Investment in enterprise architecture (EA) has increased over the last two years. That’s what 64% of respondents to a recently published survey by SAP LeanIX–EA Insights 2025–found. That’s good news and suggests that more and more companies have begun to recognize the of value effective enterprise architecture management.
We conducted this survey of 360 enterprise architects from around the world because we wanted to learn more about EA priorities today, how organizations view their EA practice, and how different EA teams approach governance.
What we discovered shines a light both on what EA teams are doing well today, and how they could increase their impact going forward.
To get the whole story, download the report!
EA Priority #1: Mastering the As-is
Two-thirds (66%) of respondents reported that creating a reliable inventory of applications and IT assets was a high priority. An additional 28% said that this was a medium priority. Only 5% said this was a low priority.
This finding reflects our experience: Regardless of where companies hope to go tomorrow, they struggle to understand where they are today.
Without a reliable inventory of your applications, it’s very difficult to answer some very basic questions, starting with, “How much am I currently spending on software?” It’s even more difficult to answer questions such as, “Do I have the right/best software for my business?” or “If I wanted to transform my business, what would I have to change in my current architecture?”
Creating a reliable inventory is the prerequisite when it comes to business capability modeling, rationalizing your application landscape, and ultimately modernizing it. For this reason, it’s not surprising that the majority of companies see it as a high priority.
Realizing that most companies don’t have a reliable inventory of applications right now, on the other hand, is surprising (and maybe a little sad)!
Perception of EA: IT Administration and Governance
Establishing a solid EA governance framework was the second big priority we heard about, with 48% of respondents calling it a high priority. In other words, the top two EA priorities identified involved IT administration (inventorying applications and assets) and governance.
When we asked how EA was perceived in the organization, we found that the general perception reflected these priorities. Ninety-one percent said that EA was perceived (at least in part) as an administrative IT function focused on application portfolio management; eighty-five percent said it was perceived as a governing function that controls technology use and investment.
To be fair, there is nothing inaccurate about these perceptions. There is also nothing especially troubling about this finding. After all, maintaining reliable data about IT investments and establishing architecture principles are not only stated EA priorities, they also serve as the foundation for EA’s broader business impact.
That being said, people don’t always see administrative tasks or governance as particularly helpful. In fact, 51% agreed with the statement that, when it comes to governance, “Decisions take too long. The process is a nuisance that slows everything down."
This raises the question, “How can EA approach its core functions without, well, annoying people?”
EA Governance: The more, the better
Oddly enough, the answer to that question is not, “He who governs best, governs least.” In fact, our survey suggests that more comprehensive governance increases the efficiency of governance overall.
The survey established that EAs see value in four governance best practices:
- Documenting the organization’s architecture principles
- Creating a transparent architecture decision process
- Maintaining a system of record for architecture decisions
- Establishing an architecture review board with representation from across the business
We then asked how many of these steps responding companies had taken. As you might imagine, the results were mixed: About a quarter had implemented one, another quarter had implemented two, about a tenth had implemented three, and about a fifth had implemented all of them. Seventeen percent had not implemented any!
Here’s where it gets interesting. When you compare the number of implemented governance practices with time to decision, you find that the more governance practices put in place, the shorter the time to decision.
In fact, this impact is pretty dramatic. With no governance in place, 72% say decisions take a month or longer. With all four practices in place, that number drops to 39%.
Putting things another way, on average, 41% of respondents say architecture decisions take less than a month. Putting one practice in place raises that to 43%. With all four in place, 61% say decisions take less than a month.
Long story short: More structured governance = better governance.
EA Insights 2025: The Big Takeaway
I do recommend that you download and read the entire report.
If you just can’t wait, though, here’s the big takeaway:
EA can have the most positive impact on the business by leaning into what it does best, mastering the as-is state of the IT landscape and practicing efficient architecture governance.
There is a caveat or a condition that I would add: EA works best when it works closely with the business.
The best way to do that is, first, don’t be a nuisance. Beyond that, you need to involve the business in EA. Making sure that the business is represented on architecture review boards is a good place to start. Only 19% of our respondents said this was the case in their organization. That leaves a lot of room for improvement.
I think the biggest benefit of involving the business in EA is not the much talked about “IT and business alignment,” or even the ability to “demonstrate the value of EA.”
No, the biggest benefit is that EA becomes a part of how the company does business.
When that happens, business leaders won’t ask, “Why do we need EA?” They’ll ask their EA teams, “What can we do next?”
