In my opinion, solving problems like this is the very essence of why architects exist because these problems do not often have obvious answers and there are multiple options to solving any particular given problem.

In the last month or so at work I have been looking at who decides which applications are strategic and which are not

I assumed this was a decision the Enterprise Architects made

Much to my suprise in over half of my organisation this decision is not made by people who call themselves architects at all. Instead this decision is owned by IT staff who have come from the business and now are in IT, and by Application Portfolio Managers / Application Managers.

Application Portfolio Management is a role not oft spoken of in the realms of architects but one everyone should be aware of. Application Managers typically own the operational running of a set of applications i.e. incidents, the projects, the cost and customer satisfaction of those applications. This this usually means they talk to the business very frequently about outages, incidents, projects, etc

Therefore adding on an accountability to determine whether an application is strategic or not is a very nature addition to this role. This is probably in consultation with architects but ultimately takes this decision away from the architect, if they every owned it in the first place

I have found this answer rather challenging

I had an assumption that architects would normally own this decision. They are typically technical experts with depth in one or more business domains. The most logical home for this decision

However, on reflection placing the accountability with an APM seems like a more natural home.
- they have a more holistic view of the application, its operational issues, projects in flight, customer satisfaction, cost
- they probably control the project and operational budget and can more easily make a more realistic determination about the ability of the organisation to make an investment or replacement of an existing application
- they do not need deep expertise, they can call on other expertise, most likely architects, to help with the decision but ultimately as the owner of a portfolio are the people who will have to deliver it. This gives a very healthy dose of reality and objectivity

if i put the TOGAF crop circle in front of an application manager, would they have the faintest clue what i was showing them or talking about?

the answer is almost certainly no

if i put the TOGAF crop circle in front of a business person, would they have the faintest clue what i was showing them or talking about?

absolutely not

so a togaf rebellion…

if I changed TOGAF to about analysis of requirements, design options, costs, benefits, value, implementation time, functionality, usability, and risks would they know what i was talking about?

yes they would

and so i am concluding that TOGAF is a method designed for architects by architects using an abstract and inaccessible language useful only to architects

in my opinion a new method is needed which business people can understand. They can understand that there are specific considerations to determining whether one IT solution versus another is better or not

im afraid terminology like Architecture contract, preliminary phase, and migration planning will never be part of a discussion with the business which i ever have

and perhaps thats why application managers are better placed to have accountability for architectural decisions than architects

is anyone interested in creating a method like the one i suggest, i cannot do it alone…

http://setandbma.wordpress.com/2011/03/30/togaf-foundation-level-certification-aid-for-preparation/

http://nikansell.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/togaf_9_exam_study_guide.pdf

ITIL is a set of high level processes for managing IT from Strategy through delivery, to operations. With a focus more towards Operations than the Strategy end of the spectrum

If you havent heard about ITIL I would strongly encourage you to find out more. It is very quickly gaining traction as the standard for best practice in operating an IT estate.

The exam frankly was straightforeward and I am glad to say I passed (hooray!).

Before the course i was aware of the basic concepts and after attending the course i have a much better appreciation and interest, in ITIL. It is very coherent as a whole. For me, it is an interesting contrast to TOGAF.

ITIL has gone through a radical change from version 2 to version 3 where strong editorial governance has ensured that version 3 overcomes its heritage and makes a clean break from prior versions to successfully make a wholesale restructuring of its content. In all it makes a coherent whole and the individual books makes for a well integrated method spanning strategy to operations

Unlike TOGAF… which seems to have a very weak editorial practice and as a result it a hybrid of new, high quality content from Cap Gemini in version 9 intermingled with weak legacy content from prior editions. In particular it seems wedded to the ADM ‘crop circle’ with redundant phases like Opportunities and Solutions and Migration Planning and meekly justifying their existence.
Other esoteric concepts like the Enterprise Continuum persist (a phrase like this only belongs on Star Trek) when a stronger editorial hand would have done away with all of these concepts several editions ago

i am not sure where i am going with this other than to praise ITIL and hope that the open group takes a strong editorial stance in version 10

Gabriel was one of the presenters on the day and gave a very interesting presentation on the methods Microsoft are adopting including Porters Competitive Strategy and Good to Great and lastly and most importantly the Office of Strategy Management I had not heard of that before but it is a pretty interesting concept in articulating business strategy and preoviding traceability to demands for the IT organisation. It is worth a look.

Perhaps the most interesting discussion was Gabriels experience in the CIO team at MS, and my experience in the CIO team at IBM. The similarities were quite striking. Not least the preference to use technology, applications and hardware made by your employer even when you know it is not that great, and the demands to provide state of the art functionality at the drop of a hat where people assume that as industry leaders it must be easier for us than anyone else to implement and somehow project staff and other resources like servers are free and readily available. In fact the converse is true as resources are prioritised to customers, not internal projects.
One great example of this is a piece of work i was asked to do at IBM to find all the Oracle software in IBM, provide an exit strategy for every application and a indicative cost. The reason for this was that the Software Group were unhappy about the use of Oracle and the message this was giving to customers. Within a couple of weeks i found out:

finding all the Oracle applications was very difficult because of the number of acquisition they made and continued to make, this was a moving feast

in several situations the use of Oracle by IBM was contractual, either to simplify integrations with customer systems or where IBM had a Business Process Outsourcing deal where Oracle had been taken on or stipulated as the system which had to be used to support the outsourced business processes
anyway, to nut this out, the competing pressures within IBM made this a very difficult situation. On one hand selling software in a competitive market where we needed to prove that our products are better than the opposition and on the other hand, selling Professional Services to consult on any area of interest to the customer including competitors products – the twain shall not meet!

fond memories and good luck to Gabriel!

]]> http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/11/22/ea-conference/feed/ 1 chriseaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/08/togaf-9-exam-review-worksheets/ http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/08/togaf-9-exam-review-worksheets/#comments Wed, 08 Sep 2010 18:55:51 +0000 Chris Eaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/?p=346 ]]> thanks to Khalid Tariq for sending me these excellent TOGAF 9 exam review sheets, i hope you find them useful

download them here -> TOGAF 9 Exam Review Worksheets

]]> http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/09/08/togaf-9-exam-review-worksheets/feed/ 3 chriseaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/togaf-deliverables-available-for-free-on-the-open-group-web-site/ http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/togaf-deliverables-available-for-free-on-the-open-group-web-site/#comments Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:16:41 +0000 Chris Eaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/togaf-deliverables-available-for-free-on-the-open-group-web-site/ ]]> i never knew these were available, let along for free

http://www.opengroup.org/bookstore/catalog/i093.htm

]]> http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/togaf-deliverables-available-for-free-on-the-open-group-web-site/feed/ 0 chriseaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/open-group-now-on-twitter/ http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/open-group-now-on-twitter/#comments Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:15:32 +0000 Chris Eaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/open-group-now-on-twitter/ ]]> http://twitter.com/theopengroup

]]> http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/open-group-now-on-twitter/feed/ 0 chriseaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/helpful-post-on-sdn-relaying-togaf-certification-experience/ http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/helpful-post-on-sdn-relaying-togaf-certification-experience/#comments Wed, 09 Jun 2010 18:01:18 +0000 Chris Eaton http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/?p=336 ]]> there is a recent post on the SAP solution developers network which maybe of interest to people looking into TOGAF certification

http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/weblogs?blog=/pub/wlg/19567

]]> http://chriseaton.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/helpful-post-on-sdn-relaying-togaf-certification-experience/feed/ 0 chriseaton