System integration and associated architecting is necessary as it bridges platforms and heterogeneous applications of operations (Giese 345). As such, this kind of architecture provides ties in which operating systems and business integration applications mix.
The aim of this paper is to access the role of the of the integration of the system as well as the associated architecting in an effort to ensure the environment soundness of a system of systems and any associated design, integration principles and architecture. The paper will also access the notion of Lead System Integration concept and how it relates to integration in the family system (Giese 347).
System integration and associated architecting are vital aspects of an enterprise since they allow flexibility within the enterprise system. For an architectural enterprise’s workflows to become accessible to data and functions, it is necessary that system integration architecture is utilized.
The barriers existing in an enterprise tend to fall, or are in a continuous change, if unsubstantial system boundaries are taken into account. (Dias & Richardson 26). This is mostly brought about by growth of modularity in the system. Therefore, it is the responsibility of good system integration architecture together with the most suitable middle-ware to assist and ensure that this flexibility is provided (Sonde 56).
Again, System integration and associated architecture is necessary in cases where data and functions must be used across the system and where middle ware must be incorporated to bring rapid developments. As such, an enterprise must use system integration and associated architecting in this context to ensure a long run sustainability and stability of an enterprise.
Moreover, system integration is rendered vital when building costs and unique one-to-one integrations are taken into consideration. This is due to the rapid growth being experienced in the larger systems within the sector (Dieter, Mark & Florian 196). As such, there is a tremendous cost associated, and hence, it necessitates system integration to be applied substantially than just making use of a system that is primary in nature.
Still, system integration and architecture plays an important role in that, when employed in the system of an architectural enterprise, architectural interfaces and underling principles tend to be reused.
Consequently, components and skills that follow are less in number, and this makes them key elements in sustainability of the enterprise. System integration is also important in simplification of situations where, a decision must be agreed upon concerning the course of action, which needs to be taken to deliver the desired results (Dieter, Mark & Florian 198).
As large amounts of data and work processes that have been differentiated are put into use across the system, a system integration architecture coupled with solutions brought about by middle-ware will therefore ensure that the integrity of the data across the entire architecture system is maintained and used effectively.
In respect to horizontal systems, the efforts utilized tends to give an assurance that the evolutions are reliable, robust and secured. These efforts are mostly concentrated in the layers of system architectural services rather than made to distribute over applications that are in nature, single (Dieter, Mark & Florian 200).
System integration in architecture is also necessary, as it is the basis to which new services as well as products are invented. As such, access, which is easy and secured to the system’s information, ensures openings to products’ new opportunities. This is most necessary where an enterprise is more interested on platforms associated with new products.
Furthermore, it is the role of system integration and associated architecting to prevent lock-in by vendors. As such, it enables replacement of a subsystem from any vendor, say A, by a system equivalent to it from another vendor. The most important aspect is that, this process does not require configuration of the rest of the system (Dieter, Mark & Florian 202).
System integration in architecture is also necessary in notion of an overview of an enterprise. As more and more familiar ways of establishing or achieving integration are put into place, there is a probability that an organization will have a chance to depict a clear overview.
This is mostly due to the standardization as well as the necessity of information respiratory in regard to systems, integrations, meta-data, interfaces, data and functions. Consequently, opportunities for routines associated with management oriented to strong change, are opened up. Precisely, there is an improvement in the search ability within the data in the system.
In the notion of planning associated with the system, departments of technical planning are faced with standardization (Sonde 56). As a result, this standardization paves way for tools usage and as such, planning process tends to become easier. In the same point of view, the focus will remain fixed on technical problems, which are specified, but more on flow of work, that is, workflow optimization.
System integration plays a major role in situations concerned with training. As such, a comprehension of flows of work in which the practitioners are involved will become necessary in the future rather than in the present (Sonde 58).
As such, the technical training for architectural software or a device application, which is in itself much dedicated, will not only be essential, but also impart an understanding of the entire chain of production. An architect system, which has a basis of predefined processes and is generic in nature ensures simplification of the production chain hence easy understanding as compared to structures that are proprietary (Yacov 992).
It is a prerequisite that a huge amount of subsystem compatibility is employed to ensure that there is integration taking place. As such, all system integration is an important element if there has to be a successful system of systems acquisition.
Architecture industry must adapt to the approach of lead system integrator in order to ensure facilitation of seemingly needful managerial effort, which is in nature, insurmountable (Andrew & William 147).
Lead System Integrator is a concept that has recently passed through integrations. As a result, it is misunderstood especially when its responsibilities are brought into contention. Therefore, it necessitates a definition of the concept (Andrew & William 145). There usually exist two types of lead System Integrators (Dieter, Mark & Florian 196). These includes;
- prime contractors-These are those contractors with the responsibility of developing major architectural systems. They are also expected to perform a tremendous work portion on the major subsystems and entire systems at the moment of contractual award.
- Acquisition Performance Contractors-They are those Lead System contractors whose role is to ensure that acquisitions are done efficiently.
These are related to the government as they are contracted in the major systems development. It is a prerequisite that a huge amount of subsystem compatibility is employed to ensure that there is integration taking place.
As such, all system integration is an important element if there has to be a successful system of systems acquisition. Architecture industry must adapt to the approach of lead system integrator in order to ensure facilitation of seemingly needful managerial effort that is in nature insurmountable (Andrew & William 147).
The system integration is essential as it plays a major role in complex systems associated with engineering. It is from use of LSI that that a sensible, organized, as well as workable approach is provided to those programs which are in nature seemingly incomprehensible.
This role associated with Lead System Integration is dealt with in the large part of a system in regards to the managerial aspects considered complex. For instance, such programs as the FC and Deep-water are regarded as complex efforts towards modernization by architectural departments (Cornelius 125). Much system integration in the programs, to suit the sub-system architecture, gives rise to this complexity.
The person responsible with the Lead System Integration should effectively manage and absorb those program complexities by ensuring that certain functions which includes; development, utilization of strategic plan in management , technical program aspects and establishment of audit trail, have been endured till the completion of the architectural system (Rogério, Cristina, & Romanovsky 100).
In reference to this analysis, it is then evident that integration of the system as well as the associated architecting plays a major role in an effort to ensure the system environment soundness of a system of systems and any design that is associated, integration principles and architecture.
Still, the notion of Lead system Integrator is much associated to the system family integration in a superior way and as such, it goes hand in hand and this correlation is essential (Rogério, Cristina, and Romanovsky 110).
Works Cited
Andrew, Sage, & William, Rouse. Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. Print
Cornelius, Leondes. Intelligent Knowledge-Based Systems. New York: Springer. 2011. Print
Dias, Marcio, & Debra, Richardson. The Role of Event Description in Architecting Dependable Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2677.1 (2006): pp. 150-174.
Dieter, Uckelmann, Harrison, Mark, & Florian, Michahelles. Architecting the Internet of Things. New York: Springer, 2011. Print
Giese, Holger. Architecting Critical Systems: First International Symposium. New York: Springer, 2010.Print
Rogério, Lemos, Gacek, Cristina, & Alexande, Romanovsky. Architecting dependable systems II. New York: Springer, 2011. Print
Sonde, B. S. Introduction to System Design Using Integrated Circuits. New Delhi: New Age International, 2002. Print
Yacov, Haimes. Risk Modeling, Assessment and Management. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. Print