world class ea - governor's approach to developing and exercising ea capability governance

© The Open Group, 2017

WebinarWorld-Class EA:Governors’ Approach to Developing and Exercising an Enterprise Architecture Governance Capability

By Ken Street, Sriram Sabesan,Nathan Hornford, Samantha Toder& Dave Hornford20 September, 2017

1


The Open Group is ...

AustraliaBelgiumBrazilCanadaChinaColombiaCzech RepublicDenmarkFinlandFranceGermanyHong KongIndiaIrelandItalyJapanKoreaLuxembourgMalaysiaMexico

488 Member Enterprises in 40 CountriesStaff and local partners in 12 Countries

NetherlandsNew Zealand

NigeriaNorway

PhilippinesPoland

PortugalQatar

Saudi ArabiaSingapore

South AfricaSpain

SwedenSwitzerland

TaiwanTurkey

UKUnited Arab Emirates

USAVietnam

2


The Open Group

» Enable all organizations that use information technology to do things better, faster, and cheaper

» Enable all suppliers of information technology products and services to gain business benefit

» Enable every individual that we meet to develop their skills and capabilities

Everything we do, is intended to …

3


Final Thought“You have a choice: you can either create your own future, or you can become the victim of a future that

someone else creates for you.”

Vice Admiral (ret.) Arthur K. Cebrowski

4

Copyright © The Open Group 2017

5

Webinar

Governor’s Guidance


Agenda

» Who we are

» Why this whitepaper

» What is Governance

» Four Expressions of Governance– Governing the creation of enterprise architecture

– Governing change through the use of enterprise architecture

– Governing value realization after the change team is done

– Governing the EA Team

» Takeaways

» Q&A

6


Conexiam» Vanguard Enterprise Architecture

– Develops client’s EA teams– Delivers Enterprise Architecture

» Contributing thought leaders– The Open Group

IT4IT™ Forum, Digital Transformation, Architecture Forum, Cloud Forum, Platform 3 Forum, Security Forum

– The SABSA Institute

» Public commentary– www.conexiam.com– www.delegata.com

Right in the middle mergingwith Delegata

7


Whitepaper Authors

» Ken Street» Sriram Sabesan» Dave Hornford» Samantha Toder» Nathan Hornford» Chris Searle

www.conexiam.comwww.delegata.com

Drawn from our work developing high-functioning EA Teams we developed consistent guidance

» We saw four essential challenges:1. configuring your EA team aligned to

purpose, processes and operational needs Leader’s Guidance

2. developing and using enterprise architecture aligned to purpose and operational needs Practitioners’ Guidance

3. governing creation of architecture, the EA team, and most importantly changeGovernors’ Guidance

4. using different standards and reference tools to accelerate your workDigital Transformation: Strategy to Implementation

8


Why This Whitepaper» Philosophy

– Share our practice– Improve the profession– We don’t reinvent the basics of the wheel

» Acceleration– Frames conversations about effective

governance– Highlight TOGAF’s framework support for

modern EA

» Effective guidance to our clients– Make it real– Make it practical– Make it work

» “How do you get Management support?” comes down to governance

– Governing creation– Governing change– Governing value

» Think about the Leadership’s problem– Does the target represent what is wanted &

the change required?– Is the change initiative doing what is

expected?– Is the change delivering the value

expected?

