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 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.  

Sparx has mainly improved my organization through the communication of ideas through the sharing of models and a variety of diagramming techniques. Consistency is a key attribute of a good codebase. This tool helps a lot in the maintenance and organization of a lot of complexity.

It has led some teams to do better code reviews - to be less focussed on coding conventions (syntax) and more focussed on the semantics because of the abstraction level clear design affords.

We all know understanding is ALL - so Communication is vital, this tool makes it easy.

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.

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.

Sparx EA is a good tool to model any system on. It is based on UML, but it provides the ability to create your own metamodels, so you can implement/model anything.

The tool comes in the Ultimate version with tons of predefined perspectives which are suited for plain UML, Strategy, Structured Analysis, Requirements, Database, and Enterprise Architecture Modelling to name just a few.

It is possible to mind map and wireframe and also to create roadmap diagrams. That said, to be honest, some of these diagrams could be improved.

It helps in centralizing data or putting our data in one place.

Supporting all of the important architecture modeling notations and all types and levels of architecture modeling in a secure, collaborative, and well-integrated model repository is really unifying and beneficial.

Having the possibility of integrating and sharing all architecture models inside a centralized repository for all architecture stakeholders provides immense and cohesive insight into all architecture domains and dimension interrelationships. 

The capability to analyze interdependencies between architectural elements makes for a very reliable comprehension of all architectural interactions, as opposed to trying to figure it out from a pile of Visio and PowerPoints (or any other diagramming tool) independent documents.

Improved cross-functional team collaboration. Dynamic visual activity models improved communication and understanding with the business. Shared repository enabled reuse of model elements by users. Established a well-defined structure to manage whole solutions. Ability to ingest external document artifacts became a viable alternative to SharePoint. UML based modeling enable model-first approach in lieu of document-first approach to solutioning (alternative to Microsoft Office - Word, Excel, Visio, Powerpoint) 

We could capture the process models around 24 countries with all their local variations. After process modeling, we have depicted the similarities and differences in SAPRX for process harmonization, process standardization. 

SPARX EA, with a variety of notations and custom attributes, helped track the process delivery for each center smoothly. We have also created applications, information, and data models linked with BPMN process models. 

We were able to produce a range of Process-based reports that were published to Confluence reports, as well as our Business and Processes Architectures, for use by a large internal program. The Business end-users and external vendors seemed happy with the outcomes, although some members of the program management team struggled to understand the importance of these documents. 

1. Sparx EA is used to capture the current state of technology systems as it pertains to the business infrastructure and application components, and how they combine to support the business needs and goals
2. Similarly, it captures the planned state for projects that are delivering change
3. Similarly, it captures the planned state for projects that are delivering change

It allows some kind of reverse engineering, where if you have a database or some different languages, you can reverse engineer and get the diagrams, which is very helpful.

We adopted Sparx EA more than six years ago. Before that, all models were created in MS Visio and were maintained independently without any tractability. That led to insufficient incomplete impact analysis and incomplete solutions. With Sparx EA, models became a maintainable and reusable asset of the corporation. Correct impact analysis became a matter of minutes. As a result the quality of solutions drastically improved. Not mentioning that all employees in any department can now clearly understand business processes with all related applications and infrastructure at any level.

I can create requirements, draw all kinds of UML diagrams, link it all together and produce nice PDF reports and charts for the stakeholders. We even quit using JIRA and perform issue tracking with a nearshoring team of 10 people directly in Sparx.

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

We haven't used the solution long enough to make any observations in terms of the product improving our company's functions. It's too soon to tell.

Allowed us to validate design changes and give an indication of the code before even speaking with developers. It also allowed the architects to reuse work done by other projects or by other architecture specialities. It is more structured than tools like Visio making it easier to build accurate diagrams.

In one organization, it allowed teams and team members all over the world to collaborate and sync up on specific detailed parts of the solution or model easily with a minimum of fuss by sharing the repository instead of having to e-mail diagrams or search through SharePoint to find the right diagram. Its easy to bookmark a diagram in a repo so someone else can open their EA client and quickly find and even modify it directly, if appropriate

I don't know where to start. I've used Sparx at one organization and was subsequently primarily involved in the adoption and implementation of EA at another organization.

We transformed the tooling from a mis-mash of Gliffy diagrams, web-sequence diagrams, and some Aris for capturing requirements. We have implemented standardized EA models aided by templates. It increased the productivity due to ease of use. It provided a uniform tool from requirements analysis to technical design specifications used across teams. We have more complete models that are published and accessible, they reflect changes in real time. Links across components aids in impact assessment.

Shared models capture digitally fundamental knowledge about the business and its representation in ICT systems. Tooling makes this knowledge shareable, reusable, validated, rigorous, open and  turns it into a common asset of the Company rather than an arcane informal insight of a few individuals. Helps communicate with vendors and quickly bring new hires or new project members up to speed on projects

This is a great tool for creating models with a very flexible data model behind the diagrams, making updates simple.

The company uses this for their own modeling, and perhaps for their processes, as well. Prior to using this application, people were creating PowerPoint slides with any flow that they wanted. This solution looks for consistency and performs checks on the model. In this way, the quality of the documentation has improved.

We can easily use it with our new customers.

• Documented operational processes of all business departments using Archimate 2.0 framework
• Able to depict bottleneck areas - risky processes, infrastructure deficiencies, and opportunities to reuse strategic content
• Visualization of the business was a major benefit

The company wants to reduce its maintenance budget so the aim is to get more for less. The solution has achieved this and improved efficiency.

