque et al., 2024; Anthony Jnr et al., 2023) | Integration of Emerging Technology | Embraces technologies like AI for operational enhancement | May resist rapid technological changes due to process focus |
(Bernaert et al., 2014; Knezović et al., 2020; Siregar et al., 2024; Sastryawanto et al., 2024; Cahyono et al., 2022; Al-Somali et al., 2024) | Implications for SMEs | Can lead to improved effectiveness but risks disruption | Encourages sustainable practices but may hinder tech adoption |
Ref. | Cites | Year | Contribution | Pros | Cons |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Becker & Schmid, 2020) | 171 | 2020 | Enhances SME performance through effective IT integration. | Improves decision-making via structured information management. | Initial complexity may overwhelm resource-limited SMEs. |
(Kareem et al., 2021) | 41 | 2021 | Provides insights into digital transformation. | Enhances operational efficiency and productivity. | Executing can be complex and resource-intensive. |
(Molete et al., 2025) | 4 | 2025 | Assessing the impact of cloud-based solutions on business performance in SMEs in Germany. | Cloud computing enables system scalability and cost savings for businesses. | Migrating to the cloud requires careful planning and potential application refactoring. |
(Van de Wetering et al., 2021) | 35 | 2021 | Enhances strategic IT alignment. | Provides a comprehensive framework. | Complexity may hinder implementation. |
(Antunes et al., 2021) | 113 | 2021 | Enhances data accuracy and customer satisfaction. | Improves competitive advantage through effective management. | Implementation can be costly for resource-limited startups. |
Proposed systematic review | 2025 | This research evaluates Enterprise Architecture, performance metrics, and innovative models to enhance SMEs’ IT sustainability. | Improved decision-making through data-driven insights and predictive analytics. |
Criteria | Inclusion | Exclusion |
---|---|---|
Topic | Articles must focus on strategies guiding IT growth and sustaining performance in SMEs through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management | Articles unrelated to strategies guiding IT growth and sustaining performance in SMEs through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management |
Research Framework | The articles must include a research framework for strategies guiding IT growth and sustaining performance in SMEs through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management | Articles lacking a clear methodology related strategies for guiding IT growth and sustaining performance in SMEs through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management |
Language | Must be written in the English language | Articles published in languages other than English |
Period | Articles must be published between 2014 and 2024 | Articles published outside 2014 and 2024 |
Search Wordlist |
---|
“Enterprise Architecture” OR “Business Architecture” |
“Information Management” OR “Data Management” “Records Management” OR “information systems” “Information Technology” AND “growth strategies” |
“Small and Medium Enterprises” OR “Small and Medium-sized Businesses” “Small and Medium-sized Companies” OR “Small and Medium-sized Firms” “SMEs” AND “IT growth” “Sustaining Performance” OR “Competitive Advantage” |
“Corporate Architecture” AND “Performance Sustainability” |
Question (Q) | Research Quality Questions |
---|---|
Q1 | Are the research objectives clearly defined? |
Q2 | Is the research methodology adequately explained? |
Q3 | Is a research model presented? |
Q4 | Are the data collection procedures described in detail? |
Q5 | Is the research field or context clearly identified? |
Q6 | Do the findings contribute to existing knowledge? |
Data Item | Description | Example Entries |
---|---|---|
Title | Title of the study | “Enterprise Architecture for IT growth” |
Year | The year the study was published | 2014–2024 |
Online Database | The online repository to find studies | Google Scholar, SCOPUS, Web of Science |
Journal Name | The journal used for publication | Journal of Information Technology |
Research Type | The type of research | Empirical, Theoretical |
Subject Area | The academic discipline of the study | EA, IM, IT growth, SME performance |
Industry Context | The industry or sector focus of the study | SMEs, startups, small businesses |
Geographic Location | The geographic focus of the study | Countries |
Economic Context | The economic context | Developed vs. developing countries |
EA Framework Types | Specific EA frameworks | TOGAF, Zachman Framework |
IM Practices | Key practices related to IM | Data Governance |
Technology Providers | Technology vendors mentioned | Microsoft, IBM |
IT Model | The model used for executing technology | Agile, Waterfall |
Research Design | The design of the research | Experimental, case study, survey, etc. |
Scholarly Paper Type | The type of study | Qualitative, Quantitative |
