Aggregated enterprise architecture wisdom
Before the start of the football season, football journalists have little to write about except transfer speculation – wondering which player might be about to transfer from one overpaid job to another overpaid job. This period is known as the Transfer…
Before the start of the football season, football journalists have little to write about except transfer speculation – wondering which player might be about to transfer from one overpaid job to another overpaid job. This period is known as the Transfer…
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…
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.
I caught up with Gil Long who has served IBM as a Business Development Executive, Distinguished Engineer and CIO Office Chief Enterprise Architecture leader. As the Worldwide Enterprise Architecture Community Leader, he specialized in architecture governance, strategic architecture design and infrastructure transition planning. He was responsible for IBM’s enterprise architecture strategy and planning service offerings, global enterprise architecture training programs, and functioned as a member of IBM’s Architect Certification Board.
Gil has had direct management responsibility for large IT organizations and staffing, and substantial ongoing budget accountability. His multi-industry experience includes international banking, securities, education, retail, healthcare, insurance, utilities, manufacturing, semi-conductor, airlines, telecommunications and government.
Gil is a competitive aerobatics and commercial pilot.
In many years of your experience across hundreds of customers, what is the fundamental thing that organizations miss about Enterprise Architecture?
Understanding the value of EA is often an issue. The value is not only about reducing IT cost, but investing in innovative ways to improve the business. In my opinion, many companies do not understand what EA is!
EA needs the buy-in from upper management, but most upper managements think it is merely a technical or standards issue, and miss the point that it covers all aspects of business and technical structure and management. It is very important to have someone at the sponsorship level who understands what EA is and what value it brings.
In your experience what has been one of the most remarkable transformations enabled by Enterprise Architecture?
Obviously, I am intimately familiar with IBM’s EA and how it has influenced multiple internal transformations. I shared with you the IBM Transformation Story. Great showcase!
I have seen many other transformations in the client world. One involved the consolidation of 90 companies (utilities) into a common footprint! Generally, the more complex the environment, the greater the benefit EA can deliver.
What do you think is one of the most underrated aspects of Enterprise Architecture?
The leadership role that an Enterprise Architect can provide to the organization.
For an aspiring Enterprise Architect, what are some key things she needs to start working on right now?
[-] Understand what EA is and what value it brings to the organization.
[-] Get EA training. You could start with understanding TOGAF, which is an internationally recognized standard for Enterprise Architecture.
[-] Get certified if you can, it could establish your credibility both within and outside your organization.
[-] Develop strong relationships with stakeholders that are impacted by EA. Its importance cannot be overstated. Involve them in the process.
[-] Understand your industry. Industries have their own context, business process models, histories, politics and challenges. Understanding your industry gives you an edge when working with partners across the company.
[-] Work on your communication skills. Always put yourself in the shoes of your audience. Communicate in a way that the listener will understand. Your message should be simple, concise and actionable, and answer the question, ‘What’s in it for me?’.
[-] An Enterprise Architect needs to stand up and speak, evangelize ideas, develop consensus, work across boundaries. Do not throw up your hands and quit, or be draconian and say if I don’t get what I want, the world will come to an end!
Do you think Enterprise Architecture has a brand issue?
Yes, the name itself implies it is a technical concept, rather than an overall business concept. The word “architecture” conjures an image of a guy with his head down, drawing a complex picture! The word “enterprise” can also be a bit vague. The enterprise represents the totality of the business; including business partners, customers and other stakeholders, and the infrastructure they use to accomplish their objectives.
However, a good Enterprise Architect will be able to explain EA to anyone in terms they can understand.
At the risk of drawing you into the “war of EA frameworks”, how important is the EA framework brand to you?
You have quite a collection of funny “ditties”! Which one is your favorite?
I have many favorites, but the “You are here!” picture always gets a laugh from architects 🙂
I caught up with Gil Long who has served IBM as a Business Development Executive, Distinguished Engineer and CIO Office Chief Enterprise Architecture leader. As the Worldwide Enterprise Architecture Community Leader, he specialized in architecture governance, strategic architecture design and infrastructure transition planning. He was responsible for IBM’s enterprise architecture strategy and planning service offerings, global enterprise architecture training programs, and functioned as a member of IBM’s Architect Certification Board.
