Aggregated enterprise architecture wisdom
By Loren K. Baynes, Director, Global Marketing Communications at The Open Group. Day 2 at The Open Group conference in the City of Brotherly Love, as Philadelphia is also known, was another busy and remarkable day. The plenary started with … Continue reading →
.JPG)
“The best executives I have met have had a great understanding of how to use technology to gain competitive advantage and improve operations. They also worked with the CIO to help them to understand the business. They worked together to identify the technologies that could improve the company’s competitive advantage versus technologies that were needed to support the business. Once this was done, the executive leadership and CIO focused on implementing technologies that improve the company’s competitive advantage”.
The demise of the IT Department is not a new prediction, it was first suggested in 2004 by Nicolas Carr in his book ‘Does IT Matter?‘ and again in 2007 when Chris Anderson published his ‘Black Wire – White Wire’ article. This post talked about how corporate IT was being over-taken by consumer-IT. Later, in January 2008, Nicholas Carr famously pronounced “The IT department is dead” referring to the up-take of utility computing since his 2004 prediction.
|
Old Habits
|
New Habits
|
|
1.The department of ‘No’
2.Products focus
3.Internal SLAs
4.IT Strategy
5.Cyber security tooling
6.CAPEX-first mentality
7.Solution-focused technology architecture
8.Product standardized IT portfolio management
9.Governance of large IT projects
10.IT Cost Centre management
11.Internal procedures & methods
12.‘Family’ of IT vendors
13.Gadget-focused innovation
14.Periodic, internally-focused, measurement
15.Technology focus
|
1.The department of qualified ‘Yes’
2.Services focus
3.Services internal/external ecosystem –SLA-chains
4.Integrated BT strategy
5.Cyber security culture
6.Balanced, outcome-focused, investment
7.Adaptive, value-focused, Enterprise Architecture
8.Principle-led architecture & standards-based integration
9.Company-wide, joined-up, BT-governance
10.BT services broker, innovation-lead and advisory
11.Internal & external engagement
12.Consumer-driven, ecosystem of suppliers
13.Customer-story-based innovation
14.Constant, external & internal, feedback-loops
15.Focus on information value & risk
|
“The best executives I have met have had a great understanding of how to use technology to gain competitive advantage and improve operations. They also worked with the CIO to help them to understand the business. They worked together to identify the technologies that could improve the company’s competitive advantage versus technologies that were needed to support the business. Once this was done, the executive leadership and CIO focused on implementing technologies that improve the company’s competitive advantage”.
The demise of the IT Department is not a new prediction, it was first suggested in 2004 by Nicolas Carr in his book ‘Does IT Matter?‘ and again in 2007 when Chris Anderson published his ‘Black Wire – White Wire’ article. This post talked about how corporate IT was being over-taken by consumer-IT. Later, in January 2008, Nicholas Carr famously pronounced “The IT department is dead” referring to the up-take of utility computing since his 2004 prediction.
|
Old Habits
|
New Habits
|
|
1.The department of ‘No’
2.Products focus
3.Internal SLAs
4.IT Strategy
5.Cyber security tooling
6.CAPEX-first mentality
7.Solution-focused technology architecture
8.Product standardized IT portfolio management
9.Governance of large IT projects
10.IT Cost Centre management
11.Internal procedures & methods
12.‘Family’ of IT vendors
13.Gadget-focused innovation
14.Periodic, internally-focused, measurement
15.Technology focus
|
1.The department of qualified ‘Yes’
2.Services focus
3.Services internal/external ecosystem –SLA-chains
4.Integrated BT strategy
5.Cyber security culture
6.Balanced, outcome-focused, investment
7.Adaptive, value-focused, Enterprise Architecture
8.Principle-led architecture & standards-based integration
9.Company-wide, joined-up, BT-governance
10.BT services broker, innovation-lead and advisory
11.Internal & external engagement
12.Consumer-driven, ecosystem of suppliers
13.Customer-story-based innovation
14.Constant, external & internal, feedback-loops
15.Focus on information value & risk
|
Intellectual Capital within a business is an asset that should be enhanced whenever possible. Frequently, when undertaking activities that lead to increased capability, improved business processes or perhaps more efficient operations and where external resources are utilised, the opportunity of … Continue reading →
While thinking of ideas discussed in this blog, have been probing the tenants that creates the fundamental characteristics of the system such as :- Division Of Labor – the most important idea that revolutionized industrialization and for rise of capitalism Commodiitization vs Specialization Production of cost by Economy Of Scale by Division vs Multiplexing (manual […]
By: Ben Geller, VP Marketing, Troux
For any global, highly diversified Fortune 500 enterprise, providing reliable and cost-effective IT solutions that support company growth objectives requires a great deal of planning and foresight. For companies that have multiple subsidiaries and disparate business groups with different priorities and infrastructure requirements, the IT support challenge can quickly escalate from complex to overwhelming.
Troux customer Bayer Corporation knows this challenge all too well. With more than $36 Billion in revenue and 110,000 employees worldwide, the German chemical and pharmaceutical company is comprised of 283 subsidiaries representing three major business areas — CropScience, MaterialScience and HealthCare — each of which has distinct, yet overlapping, IT and application needs. While each business group had previously experimented with Enterprise Architecture, as the company continued to grow it became increasingly clear Bayer needed a comprehensive strategy for managing its expanding application portfolio and IT assets.
In an effort to more effectively support the business goals of each group while simultaneously reducing IT complexity and costs, in 2008 Bayer began working with Troux to implement an EA strategy that would enable it to be more agile and strategic while positioning the company for future growth.
