James McGovern’s latest post on Enterprise Architecture discusses how many enterprise architects are favoring contract/consultant work over permanent work because of the better paying opportunities and offers.
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
Business Standard mentioned today, in this article, that
“As organisations become more global, SOA will become an integral part of their strategy. It is aimed at lowering the total cost of ownership, simplifying integration and customisation. Organisations are increasingly embracing SOA as a means to access and distribute information in real time”
It is cautioned, however, that organizations need to be aware of disappointment that some companies may announce. As Chandika Mendi, director and head of Virtusa Corporation, explained
“The reason for the disappointment will be due to taking a much narrowed approach while defining SOA, which could lead to failure of implementations. Also, the initial investment in SOA is high and will reap benefits slowly as the entire enterprise moves to it, which is a fairly long journey,”
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
Anton Venter’s latest post on the IT Knowledge Exchange argues that the real ROI of EA comes from information and its use. Anton makes another great point that documentation of architecture makes finding information easier and readily available. It also becomes easier to provide outsourcers info on the architecture should they need it to support an organization’s applications. What do you think is the real ROI of enterprise architecture?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
In our attempt to deliver the latest updates and insights within the EA space, we’ve scheduled a series of free webinars that will happen over the next couple of months. The first webinar in the series “Putting the "E" in TOGAF: An EAdirections Webinar,” will be presented by three managing directors of EAdirections: Larry R. DeBoever, George S. Paras, and Tim Westbrock. Register now for the webinar on Thursday, Sep 4, 2008 from 2:00 PM - 3:00 PM EDT to save your webinar seat. Here’s a brief description of the webinar and what you can expect to take out of it by attending:
A number of EA practitioners have concluded that TOGAF is not an effective framework (and ADM is not an effective methodology) for
If you are a Chief Architect or IT manager evaluating EA frameworks, or if you are struggling to apply TOGAF (or another framework), on an enterprise-wide basis, then this webinar is for you. Topics will include:
What you will learn:
This webinar is being brought to you by the Enterprise Architectures Conference, don’t forget to take a look at the lineup of speakers we have this year. Click on the link below to register for the free webinar.
https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/924415223
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
Alan Inglis, in this blog post, discusses the above chart. He comments that he would add a business entry point, and would also like to see an entry point from an “information or data perspective”.
What are your thoughts? Is there anything else you would add to build on these two authors viewpoints?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
What matters most in enterprise architecture? Is it the business model, or the people who lead the organization? Chris Potts reviews this question in his latest post on CIO. One of the points Chris brings up relates to the Economist’s article "No Size Fits All", which explores whether the business model or the people managing it were responsible for the credit crunch.
According to Chris, replicating a business model within organizations does not guarantee success or failure. Only people, ex: customers, suppliers, partners, and employees are able to make a model work. Chris states that business instead, should start on the right hand side like the Zachman Framework for EA (Who, When, Why), not the left (What, How, Where).
Is your organization more concerned with its structure than management?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
In a recent article at CIO, Ty Anderson discuses how adopting SOA into the business is like buying a total home gym. Buying it doesn’t get the job done, it’s important to use the purchase continually in order to get the benefits the software can offer.
-- It’s important to audit existing applications. See what the processes are for your current business processes. Know what you’ve got so you can start in the right place.
-- Make the services as simple as possible
-- Work with your SOA tools every day. You’ve got to continually work towards the adoption, day in and day out to find out how the software truly works.
-- Keep working – Now that you’ve got SOA, it’s important to keep it current. Learn what’s new in the software and implement additional tools that are beneficial to your company.
And throughout the whole process, have someone there to keep you going in the right direction. A mentor can help you achieve your goals and keep you working towards the benefits of SOA.
In a recent article at Inside Architecture, Nick Malik took time to detail the different enterprise architecture frameworks. He then goes on to pose the question, what would the ideal framework be? What would you take from each of the individual methods below to make your enterprise architecture fit your needs?
- TOGAF - Basic strength: solution architecture. Various models and how to create them. Basic weaknesses: Planning methods and governance framework. Weak on Information Architecture
- FEAF - Basic strength: complete implementation tied to measurement framework. Basic weaknesses: very specific to government, lack of independent process taxonomy keeps processes "in the silo."
- eTOM - Basic strength: excellent process taxonomy with rich details. Strong information architecture. Great for governing external vendors. Basic weaknesses: fairly specific to telecom industry, gaps in governance and enterprise architecture models.
- ITIL - Basic strength: excellent process framework for operations and (now) governance. Basic weaknesses: no architectural methodology to speak of. Sizeable gaps in information or application architecture.
-
- Zachman - Basic strength: comprehensive taxonomy of architectural artifacts (to let you know when you are done). Basic weaknesses: Lack of published and vetted methods to avoid "boil-the-ocean" exercises and focus on one particular benefit. Very shallow: No detailed process, capability, or solution frameworks for "level 2" detail. Highly proprietary.
Every organization defines the goals of Enterprise Architecture in their own distinct way. Anton Venter lists six goals of practicing enterprise architecture in his latest post on the IT Knowledge Exchange. Here they are:
What are your company’s goals of practicing EA? Do they differ from Anton’s?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
In a recent blog post by Nick Malik at Inside Architecture, he ponders a very common question: Will information in the enterprise ever be able to be coordinated? Many of his readers think it is a nearly impossible task, but Nick believes with a little bit of software and coordination, it can happen. While all information is department specific, there is some overlap that can be coordinated. The value of coordinated communication is not something businesses should look over.
