Developing an Ambidextrous Technology Architecture for AI-Enabled Lending Transformation at BankCo Using TOGAF 10
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15408/aism.v9i2.52597Keywords:
AI-driven lending, ambidextrous technology architecture, digital transformation, technology architecture, TOGAF 10Abstract
Banking organizations face increasing pressure to achieve digital transformation while maintaining operational stability, regulatory compliance, and service reliability. Although previous studies have explored enterprise architecture and TOGAF-based digital transformation, limited research has translated these approaches into technology architecture artifacts that simultaneously support governance and AI-driven innovation in banking. This study proposes a TOGAF-based ambidextrous technology architecture for BankCo’s lending process using design science research methodology (DSRM). Unlike conventional TOGAF-based approaches, the proposed architecture integrates traditional and agile technology perspectives through governance mechanisms, technology modernization strategies, and architecture decision models to support continuous technology evolution. The resulting architecture captures technology principles, standards, governance readiness assessment, modernization strategy, an iterative implementation roadmap, and an ambidextrous decision model for AI-enabled lending transformation. The stakeholder-based architecture validation shows that the proposed architecture is feasible for supporting operational stability and enabling the controlled deployment of AI-driven lending capabilities. This research operationalizes ambidextrous enterprise architecture within the technology architecture domain. It provides banking organizations with a structured approach for introducing AI-driven lending capabilities while maintaining governance, regulatory compliance, and operational stability.
Downloads
References
[1]H. Alghamdi, “Assessing the impact of enterprise architecture on digital transformation success: A global perspective,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 20, Art. no. 8865, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16208865.
[2]P. C. Verhoef et al., “Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 122, pp. 889–901, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022.
[3]S. Kraus, S. Durst, J. J. Ferreira, P. Veiga, N. Kailer, and A. Weinmann, “Digital transformation in business and management research: An overview of the current status quo,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 63, Art. no. 102466, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102466.
[4]D. O’Higgins, “Impacts of business architecture in the context of digital transformation: An empirical study using PLS-SEM approach,” J. Bus. Manage. Stud., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 72–84, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.32996/jbms.2023.5.4.7.
[5]M. I. Ekarini, A. Rahayu, Disman, and L. A. Wibowo, “Implementation of digital transformation and government enterprise architecture in improving the performance of integrated social services,” J. Manaj. Pelayanan Publik, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 742–761, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.24198/jmpp.v8i2.54095.
[6]R. G. Rahmadani, O. D. Nurhayati, and D. M. K. Nugraheni, “Oriented enterprise architecture for enhancing digital governance and technopreneurship in regional governments,” APTISI Trans. Technopreneurship, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 942–956, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.34306/att.v7i3.769.
[7]M. I. Alhari and A. A. N. Fajrillah, “Enterprise architecture: A strategy to achieve e-government dimension of smart village using TOGAF ADM 9.2,” JOIV: Int. J. Informatics Visualization, vol. 6, no. 2-2, pp. 540–545, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.30630/joiv.6.2-2.1147.
[8]P. Singh, F. Lynch, and M. Helfert, “Enterprise architecture for the transformation of public services based on citizen’s feedback,” Digit. Policy, Regul. Governance, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 38–54, Jan. 2024, doi: 10.1108/DPRG-11-2022-0123.
[9]A. M. Al-Ansi, A. Garad, and M. Jaboob, “Unraveling the complexities of financial innovation and digital transformation within banking systems,” Multidisciplinary Reviews, vol. 7, Art. no. e2024265, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.31893/multirev.2024265.
[10]L. A. D. Sari, R. Mulyana, and I. Y. Mukti, “A TOGAF 10-based enterprise architecture framework for digital transformation in SME banks,” J. Tek. Inform. (JUTIF), vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 673–690, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.52436/1.jutif.2025.6.2.4329.
[11]S. Sentosa, R. E. Indrajit, and E. Dazki, “Enterprise architecture of the basic banking feature for a new challenger of digital banking in Indonesia,” Sinkron, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 2197–2211, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.33395/sinkron.v8i4.14116.
[12]T. N. Kadhim, “The impact of digital transformation on accounting measurement in private banks,” Indonesian J. Law Econ. Rev., vol. 21, no. 2, 2026, doi: 10.21070/ijler.v21i2.1541.
[13]R. Van de Wetering, “Dynamic enterprise architecture capabilities and organizational benefits: An empirical mediation study,” in Proc. 28th Eur. Conf. Inf. Syst. (ECIS 2020), 2020, pp. 1–18.
[14]R. Mulyana, L. Rusu, and E. Perjons, “Key ambidextrous IT governance mechanisms influence on digital transformation and organizational performance in Indonesian banking and insurance,” in PACIS 2024 Proc., 2024, Paper 7.
[15]M. Pattij, R. Van de Wetering, and R. Kusters, “Enhanced digital transformation supporting capabilities through enterprise architecture management: A fsQCA perspective,” Digital Business, vol. 2, no. 2, Art. no. 100036, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.digbus.2022.100036.
[16]F. Grave, Enterprise Architecture Artifacts’ Value for Digital Transformation: Exploring Enterprise Architecture Artifacts to Improve Organizational Performance Through Digital Transformation. Deventer, The Netherlands: Open Universiteit, 2024.
[17]R. Mulyana, L. Rusu, and E. Perjons, “How hybrid IT governance mechanisms influence digital transformation and organizational performance in the banking and insurance industry of Indonesia,” in Proc. 31st Int. Conf. Inf. Syst. Develop. (ISD 2023), Lisbon, Portugal, 2023, pp. 1–12, doi: 10.62036/ISD.2023.33.