» You don’t get Management supportYou provide support to Management

9


World Class EA & TOGAF» EA is developed for one very simple reason:

guide effective change that produces a value

» We strongly recommend using TOGAF as it was designedA framework of essential scaffolding

» The World Class guidance uses TOGAF as essential scaffolding– Today the requires reading past specifics that have snuck in where a concept

should be

» Together with these papers provide the minimal essential guidance on using TOGAF to deliver useful Enterprise Architecture and using the Enterprise Architecture to guide effective change

10


Governance & EA

» Conversation typically focused on controlling implementation

Conversation misses the point

» Best practice addresses the 4 expressions

11

Governance: Foundational EA CapabilityApplies to every purpose

Applies to Creation & Change


What is Governance» Direction & Control

– Direct what activity is desired– Control activity performed

» Value of EA Governance is confidence for decision-makers

» Deliver Confidence– That change recommendations inherent in all architecture work are well considered, well

grounded– That the required work was completed– Value was delivered

» EA governor key role: Auditor– ensure that the architecture suits the intended purpose and that any change work has been

completed to the right level of detail

» EA governor is the guardian of the value EA delivers to the organization.

12


Four Expressions

1. Governing the target architecture

2. Governing the target architecture implementation

3. Governing the delivery of value of the target architecture

4. Governing the architecture practice

» Too many conversations are lost in time

» Each expression– distinct engagement

– different roles lead

– architect’s role shifts dramatically

13


Simplified lifecycle

» Starts & Stops at Value

– Team design dependent upon Value

– Target paints path to Value

– Implementation enables Value

Test for Value

Design the EA Team

Develop the Target

Implement the change

14


Primary Governance Roles» Stakeholder – owner of the architecture

Provides priority, preference, and direction. Own all decision rights regarding the target architecture, and any relief from and enforcement of the target

» Stakeholder Agent – representative of the StakeholderRepresents the Stakeholder when the Stakeholder is absent

» Subject Matter Expert – possesses specialized knowledgeProvides knowledge, advice, and validation of interpretation.

» Implementer – responsible for performing all change activityThe scope of change is not relevant. All decision rights about proposed implementation choices, such as design, product selection, and change sequence, are vested with the Implementer. Vested with the context of the architecture

» Practitioner (Architect) – developer of the target architectureProvides recommendations when non-compliance with the target is determined.

» Auditor – performs systematic reviews of both the target and implementation

15


Decision Authority

» For Architecturethe Stakeholders– Always– Only

» For Change Activitythe Implementer– Within context of the

Architecture

» Every other model fails– Always

16


Trap: Don’t do Governance

» Practitioner fills the role of Stakeholder Agent, Subject Matter Expert, and Implementer– In this case the Stakeholder isn’t ever interrupted. For anything

» Bluntly: this model does not have an approved target architecture. Instead skilled thoughtful individuals make tactical decisions– The time saving & value is illusionary

– Rework & re-decision happen every day

17


Governing the Architecture Practice

» Design Governance Process

» Fit into decision-making

» Use an EA Board for managing process, reporting & escalation– EA Board has no decision rights

» Use the Checklists

» Completeness & confidence

» Design EA Team

» Align to purpose needed

» Viewpoints Library supported by Tooling– Repository & Metamodel

» Minimize information

18


Don’t Support the Strategy, Deliver the Strategy

» Too often we see claims of alignment

» Good architecture doesn’t– align with Strategy– support Strategy– attempt to prove someone’s idea isn’t misaligned

» Good architecture delivers the strategy– Minimum set of changes necessary for value– Mandatory sequence– Minimum constraints on Implementer’s creativity & freedom

19


Guiding Investment Decisions

» Portfolio Decisions– An architected approach supports and guides decisions– Solution Delivery controls 80% of effort and spend– Portfolio directs 80% of effort and spend

» Must be done before decision to focus on value

20


Governing the Target Architecture» Not paying lip service

» Views explain the architecture in terms of a Concern

» We find useful Concerns are single words

– Agility, Security, Mandate, Growth

» Multiple Concerns represent the complex web of hopes, fears & dreams about the future

If the Practitioner cannot explain the impact on Agility, Security, Mandate & Growth

what confidence should anyone have that the target

is actually a good idea?

» Were the correct Stakeholders identified: Y/N– If no, engage with the Stakeholders

» Were constraints and guidance from approved superior architectures considered: Y/N?

