1 / 60

Architectural Alignment

Architectural Alignment. Pascal van Eck University of Twente Information Systems Group p.vaneck@utwente.nl. SIKS course “Architectures for IKS“ Vught, September 28, 2006. Mission statement. To put architecture in its organizational context, focusing on business and IT strategy .

ryder
Download Presentation

Architectural Alignment

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. Architectural Alignment Pascal van Eck University of Twente Information Systems Group p.vaneck@utwente.nl SIKS course “Architectures for IKS“ Vught, September 28, 2006

  2. Mission statement To put architecture in its organizational context, focusing on business and IT strategy

  3. Outline 1/2 Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman, 1993) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan, ’97-’03) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al., 2000) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente, 2004) Validation case study (Avison et al., 2004) What is alignment?

  4. Outline 2/2 What is alignment? Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al.) Validation case study (Avison et al.) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente)

  5. What is alignment? Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al.) Validation case study (Avison et al.) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente) Architecture and Alignment Definitions

  6. You’ve seen this one before Architecture is about fundamental structural choices and their motivation Taken from: Stijn Hoppenbrouwer’s presentation, delivered yesterday.

  7. Architecture and granularity Software architecture Enterprise architecture Intel Microcode architecture

  8. Architecture alignment • Architecture alignment: • Allocation of IT budgets such that business functions are supported in an optimal way (outcome) • “the continuous process, …, of consciously and coherently interrelating all components of the business – IT relationship in order to contribute to the organisation’s performance over time” (process) (From Maes et al., 2000)

  9. Strategy, tactics and operations • Strategy: external position of the organization • Examples: Product/market combinations, make-or-buy decisions, human resource acquisition • Impact of decisions: years Tactical level: realizing the strategy by internal means • Impact of decisions: month(s) – 1 year • Example: organization structure • Operational level: day-to-day decisions • Impact of decisions: day(s) – month(s) • Example: hire temps in case of sudden increase in sales

  10. What is alignment? Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al.) Validation case study (Avison et al.) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente) The Strategic Alignment Model • Henderson, & Venkatraman, (1993). Strategic alignment: Leveraging • information technology for transforming organisations. IBM Systems Journal, 32(1):472-484.http://researchweb.watson.ibm.com/journal/sj/382/henderson.pdf

  11. Pre-1993 view on business/IT integration Adapted from: Henderson, & Venkatraman, (1993). Strategic alignment: Leveraging information technology for transforming organisations. IBM Systems Journal, 32(1):472-484.

  12. Henderson & Venkatraman’s take home message #1 • Similar to business strategy, IT strategy has to consider both internal as well as external aspects

  13. The Strategic Alignment Model (SAM) Taken from: Henderson, & Venkatraman, (1993). Strategic alignment: Leveraging information technology for transforming organisations. IBM Systems Journal, 32(1):472-484.

  14. Henderson & Venkatraman’s take home message #2 • Both internal/external alignment as well as functional integration must be taken into account. Only one of them is not sufficient

  15. Four alignment perspectives Taken from: Henderson, & Venkatraman, (1993). Strategic alignment: Leveraging information technology for transforming organisations. IBM Systems Journal, 32(1):472-484.

  16. What is alignment? Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al.) Validation case study (Avison et al.) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente) The Unified Architecture Framework [HV93] + [Maes99] = GAF GAF + IAF = UAF • Maes, R., Rijsenbrij, D., Truijens, O. and Goedvolk, H. (2000). Redefining business–IT alignment through a unified framework. PrimaVera Working Paper 2000-19, Univ. of Amsterdam. http://imwww.fee.uva.nl/~maestro/PDF/2000-19.pdf

  17. Maes’ (1999) extension: the Generic framework • More detail in the two H&V-dimensions • Extra row: internal -> structure + operations • “Designing and managing this organisational structure is above all an architectural issue: the combined contribution of business, information and technology architects is key to the long term health of present-day organisations, …” • Extra column: IT -> information & communication + Technology • “It is appropriate to state that the use and the internal and external sharing of information and not its provision are of strategic nature.”

  18. Maes’s (1999) Generic framework

  19. Maes’ et al.’s (2000) extensions: the Unified Framework • CapGemini’s Integrated Architecture Framework (IAF) adds: • Extra column: Technology -> Information Systems + Technology infrastructure • Third dimension: five design phases • Contextual (why?): mission & strategy • Conceptual (what?): describes four architecture areas • Logical (how?): operations & structures • Physical (with what?): resources • Transformational: roll-out • Fourth dimension: specific viewpoints (e.g., security, governance)

  20. The Unified Architecture Framework Where is the ? 4th dimension Taken from: Maes, R., Rijsenbrij, D., Truijens, O., Goedvolk, H. (2000). Redefining business–IT alignment through a unified framework. PrimaVera Working Paper 2000-19, Univ. of Amsterdam.

  21. CapGemini’s IAF = UAF – (strategy/structure/operations) Taken from: http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/dnmaj/html/aj1entarch.asp See also: http://www.capgemini.com/services/soa/ent_architecture/iaf/

  22. What is alignment? Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al.) Validation case study (Avison et al.) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente) Validation case study • Avison, D., Jones, J., Powell, P., Wilson, D. (2004). Using and validating the strategic alignment model. J. Strat. Inf. Sys. 13:223-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2004.08.002

  23. Validation • Case study source: financial custody services firm • Worldwide: 18.000 employees • Australia: 400 employees • Studied 55 IT projects carried out in 2000

  24. Observed alignment • Project category: • OE: operating efficiency • CD: client demand • IU: infrastructure upgrade • R: regulatory • Area impacted: • CA: competitive advantage • H: health (ongoing maintenance) • R: repositioning Taken from: Avison, D., Jones, J., Powell, P., Wilson, D. (2004). Using and validating the strategic alignment model. J. Strat. Inf. Sys. 13:223-246.

