Measuring the Value of EA: Part Art, Part Science

bg outline

Ben Geller, VP Marketing, Troux

As you know, Troux recently joined other industry experts in support of the Penn State Center for Enterprise Architecture (EA) program. The fact that Penn State’s Center for EA Architecture is receiving industry wide support and recognition is a testament to how the discipline of EA is hitting its stride.

On Wednesday, June 12, Troux hosted a webinar featuring Dr. Brian Cameron, Executive Directorblog image pr art science of the Center for Enterprise Architecture at the Pennsylvania State University, to discuss framework for determining how to best measure EA value within your organization. The webinar broke registration and attendance records and we were thrilled at the level of participation and engagement from attendees! (If you’ve ever sat through a particularly dry webinar, you know exactly what we mean.) We’re fielding requests for access to the replay left and right. And this tells us that we nailed it. EA professionals are out there, they understand that value measurement is imperative to their programs’ success, and they want to know more.

A recognized thought leader in the EA field, Dr. Cameron shared his insights on tackling the challenge of value measurement, which—while typically cited as a key area of importance for an EA program—is the least mature category in the discipline and the toughest to capture. When all is said and done measuring the value of EA is not straightforward or easy. Dr. Cameron’s insights highlighted – measuring EA value takes analytical skills and organizational finesse, making the task part art and part science. Sometimes results cannot be successfully achieved without third party involvement.

Troux has long recognized the challenges of the discipline. We’ve seen it across organizations of all sizes and all verticals. We’ve got some pretty good war stories. So, when we heard that Penn State was putting together a program to develop successful EA professionals who will be able to integrate business with technology and then analyze, justify, and communicate the solution to enterprise architecture problems, we said, “How can we help?”

As we mentioned in our last blog post, old data methods don’t work in terms of value measurement. Curious about what does? You can view the replay here.