Sample Size | The size of the sample used in the study | 50 companies, 200 employees |
Sample Attributes | Characteristics of the sample | Multinational Corporations |
Data Acquisition | Methods used to collect data | Interviews, Surveys |
Analytical Tools | Techniques used to analyze the data | Regression Analysis |
IT Performance Metrics | Metrics used to measure IT performance | System Uptime, Response Time |
EA Performance Metrics | Metrics used to measure EA performance | ROI, Market Share |
Organizational Outcomes | Managerial performance outcomes | Increased Efficiency, Cost Reduction |
Long-term Impacts | Long-term impacts identified in studies | Competitive Advantage |
Bias Domain | Source of Bias | Support for Judgment | Review Authors’ Judgment |
---|---|---|---|
Selection bias | Random Sequence Generation | Clarify the methodology for allocating SMEs to various IT growth strategies, such as AI and cloud computing, ensuring comparability among groups. | Inadequate randomization may lead to biased allocation of SMEs to specific IT strategies. |
Allocation Concealment | Explain the methods used to obscure SME allocation to IT strategies, assessing the foreseeability of interventions like AI implementation. | Allocation bias arises from insufficient concealment prior to assigning SMEs to IT strategies. | |
Performance Bias | The Blinding of Participants and Personnel | Detail the blinding methods employed for SMEs and researchers, evaluating their effectiveness in maintaining impartiality regarding AI and cloud computing strategies. | Performance bias may occur if SMEs and personnel are aware of the allocated IT strategies during the study. |
Detection Bias | The Blinding of Outcome Assessment | Describe measures implemented to blind outcome assessments related to SME IT strategies, including the effectiveness of blinding in evaluating AI outcomes. | Detection bias can result from the knowledge of allocated IT strategies influencing outcome assessments. |
Attrition Bias | Incomplete Outcome Data | Assess the completeness of outcome data by detailing attrition rates, exclusions, and re-inclusions for each IT strategy group, particularly focusing on AI and cloud initiatives. | Attrition bias may arise from the amount, nature, or handling of incomplete outcome data for SMEs engaged in different IT strategies. |
Reporting Bias | Selective Reporting | State how selective outcome reporting was examined concerning AI and cloud computing strategies, including findings on reported versus unreported outcomes. | Reporting bias is evident due to selective reporting of outcomes related to SME IT strategies. |
Other bias | – | Identify any significant biases related to IT strategies for SMEs that are not addressed in other domains, such as biases arising from external market influences on AI adoption. | Bias may stem from issues not covered that could impact the outcomes of IT strategy implementations for SMEs. |
Paper Sample | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Tshwete, 2020; Gaskins, 2019; Reichstein et al., 2019; Naranjo et al., 2014; Grave et al., 2023; Kitsios & Kamariotou, 2018; Giachetti, 2016; Corbett et al., 2014; Faruque et al., 2024; Bernaert et al., 2014; Siregar et al., 2024) | Low risk | Not applicable | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk |
(Rouhani et al., 2019; Haki & Legner, 2021; Grisot et al., 2014; Hermawan et al., 2017; Granholm et al., 2019; Van de Wetering et al., 2021; Al-Shukri, 2024; Alghamdi, 2024a) | Some concerns | Not applicable | Some concerns | Some concerns | Low risk | Low risk | Some concerns | Some concerns |
(Molete et al., 2025; Antunes et al., 2021; Deny et al., 2021; Becker & Schmid, 2020; Kareem et al., 2021; Anthony Jnr et al., 2023; Jnr & Petersen, 2023; Al-Somali et al., 2024) | High risk | Not applicable | High risk | High risk | High risk | High risk | High risk | High risk |
Characteristics |
---|
Title |
Year of Publication Research Type (e.g., Article Journal, Book Chapter, Dissertation, Thesis) Online Database (Google Scholar, SCOPUS, Web of Science) Number of Citations Subject Area |
Industry Context |
Geographical location (SA, UK, USA) |
Economic Context (e.g., developed vs. developing countries) |
Types of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks (e.g., TOGAF, Zachman, FEAF) |
Information Management Practices (e.g., data governance) |
Technology Implementation Model (e.g., on-premises, cloud-based, hybrid) Name of Author(s) |
Aspect | Description |
---|---|
Definition of Reporting Bias | Reporting bias occurs when studies with significant or positive results are published more frequently than those yielding negative findings. This phenomenon can distort the overall understanding of research outcomes, particularly in fields such as IT using strategies like AI and cloud computing. |
