Enterprise Architectures: Putting Motion, DSI, TOGAF into the cauldron

1
Enterprise Architectures Putting Motion, DSI,
TOGAF into the cauldron

• Iain Mortimer
• Architect, Microsoft UK
• Iain.mortimer_at_microsoft.com

2
Enterprise Architects and CIOs are having a
really hard time out there.

• Business and industry perceptions
• The biggest complaints?
• IT costs too much.
• It takes too long to deliver benefits or doesn't
  deliver them at all.
• IT is a commodity that fails to deliver
  differentiation. It doesn't line up with business
  strategy.
• Project failures

Failures Macdonalds 170 M FBI 581 M FEMA 100
M
3
The choice of EA framework(s) is a major issue

• Im frequently asked
• is it the right one
• will it work

• Tendency for organisations to see an EA framework
  as a solution, not as a decision to start a
  dialogue

4
Enterprise architects are increasingly bewildered
by the number of vying frameworks
5
Organisations look to EA and Architects for many
benefits
And Many Many More.
Justification becomes the focus of much activity
6
Many frameworks fail to deliver business benefits
or resonate with the organsiation

• Seem to work at the wrong level
• Lack of business focus
• Lack of commercialism
• Lots of Technology stuff
• An Architecture is not an IT Strategy
• Ramp up and Lead times too long for initial
  benefits
• IT people doing Business
• Generally summarised as a communication problem

7
For EA to succeed it must refocus itself on to
Business problems

• Customer
• Cost
• Shareholder
• Colleague
• Technology
• Process
• Tooling

8
How? Review current EA practice in a business
perspective and apply it to our organisations

• Understand the organisational problems which lead
  to EA
• Review how EA frameworks have matured and their
  weaknesses
• Be able to critically assess the business
  efficacy of a framework. Practical Application

9

• What were the Organisational problems which lead
  to EA?

10
The Genesis of EA was in response to clear
business problems
11
Costs were Paradoxical

• Huge investment in technology but Benefits
  frequently illusive
• H/W refreshes
• S/w refreshes

12
Complexity was daunting
Many organisations have been paralysed by the
complexity of the business technology and the
rate of change in business technology.
Increase in IT intensity - drove increase in IT
estate leading to chaotic and overly complex
solutions

• There is no one single point of discontinuity
  where EA complexity problems surface
• Employee size
• Number of systems
• Number of technologies
• Diversity of geographies

Complex technology Stacks
13
Keeping control over IT was increasingly difficult
Business leaders unable to understand in a non
technical fashion what IT is in place and how it
can be exploited

• They CxOs seem to want some overarching
  framework within which the various aspects of
  decision making and development are considered.
• MBAs tend to teach very few IT strategy/Architectu
  re models

14
Trust between Business partners and IT became
increasingly fraught
As organisations grew (eg Customer base, product
reach and feature set) the complex interplay
between business strategy, decision making and IT
came increasingly to the fore
This is the golden bullet
15

• How have EA frameworks matured?

16
EA has a long history

• John Zachman presented his seminal work (1987)
• Really a Meta model
• No codification of process
• The interlinks are of more interest

17
EA has a long history

• Zachmans model useful diagnostic for EA focus
  and coverage

EA Concerns focus here
Early activity focussed here
18
There are numerous models of EA maturity
Meta Group Maturity assessment framework
Meta Group Maturity assessment framework
Return on Information
Meta Group Maturity assessment framework
Meta Group Maturity assessment framework
Gartner Group Maturity assessment framework Etc
They tend to measure processes, documentation,
lots of hard facts. They need lots of
information Consultants
Reduce Complexity costs
19
How did EA maturity become so difficult?