– If no, the Practitioner has to do their job

» Do appropriate Subject Matter Experts agree with the facts and interpretation of the facts in the architecture: Y/N?

– If no, the Practitioner has to do their jobWhere SMEs conflict the Stakeholders should have limitations in confidence

» Are all the constraints or guidance produced in the architecture reflected in the views produced and any underpinning architecture models, roadmaps: Y/N?

– If no, the Practitioner needs to do their job

» Do the Stakeholders understand the value, and any uncertainty in achieving the value, provided by the target: Y/N?


» Do the Stakeholders understand the work necessary to reach the target state and any uncertainty (risk) in successfully accomplishing the work: Y/N?


» Do the Stakeholders understand limitations in confidence they should have: Y/N?– If no, the Practitioner needs to do their job

» Have the Stakeholders approved the views: Y/N?– If no, the Practitioner needs to do their job

21


Do you even have an Architecture?

» Without approval by the Stakeholders– no implementation governance is possible

– no governance of the next architecture

» Without approval you have a documented opinion– Subject Matter Experts, Implementers, and other have opinions

– Stakeholders have decision rights

» Develop the architecture in sync with the business cycle– Architecture delivered the day after a decision is valueless

22


Completeness & Confidence

Two core measures

1. Completeness– has enough work been done to cover the decision the architecture

supports?

– not an exercise in doing more. Simply address the Concerns

2. Confidence– do you have confidence that the architecture will deliver the

complete value?

– do you have confidence that the architecture identifies all the work

23


Use the Repository!

» Where the repository has an answer:use the answer

» Where the repository is empty:fill in the answer

» Consider– Superior Architecture

• Limits your choice

– Current – Candidate – Target• Facts – Possibilities – Intentions

– Recency

– Reference Architecture / Reference Model• Wheels are round & removable

24


Governing the Target Architecture Implementation

» Solution Delivery Notebook– Enables direction

– Enables control

– Governance

» SDN Core– Gap: what must change

– Work package: approach to change

– Architecture Specification: limitations on creativity & provides compliance tests

» Architects don’t do the job of an SME or Implementer– Where must you remove their

freedom to be creative?

» TOGAF Phase G Implementation Governance– Fill the Gap

– Avoid the Prohibited

» Implementation Governance Checklist

25


Implementation Checklist» Did the implementer reasonably interpret guidance and constraints: Y/N?

– If yes, their interpretation is compliant. Problems NOT documented are future problems the Architect must solve

– This is a key point. Good architecture supports multiple choices. Implementer is not required to adhere to opinion

» Do appropriate SMEs agree with the facts and interpretation of the facts in the impact assessment: Y/N?

– If no, develop a report for the Stakeholders identifying limitations in confidence of the impact assessment.

» Do appropriate SME agree with the recommendation to enforce the target, grant time-bound relief, or change the architecture: Y/N?

– If no, develop a report for the Stakeholders identifying limitations in confidence of the compliance recommendation

» Do the views and other materials produced for the Stakeholders reflect the impact assessment and reflect any underpinning architecture and analysis: Y/N?

– If no, the Practitioner must do their job.

» Do the Stakeholders understand the impact on expected value, and any change in certainty in achieving the value, provided by reaching the target state: Y/N?

– If no, the Practitioner must do their jobProvide the impact assessment & compliance recommendation

26

» Assess against documented target

» Develop impact assessment & compliance recommendation

» Stakeholder’s three choices1. Change Architecture2. Change

Implementation3. Cancel Implementation

Granting exception is changing the architecture by stealth

Never lose sight of the expected & approved value

Implementation Governance is guarding the expected value


Implementation Non-compliance

» This is a key function of high-functioning EA team» Good EA support value realization & mid-course correction

» Value drove the change. Without value we are just spending money.

» When non-compliance impacts value the with the compliance recommendation nets down to:

a) Provide relief to the Implementerb) Force the Implementer conforms to the targetc) End the implementation

» The Stakeholder owns the decisionNot the Project team, not the Project Sponsor. Always the Stakeholder.

