An Enterprise Modeling Methodologist

After working for a while at an organization someone asked, what is it that I do? And I had no answer. After some research, Eureka! "Enterprise architecture methodologist'

The complexity of EA necessitates that a trained method engineer in Enterprise architecture modeling and methodology techniques, instruct the EA practice to managers and architects, and in situations conduct the EA it self, through iterative interviews. Using a methodologist such as me, provides an experienced knowledge base from which ideas and suggestions on overall improvements can be obtained.

Promoting enterprise architecture: A change management approach

EA requires high buy-in due to many inhibitors. The EA manager has a highly important task to promote and sell this initiative to the organization. An important aspect for this task is “Change Management (People)” is very important to handle the high buy-in required by Enterprise Architecture modeling initiative. Kotter’s "Winning at Change" Leader to Leader, proposes a 8 step strategy which can be adopted to successfully handling change. Its relevance to EA is evident.

· Establish a Sense of Urgency

1. Examine current realities and position of the Enterprise Modeling initiative, using the performance measurement system created.

2. Identify and discuss inhibitors, potential inhibitors, or major opportunities for Enterprise Architecture

· Form a Powerful Guiding Coalition

1. Assemble a steering group with enough power to lead the change effort.

· Create a Vision

1. Create a vision to help direct the change effort

2. Develop strategies for achieving that

· Communicate the Vision

1. Use every vehicle possible to communicate the new vision and strategies.

2. Empower Others to Act on the Vision

3. Handle obstacles and inhibitors to the change

4. Encourage employees to accept the change

· Plan for and Create Short-Term Wins

1. Plan and target for visible and incremental short term performance improvements.

2. Recognize and reward for such improvements

· Consolidate Improvements and Produce Still More Change

1. Reinvigorate the process with new initiative by increasing scope of the modeling initiative.

· Institutionalize the change

1. Change needs to become institutionalized and has been widely accepted as part of the organizational culture, if not it can be subject to degradation. Hence efforts are required to anchor the change into the organizational culture.

Redundancy and Gap Analysis of IT Applications

Architects often need to perform analysis on a set of IT Applications for redundancy and gaps in the functionality it offers. This activity is required for example during

Application convergence

Redundant Application phase-out

Activity 1: Contextual Analysis
(IAF's contextual analysis, TOGAF's Preliminary Phase: Framework and Principles (Re-look) and Architecture Vision Phase)

When conducting any architecture analysis, it is recommended to conduct a contextual analysis of the architecture so that the objectives are agreed upon. This is a collaborative effort which requires proper buy-in from all sponsors. Note that the risk of failure is high if this step is skipped. Also the effectiveness of this critical step depends on the maturity and capability of the EA practice within the organization. The common denominator of all enterprise architecture wisdom is: start simple, remain simple but grow (mature). This is very true in this stage. Based on TOGAF and my own experience the following needs to be exchanged and validated by all stakeholders of the architecture.

· To review the organizational context for conducting architecture analysis

· To identify the sponsor stakeholder(s) and other major stakeholders impacted by the business directive to create the architecture analysis

· To ensure that everyone who will be involved in, or benefit from, this approach is committed to the success of the architectural process

· To define the "architecture footprint" - the people responsible for performing architecture work, where they are located, and their responsibilities

· To define the framework and detailed methodology that are going to be used to develop the architecture and share it across

· To confirm a governance

· To define the architecture principles that will form part of the constraints on the architecture work

Activity 2: Application modeling

(IAF's Physical IS/IT, TOGAF's Phase C: Information Systems Architectures)

Most of the situations, architects a-priori know what applications need to be analyzed. But before making a rational call to make an analysis on an application, it is necessary to make a technical analysis on all relevant application on inter-application dependencies (technical and functional). If a legacy application which needs to be phased out has dependencies on other applications and vice-versa, an impact analysis needs to be made. Following are few considerations need to be made.

· Applications transmitting data.

· Applications receiving data.

· Architecture standards of the applications and the interdependent and potentially impacted applications.