We used Sparx EA to document CCAR data lineage in response to an OCC MRA filing.

Using the products scripting and namespace management has allowed for the expression of business models (level 1 - 4) for a government agency that provided a ‘tipping point’ for enterprise architecture acceptance. The span of coverage and consistent traceability for view point presentation allows client teams access to continually maintained building block catalogues and alignment with the business models.

I am not a big fan of using Sparx. The interface is not user-friendly and is outdated. For example, it is not possible to only open a view you've created or to open one project at a time instead of the entire package.

I'm not looking into expanding the use of Enterprise Architect, but I'm looking into replacing it.

It has provided a single repository for all architecture work. Then, the models can be shared between the architects and other information management users. 

Various groups within the enterprise can now have access to a centralized and standardized repository.

Team collaboration. It’s like the Microsoft TFS equivalent for architecture.

It provides a centralized, self-regulating (like a spreadsheet is self regulating) standardized repository of architectural artifacts which can take in or spit out a custom selected subset of these artifacts in a wide variety of forms including diagrams, spreadsheets, MS Word documents, tables, xml, JSON, etc. By allowing extreme customizability, it has drastically reduced learning and ramp up time for new uses.

I have used the BPMN modelling, reporting, and analytic capability with a number of clients to document their business processes. These have been used for staff training, change management, and regulatory reporting.

Our clients have used EA to document the architecture for enterprise architecture as well as for software architecture. The architectural blueprints in Sparx EA acting as key reference repository for the transformation projects. 

It is now based on business drivers, goals and requirements, and linked to business and IT functions. This results in traceability and alignment with business objectives.

UML Use Case modeling with complete requirement statement generation.

We have three licenses being used by a team of project managers. We can work collectively instead of various people doing the same thing.

And we can generate up-to-date documentation for our customers.

Now for the first time we have a complete reference architecture repository to build different target architecture for every large program and projects.

From an architectural point of view it is easy to define the application landscape and maintain the relationships between components. This helps when the current state application architecture is considered especially by architects new to an organisation. It also assists the embedded architects to design the future state architecture more effectively.

I am the only user of EA as I am a system designer. I use it to make reports from it and what I give to the developers. I am sure that the process of the developing of our product is faster and more secure through using Sparx.

From the island of non managed analysis and design information to shared repositories with templates. It has helped us with real MDA and code generation directly into Visual Studio.

The user interface could be more intuitive and support for a Mac, iOS or at least a browser version would be very welcomed.

• Ability to use a single shared repository and defined languages, using both ArchiMate as the modelling language and the business language based on the repository contents. 
• It’s easy to deploy in a small workgroup.

Sparx System Enterprise Architect has improved the communication aspect between our architects.

All requirements management is now moved to EA.

EA is just a tool and can't help you in any way, unless proper government process is enforced. In order to set-up sustainable gov. processes you have to have clear understanding between business and IT. As we all know IT doesn't speak the business language and business is not able to keep up with IT. We have exchanged "language" for picture (diagrams) and the result was awesome. Understanding now is more clear and and straightforward. EA helped us to express our IT vision in conceptual and logical models which are easy to explain to top management. Any changes or buss requirements are modeled first and then implemented. 

The communication amongst several parties using common language and using a repository.

• Conceptual, Logical and Physical Data models transformation to database design which gave us the benefit of no hand crafting of code, and it can be published as HTML or as a Word document.
• BPMN process models benefits us as things can be copied and pasted into PowerPoint presentations and HTML
• ArchiMate models which helps in the publishing of HTML models for users without Sparx

When modelized, the scope of any developed application is clear for both the Client and the Development Team. The thing that is going to be developed and present in the application is known from the beginning of the projet. Afterwards, any further requirements can be seen through the already existing models and the impact is easily visible.

We used Sparx as a central repository for architecture models. Subsequently used on project delivery as a reference and during strategic planning.

My organization didn’t manage to take advantage. It needs a ‘critical mass’ of users and understanding to generate benefit, but here we failed.

As a business analyst, I am responsible for the requirements and arrangement. This solution makes my work very easy. Some of the business processes are very easy to compare when you have the diagrams.

Was able to create full specifications (BRD, FRD, Tech design documents), utilizing SPARX application.

(Enterprise) solution architecture creation.

It improved our requirements by closing holes. It also, provided visualization features to translate requirements to a non technical language.

• Repository.
• Reuse of objects
• Making fewer mistakes in models (i.e., naming objects, attributes, etc.).

Large diagrams for hardware infrastructure, HA environments, Integrated Solution view, etc all help different teams to understand the scope of projects.

We've improved overall to some extent due to Sparx.

It has not improved our organization mainly due to the poor diagramming capabilities within the product, which are outdated and look like Visual Studio 2005. As a result, our architecture team constantly reverts back to Visio diagramming (and Visio's inability to reference defined artifacts).

Simplified our task at maintaining architecture information and traceability with requirements.

Using Sparx Enterprise Architect allowed my customer to detail and make the company's IT strategy visible and accessible to all. The system provided clear roadmaps for IT development and helped to keep up-to-date documentation of systems and processes.

Not really.

Unfortunately, only one of our solution architects was using this in the end, as the others resorted to Vision because it was more user-friendly. I ended up buying an Idera licence for ER/Studio and using that instead.