Link: https://www.eatransformation.com/p/questions-enterprise-architecture-still-cant-fully-answer
From Enterprise Architecture Transformation: A Practical Guide
The practice of enterprise architecture (EA) has never been more established.
We have frameworks, standards, modeling languages, tools, and an ever-growing library of “best practices.”
And yet, some of the most fundamental questions in EA remain open.
Not because the discipline lacks structure, but because architecture sits at the intersection of methods and judgment—where clear rules meet real-world complexity.
These are the questions that keep coming back, reminding us that EA is not a solved problem, but a continuous practice.
The Ongoing Questions of Enterprise Architecture
Even in the most mature organizations, EA remains a discipline defined as much by its questions as by its answers. Each practice faces the same dilemmas—how much to formalize, who should decide, and how to prove that architecture truly makes a difference.
Here are some of the questions that continue to shape how EA is practiced, discussed, and understood.
How much is “enough” architecture?
Almost every organization says it wants “just enough EA.” But what does that actually mean?
For one company, a simple capability map might be transformative: finally connecting business priorities to applications and projects. For another, even a full-fledged repository can feel too high-level to be useful.
The real question is: enough for what purpose, and for whom?
Sometimes “enough” means having one shared picture of key capabilities or information flows to guide decisions. Other times it means detailed API ecosystem descriptions or process models.
And there is another dimension: how deep should each view go? As discussed in an earlier post, detail is not value, unless someone uses it to make a decision.
The right level of abstraction depends on the audience, the maturity of the EA practice, and the pace of change.
Who owns enterprise architecture?
Is it the architects? The CIO? The business? Everyone together?
In practice, architectural decisions are made in many places: strategic planning, steering boards, project planning sessions, procurement discussions, even hallway conversations. That makes the idea of a single “owner” comforting, but unrealistic.
A better goal is shared ownership and clear accountability. Enterprise architects own the practice: the methods, tools, descriptions, and principles that make architectural thinking possible. But the architecture itself—the sum of business, data, and technology choices—belongs to the organization and its leaders.
Architecture cannot be delegated to architects alone. It lives through the decisions that leadership makes, projects execute, and teams sustain every day.
How do we measure enterprise architecture’s value?
EA prevents waste, reduces duplication, improves dialogue, and helps organizations make better choices. But these are indirect effects, not easily visible on a balance sheet.
And even when you can measure the outcomes, such as reduced IT costs or faster project starts, isolating what portion of that improvement came from practicing EA is almost impossible.
This is why many organizations focus on proxy metrics:
-
How often EA insights are used in decision-making.
-
Stakeholder satisfaction: do leaders, experts, and initiatives find EA useful?
-
The maturity of the EA practice itself: consistency of models, engagement in governance, and clarity of work practices.
EA’s impact may not always show in numbers, but becomes visible in smoother transformations, fewer surprises, and better-aligned portfolios.
How much should the enterprise architecture function lead versus support?
Sometimes EA is expected to “drive transformation.” Other times it is told to “stay out of the way.”
In reality, the EA function’s role is primarily to enable and inform, not to command.
It leads by making key issues visible—surfacing dependencies, risks, and trade-offs that others might overlook. It brings the right people into the conversation and ensures that strategic discussions are grounded in facts and shared understanding.
But once execution begins, EA’s role becomes supportive: helping teams stay aligned, resolve conflicts, and make consistent design choices without dictating them.
How this balance plays out depends also on culture. In some organizations, architects act as advisors; in others, they are embedded within delivery teams. In every case, EA’s influence comes from relevance, clarity, and timing, not authority. When architecture makes conversations smarter instead of heavier, alignment follows naturally.
How should enterprise architecture evolve as the organization matures?
In the beginning, EA is about visibility and connection: mapping what exists, who owns what, and how things fit together. The goal is to replace assumptions with a shared picture of reality.
As the organization matures, EA shifts focus toward integration and consistency—aligning overlapping initiatives, standardizing where it makes sense, and embedding architectural thinking into planning and governance routines.
Maturity does not mean heavier processes or thicker frameworks. It means better timing and proportion: knowing when to simplify, when to standardize, and when to let go. The most mature EA functions move in rhythm with the organization’s change cycles—never running too far ahead, but never lagging behind either.
Can the discipline of enterprise architecture ever be “ready”?
Probably not. Organizations change, technologies evolve, and people come and go. EA is not a destination but a way of maintaining clarity while everything else moves. The models, principles, and discussions are not there to freeze reality, but to help navigate it.
New developments—especially in AI—are already reshaping how we document, analyze, and communicate architecture. But they do not remove the need for architects. If anything, they make the human part of the discipline even more important: asking the right questions, setting context, and ensuring that what we automate still serves shared goals.
Final Thoughts
The beauty—and the frustration—of EA is that it lives in the gray areas: between strategy and execution, order and change, certainty and possibility.
If every question had a clear answer, we would no longer need architects. Perhaps our real work is not to provide certainty, but to help organizations ask better questions and navigate the space in between, together.
📢 Upcoming Book Launch Events
There is still time to join the virtual launch sessions for my new book Enterprise Architecture – Your Guide to Organizational Transformation (Business Expert Press, 2025).
-
English session: Thursday, October 30 (17.00–17.45 EET / 16.00 CET / 11:00 AM EDT / 8:00 AM PDT) – an introduction to the book, short practical talk on how enterprise architecture helps organizations manage transformation, and Q&A.
-
Register here: Teams Webinar
-
-
Finnish session: Wednesday, October 22 (16.00 EEST) – an introduction to the book, a practical discussion on why enterprise architecture matters beyond IT, and Q&A.
-
Register here: Teams Webinar
-
🔗 You May Also Like
Looking to dive deeper? Here are more enterprise architecture insights you might find useful:
📬 Want More Practical Enterprise Architecture Content?
Subscribe to Enterprise Architecture Transformation for real-world advice on architecture that supports change, strategy, and delivery.