As with many EA projects, a core objective for Bayer was developing a common language and understanding concerning IT infrastructure across the entire organization to improve collaboration and ensure stakeholders were invested in achieving the same goals. Another critical and ambitious project Bayer tackled with Troux’s support was revamping the manner in which the IT management team tracks, monitors and reports on the overall health of technology assets, key services and resources. Like many organizations, traditionally this information was silo-ed in a collection of Excel and PowerPoint documents and updated inconsistently, making accurate reporting a near-impossible and time-consuming challenge. By managing information through Troux’s platform, the IT department is easily able to retrieve answers to questions and quickly push updates to stakeholders across the business to aid in decision making.
If you’d like to read more about Bayer’s approach, you can access the full case study here at the link below.
Creating a Global Community: Bayer IT unites multiple business segments using Troux
If we can agree that Configuration Management is at the core of the service-centric IT universe, then why aren’t more companies jumping at the opportunity to implement the solutions required to properly facilitate it? While most companies profess…
By Loren K. Baynes, Director, Global Marketing Communications at The Open Group. On Monday, July 15th, we kicked off our conference in Philadelphia. As Allen Brown, CEO of The Open Group, commented in his opening remarks, Philadelphia is the birthplace … Continue reading →
This post is my devotion to the love of my life, my wife Dawn
The post Devoted to Dawn appeared first on Enterprise Architecture in Higher Education.
The big problem is that today Business (Enterprise) Architecture practices exist without ever creating business blueprints.
As Architects we often spend countless hours working toward delivering great artifacts, including a future state, current state and roadmap to assist our customers in developing a vision and plan toward transformation or maturity. This work is often completed and finds its place on the CIO’s bookshelf or the Lead Architect’s desk with little action or even a second look. Why is this work not actively embraced by many organizations beyond the IT walls or even within the IT organization?
Don’t misunderstand my position, I believe all of the work completed during an iterative EA process that outputs the artifacts I mentioned above add value, although if the organization is not “culturally” ready to embrace the work and transform then the effort is for not.
Culture is defined in many ways by many scholars, although I find it easiest to define culture as interactions and relationships between members of an organization or unit within that organization. This assumes there is an organizational culture and sub cultures within that organization. With this said, it is important that we as architects focus on the overarching organizational culture to better understand whether our customers are ready for an EA engagement.
Our first priority is to ensure we are engaged with the highest level of sponsorship within the organization. For instance, developing physical architectures with the platform division does not constitute Enterprise Architecture, but rather a Technical Architecture and will only have an effect on that sub culture within the organization. EAs need to ensure they are seated alongside the CIO, CFO, COO or even the Chief Executive to ensure efforts toward cultural transformation can be enabled via strong sponsorship.
In the public sector this can be a difficult task as most executives are focused on business related practices and often see the CIO and vendors as “IT focused.” It is critical for our communication during initial contact to be business focused. Conversations about technology are not held until key items, like capability modeling, guiding principles and governance structures are embraced by the organization as a result of cultural change. Once these cultural elements are embraced and socialized technology decisions will be easily facilitated with little debate or power struggles. Remember, the “sponsor” understands how important organizational transformation is at this point in the evolution and will help sub groups understand the vision. Communication and vision are critical elements at this point in the journey toward transformation.
Once we have commitment from the sponsor it is critical for the sponsor to understand the partnership needed between the EA Team and Executive Team. The EA Team is not chartered with creating mission, vision, strategy etc. but rather with understanding the Executive Team’s goals and objectives for the organization and aligning the technology investments with these goals and objectives. Every investment decision made is a direct representation of how the organization’s culture is manifesting itself physically.
As Architects we often spend countless hours working toward delivering great artifacts, including a future state, current state and roadmap to assist our customers in developing a vision and plan toward transformation or maturity. This work is often completed and finds its place on the CIO’s bookshelf or the Lead Architect’s desk with little action or even a second look. Why is this work not actively embraced by many organizations beyond the IT walls or even within the IT organization?
Don’t misunderstand my position, I believe all of the work completed during an iterative EA process that outputs the artifacts I mentioned above add value, although if the organization is not “culturally” ready to embrace the work and transform then the effort is for not.
Culture is defined in many ways by many scholars, although I find it easiest to define culture as interactions and relationships between members of an organization or unit within that organization. This assumes there is an organizational culture and sub cultures within that organization. With this said, it is important that we as architects focus on the overarching organizational culture to better understand whether our customers are ready for an EA engagement.
Our first priority is to ensure we are engaged with the highest level of sponsorship within the organization. For instance, developing physical architectures with the platform division does not constitute Enterprise Architecture, but rather a Technical Architecture and will only have an effect on that sub culture within the organization. EAs need to ensure they are seated alongside the CIO, CFO, COO or even the Chief Executive to ensure efforts toward cultural transformation can be enabled via strong sponsorship.
In the public sector this can be a difficult task as most executives are focused on business related practices and often see the CIO and vendors as “IT focused.” It is critical for our communication during initial contact to be business focused. Conversations about technology are not held until key items, like capability modeling, guiding principles and governance structures are embraced by the organization as a result of cultural change. Once these cultural elements are embraced and socialized technology decisions will be easily facilitated with little debate or power struggles. Remember, the “sponsor” understands how important organizational transformation is at this point in the evolution and will help sub groups understand the vision. Communication and vision are critical elements at this point in the journey toward transformation.
Once we have commitment from the sponsor it is critical for the sponsor to understand the partnership needed between the EA Team and Executive Team. The EA Team is not chartered with creating mission, vision, strategy etc. but rather with understanding the Executive Team’s goals and objectives for the organization and aligning the technology investments with these goals and objectives. Every investment decision made is a direct representation of how the organization’s culture is manifesting itself physically.