Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

A Business-Service-Oriented Govt. Architecture

292

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
292
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. A Business-Service-Oriented Government Architecture: Government Business-Service Grid for Transformation Executive Summary The IAC Enterprise Architecture (EA) SIG has collaborated closely with the Federal Enterprise Architecture Program Management Office (FEA-PMO) and the Architecture and Infrastructure Committee of the CIO Council in an effort to extend, enhance, and enable the Enterprise Architecture to transform government. The EA Shared Interest Group is made up of managers and Enterprise Architects and Solution Architects with extensive experience and many diverse viewpoints. We came together with the goal of improving the Enterprise Architecture process and driving for government transformation. We have taken a special focus on supporting the e-government projects and the Homeland Security efforts. However, we feel that the concepts presented by these papers are valuable to not only Federal but also state and local government and can be used in commercial and non-profit enterprise and extended enterprise initiatives. The Business Service-Oriented approach to Government Architecture that is presented in this document extends and builds upon a number of elements: the Reference Models that have been developed by the FEA-PMO, the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework extensions to 1.1 release, along with the DOD Enterprise Architecture represented by GIG and C4ISR activities, as well as activities within NASCIO, the standards communities, and the many commercial and government projects that the industry teams and government partners are involved in. While we cannot claim that these practices and conceptual ideas are yet “best practices” we believe that they represent useful practices that have proven to be successful in a number of cases. As we undertook this support initiative, we had the opportunity to identify the major “Challenge Problems” and to extend the Vision of the current FEA framework with a Business Service-Oriented Architecture. Our proposed architecture can use the Internet, web services, and Grid Services to form a Business Grid for not only Federal, but also state and local interactions with citizens and stakeholders. These concepts address some of the significant challenges facing the e- government initiatives and Enterprise Architecture efforts today and provide a vision of a Government Business-Service Grid that can be implemented and evolved in phases. This overview paper summarizes the proposed vision and introduces a series of concept papers through which the vision can be extended and broadened. The papers are clustered into topic areas. Each paper addresses a key challenge. We have built upon a long legacy of good work by both government and industry and recognize that while there are many actionable steps that can be taken, there remain a number of open issues. Each of the subject areas includes a number of open issues and thus will need to be developed to greater depth. We have purposely intended to keep the papers and companion presentations at the conceptual level; however, each group had to work at a 1
  • 2. more detailed level to develop what we feel are valid and worthwhile concepts, models, templates, and recommendations. 2
  • 3. Challenge Projects: Challenge areas selected for further study by the IAC EA SIG constitute the Challenge Projects. The Projects are built around a series of emerging Federal Enterprise Architecture reference models and the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) 1.1 as well as in-process work to create a 2.0 version of the FEAF guidance material. The EA SIG feels strongly that development of both is needed, together with other supporting Governance and EA Management guidance, updates to the A-130 Policy documents, and an extensive outreach, education and support network of stakeholders that the industry members are eager to support. A graphical view of how the concept papers relate to the FEA Reference Model, (also called the “Wedding Cake”) and the FEAF-pyramid is depicted in the context diagram shown in Figure 1. A few of the activities that are shaded are in their initial concept stage and not ready for the initial review. Figure 2 indicates the numbers of the papers within the context diagram. Figure 1: Starting Context Diagram: Papers Extend Reference Model and FEAF with insights from NASCIO and DOD-C4ISR and GIG Efforts 3
  • 4. Figure 2: Relationship of Papers with Reference Model and FEAF 2.0 Service to the Citizen: Business Service Framework One of the primary purpose of government is to provide service to meet the needs of its citizens, and as such, all of the functions of the government must provide value to the citizens. Over many years, the delivery of services to the citizen has become fragmented through legislative mandates and funding practices that may span across a number of governmental elements. New service-oriented thinking that starts with a focus on meeting the needs of the citizen or other government stakeholders has been part of the reinventing government efforts for the past decade. Similarly, the CIO’s Enterprise Architecture efforts initially focused on planning of major IT investments, but due to a direct link of IT in support of the business mission of agencies, enterprise architecture concepts have been extended with Business Process Reengineering and newer supply-chain and business process management efforts. Planning efforts and decision-making have moved out of the IT shops to the boardrooms of leading companies. The initial set of e-government projects proposed by the current administration have shown great potential to deliver improved services to the citizen for basic business services. However, greater enterprise and cross-enterprise integration approaches can offer more unified set of services that can save the citizen and the government time and effort, while improving the overall quality of the service. This transformation of government services is exciting but can be difficult to achieve without a roadmap-- a Blueprint for change-- which can be developed using a systematic Enterprise Architecture process. 4
