Mike, Well put. I would very much agree with your take on Enterprise Architecture. Sounds like you've also had a bit of exposure to systems thinking (Senge) as well? As you said, I also find that a systems approach to both technology systems and organizational behavior is the only way to make any sense of it all and have any hope of "doing the right thing". :)
ast On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 11:49, Mike Glendinning wrote: > --- In [email protected], "jm04469" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Curious if you guys agree with this blog entry: > > http://knowledgecrisis.blogspot.com/2006/11/business-architect- > whatever.html > > > > Well, you don't say who you are or explain why we should care, but > this is topic that interests me, so I'll have a stab at some comments. > > The blogger seems frustrated that some non-technical guys > have "stolen" the term "business architecture" from the IT > department. This is reminiscent of the hurt that the REST guys feel > when the WS folks filched the term "web" from them! > > Whilst the web sites referenced in the blog are poor quality and > somewhat full of themselves, I disagree with the blog's view that > business architecture is the responsibility of IT. > > Of course there are problems of terminology here. I take "business > architecture" to mean exactly that, the architecture of the business. > Historically, this has been considered more or less equivalent > to "organisation design", for which there is a comprehensive set of > established theories. > > But organisation design has tended to focus on the breakdown of human > work activities into specialisms, individual job specifications and > so on. Where do you think all those "functional silos" in most > businesses come from? A number of recent trends mean that this old- > fashioned approach to organisation design is being challenged, for > example: > > . The introduction and rise in the importance of IT in the > organisation. > > . A blurring of the edges of the organisation caused by techniques > such as vendor-managed inventory and business process outsourcing. > > . The shift in the structure of many industries, particularly those > based on human knowledge, from "value chain" to "value network". > > Although I believe that the basic Coaseian economic principles are > still valid, it is clear, I think that older ideas on organisation > design must give way to a more "architectural" approach that takes > into account these trends. > > I would prefer to call that approach "enterprise architecture", if > only to avoid an implicit reference to the potential dichotomy > of "business" and "IT". > > Unfortunately, the term "enterprise architecture" also has several > interpretations and in my opinion is generally misused. I > distinguish three different kinds of architecture that others often > label as simply "enterprise architecture": > > 1. Technology Architecture. This is about the rationalisation of > the firm's IT infrastructure. Its purpose is to reduce technical > complexity and cost. The audience for this architecture is largely > the CTO and IT operations department. > > 2. Applications Architecture. This is concerned with the definition > of information models, business processes and the supporting IT > application systems. The purpose is to ensure adequate systems > support for business activities. The audience is largely the CIO and > his business analysts and application system designers. > > 3. Enterprise Architecture. This is about the alignment of > strategy, organisation structure, information models, business > processes, application systems and technical infrastructure of the > firm. Its purpose is the improvement of all aspects of the > organisation's structure and operation. The audience is the CEO and > everybody else besides! > > In true enterprise architecture, a single design process encompasses > all of "business" and "IT", organisation structure and IT systems, > human activities and automated processes. It also involves everything > from the definition of the organisation's purpose, its fundamental > business model and strategy. Clearly, such a multi-disciplinary > approach cannot be the preserve of only the IT department. > > It is common these days to talk about the difficulties of aligning IT > with the needs of the business. But I believe that by treating the > enterprise as a whole in this way, we can sidestep this problem > entirely. The enterprise is simply a single system, composed of some > human parts and some computer systems. A true enterprise architect > deals with both and treats them similarly. Once you start to look at > the enterprise in this way, it becomes impossible to think in purely > technical/systems terms! > > For practitioners of SOA (at least, as generally understood and > implemented today), this means that the design of your technical > services must match (or align with) the design of your organisation > structure and business processes. In fact, you probably can't design > one without considering and perhaps re-designing the others. This can > be difficult if not impossible to achieve if your SOA initiative is > contained purely within the IT department. In many cases, a clear and > useful exposition of the firm's purpose, strategy and business model > may also be unavailable. In my own work over the past few years, I > have often found myself having to fill-in these missing pieces so > that lower-level SOA design activities can proceed. > > > -Mike Glendinning, freelance "business architect" (or "enterprise > architect" or whatever). > > > P.S. For further reading, see the following: > > Enterprise Architecture at Work, Mark Lankhorst et al. > http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/3540243712 > A good overview of the current state of the discpline of enterprise > architecture, at least from the more technical perspective. > > Enterprise Architecture as Strategy, Jean Ross, Peter Weill, David > C. Robertson > http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1591398398 > Excellent "how to" book but still perhaps a little technology- > centric for my taste. Their book on "IT Governance" is excellent also > and probably even more useful. > > The Modern Firm, John Roberts > http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0198293763 > A classic and perhaps one of the best books on organisation design > and true enterprise architecture today. Describes an economic > perspective on system design. > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > -- Andrew S. Townley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://atownley.org
