However, enterprise architecture encompasses a culture of decision mechanisms, achievement, and recognition of business information like a business resource. In addition, the enterprise architecture is really large picture oriented framework, as well as there are clear-cut methods for attaining and carrying on its required viewpoint (Czuchnicki, 2006; Winter & Schelp, 2008).
According to Salmon (2009), the Citigroup has initially predicted that it could save $3billion over next 3 years by rationalizing its technology and operations purposes those are utilized by more than 140,000 people comprising 25,000 software developers and a lot of IT corporations. However, the current development in minimizing the overlaps among systems, as well as connecting the information technology communications across companies that had earlier working and running through individual systems has encouraged Citigroup administration to stridently augment its cost-saving target implementation through the new technology infrastructure implementation (Salmon, 2009). However, according to Nally (2006), the fundamntal problems inside the Citigroup business are the legacy systems those are supporting the business’s vital databases and operations. Furthermore, these systems can not simply stop to implement the new enterprise architecture (Nally, 2006). In this scenario Czuchnicki (2006) describe that Citigroup’s IT management has established effective enterprise architecture through which Citigroup will follow the policy similar to the Microsoft. In addition, through this enterprise architecture policy the backwards-compatible will be implemented in all the technology areas in Citigroup business. In this way they will develop some brand-new system those will be functional backwards-compatible to old systems and old data. Thus, the old data will be imported to new technology infrastructure. Furthermore, it is an unusual sign of excellence inside Citigroup