1 / 41

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

Enterprise Architectures: Putting Motion, DSI, TOGAF into the cauldron. Iain Mortimer Architect, Microsoft UK Iain.mortimer@microsoft.com. Enterprise Architects and CIOs are having a really hard time out there. Business and industry perceptions The biggest complaints? IT costs too much.

yitta
Download Presentation

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

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Enterprise Architectures: Putting Motion, DSI, TOGAF into the cauldron Iain Mortimer Architect, Microsoft UK Iain.mortimer@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 I’m 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 Increase in IT intensity - drove increase in IT estate leading to chaotic and overly complex solutions Many organisations have been paralysed by the complexity of the business & technology and the rate of change in business & technology. • 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/Architecture 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 • Zachman’s 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 Zachman’s 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 Organ’al Divisional IT Stage 1 System System IT Divisional Organisational 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 Organ’al Stage 2 Divisional IT Stage 1 System System IT Divisional Organisational 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 Organ’al Stage 2 Stage 3 Divisional IT Stage 1 System System IT Divisional Organisational 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 Organ’al Stage 2 Stage 3 Divisional IT Stage 1 System System IT Divisional Organisational 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 adescription 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 Organ’al Divisional DSI IT System System IT Divisional Organisational Market

  40. TOGAF Market Organ’al TOGAF Divisional IT System System IT Divisional Organisational Market

  41. MOTION Market Organ’al MOTION Divisional IT System System IT Divisional Organisational Market

More Related