How difficult should it be?

by

The basics of a team structure to drive from continuos customer dialog to delivery of result. The Need Team Someone submits an idea for review (basically a change request from anyone) The team reviews the idea and assigns it a status Inform the other teams of relevant status constantly Inform the stakeholders (don’t forget the […]

A practical set of EA deliverables

by

A question on LinkedIn recently reminded me that, as the team leader for Segment Architecture in my former EA team, I was accountable for identifying a core set of deliverables for the team.  The idea was that we could focus on defining standard formats and contents for these deliverables and, in doing so, we could start to measure both our output and our quality.

We only created  pre-canned templates for a few of them.  This is partly because the team was not mature enough in its practices to get consistency, and partly because Enterprise Architecture itself is not mature, or accepted, enough to have stakeholders that would notice if our deliverables meet an objective standard.  Also this list is not intended to be comprehensive.  The goal was to describe deliverables where it may possibly make sense to go for some level of consistency.  Any EA could (and often did) create deliverables that were not on the list.

Perhaps it is time to share what we came up with. 

Note that this list is the result of a single team doing its work, and is not representative of any “standards” effort across other EA groups.  That said, I stand beside this list.  I think it is a useful start.  Note that many are technical in nature.  I did not, in making this list, differentiate between BA and EITA deliverables.  So if you are someone who believes that EA = BA + EITA, then you will see both sets of deliverables, intermixed, in the list below.  If you are someone offended by the inclusion of technical architecture deliverables in an EA list… tough.  I was working with reality.

Deliverable name

Why create it

Description

Architectural Point of View (or Technical Policy)

Provide clear input to Business or IT leadership on issues relevant to Enterprise Architecture

Short document describing a problem that requires attention and the opinion of EA for solving it.

Architectural Reference Model (or Architectural Pattern)

Provide clear input to IT project SMEs on optimal or preferable design options

Short document describing a set of concerns and a proven approach for addressing them

<Segment> Current State Model and Analysis

To demonstrate and communicate challenges inherent in current processes / systems / information

A collection of architectural models, including a context model, process models, and information models, as understood to currently exist , plus an analysis of issues and risks

<segment> Future State Vision and Model

To demonstrate the design of the future processes / systems / information needed by strategic intent.

A collection of architectural models that reflect a specific set of engineered changes

Governance Model and Analysis

Clarify roles and responsibilities and decision making processes for planning and oversight of initiatives

Process model, description of roles and responsibilities, and description of deliverables needed for planning, oversight and governance, along with implementation ROI and plans

M&A Business Case & Analysis

To provide a rationale for the acquisition of a company for the purpose of improving operational effectiveness. (M&A)

The document contains rationale including Competitive Analysis, SWOT / Twos analysis, and Strategic Alternatives Analysis

System Integration Recommendations  Document

To set a vision for how key processes and systems shall be integrated into enterprise infrastructure (primarily M&A)

End to End business scenarios, Process and System Integration points, Risks and Issues for each integration concern, and an analysis of alternatives and recommendations

Value chain and operating model analysis

To clearly address gaps and strategic requirements for integrating or divesting a set of processes and/or systems (primarily M&A)

Target value chain and operating model for post-M&A future state. Mappings of key processes to or from the enterprise core diagram, and analysis of changes with the intent of composing key initiatives.

Enterprise Core Diagram

To clearly declare the processes and systems that are NOT core to the operations of the enterprise

A list of systems and processes mapped grouped into “ecosystems” that are clearly indicated as “core” and “edge” with analysis of governance

EARB Engagement Package

To demonstrate project level architectural quality to the EA Review Board

A pre-defined collection of project architectural models and artifacts.

Capability Model and Assessment

Provide clear basis for data collection for a segment

List of capabilities for a segment with assessment of capability maturity, etc.

Capability Gap Analysis

Highlight underperforming capabilities to focus investment

Map of capabilities needed by strategies, highlighting those needed investment, and listing relative and absolute program spend against each

<segment> Roadmap (a.k.a. Transition Plan)

To clarify the scope, timing, and dependencies between initiatives needed to deliver on a strategy

List of proposed initiatives and dependencies between them to deliver on strategic intent

Strategy Map and/or Balanced Scorecard

To clarify the strategies, goals, and objectives of a segment and allow for measurement and alignment

Categorized strategies, measures, and metrics for a specific timeframe and business scope

<segment> Process Model and Analysis

To clarify and build consensus on the business processes (as-is or to-be), and as input to process improvement / measurement

Models of processes, activities, information assets and system interaction points , and an analysis of opportunities to improve.