Importance of Assessment | Assessing reporting bias is crucial for ensuring a balanced representation of evidence. In the context of IT strategies, such as AI implementations or cloud computing solutions, an accurate assessment helps avoid misleading conclusions that could arise from an incomplete understanding of the effectiveness and limitations of these technologies. |
Review Protocol | Reviewers must clearly specify the methods for assessing reporting biases in their review protocols to enhance credibility. This clarity is especially important in IT research, where methodologies may differ significantly from traditional clinical studies, necessitating tailored approaches to bias assessment that reflect the unique characteristics of technology-focused investigations. |
Common Methods for Assessment | The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool serves as a systematic instrument for evaluating risk across various domains, including selection, performance, detection, and attrition bias. Additionally, funnel plots provide a visual representation for assessing publication bias, while Egger’s Test offers a statistical approach to evaluate its presence. These methods are essential for maintaining rigor in IT-related systematic reviews. |
Outcome | A thorough assessment of reporting biases significantly contributes to the integrity of systematic reviews, fostering a more accurate understanding of the evidence landscape. In the rapidly evolving field of IT, where strategies like AI and cloud computing are increasingly adopted, addressing reporting biases ensures that stakeholders can make informed decisions based on comprehensive and reliable data. |
Factor | Description | Importance |
---|---|---|
Risk of Bias | The probability that a study may be flawed due to design issues, randomization, or methodological shortcomings. In the context of IT strategies, such as AI and cloud computing, it is crucial to assess how biases may influence findings related to implementation and effectiveness. | A high risk of bias can undermine the reliability of study findings, leading to misguided decisions in technology adoption. |
Inconsistency | This refers to the variability of results across different studies. For instance, studies examining AI applications in various sectors may yield divergent outcomes due to differing methodologies or contexts. | Consistent results across studies enhance confidence in the overall findings, thereby supporting strategic decisions in IT investments. |
Indirectness | Indirectness pertains to the relevance of studies to the specific context of interest. Research focusing on cloud computing implementations in healthcare may not directly apply to other sectors like finance. | Studies that closely match the target population and intervention increase the applicability of results, ensuring that insights are relevant to specific IT strategies. |
Imprecision | Imprecision involves the clarity and specificity of results, often measured by confidence intervals. For example, vague estimates regarding AI performance can lead organizations to make uninformed decisions about its integration. | More precise estimates make the results more trustworthy and actionable, empowering organizations to implement effective IT solutions confidently. |
Publication Bias | This refers to the potential for some studies to remain unpublished, which can skew the overall evidence base. In IT research, if only successful AI projects are published, it may create an unrealistic perception of effectiveness. | Unpublished studies can lead to an overestimation of effects if only positive results are reported, ultimately hindering informed decision-making in technology adoption. |
Assessed Factors | Grade | Definition |
---|---|---|
Consistency | High | There is strong confidence that the true effect closely aligns with the estimated effect, indicating reliable outcomes across diverse IT applications. |
Directness | Moderate | There is moderate confidence in the effect estimate; while it is likely close to the true effect, significant differences may exist due to context-specific factors. |
Use of Tools | Low | Confidence in the effect estimate is limited, as biases may distort findings, especially in the non-randomized settings common in IT research. |
Determine Certainty Level | Very Low | Very little confidence exists in the effect estimate; substantial differences from the estimated effects are likely, necessitating careful interpretation in IT contexts. |
Reference | Selection | Comparability | Outcome | Total Stars | Quality Rating |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Afarini & Hindarto, 2023; Santosa & Mulyana, 2023; Jnr & Petersen, 2023; Alghamdi, 2024a; Mkhize et al., 2024; Merín-Rodrigáñez et al., 2024; Mustafa et al., 2024; Al-Somali et al., 2024; Sastryawanto et al., 2024) | ★★★★ (LR) | ★★ (SC) | ★★★ (LR) | 8–9 | High Quality |
(Cahyono et al., 2022; Srisawat et al., 2024; Faruque et al., 2024; Odukoya, 2024; Alirezaie et al., 2024; Muniz-Rodriguez et al., 2024; Al-Momani et al., 2024; Purwaningsih et al., 2024) | ★★★ (SC) | ★ (HR) | ★★ (SC) | 6–7 | Moderate Quality |