Activity 3: Information system functional (capability) modeling

(IAF's Logical IS/IT, TOGAF's Phase C: Information Systems Architectures)

ARIS identifies information system functions as IT capabilities. This name best captures this aspect. Depending on the complexity of the application, either a complete architecture development lifecycle (from business to IS/IT) or a direct functional mapping can be done. A mix of a top-down and vice versa approach is to be used to identify and map the IS Functions to the supporting IT Applications. Mark a cross or a percentage of coverage of the functionality.

I have developed a very smart analysis report using ARIS which populates functionality coverage. However a level based modeling approach is to be used. This works like charm and very simple to manage, though it looks a bit complicated. We were able to model and make analysis with ease and intuitively. A simple example is shown below. Function 1 is broken down into further details and its lower level functionality is also mapped to the applications which support it. For example, resource management which is functionality can be provided by multiple applications. But there can be very important differences in its lower level details which may or may not be supported by other applications.

	App 1	App 2	App 3	App 4
Function 1	40%	60%	80%	20%
Function 2	35%	40%	100%	0%
Function 3	0%	%	100%	0%
…
….

	App 1	App 2	App 3	App 4
Function 1.1	100%	100%	100%	100%
Function 1.2	100%	100%	100%
Function 1.3
Function 1.4			100%
Function 1.5		100%	100%

Activity 4: Analysis

(TOGAF’ Phase E: Opportunities and Solutions)

After identifying gaps and convergences, prepare a road map to phase-out and build if needed.

If you have any comments please do let me know.

ARIS Scripting: Circles in report

May be I have an IQ in the negative direction, but this took me around 4 hours to figure it out. Trust me you will thank me.

function defineAStatusSymbol(colour){
var aCircle = Context.createPicture();
aCircle.SelectBrush(colour);
aCircle.SelectPen ( Constants.BRDR_NORMAL, 100, Constants.C_BLACK )
temp1 = aCircle.Ellipse ( 0, 0, 50, 50 );
return aCircle;
}

ARIS Scripting: Custom Colours

java.awt.Color(int r, int g, int b)

example for back ground colour java.awt.Color(0.83,0.36,0.09).hashCode()

ooutfile.TableCell("Hello world", 35, "Lucida Sans", 10, Constants.C_BLACK, java.awt.Color(0.83,0.36,0.09).hashCode() , 0, Constants.FMT_BOLD| Constants.FMT_LEFT , 0);

ARIS Scripting: Symbols reporting

function getMethodFilter(){

return ArisData.getActiveDatabase ( ).ActiveFilter ( );
}


function getPictureObject(currentObject){
return methodFilter.SymbolGraphic (currentObject.SymbolNum());
}

Understanding of Context which governs Enterprise Modeling Projects (An extract from my thesis)

It is well understood that all business activities do not exist in vacuum but they exist and are shaped and as well as shape the context environment they operate in, are context based, as they exist in a unique environment. Understanding the fundamental factors which are part of the context or environment is vital (Business in context By David Needle). In The Art of War", role played by fundamental factors are described as "he who knows them will be victorious; he who knows them not will fail." One needs to consider these factors and understand how they affect the Project.

Alignment with business and technology vision, strategy and principles: This forms the basis for guiding the Organization’s architecture, its modeling and its underlying principles, methodology, constraints, decisions, scope and usage. This is not only a characteristic but is in the very nature of Enterprise Architecture and its modeling. And the Enterprise modeling project should be dynamic reflecting the changes to the business strategy (TOGAF, Rosemann. M 2006, Stevens et al, 2003, King 1995, Schekkerman, 2003; Delen, 2005) and thus need to realign.

Involves high Collaboration: it is important that during development cycle of Models, it is necessary to involve the various experts, stakeholders and users. (Alur and Dill, 1994; Chirichiello and Sala, 2005; Clarke and Peled, 2000). Though all these parties are either interviewed or communicated with in other ways, there is often a lack in the skills or in the time to actively participate in the modeling effort (Renger et all, 2008). This is particularly true for large distributed organizations. This also raises “Communication Issues”. Though analysts and architects might have mental models, visions for solution designs and meta-models, they often lack the adequate means of articulating and communicating them and their purpose in terms familiar to all stakeholders involved (Renger et all 2008; Clarke et al 1995). Enterprise Modeling thus requires high level of continuous correlation among all stakeholders (Delen et all, 2005).