Nick believes that the information can be a powerful asset if shared throughout the company. So the easiest way to do this is to come up with a submission model. This model would be assembled by enterprise architects, then put together in a common repository. They can then assemble the information together in a way that information could run parallel in departments. Nick points out that in the end, we may be closer to having enterprise-wide architecture. There will be criticisms throughout the process, but the productivity in the end will shine brightly for enterprise architecture efforts.
In a recent post at User Centric Enterprise Architecture, Andy Blumenthal explores the craze that has come with having access to the internet and being connected 24/7. Blumenthal spoke an official at Northwest University Hospital, and found out that he’d treated patients who’d suffered from injuries while texting at least once a day. Now that we have access to all business information at any second, people can be more productive but only when the tools are used properly. It’s important for the enterprise architects of the organizations to teach the users of their technology appropriately. It’s important to focus on the human aspects of the tools of enterprise architecture and pass them along to those using the tools.
In a recent post by Nick Malik, he details how he was asked a question about whether or not Microsoft provides “internal support to create an Enterprsie Architecture program.” Upon reflection, Malik felt that, yes Microsoft does support the EA team. He also remarked on his definition of what constitutes excellence:
Excellent, to me, means that the effort is tailored to the needs of the business. That includes business strategy, business structure, and corporate culture.
His opinion is that this definition of excellence is different for everyone. Do you think there is a common way to define it? And what would you define as attaining excellence for an enterprise architecture program?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
As reported by this article at CIO, Carphone Warehouse, a mobile phone retailer in the
As a result, they adopted HP Systinet. This SOA governance tool helped 95% of new service designs pass the governance test. It has also estimated that this new software will save them £526,000 over the next three years, due to the avoidance of duplicating processes. It also will allow the IT department to deliver new services to the business in the shortest amount of time possible.
Do you think that corporations selling SOA governance tools are starting to respond more to customers needs?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
Chris Potts reminds us in his latest post on CIO where the balance lies between the
He begins his explanation with a definition of
The real benefit comes when the enterprise drives the architecture and not vice versa.
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
An article at CIO recently defined service oriented architecture as:
a broad, standards-based framework in which services are built, deployed, managed, and orchestrated in pursuit of new and much more agile IT infrastructures that respond swiftly to shifting business demands.
Also according to the article, SOA also has the potential to reduce your IT costs and improve your business agility, all while taking many of the tools already at use in the organization and conforming them to a new structure that will help align the business.
Do you agree with this definition, if not, what would you change?
Recently I saw this interesting slideshare presentation that discusses Service Oriented Architecture titled “The Service Oriented Elephant”. Some of the main points that it covers include: Building Blocks of SOA, Organization Roadmap – How much SOA, and Implementation scenarios. Take a few minutes to go over this and let us know your thoughts. Do you have any observations or musings regarding the presentation?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
This latest post on the SOA Network details how the latest report from Input, a leader in the authority of government business, discusses that the government’s growing adoption of SOA practices will fundamentally change how it delivers internal citizen-facing services. The federal market can benefit from increased agility and better IT alignment that SOA brings to the table.
Deniece Peterson, senior analyst at INPUT mentions:
"SOA shifts the concept of the application into a highly dynamic and fluid marketplace of plug-and-play services. A function previously performed by one vendor's application could now be completed by a number of discrete services provided by a multitude of providers. The standardized environment required to make this happen could severely impact the provider who relies heavily on proprietary elements for competitive advantage."
It is still early in the process to see a dramatic change in the federal SOA market as SOA solutions are slowly being integrated into the customer’s environment. The findings from Input can be found here, “Service-Oriented Architecture: Implications for Government and Industry”.
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
At CIO, they recently profiled a chapter from the book Executing SOA: A Practical Guide for the Service-Oriented Architect. SOA can result in the collaboration and a change in the system both affects the workers and the management of the system. Changes in the system can mean behavioral changes in employees and management and changes in the roles of all employees, with cooperation of all parties a high priority.
This article defines the following as important for service oriented people in the enterprise. Here’s the list from the book about managers:
Do you agree with all these points? Would you add any?
I came across this interesting post today regarding the hiring of Enterprise Architects. It poses the interesting question of by simply hiring and enterprise architect, does that mean that you will automatically have enterprise architecture? This blogger says no. In fact, in his opinion, many companies would like to believe that having an architect qualifies them to say that have architecture in place, but in fact there is more to the process than simply having the personnel in place. The blogger also contends that EA is a “necessary evil” and in order to hire the best architects they
“must be a dedicated and well rounded man that has to apply creatively the existing body of knowledge since the current state does not support well your endeavor to create your enterprise architecture.”
Do you think that some companies simply believe that by having an architect it means that they have an architecture? What are qualities you look for in an enterprise architect, who would need to successfully build a framework for enterprise architecture from the ground up in an organization?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
on IT-Business Alignment. Neil states that even though EA is extremely effective, it is at best only shaping the way that IT supports changing business conditions and not “changing” business focus. New forces (new product launches and development, acquisitions and mergers, new regulations) will always drive business to further develop its technology focus. The best EA teams provide a way for organizations to adapt to these changes with the least amount of stress possible. Do you think that enterprise architects are realigning or “architecting” the enterprise?
We're getting ready to launch a new blog that looks at the broader issues of Enterprise Architecture, update your RSS feed now as we get it ready for our official launch: http://evolveea.blogspot.com/
