association of enterprise architects international committee on enterprise architecture standards...

Sept 2006 - EA Conference aeajournal.org 1

Association of Enterprise ArchitectsInternational Committee on Enterprise Architecture Standards

Building EA Management Standards:The Progresses and Challenges of the EA

Management Guide Project

Haiping Luo, CEA

a|EA Standards Committee



Topics• Why We Need EA Management

Standards

• EA Management Guide (EAMG) Project Overview

• Challenges Encountered by the EAMG Project

• Approaches and Progress



Why We Need EA Management Standards

• The EA discipline is a relatively new and evolving field

• The EA Body of Knowledge has three major deficiencies:

Inconsistency

Incompleteness

Lack of community participation and ratification



Inconsistency• Situations:

– Lack of consensus on EA concepts, terminologies, goals, approaches, techniques, and outcomes.

– Disagreement on what an EA program should do and deliver.

• Consequences:– Confusions in communications within the EA field and

with EA stakeholders– Instability on quality and performance requirements

and measures



Incompleteness• Situations:

– Literatures often focus on part of EA topics such as frameworks, models, processes.

– Knowledge gaps exist in terms of covering the complete spectrum of EA management, from establishing an EA management program, to delivering the final output and outcomes of the EA management

– Lack of a true enterprise perspective and coverage. Literatures often have an IT-centric thinking.

• Consequences:– Architects can’t find complete guidance to carry out all aspects of

EA management work.– Stakeholders don’t see EA outcomes beyond IT planning.



Lack of Community Participation and Ratification

• Situations:– The existing EA literatures are often the products of individual

effort or focus-group effort. – The EA community had no formal structure to take wide

participation in the development of EA body of knowledge or to ratify and maintain the resulting body of knowledge.

• Consequences:– Inconsistency and gaps continue.– The EA discipline and practice cannot advance toward maturity.– EA deliverables and expectations may not able to meet.



Benefits of Developing EA Management Standards

• Build consensus and common ground• Fill knowledge gaps• Involve participation and establish commitment• Raise levels of effectiveness, quality, reliability,

efficiency, interoperability, and return on investment for EA services.



EA Management Guide Project Overview• Purpose:

– Identify and organize EA knowledge and best practices for every aspect of EA management;

– Assemble EA management information that is generally recognized as good EA practice and knowledge in most enterprises, most of the time.

• Project Management: Led by a|EA’s EA Standards Committee• Objectives:

– Complete an EA Management Guide (Version 1.0).– Establish the Guide as an a|EA standard.– Pursue acceptance with international standards organizations.

• Target Timeline for the Guide: Nov 2005 – Oct 2007



Project Approach and Progress• Principles:

Open participation; Transparent process; Consensus-building journey.

• Team: Currently over 70 volunteers from 9 countries, representing practitioners and scholars with EA expertise in public and private sectors, civilian and military institutions, and different industries.

• Progress:– Project initiated and planned.– Call for Participation distributed to the EA community.– Outline reviewed by the EA community.– First draft authoring is underway.



Challenges Encountered

• Disagreement on concepts and terminologies

• Divergence on goals and outcomes

• Discrepancy in processes and approaches



Examples

• Disagreement on concepts and terminology:– What is Enterprise Architecture, after all?

• The physical structure of an enterprise?

• The documentation or blueprint of an enterprise’ structure?

• The process to architect an enterprise’ structure?

• An EA program?

• The discipline about architecting an enterprise?

• A framework referred in architecting work?

• …



Examples• Disagreement on concepts and terminology (cont.):

– Implications• None of the definitions are wrong, but multiple definitions can cause

real problems. • For example, when we measure EA maturity, are we measuring

– How good the physical structure of an enterprise is?– How good the documentation of an enterprise’ structure is?– How good the architecting process is?– How good an EA program is? or– How well established the EA discipline is?Different definitions lead to very different measuring systems and quality

standards.

• Also, when we communicate about EA, in which meaning are we talking about?



Examples

• Divergence on goals and outcomes:– What an EA program should achieve and deliver? The answers to this question range from delivering blueprint plans to providing good management.



Examples• Divergence on goals and outcomes (cont.)

• EA program goal spectrum:

Deliver IT architectureblueprints to control ITinvestment& development.

Deliver enterprise architectureblueprints to support and guide enterprise planning.

Lead the enterprise to pursue architectural soundness to support enterprise management.

Implement enterprise management.



Examples• Divergence on goals and outcomes (cont.)

– Implications:• Divergence in goals and outcomes results in

discrepancy in processes and approaches.

• Again, how to assess quality and performance becomes a problem.



Examples• Discrepancy in processes and approaches:

– Architects give discrepant answers to common EA questions:• What are the architectural principles we should implement or steward?• Whether architecting is a process cycle or a chain of incremental changes?• What are the key stages an architecting process must have?• Who should be doing what in an architecting process?