27


Governing the Delivery of Value

» Where the rubber hits the road

» Very few initiatives deliver value at project completionThey set the stage– EA accountable for value realization

– Good EA governance reporting tracks expected value

28


Value Realization ChecklistsOngoing Value Realization Governance» Was an ongoing value realization

owner (Stakeholder) identified and did they agree to perform the role of value owner: Y/N

– If no, identify the ongoing value owner gap and the associated risks to the ongoing value realization to the appropriate Stakeholder

» Were ongoing value metrics identified and included in the architecture: Y/N

– If no, get Stakeholder agreement to value metrics until the Stakeholder approves

» Were ongoing value processes developed and included in the architecture: Y/N

– If no, get Stakeholder approval

Implementation Value Realization Governance» Was a value owner (Stakeholder)

identified and agreed to perform the role of value owner: Y/N

– If no, identify the value owner gap and the associated risks to value to the appropriate Stakeholder

» Were value metrics identified and included in the architecture: Y/N

– If no, get Stakeholder agreement to value metrics until the Stakeholder approves

» Were value processes developed and included in the architecture: Y/N

– If no, get Stakeholder approval

29

Continuing without value ownership & tracking is a critical exception and calls

into question the value expectation


EA & GRC Benefit

» Value & Benefit Realization is the foundation of good Enterprise Architecture

» Best practice implementation governance is worried about Value– Clarity of expected Value

– Clarity of what work delivers the Value

– Clarity of what restrictions (architecture specifications) protect the Value

30


Governance Reporting» Governance reporting plays a significant role in building confidence for decision-makers

– provides a real opportunity to reap the benefits of the good practice that exists within companies.

» Characteristics of good governance reports are:– Inclusion of a standard set of disclosures – related to events of interest, risks, or challenges faced

by the architecture effort and the Enterprise– Not customizing the needs of a specific Stakeholder or a decision-maker, but addressing the

concerns of the Enterprise and inter-dependent efforts– Dealing with sensitive aspects of the Enterprise context, interests of individuals, and board

concerns– Parameters that drives completeness and confidence– Looking ahead at issues that could impact the architecture or achievement of the future state

realizing value

» Governance reporting is similar to an investor relationship letter.– Present facts, be objective– Set a cadence. Keep it short and crisp. Focus attention to what is pertinent and relevant– Maintain confidence of the Stakeholders to continue investing in the change.

31


Conclusion

32


Without Governance we are wasting our time» “How do you get Management support?”

comes down to governance– Governing creation– Governing change– Governing value

» Think about the Leadership’s problem– Does the target represent what is wanted & the

change required?– Is the change initiative doing what is expected?– Is the change delivering the value expected?

You don’t get Management support for your ideaYou provide support to Management for their idea

Focused on Value Realization

33

Governance: Foundational EA CapabilityApplies to every purpose

Applies to Creation & Change


World Class & TOGAF» Use TOGAF as it was designedA framework of essential scaffolding» Govern the target architecture

– Approval by the Stakeholder– Views that explain by Concern

» Govern the implementation– Does it follow the documented

architecture?– Three choices

1. Change the architecture2. Change the implementation3. Avoid the hard decision

» Govern value delivery– Are you getting what was expected?

» Governing the architecture team– Skill, tools & process

» We saw four essential challenges:– configuring your EA team aligned to

purpose and operational needs Leader’s Guidance

– developing and using enterprise architecture aligned to purpose and operational needs Practitioners’ Guidance

– governing creation of architecture, the EA team, and most importantly changeGovernor’s Guidance

– using different standards and reference tools to accelerate your workDigital Transformation: Strategy to Implementation

Drawn from our work developing high-functioning EA Teams

34


Q & AThank You!

35

world class ea - governor's approach to developing and exercising ea capability governance

Leadership & Management