Large organizations such as ST have become increasingly distributed, with information sources dispersed in multiple locations which makes effective collaboration for model management and knowledge access very difficult (Brown and Duguid, 1998; Ba et all 2008). To develop a comprehensive and coherent view of the enterprise, the various models must be correlated to facilitate understanding of the relationships and constraints between the elements represented in the various models which calls for decision-makers to collaborate to detect conflicts and inconsistencies between models, identify missing information, and calculate the impact of changes in one aspect of the enterprise on other aspects (Delen and Benjamin, 2005).

Balance of Scope: Enterprise level architecture involves a scope which spreads across multiple domains such as Business, IT, Data, Infrastructure and Organization resources. There are multiple purposes for Modeling such as Sarbanes-Oxley Act, ISO 9000 audit, knowledge base, business process engineering and Technology architecture work. Adopted from TOGAF’s dimension of scope of an Enterprise Architecture, the following has been identified as the dimension of scope for Enterprise Modeling.

· The breadth of coverage (Horizontal coverage) of the enterprise.

· The level of details (Vertical coverage).

· Domains to be covered (business, data, application, technology).

· Time horizon.

· The architectural assets (Models to be created, reused, recreated or modified, and their conditions for use.

A guiding principle for the scope for Enterprise Architecture modeling is “Good, is Good enough” (Delen and Benjamin, 2005). An enterprise model is not independent from one another an each model describes an aspect that it depends on, and is constrained by aspects described in other models. Delen and Benjamin, (2005) suggest a critical characteristic of enterprise models is that all model types are equally important in describing an enterprise. The goal of a model is to address comprehensively the types of questions being posed by decision-makers, not to provide the most detailed analysis possible. Shapiro, Charles (2004).

Method and discipline: Enterprise architecture is principled based. It lays down methodology which should be followed. As the various enterprises model types focus on different domains of an organization, such as data, activity, process, information system and organizational structure and to understand the entire enterprise it is the relationships and integration between the various model types from the different domains. This requires a method to support to support such integration. (Delen et all, 2005; Vernadat

, 2002). Delen et all (2005) provide reasons of correlation and maintenance problems with the various type of model from different domain captured, represented, and stored when using a standalone application. Modeling methods and tools are seen as complex, non integrated, time-consuming, expensive, and usable only by experts with a specific set of skills who are difficult to find (Delen et all, 2001; Mize et all, 1992; Vernadat, 2002; Williams 1994).

Requires High Buy-in and should handle Corporate Politics : TOGAF describes this factor this as "There is a similarity between enterprise architecture and architecture in the physical world, in that politics has an important role to play in the acceptance of both architectures. In the real world, it is the dual politics of the environment and commerce, while in the world of enterprise architecture a consideration of corporate politics is critical. An enterprise architecture imposed without appropriate political backing is bound to fail". The organization culture and resistance to change creates an environment which inhibits the Enterprise modeling initiative.

Reference:Alur, R., Dill, D.L.: A theory of timed automata. Theoretical Computer Science 126(2), 183 - 235 (1994)
Brown JS, Duguid P (1998) Organizing knowledge. California Manage Rev 40(3):90–111
Delen, Dursun;Benjamin Perakath C. ; Towards a truly integrated enterprise modeling and analysis environment.Computers in Industry Aug2003, Vol. 51 Issue 3, p257
King, W.R. (1995, Winter). "Creating a Strategic Capabilities Architecture," Information Systems Management, 12(1), pp. 67-69
http://www.opengroup.org/architecture/0404brus/speakers/schekkerman_jaap.htm
Michiel Renger , Gwendolyn L Kolfschoten ., and Gert-Jan de Vreede: Challenges in Collaborative Modeling:A Literature Review: Advances in Enterprise Engineering I 4th InternationalWorkshop CIAO! and 4th InternationalWorkshop EOMAS, held at CAiSE 2008 Montpellier, France, June 16-17, 2008
Rosemann, Michael Potential pitfalls of process modeling: part A Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2. (March 2006), pp. 249-254.
Rosemann, Michael Potential pitfalls of process modeling: part B Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 12, No. 3. (March 2006), pp. 377-384.
Vernadat F.B. (1997). Enterprise Modelling Languages ICEIMT'97 Enterprise Integration - International Consensus. EI-IC ESPRIT Project 21.859.