• It is amazing for such a top-down strategic
  discipline that it failed to galvanise Zachmans
  thinking. Why?
• Tremendous enthusiasm for EA resulted in the
  rapid emergence of Dozens of Frameworks
• Exploited the IT mind set (iteration, recursion,
  OODA)
• Exhibiting rapid Darwinism
• Key personnel occupied on the problem for
  protracted periods

20
Organisational and cultural maturity models may
give us a better clue if an approach will work
Power Distance

• Embodies
• Stakeholder scope
• Level of concerns
• Hierarchy
• Alignment
• Frustration
• Scope of language

Me Family Wider Family Clan State
Me Family Wider Family Clan State
If IT matures like cultures then we should be
able to predict what we need for the future
21
EA seems to mature through four stages - tied
closely to the maturity of business relationships
On Us
1
On You
2
On We
3
For them
4
.. ???
22
Power Distance has been a real issue for EA
Market
Organal
Divisional
IT
Stage 1
System
IT
Divisional
Organisational
System
Market
23
Stage 1 On Us

• Context
• IT doing things for IT

• Frameworks
• UML
• OODA

• Results
• Component centric
• Construction model
• Very Now focussed
• Over extension for reuse

• Problems
• Micro to macro transformations
• Business are not finite state machines

24
Stage 1
25
Power Distance has been a real issue for EA
Market
Organal
Stage 2
Divisional
IT
Stage 1
System
IT
Divisional
Organisational
System
Market
26
Stage 2 On You

• Context
• IT do this for the business
• Do not worry about business concerns

• Frameworks
• Numerous (OODA legacy)
• Patterns Viewpoints emerge to handle complexity
  problem

• Results
• Deconstructive models
• Assembly model (Lego)
• Very Now focussed

• Problems
• Pan Galactic models
• Stove Pipes
• Little real business context - Communication

27
Stage 2
28
Power Distance has been a real issue for EA
Market
Organal
Stage 2
Stage 3
Divisional
IT
Stage 1
System
IT
Divisional
Organisational
System
Market
29
Stage 3 On We

• Context
• Organisation as a unified system
• Greater focus on Business Dynamics

• Frameworks
• Complex (Now, To Be Target) - Change
• Business change planning

Results Multi function contribution Business as
a context diagram
Problems Agreeing language and
definitions Problems over strategy
information Organisational norms
30
Stage 3
31
Power Distance has been a real issue for EA
Market
Stage 4
Organal
Stage 2
Stage 3
Divisional
IT
Stage 1
System
IT
Divisional
Organisational
System
Market
32
Stage 4 - For them

• Context
• Recognition business centric focus not enough
  must be stakeholder focused

• Frameworks
• Catalogue of business capabilities
• SLA definition

Results Multi function and stakeholder
contribution Real understanding of TCO
Problems Timing Managing the ultimate
customers
33
Stage 4 concerns ?
34
Stage 4
SLAs Costs Contracts
35
Summary of EA Maturity
L4 - Stakeholder
An Enterprise Architecture is a description of
the goals of an organization, how those goals are
realized by business processes, and how those
business processes can be better served through
technology.
L3 - Organisation
Reducing divisions
L2 - IT
L1 -System
Focus of effort on the point of intersection
NOT the whole scope of the box
36
EA Maturity is about building on previous
Architectural activity not reinventing it
L4 - Stakeholder
L3 - Organisation
L2 - IT

• Look for frameworks which have a
• Low power distance
• Information focus is at the same scope
• Reach back to previous models

L1 -System
37
Practical steps

• 1 Determine organisational (Power) hierarchy
• 2 - Set the tram lines
• 3 Determine the interests, language at each
  level
• Read the decks they produce
• Try the McKinsey method
• 4 Think about existing frameworks/projects
  how would you draw their focus on your model?

38

• Assessing some frameworks

39
DSI
Market
Organal
Divisional
DSI
IT
System
IT
Divisional
Organisational
System
Market
40
TOGAF
Market
Organal
TOGAF
Divisional
IT
System
IT
Divisional
Organisational
System
Market
41
MOTION
Market
Organal
MOTION
Divisional
IT
System
IT
Divisional
Organisational
System
Market