Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

We are mostly using the ArchiMate language to describe enterprise or solution architecture, along with a bit of use cases. We are producing quite large models, with over 10,000 elements and relationships. Sometimes, we prepare the designs, describe the models, and automatically generate documentation from them.

The solution allows us to quickly present designs and concepts to customers and get their feedback, thereby moving the project forward step by step. We work with the model to prepare the templates for document generation and deliver the final documentation to the customer efficiently.

Modeling future solutions and using BPMN or use cases. So, in general, creating direct accounts.

We use it On the analyst level. So, analysts create specifications or storage using this tool. 

Sparx helped us facilitate better system modeling and design in our organization.  

I have used the solution to manage software architecture.

The solution offers different types of models and features apart from diagrams. It also supports giant patterns for software systems with a high level of extraction independent from implementation networks. 

The solution is used for Modeling enterprise architecture artifacts, and also for project delivery artifacts as well. So solution architectures, designs. Sometimes I've used it for requirement gathering for functional and non- functional.

Working with the solution being right around keeping an asset repository that various projects and programs can utilize. So it's about reusability of assets and making sure that a baseline can be achieved against which a target can be models. So it allows the baseline to be models and maintained well.

My company uses Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for data modeling, but it's not being used very much because it's not a suitable tool. It's a UML-based toolset, and my company was looking to do entity-relationship modeling, so Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is not as suitable. My only involvement with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect was to try and do some data modeling on a MySQL database based on AWS.

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect didn't improve my company. I'd rather use Visio to do my diagramming because it's a tool that's easier to use.

We use Sparx to create enterprise-level architecture in high-level environments and ticketing IT landscapes.

The solution saved a lot of time, about 30%.

We use Sparx to design the whole enterprise architecture, from the highest level down to the physical level, and to generate those XML messages. Also, we generate the DDL for the database to support DevOps. 

In the beginning, I didn't have any training. I just wanted to try, but I spent two hours and I couldn't do anything. I clicked here, then clicked there—it didn't work. Eventually, I learned how to use it, but in the beginning, it wasn't very straightforward. Usually, because of my computer experience, I can do things by intuition. So if you do not get training, read the user manual, or Google how to use it, then it's hard to do anything. With some other tools, you can immediately do something, but I had to take some time with this one.

My job is about helping the organization to create a functional solution. I build models for the organization at the business layer, application layer, etc. It also involves integration with other tools, such as erwin, for data modeling.

Its traversability is most valuable. I can use ArchiMate, and I can create a UML model. ArchiMate is for logical enterprise architecture, UML is for software engineering, and BPMN is for business processes. I can build it to have multiple models, and they are also traversable, which is not something that every tool allows. If there is a huge organization, you can segment it and have separate models for business technology or internal resource management system. You don't need to keep them in one model, and you can decide to segregate them.

Its model-centric approach makes it very easy to create documentation based on a template. Every company says that maintaining documentation is a very tedious task, and it usually requires subject matter experts. That's why companies rarely maintain documentation, but when you maintain the model, and you have the right processes and the right roles assigned, it can be naturally maintained. You can just simply produce a document by selecting whatever you need and in a format that you need. It is a very powerful feature.