My Thesis

My thesis researches the use of the Balance scorecard (BSC) approach to evaluate the performance of ”Enterprise Modeling” intiatives within organizations. The Delone & Mclean IS success measurement theory was used within the Enterprise Modelng context, to systematically identify the dependent sucess measurement variables and their inter relationships which were applied to the balance scorecard. A case-study is made with ST Microelectronic's enterprise modeling initiative.
The following are the deliverables for my thesis
• Enterprise Modeling environmental context factors
• Enterprise Modeling success measurement dependent variables
• Enterprise Modeling key success factors
• Enterprise Modeling performance measurement system development using Balance scorecard.
• Enterprise Modeling strategy map.
• Enterprise Modeling measures and metrics.

I have uploaded a draft version of the BCS for EA modeling, which is also published in my thesis.

TOGAF 8 Certified

I got my TOGAF 8 certification finally. I got a 50 % reduction on the exam because I bought the book. I was actually rewarded for not torrenting the same (I did not find it). However I can breathe now. Here are some points I want to put forward to anyone who wants to write the exam.

• Buy the exam preparation book online :)
  
• They ask silly questions on details. Best way to prepare for them is to take all the sample tests.
• Prepare everyday. I had broken up with my ex, so I had the time :p
• Common sense
• Take the exam to make you learn. Yeah the certification is cool on your resume, but still.
• After you spend some time, you start seeing a better picture into the world of EA
• EA folks love documentation. So there is loads of it in TOGAF, and you may get lost in it. Try to find the simplicity in it.
  

How to build a BSC strategy map for Enterprise architecture

Kaplan and Norton have identified the following the 5 principles of that guide the development of the strategy map. The principles have been modified to fit the Enterprise Architecture context.

1. Strategy balances contradictory forces: EA’s short term resource expense should balance the benefits realized mainly on a long term return time horizon
2. Strategy is based on a differentiated customer value proposition. Satisfying customers needs the vital source of sustainable value creation. The targeted customer segments of the EA initiative need to be identified and a value proposition need to be formulated.
3. Value is created through internal processes. Effective and aligned internal processes of the enterprise modeling initiative, determine how value gets created and sustained for customers. Focus is on critical few internal processes that deliver the differentiating value proposition
4. Strategy consists of simultaneous, complementary themes. The formulated key internal process, occur parallel and in many situations complement each other. However, they do not always deliver benefits at the same time. Hence care is to be taken so that, they are formulated, evolve and measured at appropriate intervals to create a sustaining growth.
5. Strategic alignment determines the value of intangible assets. The future learning and growth perspective, describes the EA initiative’s intangible assets and their role in the strategy.

I find work done by an EA guru, Jaap Schekkerman in Extended Enterprise Architecture Maturity Model Support Guide SM Version 2.0, an exceptional starting point to use maturity based KPIs to measure the objectives indicated in the strategy map.

http://www.enterprise-architecture.info/Images/E2AF/Extended%20Enterprise%20Architecture%20Maturity%20Model%20Guide%20v2.pdf

Balance scorecard simplified

Kaplan and Norton presented the Balance Scorecard (BSC) concept in articles published in the Harvard Business Review. The original BSC was created to overcome the traditional financial accounting measures such as ROI and payback period, which offer a very narrow and incomplete picture of business performance. It was clear that dependency on such data inhibits future actions to create value. The competitive strategy of a firm should not be solely driven by the core competencies and internal process but also by its environment, Prahalad and Hamel (Competing for the Future).

Hence there is a need create a strategy which is environment inclusive and a performance measurement to measure the same. As a result, Kaplan and Norton suggest that financial measures should be supplemented with further measures that reflect customer satisfaction (delivering value to the customer), internal business processes (building the right strategic capabilities and efficiencies) and the ability to learn and grow (skills and systems that will be needed) . Furthermore, the name “balance” stems from the concept to keep score between

· short- and long-term objectives

· financial and non-financial

· between lagging and leading indicators

· internal and external performance perspectives

In short the balance scorecard identifies the knowledge, skills and systems that
employees will need (learning and growth) to develop and build the right strategic capabilities (internal processes) to deliver value to the market (customer) which leads to higher shareholder value (financial).