Categories Uncategorized

Enterprise Architecture Roadmap for success: Capability Based Planning

<p>This is the 12th posting of the enterprise architecture Roadmap for success blog series, before we wrap it up with an overview in the last posting. We have covered a wide range of topics so far, in this posting we zoom in on one of the most useful techniques in the field of strategic enterprise architecture planning: capability based planning.</p><div class=”captionImage leftAlone” style=”width: 337px;”><div class=”captionImage leftAlone” style=”width: 600px;”><img alt=”Capability Based Planning” class=”leftAlone” height=”375″ src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/_resampled/resizedimage600375-Roadmap-for-success-capability-based-planning.png” title=”12th posting in the roadmap for succes series” width=”600″/><p class=”caption”>Part 12: Capability Based Planning</p></div></div><p><span style=”color: #e3004a; font-size: 12px; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 15px; word-spacing: 1px;”>Capability based planning</span></p><p><img alt=”Capability Based Planning” class=”left” height=”139″ src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/_resampled/resizedimage150139-capability-based-planning.png” title=”It may take a long time to realize the architecture” width=”150″/></p><p>There are many ways to look at architecture as we have seen in this blog series. Generally, architectures of systems (in the broadest sense of the word) are fairly high level and focus on the fundamental organization of the system as well as principles underlying this <em>fundamental</em> organization.</p><p>Especially for complex systems, it may take a long time to realize the architecture. Or, to put it in a different light, organizations may be smart and to cater for the fact that their long-term vision may change, deciding to take it one step at a time, allowing for the vision / architecture to change. This also takes into account the fact that organizations already have certain capabilities that they may wish / need to develop further in an incremental fashion. This is where Capability Based Planning kicks in.</p><h2>Capability Based Planning – the TOGAF™ way</h2><p>Many definitions for capabilities (and frameworks around capabilities) have been proposed and used in practice. In this post we zoom in on the TOGAF-framework which is fairly well aligned with other capability frameworks. The TOGAF-standard has two definitions for the term Capability, which can loosely be paraphrased with the statement “A capability is an ability that an organization, person, or system possesses”. Capabilities are typically ‘horizontal’ in the sense that they span many lines of business as is illustrated by the figure below (from <a href=”http://pubs.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf9-doc/arch/chap32.html” target=”_blank”>Chapter 32</a> of the TOGAF standard), but that is not always the case.</p><p><img alt=”TOGAF and Capability Based Planning” class=”leftAlone” height=”333″ src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/_resampled/resizedimage600333-TOGAF-framework.png” title=”The TOGAF-standard has two definitions for the term Capability” width=”600″/></p><p class=”caption”>Two capability definitions in TOGAF</p><p>The idea is that an organization’s capability may be at a certain ‘level’ at some point in time. In order to further that capability – conform the Architecture Development Method – a new architecture is developed (using e.g. ArchiMate), which is fleshed out in more detail in a solution model (e.g. ArchiMate, UML, BPMN) before it is actually implemented:</p><p><img alt=”Capability, Architecture, Solution model” class=”leftAlone” height=”193″ src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/_resampled/resizedimage600193-Screen-Shot-2013-04-26-at-11.32.44-.png” title=”a new architecture is developed (using e.g. ArchiMate), which is fleshed out in more detail in a solution model (e.g. ArchiMate, UML, BPMN) ” width=”600″/></p><p>Another important aspect of capabilities lies in the fact that they may have different ‘dimensions’. For example, <a href=”http://pubs.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf9-doc/arch/chap32.html” target=”_blank”>Chapter 32</a> of the TOGAF standard lists a people dimension, process dimension, and material dimensions for a given capability. In other words, when planning the next increment for our ability (i.e., the goal we want to achieve for this increment in the next ADM cycle), we should consider the ramifications for each of these dimensions.</p><h2>Modeling support</h2><p>Given the integration between ArchiMate® and TOGAF™, we feel that capability based planning also deserves proper modeling support. We are working on a simple meta-model to support capability based planning, the core of which looks like this:</p><p><br/><img alt=”Capability based planning. A meta model” class=”leftAlone” height=”301″ src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/core-modeling-ArchiMate-TOGAF.png” title=”meta-model to support capability based planning” width=”422″/></p><p>This sample shows that capabilities may have one or more dimensions, and are realized by one of more increments, indicative of the different points in time. These increments are still conceptual in nature, and indicate points in time. Each increment may be realized by an architecture, expressed as a set of core concepts (<a href=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/blog/archimate-core-overview/” target=”_blank”>see our series on ArchiMate</a>). Using this simple meta-model we can create the following view:</p><p><img alt=”Capability with 5 different dimensions” class=”leftAlone” height=”299″ src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/_resampled/resizedimage500299-core-concepts-meta-model-ArchiMate-TOGAF.png” title=”Each increment may be realized by an architecture, expressed as a set of core concepts” width=”500″/></p><p>Here we see a capability with 5 different dimensions. In each of the four increments, the capability has a certain <em>value</em> that indicates ‘how good we are doing with respect to this capability’. As the analysis of this diagram may be hard, we propose a simple radar view as follows:</p><p><img alt=”radar view of capability” class=”leftAlone” src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/customer-dimension-capability-increments.png” title=”Capability radar view” width=”350″/></p><h2>Use in practice</h2><p>In our experience, Capability Based Planning as a technique can be used in a many different settings. The main benefit of this approach lies in the combination of easy communication (capability is a term that management tends to understand well) while still allows for formal modeling and analysis. We have used it successfully in helping one of our clients in furthering their data management practice, linking the technique of capability based planning with the DAMA DMBOK framework. The DMBOK framework decomposes the data management capability into several sub capabilities such as data governance, master data management, Business Intelligence and so on. It also proposes to consider each capability from different dimensions which may lead to an assessment such as:</p><p><img alt=”Capability assessment” class=”leftAlone” height=”270″ src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130426_ea-roadmap-for-success/_resampled/resizedimage450270-DAMA-DMBOK-framework.png” title=”such diagrams communicate well and provide a solid basis for further analysis and realization” width=”450″/></p><p>Indeed, such diagrams communicate well and provide a solid basis for further analysis and realization (which steps will we take? When? What is the architecture that goes with each of these steps? How does this translate to projects that take us to the next level?).</p><h2>Next posting</h2><p>If you’d like to know more, please contact the authors directly at <a href=”mailto:b.vangils@bizzdesign.com” target=”_blank”>b.vangils@bizzdesign.com</a> / <a href=”mailto:s.vandijk@bizzdesign.com” target=”_blank”>s.vandijk@bizzdesign.com</a>, or leave a comment. The next wraps up the series! It is scheduled to between 6th and 10th of May.</p><p> </p>

Categories Uncategorized

Whence, Angels?

As you’ve read over past couple of years, we’ve started investing in a hybrid Angel/VC model.  Lots of risk, lots of upside, and lots of fun new things to learn.  Applying Capability Driven Methods to management from the start has been both f…

Emerging Technology and Disruptive Technology – What’s the Difference?

Some people question my use of the word “emerging” to categorize technologies such as social, mobile, cloud, analytics, sensors and others.  They argue that these technologies are already here and aren’t emerging anymore.  Some suggest using “disruptive” to describe them instead.  Now is a good time to distinguish between these two labels and make sure that we are using each to help us better understand technology’s impact to our businesses. Emerging means to come into […]

So you have to transmit some files, huh?

When was the last time you found yourself on a project that didn’t involve some degree of file transmission? No, that one doesn’t count… Ok, so maybe you occasionally have a solution that doesn’t require any file delivery but every architect worth his weight in .csv files is going to come across this task at […]

Maximize Value from CMDB by Integration

In part 4 of “Memoirs of an Enterprise Architect” I discussed the rules around defining an application as well as the 6 keys to successful Application Portfolio Management.  In Part 5, I will discuss integrating with a Configuration Manage…

Categories Uncategorized