(Soomro & Khan, 2024; Al-Momani et al., 2024; Sastryawanto et al., 2024; Bernaert et al., 2014; Siregar et al., 2024) | ★★ (SC) | ★ (HR) | ★★ (SC) | 4–5 | Low Quality |
(Islam et al., 2022; Judijanto et al., 2023; Van de Wetering, 2022; Santosa & Mulyana, 2023) | ★ (HR) | ★ (HR) | ★ (HR) | 0–3 | Very Low Quality |
Characteristic | Description |
---|---|
Study Selection and Inclusion Criteria | This study systematically selected research focusing on EA and IM strategies for SMEs, emphasizing relevance and methodological rigor to ensure high-quality insights. |
Methodological Diversity | The studies employed a mix of qualitative and quantitative methodologies, which enriched the synthesis of findings but also introduced complexities in comparing results across different studies. |
Outcomes Assessed | Key outcomes included IT growth, performance sustainability, and strategic alignment, with a particular focus on emerging IT strategies such as AI and cloud computing, utilizing various effect measures and metrics. |
Heterogeneity | Significant statistical heterogeneity was observed in the meta-analyses, primarily due to variations in study designs, participant demographics, and the specific IT strategies implemented across different contexts. |
Aspect of Bias | Description | Implications |
---|---|---|
Design Bias | Many studies exhibit design biases, such as response bias from self-reports and limited causal inferences due to inadequate controls. | This undermines the validity of findings and restricts definitive conclusions regarding the effectiveness of IT strategies like AI and cloud computing. |
Risk Assessment Methods | Inconsistent assessments of bias hinder comprehensive evidence evaluation. | Such an inconsistency skews results, making it challenging to ascertain the true impact of implemented IT strategies. |
Reviewer Independence | The number of reviewers and their independence were reported inconsistently across studies. | This raises concerns about the reliability of bias assessments, potentially affecting the credibility of the findings. |
Reporting Bias | A high risk of reporting bias exists in studies that omit negative or inconclusive results. | This can lead to an overestimation of the effectiveness of strategies, necessitating a critical examination of the existing literature. |
Certainty of Evidence | Evidence quality varies significantly; while some studies provide robust data, others are limited by small sample sizes or methodological flaws. | This variability highlights the need for cautious interpretation of findings, given potential biases and differing study quality. |
Study | Reporting Bias | Impact on Reliability |
---|---|---|
(Liu et al., 2022; Chaithanapat & Rakthin, 2021; Verhagen et al., 2021; Ahmad et al., 2022; Judijanto et al., 2023; Vargas & Fontoura, 2024; Alghamdi, 2024a, 2024b; Mustafa et al., 2024; Srisawat et al., 2024; Faruque et al., 2024; Merín-Rodrigáñez et al., 2024; Odukoya, 2024; Muniz-Rodriguez et al., 2024) | Reported significant improvements in IT performance metrics, suggesting a positive effect | Reliable, but long-term impact unclear |
(Merín-Rodrigáñez et al., 2024; Odukoya, 2024; Alirezaie et al., 2024; Al-Momani et al., 2024; Al-Somali et al., 2024; Sastryawanto et al., 2024; Purwaningsih et al., 2024; Soomro & Khan, 2024; Kotusev & Alwadain, 2024) | Did not provide a full set of results concerning the long-term impact of EAFs | Less reliable due to missing information |
Ref. | Directness | Precision | Consistency | Use of Tools |
---|---|---|---|---|
(Andriyanto & Doss, 2020; Chaithanapat & Rakthin, 2021; Jiang & Chen, 2021; Liu et al., 2022; Van de Wetering, 2022; Merín-Rodrigáñez et al., 2024) | High | High | High | High |
(Ullah et al., 2021; Widadi & Fajrin, 2021; Jiang & Chen, 2021; Vargas & Fontoura, 2024; Mustafa et al., 2024; Alghamdi, 2024b; Faruque et al., 2024; Purwaningsih et al., 2024) | High | High | Moderate | Moderate |
(Santosa & Mulyana, 2023; Mkhize et al., 2024; Judijanto et al., 2023; Vargas & Fontoura, 2024; Manyaga et al., 2024) | High | Moderate | Moderate | Low |
Challenges | Recommendations | Actionable Steps |
---|---|---|
Cybersecurity Threats | Invest in robust cybersecurity measures. | Conduct regular security audits; implement firewalls, encryption, and employee training programs to mitigate risks. |
Digital Skills Gap | Adopt a culture of continuous learning and innovation. | Establish training programs for employees; partner with educational institutions to provide workshops on emerging technologies like AI and cloud computing. |
Integration of Legacy Systems | Develop a phased approach for technology integration. | Assess existing systems; create a roadmap for gradual upgrades; prioritize cloud solutions that enhance compatibility and scalability. |
Cost Management in Cloud Services | Implement cost optimization strategies for cloud usage. | Monitor cloud usage analytics; negotiate contracts with service providers; explore multi-cloud strategies to balance costs and performance. |
