What is the Enterprise Lifecycle?

TOGAF doesn’t always provide a good explanation of important terms or phrases. One example is the Enterprise Life Cycle, which is referred to throughout TOGAF. This article – from Good e-Learning – explains why the phrase is useful, and what it means in the TOGAF context.

Related posts:

  1. What’s the Difference Between Scope and Partition? There are some things in TOGAF that confuse practitioners over…
  2. How well do you know TOGAF definitions? Here is a quick interactive quiz from Good e-Learning on…
  3. Building Blocks in Enterprise Architecture This article by Selvyn Wright provides a good explanation about…

Zachman Enterprise Engineering – Primitive vs. Composite Review

Primitives and Composites – What’s the Difference?

It is useful to discuss the differences between Primitives and Composites because this is the paradigmatic problem of the Information community of the day.

It is useful to discuss the differences between Primitives and Composites because this is the paradigmatic problem of the Information community of the day.

Primitives are single-variable, ontologically-defined categories of the essential components upon which the Enterprise is dependent for existence. Only one type of Enterprise component can be classified in any one cell of the Zachman Framework. They are the domain of Engineering, that is, Architecture. They don’t “do” anything. In contrast, Composites are multi-variable, holistic constructs of parts or pieces of the Enterprise with components from multiple categories of the essential components. Representation of different categories of components (different Framework Cells) are prerequisite for implementation. They are the domain of Manufacturing. They implement (“run”).

There is a strong metaphorical correlation between the Elements and Compounds of the Chemistry discipline and the Primitives and Composites of the Enterprise Architecture domain. Elements (Primitives) are timeless. Compounds (Composites) are temporal. Elements (Primitives) have single types of components. Compounds (Composites) have multiple types of components. Elements (Primitives) are isolated theoretically for engineering work. Compounds (Composites) are integrated practically for manufacturing work. Elements (Primitives) are Architecture. Compounds (Composites) are implementations. Elements (Primitives) are needed for Engineering. Compounds (Composites) are used by and the result of Manufacturing. Compounds (Composites) can be manufactured without knowing anything about or reusing the Elements (Primitives), but for Compounds to be engineered to produce predictable and/or modifiable behavior, they must be created from “reusable” Elements (Primitives).

This brings up a very important point. If you had inventories of all of the Chemical Elements in their primitive states, you could manufacture ANY Chemical Compound you wanted. However, as soon as you create the compound, it is fixed … it is hard to change. By the same token, if you had all of the Enterprise Primitives in inventory in their pure Primitive state, you could create any Enterprise Composite implementation required. Once you create the Composite, it is fixed, a snapshot, a point in time instantiation… an implementation.

There is a metaphorical departure in Enterprise Architecture from Chemistry in the fact that the media of the Enterprise implementation is the same as the media of its descriptive representations, namely digital depictions. We do not have to go through a media transformation from our engineering descriptions to become our implemented reality. They can both be digital. We simply “compile” the implementation. However, we learned long ago that the moment you “bind” together the components of the Composite implementation, it is fixed … you can’t change it. Therefore, the optimum implementation strategy would be to “bind at execute time” … that is, don’t “compile” the implementation until you “click your mouse” … “late binding.”

Unfortunately, “bind at execute time” is not presently perceived to be technically feasible. I think most people would argue that it is because the current technology does not support the concept. I would suggest that this is not a technical issue at all. The fundamental problem is, we do not have an inventory of our Primitive (elemental) components in their pure Primitive state from which we could bind Composites together at the click of the mouse. The key to this capability is Enterprise Architecture, the inventory of Primitive components, “loosely coupled,” related only by “foreign keys” in a database (Repository). If we had the inventory of Primitive Models in a Repository, the current technology would, in fact, support the concept. This capability in Manufacturing, Industrial Age products, is called “Mass-Customization:” “Custom Products, Mass-Produced, in Quantities of One, for Immediate Delivery.” This is REALLY important for Enterprises in the Information Age … because of the dramatic escalation of complexity and of the rate of change, the ENTERPRISE needs to be mass- produced from reusable components already “in inventory” in quantities of one for immediate instantiation … dynamically creating (late-binding) a new Enterprise implementation. This is the urgent motivation for ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE!!!

RBPEA: Constraints and corollaries

Enterprise-architectures should, in principle, apply to any enterprise, at any scale. But what happens when we scale our enterprise-architectures up to the ‘really-big-picture’ (RBPEA) level, with a literally global scope? What non-negotiable constraints would we hit up against? What corollaries would

The Strategic Staircase – Case Study

TOGAF doesn’t explain in much detail how you actually go about producing an Architecture Vision or Roadmap, and this can be particularly difficult if the future is uncertain or turbulent. This case study shows how one European telecoms company used the idea of a strategic staircase to supplement TOGAF. Read the full case study: https://www.goodelearning.com/downloads/enterprise-architecture/the-strategic-staircase-case-study?