Gil has had direct management responsibility for large IT organizations and staffing, and substantial ongoing budget accountability. His multi-industry experience includes international banking, securities, education, retail, healthcare, insurance, utilities, manufacturing, semi-conductor, airlines, telecommunications and government.
Gil is a competitive aerobatics and commercial pilot.
In many years of your experience across hundreds of customers, what is the fundamental thing that organizations miss about Enterprise Architecture?
Understanding the value of EA is often an issue. The value is not only about reducing IT cost, but investing in innovative ways to improve the business. In my opinion, many companies do not understand what EA is!
EA needs the buy-in from upper management, but most upper managements think it is merely a technical or standards issue, and miss the point that it covers all aspects of business and technical structure and management. It is very important to have someone at the sponsorship level who understands what EA is and what value it brings.
In your experience what has been one of the most remarkable transformations enabled by Enterprise Architecture?
Obviously, I am intimately familiar with IBM’s EA and how it has influenced multiple internal transformations. I shared with you the IBM Transformation Story. Great showcase!
I have seen many other transformations in the client world. One involved the consolidation of 90 companies (utilities) into a common footprint! Generally, the more complex the environment, the greater the benefit EA can deliver.
What do you think is one of the most underrated aspects of Enterprise Architecture?
The leadership role that an Enterprise Architect can provide to the organization.
For an aspiring Enterprise Architect, what are some key things she needs to start working on right now?
[-] Understand what EA is and what value it brings to the organization.
[-] Get EA training. You could start with understanding TOGAF, which is an internationally recognized standard for Enterprise Architecture.
[-] Get certified if you can, it could establish your credibility both within and outside your organization.
[-] Develop strong relationships with stakeholders that are impacted by EA. Its importance cannot be overstated. Involve them in the process.
[-] Understand your industry. Industries have their own context, business process models, histories, politics and challenges. Understanding your industry gives you an edge when working with partners across the company.
[-] Work on your communication skills. Always put yourself in the shoes of your audience. Communicate in a way that the listener will understand. Your message should be simple, concise and actionable, and answer the question, ‘What’s in it for me?’.
[-] An Enterprise Architect needs to stand up and speak, evangelize ideas, develop consensus, work across boundaries. Do not throw up your hands and quit, or be draconian and say if I don’t get what I want, the world will come to an end!
Do you think Enterprise Architecture has a brand issue?
Yes, the name itself implies it is a technical concept, rather than an overall business concept. The word “architecture” conjures an image of a guy with his head down, drawing a complex picture! The word “enterprise” can also be a bit vague. The enterprise represents the totality of the business; including business partners, customers and other stakeholders, and the infrastructure they use to accomplish their objectives.
However, a good Enterprise Architect will be able to explain EA to anyone in terms they can understand.
At the risk of drawing you into the “war of EA frameworks”, how important is the EA framework brand to you?
You have quite a collection of funny “ditties”! Which one is your favorite?
I have many favorites, but the “You are here!” picture always gets a laugh from architects 🙂
This Is the Woman at the Heart of Everything Google Builds | Wired Enterprise | Wired.com
Interesting article on the tools built/used by Google developers, and the woman who oversees the dev tool team. For the tool insights, jump to “For Google Eyes Only”.
“Google’s developer tools are, in some ways, a reflection of the egalitarian philosophy Meckfessel sees at play throughout the company. A single system, available from any company web browser, provides instant access to practically every piece of code that underpins practically every Google product and service. It even houses the code used to build, well, itself, in the kind of circular setup that’s so very common in the world of software.
The result is any Google engineer can tinker with code built by any other Google engineer. “The code is completely open — within the company,” Meckfessel says.
That doesn’t mean anyone can rewrite the code for, say, Gmail, compile it into executable software, and completely revamp the popular email service all on their own. But it does mean they can peruse and edit any of Gmail’s underlying code — and if they submit it to the right person for review and testing and compilation, they can indeed change the live service.”
tags: google development
“Everybody has this idea that Twitter is easy. With a little architectural hand waving we have a scalable Twitter, just that simple. Well, it’s not that simple as Raffi Krikorian, VP of Engineering at Twitter, describes in his superb and very detailed presentation on Timelines at Scale. If you want to know how Twitter works – then start here.”
tags: architecture twitter scale
The Body Data Craze – Newsweek and The Daily Beast
Overview of the Quantified Self trend.