Resistance to Change | Cultivate an agile organizational mindset. | Encourage leadership to model adaptability; facilitate open discussions about the benefits of new technologies, emphasizing AI’s role in efficiency. |
Access to Funding | Explore alternative financing options. | Research crowdfunding platforms, venture capital opportunities, and government grants tailored for tech adoption in SMEs. |
Regulatory Compliance | Utilize compliance management tools and software. | Stay updated on regulatory changes; implement automated compliance tracking systems to reduce manual oversight burdens. |
Framework Component | Description | Key Actions | Example from Study |
---|---|---|---|
Enterprise Architecture Framework | A structured approach to align business processes with IT systems, facilitating strategic decision-making. | Develop a tailored EA framework that addresses specific SME needs; conduct regular assessments to ensure alignment with business goals. | A study highlighted how SMEs using the Zachman Framework for EA improved operational efficiency by 30%, enabling better resource allocation during digital transitions. |
Information Management Systems | Systems designed to manage data effectively, ensuring that information is accessible and usable across the organization. | Implement robust data governance policies; utilize cloud-based solutions for data storage and access. | Research indicated that SMEs adopting cloud computing solutions saw a 25% reduction in IT costs while enhancing data accessibility, leading to improved customer service. |
AI Integration | Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to optimize processes, enhance decision-making, and personalize customer experiences. | Identify key areas where AI can add value; invest in AI tools for data analysis and customer interaction. | A case study demonstrated that an SME utilizing AI-driven analytics increased sales by 40% by better understanding customer preferences. |
Cloud Computing Adoption | Transitioning to cloud services to enhance scalability, flexibility, and collaboration among employees. | Migrate existing systems to cloud platforms; train staff on new technologies to maximize utilization. | An SME reported a 50% increase in project completion rates after adopting a cloud-based project management tool, which streamlined communication and task tracking. |
SME Name | Industry | IT/AI Solution | Results Achieved | Ref. |
---|---|---|---|---|
Tech Innovations | Technology | AI-driven analytics platform | Increased operational efficiency by 30%, reduced costs by 20%, and improved customer satisfaction scores by 40% through targeted insights from data analytics. | (Simon et al., 2013) |
Green Grocer | Retail | Cloud-based inventory management system | Enhanced inventory turnover by 25%, reduced stockouts by 15%, and improved forecasting accuracy, leading to a 10% increase in sales. | (Hadaya et al., 2020) |
HealthFirst | Healthcare | AI-powered patient management system | Streamlined patient scheduling, resulting in a 50% reduction in appointment no-shows and improved patient throughput by 20%. | (Molete et al., 2025) |
Smart Logistics | Transportation | Cloud-based logistics optimization tool | Achieved a 35% reduction in delivery times and cut fuel costs by 15% through optimized routing and real-time tracking. | (Jiang & Chen, 2021) |
EcoBuild | Construction | AI for project management and scheduling | Increased project completion rates by 30% and reduced labor costs by 25% through enhanced resource allocation and predictive analytics. | (Manyaga et al., 2024) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pingilili, A.; Letsie, N.; Nzimande, G.; Thango, B.; Matshaka, L. Guiding IT Growth and Sustaining Performance in SMEs Through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management: A Systematic Review. Businesses 2025, 5, 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses5020017
Pingilili A, Letsie N, Nzimande G, Thango B, Matshaka L. Guiding IT Growth and Sustaining Performance in SMEs Through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management: A Systematic Review. Businesses. 2025; 5(2):17. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses5020017
Chicago/Turabian StylePingilili, Andiso, Ntebele Letsie, Gift Nzimande, Bonginkosi Thango, and Lerato Matshaka. 2025. "Guiding IT Growth and Sustaining Performance in SMEs Through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management: A Systematic Review" Businesses 5, no. 2: 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses5020017
APA StylePingilili, A., Letsie, N., Nzimande, G., Thango, B., & Matshaka, L. (2025). Guiding IT Growth and Sustaining Performance in SMEs Through Enterprise Architecture and Information Management: A Systematic Review. Businesses, 5(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/businesses5020017