Enterprise Scenario and Analysis

To get clarity on the experience of a key stakeholder (often a customer or partner)

Textual and diagrammatic description of an experience, often with analysis to indicate opportunities

<segment> Information Model and Analysis

To improve understanding of requirements and the rationalization of design

Well-constructed information model, at one or more well-defined levels of abstraction, covering all aspects of a segment, aligned with EDM, along with an analysis of risks and issues

Platform Assessment

Capture ability of an app or platform to meet strategic needs

Collection of measurements, attributes, and mappings to an app or platform

Proof of Concept (POC) delivery

To create a design that demonstrates, and proves, an approach for solving difficult issues

A software deliverable and an architectural reference model (see above)

Record of Architectural Tradeoffs

To clearly communicate the tradeoffs made by architects on the customer’s behalf

Textual description of architectural decisions and the implications for the owner of the process / tool

Categories Uncategorized

EAM2013 Enterprise Architecture Management recap

by

<p class=”p1″><span style=”font-size: 11px; line-height: 19px;”><img alt=”EAM congres 2013. Tekening door Frank Los” class=”left” src=”http://www.bizzdesign.com/assets/BlogDocuments-2/20130531_BasvanGils/EAM2013-drawing-by-frank-los.png” style=”width: 260px; height: 857px; float: left;” title=”Tekening door Frank Los”/></span></p><p class=”p1″><span style=”font-size: 11px; line-height: 19px;”>I had the pleasure of attending the </span><a href=”http://www.eam-congres.nl/” style=”font-size: 11px; line-height: 19px;” target=”_blank”><span class=”s2″>EAM2013</span></a><span style=”font-size: 11px; line-height: 19px;”> conference in Houten this year. The topic for the conference: “innovation through interconnection”. In my opinion, this took place on more than one level! Of course, the topics of the sessions covered it in detail. But more importantly, people indeed (re)connected at the EAM conference. For me, the day had a feel of a reunion mixed with great content and inspiration for the next year. </span></p><p class=”p5″><span class=”s1″>As usual, the venue was great. For the first keynote from Cor Franke the main room filled up. With only a few seats left we discussed the merits and development of NORA, one of the most widely used reference architectures for (the Dutch) government. With a good discussions (both in the room as well as live on twitter, continued face to face over coffee) we set the tone for the rest of the day: good sessions, good discussions and a nice balance between academic rigor and practical relevance. </span></p><p class=”p5″><span class=”s1″>Some highlights and trends:</span></p><ul style=” float: right; width: 395px; ”><li class=”li6″><span class=”s1″>There is still talk about architects struggling to get (enough) management attention and support. However, we’ve taken big steps as a community to improve the situation. This is mainly due to focus on results rather than frameworks, and taking our circle of influence / interest into account when trying to “get shit done” (the GSD-paradigm has made its way into the enterprise architecture community too!) Paraphrasing Dijkstra, it is safe to say that “enterprise architecture is as much about frameworks as astronomy is about telescopes”</span></li> <li class=”li6″><span class=”s1″>More attention for managing and using data in building a strong enterprise. The data-theme was covered / touched upon in several sessions but it was quite an inspiration to discuss it during the breaks with several people. Looking forward to the follow-up discussions!</span></li> <li class=”li6″><span class=”s1″>In several sessions we saw discussions on the interplay between “how we get organized” (functional organization? Process focus?) and the way our IT-landscape is organized (SOA? Using cloud?). Compared to other years, there appeared to be less discussion about the IT-aspects and more about the business impact. </span></li> <li class=”li6″><span class=”s1″>Not only on EAM, but also in twitter and the blogosphere we see a trend that more attention is given to the ‘soft skills’ of architects (“Should architects be more like Einstein or like Mandela?”). For more insights into this realm, check out “<a href=”http://www.amazon.co.uk/IT-Savvy-What-Executives-Must/dp/1422181014/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1369986542&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=it+savvy” target=”_blank”><span class=”s4″>IT Savvy</span></a>”! </span></li> <li class=”li6″><span class=”s1″>Some other themes that made their way into EAM: OIAM as a framework for thinking about infrastructure architecture in a functional way, linking agile development to enterprise architecture, and the struggle of Ron Roozendaal to visualize the architecture on a massive (country) scale.</span></li></ul><p class=”p5″><span class=”s1″>Overall, the day was an inspiration. A good lunch helped, and so did the funny “visual summaries” of the sessions in the main room by sketch artist Frank Los (check out his <a href=”http://twitter.com/franklosdus” target=”_blank”><span class=”s2″>twitter feed</span></a> to see some of them – in Dutch) but it was the excellent content that did it for me. Looking forward to EAM2014!</span></p>

Categories Uncategorized

Why should your business care about Platform 3.0™? A Tweet Jam

by

By Patty Donovan, The Open Group On Thursday, June 6, The Open Group will host a tweet jam examining Platform 3.0™ and why businesses require it to remain relevant in today’s fast paced internet enabled business environment. Over recent years … Continue reading →

Five Attributes of Strategic Thinkers

by

In today’s agile, fast-twitch, act-fail-iterate environment, strategic thinking often gets a bad name. One entrepreneur friend of mine told me: “Strategic thinking is just an excuse to slack off.” If you are an internet startup, have  little revenue, and no profits, then keep iterating through tactical options until you succeed – or fail. For the […]