– Architects take discrepant approaches to address enterprise problems:• Investments are done in stovepipes. Should architects be the police or the

guide to reduce stovepipes?• Accountability is missing. Should architects push for centralization,

decentralization, or something else?• Interoperability is poor. Should architects promote integration or

standardization?• Processes are not aligned. Should architects coordinate or merely record and

report?



Examples

• Discrepancy in processes and approaches (cont.):– Implications:

• Stakeholders are confused on what to expect from architects and from an EA program.

• Management sees an EA program a rubber stamp good only for dealing with OMB or GAO.

• Other disciplines see the EA discipline a copy cat with a fancy hat but no solid methodology and value.



EAMG Approaches and Progresses

• Clarify and harmonize concepts and terminologies

• Specify goals and outcomes

• Identify key principles, major processes and core approaches

• Encourage innovation and creativity while standardize good practices



Examples

Clarify and harmonize concepts and terminologies

• Follow Three Principles to Name an Object:– Singularity. The term represents one and only one

object in a subject area. – Correctness. The term is not a faulty representation of

the object. – Recognize-ability. The term is commonly recognizable

in the subject area as identifying the object it is supposed to represent.



ExamplesClarify and harmonize concepts and

terminologies (cont.)• What is Enterprise Architecture, after all?

– This term has been used in ambiguous ways. EAMG should avoid use this term alone. EA can be used as the modifier to terms that are more specific:

• the Architecture of an Enterprise; • the Enterprise Architecture Discipline;• the Enterprise Architecting Lifecycle;• Enterprise Architecture Program Management; • the Documentation of an Enterprise's Architecture; and • the Design of an Enterprise's Architecture.



Examples

Specify goals and outcomes• EA management goal range:

Deliver IT architecture blueprints to control IT investment& development.

Deliver enterprise architectureblueprints to support and guide enterprise planning.

Lead the enterprise to pursue architectural soundness to support enterprise management.

Implement enterprise management.



Examples

Identify key principles, major processes and core approaches

• Sample architectural/architecting principles:– Quantitatively allocate enterprise goals into local goals

to ensure enterprise, not local, optimum.– Clearly assign each responsibility for an outcome to a

specific individual to implement accountability. – Standardize interfaces and exchange flows of modules

to form interoperability.– Impacts must be identified and handled before any

change takes place.



Examples

Identify key principles, major processes and core approaches (cont.)

• Sample major architecting processes:– Architecting lifecycle:

• Prerequisites to Architecting Lifecycles• Phase 1: Documenting Existing Architecture• Phase 2: Analyzing Existing Architecture• Phase 3: Planning and Ratifying Target Architecture• Phase 4: Developing and Committing Transition Plans• Phase 5: Implementing Planned Changes• Phase 6: Evaluating Implemented Changes• Phase 7: Continuing Architecture Management



Examples

• Sample core approaches:– EA metamodel standardization:

O rga n iza tion 1O rga n iza tion a l E A M o de l E x te n sion

M anaged by

O rga n iza tio n 1 E A S tan da rds C o m m ittee

O rga n iza tion 2O rga n iza tion a l E A M o de l E x te n sion

M anaged by

O rga n iza tio n 2 E A S tan da rds C o m m ittee

B u sin ess T ype 1B u sin ess C o re E A M o d e l E xte ns ion

M anaged by

B u sin ess T ype 1 E A S ta n da rds S u bC o m m ittee

B u sin ess T ype 2B u sin ess C o re E A M o d e l E xte ns ion

M anaged by

B u sin ess T ype 2 E A S ta n da rds S u bC o m m ittee

In te rna tion a l C o re E A M od e lM anaged by

In te rna tion a l E A S tan d ards C o m m ittee



Examples

Encourage innovation and creativity while standardize good practices

• EAMG recognizes alternatives, different opinions; and identifies implications for the alternatives.

• EAMG standardizes and promotes core EA practices that are considered good for most enterprises most of the time.



EAMG Focus Areas• Concepts and Terminology: Establish concepts, terms,

definitions, a common language, and a basic understanding of the EA discipline.

• Design Principles and Patterns: Identify criteria for good architectures and feasible ways to reach the good architecture.

• Processes and Techniques: Specify the standard processes and approaches for architecting an enterprise’s structure.

• Program Management: Build a high quality and strong performing EA program to carry out the EA mission.

• Problem Solving & Decision Support: Apply the EA discipline to solve common types of real world problems and provide support for specific decision-making.



Summary• The EA Discipline needs standards to guide practices.• The EA Management Guide project assembles existing

standards, extracts EA community’s wisdom and best practices, and align them all into a more consistent and complete set of standards to support the delivery of sound architectures.

• Challenges are natural part of the EAMG journey. We call for your continuous support, input, and participation to achieve our common goal.



Summary• How to help:

– Authoring– Reviewing– Promoting– Funding

• Contact Information– Haiping Luo ([email protected])

association of enterprise architects international committee on enterprise architecture standards...

Documents

ea conferenceaeajournal

ea community

ea outcomes

ea field

ea discipline

ea topics

ea program

ea concepts