[18]R. Mulyana, L. Rusu, and E. Perjons, “Key ambidextrous IT governance mechanisms for successful digital transformation: A case study of Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI),” Digital Business, vol. 4, no. 2, Art. no. 100083, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.digbus.2024.100083.
[19]R. Mulyana, IT Governance Influence on Digital Transformation. Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm University, 2025. [Online]. Available: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-242507
[20]M. Muhaemin, E. K. Budiardjo, H. B. Santoso, and P. O. H. Putra, “Agile enterprise architecture in the context of digital transformation: A critical review,” Int. J. Informatics Visualization, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 271–288, 2026, doi: 10.62527/joiv.10.1.4666.
[21]T. Lumor, A. Hirvonen, and M. Pulkkinen, “The role of enterprise architecture in building and sustaining IT-enabled organizational agility,” in Proc. 54th Hawaii Int. Conf. Syst. Sci. (HICSS 2021), 2021, pp. 6057–6066, doi: 10.24251/HICSS.2021.732.
[22]S. Srisawat, P. Wannapiroon, and P. Nilsook, “Distributed digital enterprise architecture for transformation of educational organizations,” TEM J., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1645–1657, May 2024, doi: 10.18421/TEM132-77.
[23]S. Allam, “Digital transformation in banking: A comprehensive analysis of platform modernization and performance enhancement,” Int. J. Comput. Eng. Technol., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 2999–3012, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.34218/IJCET_16_01_210.
[24]The Open Group, The TOGAF® Standard, 10th Edition—Introduction and Core Concepts—2025 Update. Zaltbommel, The Netherlands: Van Haren Publishing, 2025.
[25]
S. J. Kooy, J. P. S. Piest, and R. H. Bemthuis, “Impact and implications of generative AI for enterprise architects in agile environments: A systematic literature review,” in Enterprise Design, Operations, and Computing. EDOC 2025 Workshops, M. Mira da Silva, A. Rivkin, J. Borbinha, J. Zdravkovic, and J. Barateiro, Eds. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2026, pp. 53–69, doi: 10.1007/978-3-032-16234-2_4.
[26]S. N. Aisyah, R. Mulyana, and T. F. Kusumasari, “Ambidextrous blockchain governance to strengthen BankCo’s digital transformation through COBIT 2019 traditional and DevOps,” Kinetik, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 561–574, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.22219/kinetik.v10i4.2361.
[27]R. P. Ramdani, R. Mulyana, and T. N. Adi, “Ambidextrous AI governance model for advancing state-owned bank in Indonesia digital transformation through COBIT 2019 traditional and DevOps,” J. Tek. Inform. (JUTIF), vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1745–1768, Aug. 2025, doi: 10.52436/1.jutif.2025.6.4.4835.
[28]E. Indriasari, H. Prabowo, F. L. Gaol, and B. Purwandari, “Intelligent digital banking technology and architecture: A systematic literature review,” Int. J. Interactive Mobile Technol., vol. 16, no. 19, pp. 98–117, 2022, doi: 10.3991/ijim.v16i19.30993.
[29]I. C. Surya, R. Mulyana, and R. A. Nugraha, “Designing information security for BPRDCo SME digital transformation using ISO 27001:2022,” J. Teknol. Inf. Komun., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1242–1253, 2024, doi: 10.35870/jtik.v8i4.3148.
[30]B. R. Destian and P. D. Pamungkasari, “Integrating TOGAF 10 and ISO 20000-1:2018 for digital multi-finance service level agreement/mean time to repair improvements,” Green Intelligent Syst. Appl., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2026, doi: 10.53623/gisa.v6i1.963.
[31]S. R. Safitri, R. Mulyana, and A. A. N. Fajrillah, “Developing enterprise architecture for BPRACO SMEs digital transformation by using TOGAF 10,” JIKO (J. Informatika dan Komputer), vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 165–174, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.33387/jiko.v7i3.8629.
[32]S. B. Merriam and E. J. Tisdell, Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation, 4th ed. San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass, 2016.
[33]J. W. Creswell and C. N. Poth, Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, 4th ed. Los Angeles, CA, USA: SAGE, 2018.
[34]A. R. Hevner, S. T. March, J. Park, and S. Ram, “Design science in information systems research,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 75–105, Mar. 2004, doi: 10.2307/25148625.
[35]K. Peffers, T. Tuunanen, M. A. Rothenberger, and S. Chatterjee, “A design science research methodology for information systems research,” J. Manage. Inf. Syst., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 45–77, Dec. 2007, doi: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302.
[36]BankCo, “Good corporate governance implementation guidelines,” 2024.
[37]BankCo, “Good corporate governance annual report 2025,” 2025.
[38]BankCo, “BankCo organizational structure,” 2025.
[39]Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, “Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Republik Indonesia Nomor 22 Tahun 2023 tentang Pelindungan Konsumen dan Masyarakat di Sektor Jasa Keuangan,” 2023.
[40]Bank Indonesia, Blueprint Sistem Pembayaran Indonesia 2030: Mengakselerasi Ekonomi Digital Nasional untuk Generasi Mendatang, 2024.
[41]Kementerian Badan Usaha Milik Negara Republik Indonesia, “Peraturan Menteri Badan Usaha Milik Negara Republik Indonesia Nomor PER-2/MBU/03/2023 tentang Pedoman Tata Kelola dan Kegiatan Korporasi Signifikan Badan Usaha Milik Negara,” 2023.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jihan Rizkyta Fitri, Rahmat Mulyana, Ridha Hanafi, Ryan Adhitya Nugraha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
