USA44: Why a National Science Agency Substituted Data Repository Launches for Enterprise Architecture Reform

Overview:

This case is part of a 100-diagnostic series exposing how research institutions have mislabeled data infrastructure projects as “Enterprise Architecture progress.”

In national science programs, a recurring pattern is treating new data repositories as architecture reform. Vast datasets were stored and indexed, access was granted to researchers — yet the enterprise structure linking data governance, research workflows, and funding accountability was never modeled.

P1–P6 Insight Preview: 

Repositories improved component storage and access (P4) and implementation speed (P5), but lacked research strategy alignment (P1) and unified process architecture (P2).

System behavior (P3) stayed project-specific; business ops (P6) relied on manual coordination for data use across programs.

Role Disconnects:

1. CEO/Director: “We now have a national data hub” — but projects still operate in isolation.
   

2. CIO: “Our data is centralized” — yet usage patterns are fragmented.
   

3. Sales Head (Program Outreach): “Researchers have better access” — but cross-program insights are rare.
   

4. Chief EA: “We built storage, not an enterprise model”
   

5. Head of Data Services: “I can provision data quickly, but I can’t ensure it’s interpreted consistently”

Want to read more?

Subscribe to architecturerating.com to keep reading this exclusive post.

Subscribe Now