  25. Main results • Project category: • OE: operating efficiency • CD: client demand • IU: infrastructure upgrade • R: regulatory • Area impacted: • CA: competitive advantage • H: health (ongoing maintenance) • R: repositioning Taken from: Avison, D., Jones, J., Powell, P., Wilson, D. (2004). Using and validating the strategic alignment model. J. Strat. Inf. Sys. 13:223-246.

  26. What is alignment? Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al.) Validation case study (Avison et al.) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente) How to measure strategic alignment? The ‘American business schools’ approach • Tallon, Tallon, P., Kraemer, K. (2003). Investigating the Relationship between Strategic Alignment and Business Value. Idea Publications, Hershy, PA, pp. 1-22.

  27. Introduction Relation align- ment & value STROEPIS instrument 6 models of linkage STROBE instrument Is ‘more’ alignment always ‘better’? Tallon & Kraemer, ‘03 (book chapter) Chan et al, 1997 (article in ISR) Venkatraman, 1989b (article in Mngt. Sc.) Venkatraman, 1989a (article in Ac. Mngt. Review)

  28. Tallon & Kraemer

  29. Strategic alignment • Essence of the papers in my words:Strategic alignment is the extend to which the IT infrastructure of an organization supports its strategic orientation

  30. Strategic orientation • What is it? • An attempt to operationalize the notion of strategy • How to measure it? • For instance using Venkatraman’s STROBE instrument • Reference: • Venkatraman, N. (1989b). Strategic orientation of business enterprises: The construct, dimensionality, and measurement. Management Science, 35(8):942-962.

  31. Strategy: 6 (or 8) dimensions • Strategy is a multi-dimensional construct Taken from: Chan, Y.E., Huff, S.L., Barclay, D.W., Copeland, D.G. (1997). Business Strategic Orientation, Information Systems Strategic Orientation, and Strategic Alignment. Information Systems Research, 8(2):125-150.

  32. Example item Taken from: Chan, Y.E., Huff, S.L., Barclay, D.W., Copeland, D.G. (1997). Business Strategic Orientation, Information Systems Strategic Orientation, and Strategic Alignment. Information Systems Research, 8(2):125-150.

  33. Dimensions of strategy 1/2

  34. Dimensions of strategy 2/2

  35. Mind you … • … this really at the strategic level • Strategy: seeking the reasons why the organization still exists 3 years from now • External orientation: adapting to the environment, choosing how to differ from the competition • Tactical level: e.g. capacity planning for next month

  36. IS support for strategic orientation • Chan et al. (1997): STROEPIS instrument

  37. Linkage / strategic alignment • How to link STROBE and STROEPIS? • Venkatraman (1989a) gives 6 options for this

  38. Venkatraman’s linkage Venkatraman, N. (1989a). The concept of fit in strategy research: Towards verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14(3):423-444.

  39. Linkage as moderation • Z=f(X,Y,XY), with • X: STROBE score • Y: STROEPIS score • Z: dependent variable (e.g., shareholder value) • Data in Chan et al. (1997): • This model has best fit

  40. Conclusion • Tallon & Kraemer’s book chapter • Similar approach, not enough detail • This community focuses on the strategic level exclusively • How about tactical and operational alignment? • You can only ask so much in a questionnaire

  41. What is alignment? Strategic Alignment Model (Henderson & Venkatraman) Extension: Unified Architecture Framework (Maes et al.) Validation case study (Avison et al.) Quantitative approach (e.g., Tallon, Chan) GRAAL framework (Univ. Twente) The GRAAL framework • Eck, P. van, Blanken, H. and Wieringa, R. (2004). Project GRAAL: Towards Operational Architecture Alignment. Int. J. of Cooperative Information Systems, 13(3):235-255.http://is.cs.utwente.nl/GRAAL/eck_blanken_wieringa_ijcis04.pdf

  42. Project GRAAL • Guidelines Regarding Architecture ALignment • Goal: discovery of patterns in enterprise-level application architecture • Based on case studies in Dutch financial service organizations and large government organizations Project page: http://graal.ewi.utwente.nl

  43. What is a system? • A system is an assembly of components that behaves as a whole • There is synergy between components … • … and this synergy results in emergent properties • A product is a system with properties that are useful for someone • Examples • The system of law • The Dutch national soccer team uses a 3-3-4 system • ‘A systematic way of working’

  44. System dimensions • System aspects: externally observable properties • Aggregation hierarchy: system composition in terms of components • System life cycle: from conception to disposal

  45. System life cycle • Typical stages in the life of a system • During design, we should deal with all stages Acquisition (build or buy) Conception Usage Disposal Time Maintenance (Corrective and perfective)

  46. Software product aspects Aspects are what observers can observe Service = interaction Behavior: in what sequence (time) Communication: with whom (space) Meaning: about what The only aspect peculiar for symbol-manipulating systems SW product aspect Services Quality Behavior Communication Meaning For user For developer ... Usability Efficiency Security .... Maintainability Portability

  47. Aggregation Behavior Communication Meaning Quality Composite system Behavior Communication Meaning Quality Behavior Communication Meaning Quality External entity External entity System Behavior Communication Meaning Quality ... Component ... Aspect and aggregation are independent

  48. The meaning of aggregation A2 A1 A2 A1 C B C B C • C is a component of A if • C provides service to A • A encapsulates C • If we drop encapsulation, we get layering

  49. Architecture layers Primary service provision • Layer structure crosses worlds • This is not possible with encapsulation Business environment Social world Business Business software Symbol world SW Infrastructure Physical infrastructure Physical world

More Related