- drEAmtime – Communication
- drEAmtime – Bridging the Silo
- drEAmtime – Capability Cemetery
- drEAmtime – EPIC SCAN
- drEAmtime – Archetypes
To quote Ivo:
Some attempts to achieve IT rationalisation fail spectacularly. I’m not going to list out the reasons for that. But it is may be sad that such failures discredit EA as a management discipline as whole. But sometimes Enterprise Architect are really able to find ways to discover what’s not needed and how to remove it, or what is underutilised and how to achieve better ROI for it. After all most of them are smart people using good tools. And indeed they shoot inefficiencies and get all the glory and the money to shoot more. But as they rarely get to the cause of the inefficiencies or are in the position to influence the bigger system that produces these inefficiencies, the overall result is an oscillation or even increase in overall IT spending. The increase is because the success of the EA justifies bigger EA budget which is almost without exception a part of the IT budget.
Here Ivo points at one of the most common pitfalls of Enterprise Architecture applied: fighting symptoms instead of the root cause. This has several reasons. First of all external Enterprise Architects coming with a consulting company might not have the needed inside or full pain awareness to truly fight the root cause (some might even look for future business, and a permanent broken information flow is a permanent revenue stream). Internal Enterprise Architects might have a huge reputation problem which quite often is based on Ivos observation. So as mentioned in the other posts a clear focus on fixing the information flow is a good start to shoot at the root cause and get it eliminated or at least plant some seeds to eliminate the root cause later.
- Worth – The future capability must be worthwhile to trigger a transformation. (Ivo: But sometimes Enterprise Architect are really able to find ways to discover what’s not needed and how to remove it, or what is underutilised and how to achieve better ROI for it.)
- Informed – The future capability must contain all the relevant information as much as needed containing the necessary facts. (Ivo: After all most of them are smart people using good tools.)
- Simple – The future capability must be the most simple solution which fits the purpose. (Here Ivo seems to have lost trust and is pointing to Perverse Complexity: “Some attempts to achieve IT rationalisation fail spectacularly.”)
- Environment – The future capability must be embedded in the greater context. (Here Ivo also seems to have lost trust: “But as they rarely get to the cause of the inefficiencies or are in the position to influence the bigger system that produces these inefficiencies, the overall result is an oscillation or even increase in overall IT spending.”)
I share the observation with Ivo that in many cases so called Enterprise Architects do indeed promote decisions which are not following the WISE approach but are focusing to much on some aspects and therefore add to the EPIC complexity. After all the core reason why emergent complexity exists.
The next post will most likely be about the PACE SCAN. Feedback as always more than welcome to help me improve (or get another red line through my own thoughts. Only some posts to go till Ivos input has done its job for me).