“Welcome to my biography, 2013-style. It includes more data points than it possibly could have 20 years ago. And it’s part of a national obsession of a people who, literally, number our days. According to a recent nationwide survey for Pew Research Center Internet & American Life Project, 7 out of 10 people self-track regularly—using everything from human memory to a memory stick—some aspect of health for themselves or for someone else. Among the 3,000 adults questioned, the most popular things to monitor were weight and diet. A third of the people surveyed also track more esoteric elements of their health, from blood pressure to sleep to blood sugar. While many of them keep this information “in their heads,” a full 50 percent actually keep a written record of the data either using technology or on paper. According to the Consumer Electronics Association, in 2012 the U.S. sports and fitness category was a $70 billion business; and earlier this year, market firm ABI released a report that estimated that 485 million wearable computing devices—like smart watches and smart glasses—will be shipped annually by 2018.””
tags: quantifiedself
Irving Wladawsky-Berger: Big Data Takes Center Stage
“The next change requires accepting messiness instead of insisting on clean, carefully curated data. “[In] an increasing number of situations, a bit of inaccuracy can be tolerated, because the benefits of using vastly more data of variable quality outweigh the costs of using smaller amounts of very exact data. . . When there was not that much data around, researchers had to make sure that the figures they bothered to collect were as exact as possible. Tapping vastly more data means that we can now allow some inaccuracies to slip in (provided the data set is not completely incorrect), in return for benefiting from the insights that a massive body of data provides.””
The Quantified Self: Fundamental Disruption in Big Data Science and Biological Discovery
Research paper in Mary Ann Liebert, Big Data on Quantified Self. Big potential to aggregate individual data to make medical / biological discoveries and generate cures / remediations.
“A key contemporary trend emerging in big data science is the quantified self (QS)–individuals engaged in the self-tracking of any kind of biological, physical, behavioral, or environmental information as n=1 individuals or in groups. There are opportunities for big data scientists to develop new models to support QS data collection, integration, and analysis, and also to lead in defining open-access database resources and privacy standards for how personal data is used. Next-generation QS applications could include tools for rendering QS data meaningful in behavior change, establishing baselines and variability in objective metrics, applying new kinds of pattern recognition techniques, and aggregating multiple self-tracking data streams from wearable electronics, biosensors, mobile phones, genomic data, and cloud-based services. The long-term vision of QS activity is that of a systemic monitoring approach where an individual’s continuous personal information climate provides real-time performance optimization suggestions. There are some potential limitations related to QS activity—barriers to widespread adoption and a critique regarding scientific soundness—but these may be overcome.”
tags: bigdata healthcare quantifiedself
“Micro Service Architecture is an architectural concept that aims to decouple a solution by decomposing functionality into discrete services. Think of it as applying many of the principles of SOLID at an architectural level, instead of classes you’ve got services.
Conceptually speaking MSA is not particularly difficult to grasp but in practice it does raise many questions. How do these services communicate? What about latency between services? How do you test the services? How do you detect and respond to failure? How do you manage deployments when you have a bunch of interdependencies?”
tags: architecture
Business driven Agile development is achieved by Breaking tasks into small increments; Applying only the minimum of planning. Iterating over short time frames (timeboxes). Involving a cross functional team working in all Software Development LifeCycle functions. At the conclusion of … Continue reading →
Many members of a business community with access to an Enterprise Architecture see it as an overhead that ‘gets in the way’ of them ‘doing their job. As an overhead it is seen as something apart from their ‘Business As … Continue reading →
This is the fifth blog post in the Data Management series. We have covered several basic topics so far. This time we zoom in on one of the sub disciplines of Data Management: Master Data Management.TheoryLoosely defined and following Loshins excellen…
This post continues an earlier discussion about how to use the results from steps 1 – 3 to prioritize the actions we have identified to close the gap or difference (delta) from where we are to what we aspire to be. This is usually driven by evaluating the relative business value AND the technical complexity, plotting the results in a quadrant graph using an Action Priority Matrix. Other complimentary methods are discussed to help IDENTIFY what is feasible and what has the highest business value balancing business need with the capability to execute.