PODCAST: The Open Group FACE™ Consortium is Providing the Future of Airborne Systems

Recently, Judy Cerenzia, director of The Open Group Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE™) Consortium sat down with Defense IQ to talk about FACE and its support for open architectures. The interview is in conjunction with the Interoperable O…

When Tomorrow is Today

As I have written in my last post I believe that Enterprise Architecture is inevitable happening, no matter if it is done the one way or the other. I personally sense a lot of tribal thinking in the Enterprise Architecture community where in the heat of the discussion I sometimes wonder why there is so much talk about two sides (e.g. EITA vs EA) or even three (three schools of EA) or towards others (IT vs Business). I personally believe that the whole is a circulatory system which is always happening:


So I believe the right discussion should be along the line: how do we make the flow through the circulatory system (GLUE is just a model to reflect that) optimal instead of focusing on setting up boundaries and controls to ensure that a specific role works in a specific box. So overlaps, as described in an earlier post, is not bad if you ask me, but in fact very healthy, because to succeed not one person can decide on his own limited knowledge, but it forces people into working together, ideally collaborating or at least cooperating.

Non cooperation is a quite common pattern here though, and that is exactly what I sense in the Enterprise Architecture Community way more often than I personally understand, because it leads to nowhere. This is a discussion no one can win, because both argumentation chains (or the three of them) are valid and will be valid forever. The reason is fairly simple: By choosing a leading approach to Enterprise Architecture (be it a framework or a person) which we then follow, we focus on the difference, the unified selling proposition of that specific framework or leader. That ultimately leads to a scattered approach to Enterprise Architecture, which is a joke by itself, given the fact that most Enterprise Architects preach for standardisation across all functions.

My almost 4 year old son was a source of inspiration (once again, as well as his siblings) for me, by making a great quote:

“When Tomorrow is Today”,
Kalle Friedrich Schlüter (*2008)
 
That was just straight put where the focus should be: right now, this very moment. For him the concept of future does not exist yet. So he has to use the present to explain the future, and reality is, believe it or not, we all use that same concept, even though our grammar rules (for the languages I know) pretend that future can be expressed. As written in “Enterprise Architecting Past, Future or Present” I believe the absolute focus should be on the present, because it is the result of the Past and Leads to one out of many Futures. There is also a song from the young Billy Joel, even though is focus was not Enterprise Architecture, about the challenges of the time.


So what is my answer: I focus on the similarities, the common pattern. The things which unite Enterprise Architecture and are indeed the same. I think there is way more in common between the different approaches (and that includes Business Architecture, Project Management, Strategy, Innovation Management and many other things) than we allow ourself to accept and see. We kind of play the game of the three apes, and I wonder why.

Due to that I will focus in my future posts on something different than core Enterprise Architecture: What to learn from others is my leading theme for the next posts. Of course, as always, comments are welcome. So if you want me to look into something else which I only scratched so far then please let me know. Input from the community helps me to get my thinking straigthened.

Categories Uncategorized Tags

There is Not a Simple Solution to Every Problem

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” This maxim, attributed to Albert Einstein, bears particular relevance to how problems should be approached. There is not a simple solution to every problem. Simple problems can be solv…

Categories Uncategorized

Link Collection — September 9, 2012

  • Americans Think Cloud Computing Comes From Actual Clouds | WebProNews

    “To get the embarrassing statistics out of the way first, the survey found that 51 percent of respondents believe that stormy weather can interfere with cloud computing. A plurality of respondents (29 percent) also think that the cloud is an actual cloud. A paltry 16 percent actually knew what the cloud was.

    “This survey clearly shows that the cloud phenomenon is taking root in our mainstream culture, yet there is still a wide gap between the perceptions and realities of cloud computing,” said Kim DeCarlis, vice president of corporate marketing at Citrix.”

    tags: cloud computing

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Related posts:

  1. Link Collection — February 26, 2012
  2. Link Collection — June 10, 2012
  3. Link Collection — April 29, 2012

Another way of running projects

There is another way of running projects and that is to treat each project as an experiment within a set variance. If we do this then it becomes natural that the projects are mission based and thus find their own best way to the expected result. It has another effect and that is that it […]

GLUE – Updated Framework

In my last post I have updated and corrected the GLUE Journeys to put my thinking in the model after some reflection on my own writing triggered by reading my own thoughts and especially by some comments I received. This of course has an effect on the …

Categories Uncategorized Tags

ResEArch positions

The IT-university of Copenhagen has announced open positions as assistant and associate professors with the goal of strengthening research and teaching in the diverse area of innovation and information technology, also known as the Business Corner of the ITU Triangle Science-Arts-Business. Apply now! Also, please help spread this vacancy positing. From the call: Disciplinary or interdisciplinary backgrounds in fields …read more