Related posts:

  1. TOGAF Poster #43 – The Sandwich Diagram Knowing the seven parts of the TOGAF documentation is very…
  2. How well do you know TOGAF definitions? Here is a quick interactive quiz from Good e-Learning on…
  3. TOGAF 9 Poster #44 – TOGAF and ArchiMate TOGAF and ArchiMate are two standards managed by The Open…

The QualiWare international conference 2015

The conference is packed with workshops, keynotes and customer presentations covering the fields of enterprise architecture, business transformation, and compliance. As you know, QualiWare wants to be your preferred platform when you do enterprise architecture, process improvement, compliance management, application portfolio management, business transformation, and more. The conference program has therefore been designed to offer […]

Is Database-as-a-Service in your IT Services Catalog?

Are You Ahead or Behind theCurve?

Private Database Cloud Services or Database as a Service(DBaaS) is no longer a new idea. Infact, it is quickly becoming the de facto standard for development and testingenvironments both on premises and in the public cloud. And while there are many use cases anddeployment options, overall database total cost of ownership and businessagility have benefited from a standardized approach to workloadmanagement. Whether you are a DBA, anoperations manager, or a CIO, you are well aware that business-driven interestin social, mobile, big data, and internet of things have caused an explosion ofdevelopment, data, and database workloads. The justification for database operations to pool resources andstandardize services has never been clearer – watch thiscustomer story (TRT1:30).

Today’s best practices in cloud architecture expect serverscalability, zero data loss resiliency, and most importantly workload securityand isolation through multitenancy. For database services, the architecturewould be incomplete if database operations did not also natively supportmultitenancy. Initial approaches for DBaaSwere limited since they only relied upon virtual machines for workloadisolation and database provisioning. As general technology containers, VMs hadno intrinsic understanding of database operations, so they were unable to optimizeperformance, scalability, and resilience as well as simplify databaseadministration efforts.

Today’s best practice for database cloud services overcomesthese limitations. The Oracle PrivateDatabase Cloud approach is both revolutionary and elegantly simple. By engineering multitenant capabilities throughoutthe Oracle database platform, the complete range of database operations andadministration can now be natively managed andwithout the overhead of a virtual machine. Oracle’s Private Database Cloud guarantees isolation and leveragesOracle’s strengths in reliability, scalability, security, and systemsmanagement. Large database estates also benefit from a host of relatedcapabilities, such as cost-recovery reporting, self-service management, andpublic cloud integration. You will findthat Oracle database platform is ideal for a standardized enterprise deploymentor cloud service, whether development/test or production – watch thiscustomer story (TRT2:17).

Oracle offers a reference architecture overview and Oracleproduct mapping for DBaaS in a private cloud deployment model. The approach and guidance offered is thebyproduct of hundreds of customer projects and highlights the decisions thatcustomers faced in the course of their architecture planning andimplementations. Oracle’s advisingarchitects work across many industries and government agencies and havedeveloped standardized methodology based on enterprise architecture bestpractices. Oracle’s enterprise architecture approach and framework are articulatedin the Oracle Architecture Development Process (OADP) and the Oracle EnterpriseArchitecture Framework (OEAF).

Click here for an Enterprise Architecture approach to the Oracle Private Database Cloud

Table of contents:

Executive Summary 1

Fundamental Concepts 2

  • What is a Private Database Cloud andDatabase as a Service?
  • Why Consider Database as a Service?
  • What is Different about Database as aService?
  • Considering Moving to Database as aService?

Architectural Perspectives 5

  • Architecture Principles
  • DBaaS Architecture Domains

Architecture Views 8

  • Conceptual Architecture Overview
  • DBaaS Management Capabilities andProcess Overview
  • DBaaS Physical Architecture

Conclusion

Is Database-as-a-Service in your IT Services Catalog?

Private Database Cloud Services or Database as a Service (DBaaS) is no longer a new idea. In fact, it is quickly becoming the de facto standard for development and testing environments both on premises and in the public cloud. And while there are many use cases and deployment options, overall database total cost of ownership and business agility have benefited from a standardized approach to workload management. Whether you are a DBA, an operations manager, or a CIO, you are well aware that business-driven interest in social, mobile, big data, and internet of things have caused an explosion of development, data, and database workloads. The justification for database operations to pool resources and standardize services has never been clearer – watch this customer story (TRT1:30).

Setting up the system landscape

With a system landscape, being urgently needed (see previous post), we want the construction to be of low complexity and low risk. How do we go about this? I will claim, that one trained person with a focused effort can map a medium sized enterprise in not years, but in just one or two month! […]