7 years, 5 months ago

Webcast: Enterprise Architecture Management with TOGAF

For those that want to learn about Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) alfabet who is a tools vendor is hosting a webcast on their thoughts on EAM. I would assume that they will illustrate that through their tool. Enterprise Architecture Management…

7 years, 5 months ago

Business Capability Naming and Content

Bruce Silver, BPMN luminary, has recently posted a piece on BPMN and Business Architecture where, he says, “In the past year the ‘architects’ seem to have discovered BPMN.”  WIth his usual meticulous style he dissects the difference between a process and other notions such as capabilities and functions, terms that architects like to throw around in their paperwork.

He clearly distinguishes process as the “how,” which is what we, at SenseAgility, have been saying as well. Process diagrams, and BPMN diagrams in particular, are the proof behind a particular type of capability, namely the Business Capability. In our work we’ve found that there are specific types of acceptable proofs behind different types of capabilities.

Here’s a statement Bruce makes about typing or perhaps it is even about granularity by implication, “If you’re sorting things into boxes, it doesn’t matter so much if some boxes hold square pegs and others round holes. But when you want to assemble those boxes into a coherent unit, it would be easier if the pegs and holes all had the same shape.” To us this principle is exactly the same one we employ when naming capabilities. As mentioned above, capabilities are different types. You can tell they are different types by looking at the proof behind the capability. That is, what makes the capability a capability in the first place? Business Capabilities have processes behind them, maybe more than one, but at least one.

So what I’m saying here is that if you want to give a name to a capability you need to have something in mind besides appropriate wording. Just getting people to agree on words doesn’t cut it. Why? Because ultimately you need to be talking about something of value. If capabilities can’t be linked to something of value then you might be imagining capabilities in a vacuum.

Anyway, subscribe to Bruce’s excellent blog when you get a chance.

7 years, 5 months ago

Business Capability Naming and Content

Bruce Silver, BPMN luminary, has recently posted a piece on BPMN and Business Architecture where, he says, “In the past year the ‘architects’ seem to have discovered BPMN.”  WIth his usual meticulous style he dissects the difference between a process and other notions such as capabilities and functions, terms that architects like to throw around in their paperwork.

He clearly distinguishes process as the “how,” which is what we, at SenseAgility, have been saying as well. Process diagrams, and BPMN diagrams in particular, are the proof behind a particular type of capability, namely the Business Capability. In our work we’ve found that there are specific types of acceptable proofs behind different types of capabilities.

Here’s a statement Bruce makes about typing or perhaps it is even about granularity by implication, “If you’re sorting things into boxes, it doesn’t matter so much if some boxes hold square pegs and others round holes. But when you want to assemble those boxes into a coherent unit, it would be easier if the pegs and holes all had the same shape.” To us this principle is exactly the same one we employ when naming capabilities. As mentioned above, capabilities are different types. You can tell they are different types by looking at the proof behind the capability. That is, what makes the capability a capability in the first place? Business Capabilities have processes behind them, maybe more than one, but at least one.

So what I’m saying here is that if you want to give a name to a capability you need to have something in mind besides appropriate wording. Just getting people to agree on words doesn’t cut it. Why? Because ultimately you need to be talking about something of value. If capabilities can’t be linked to something of value then you might be imagining capabilities in a vacuum.

Anyway, subscribe to Bruce’s excellent blog when you get a chance.

7 years, 5 months ago

How Does IT Impact Business Productivity?

Print PDF Guest post by Nalneesh Gaur Nick Carr’s controversial article on "IT doesn’t matter" published in 2003 noted that infrastructure technology is easily copied thus providing no competitive advantage. Yet, savvy businesses continue to pursue technology innovations to gain competitive advantages or improve business productivity in order to provide greater shareholder value, growth, and stability. Businesses that drive consistent productivity improvements have recognized the linkage between the need to drive innovation and discretionary spend […]

If you liked this, you might also like:

  1. How to Analyze Non-Discretionary IT Budgets
  2. The Journey of a Business Strategist CIO
  3. Shared Services Diamond’s 2010 Business Design Survey
7 years, 5 months ago

Watson: Impressive Finding not Thinking

National Public Radio (NPR) seems to wake my imagination.  This morning they had a story about IBM’s Watson. Watson is IBM’s computer that is squaring off against two Jeopardy champions – the shows air for the next 3 days. I wonder how many people will begin to believe that Watson actually thinks? I’m sure it […]