  • 5. A government business-oriented framework can begin to integrate services across traditional organizational lines through the use of the integrated electronic service delivery that complements other business process changes. Multiple related services can be linked into an information chain around a common high-level need that responds to a community of citizens and forms an essential part of business line-based architecture. A grid of Business Lines can be mapped to and integrated to provide the unified set of services. As the series of Business Areas (35 in version 1.0 of the Business Reference Model) evolve and build business communities and business line channels for the delivery of services, the government Business-Service Framework will look like a Grid as shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 Business Service-Data Grid Maps Across Organizations The Grid concepts have been in development for many years and along with Web Services are two of many underlying technology elements that underlie the visionary elements of these papers. But the proposed vision also recognizes that all the enterprise architectures within Federal Departments, Agencies, State, Local, and the many partnering organizations must build upon their current framework and be more “open” for greater integration and interoperability in the future. A service-oriented structure is the key; it also is a common language for addressing the needs of the citizens. For this effort, a basic set of Service Categories can be defined as follows: • Business Services: What service do you want us to provide to you? • Interface Services: How do I talk to you? Do you have any special needs? • Information and Delivery Services: What information and data do you need? What information and data are needed to support business service delivery? • Utility Services: User identification services, role services, security and privacy services, context services, timing services, exception handling services, etc that are required to support the other services. The government service-focus and layered-approach of the Reference Model of the FEA are fundamental aspects of these papers. However, the layered approach (also called the “Lasagna” model) has confused many in industry and raised many questions: • How to use the Reference Models? • Are they complete? • The best approach? • Do they invalidate the previous Enterprise Architecture efforts? • Does the FEAF need to change? The series of papers that form part of this effort try to address these questions more thoroughly. Some short answers to the above questions are summarized below: • How to use the Reference Models? 5
  • 6. The reference models can be very useful and the early adopters and our industry reviews and “process” focus has defined what we hope are useful and useable practices. • Are they complete? They are an initial 1.0 version and will evolve through extensive involvement and collaboration of the stakeholders. The FEA-PMO and the CIO Council encourage this and IAC EA SIG is a strong partner in this activity. • The best approach? The FEA Reference Model reflects high-level, visionary thinking but it is up to government and contractors to “use” it and demonstrate that that the models are useful and practical. Change of this magnitude can be expected to cause organizational stress and be met with resistance as any change will. But it must be recognized that by providing a more integrated, holistic approach to services and making everyone accountable to follow a coordinated plan is vital to continuously improving government services. • Do they invalidate the previous Enterprise Architecture efforts? No, these proposals are extensions and refinements of previous government reform initiatives. Enterprise Architecture efforts are evolving but they will require extensive collaboration across traditional boundaries and much more involvement by organizational mission and business leaders. Information services are not a unique IT activity any more! • Does the FEAF need to change? Yes. The framework has to go beyond addressing just the Federal enterprises but also address the inter-agency Business Lines. It needs to place a stronger emphasis on performance and value creation to the citizens. It must also integrate with and enable information sharing with the state, local, private sector and other partners. Most important, it must constantly focus on services to the citizen. To achieve these goals, we recommend that an extended Government Enterprise Architecture Framework build upon the outstanding efforts within the FEAF 1.1 and act as an umbrella to integrate with the NASCIO, DOD efforts, as well as complement the efforts of other governments around the world in those areas that clearly cross national boundaries—terrorism, climate change, etc. Based on this series of papers and with the strong involvement from the Enterprise Architecture community, a new GEAF and a strong set of Reference Models can be developed. These can then be used to execute not merely the initial e-government projects but many more, as well as support the transformation required for implementing Homeland Security, along with many other required and needed changes. 6
  • 7. A summary of items that need to be changed to both make the FEA Reference Models compatible to the FEAF 1.1/2.0 efforts and to integrate in new concepts are summarized in Table 1. Each paper includes a similar table as an appendix. Table 1. Alignment of FEAF with FEA Reference Models FEA RM FEAF1.1 /2.0 New Concepts Compatibility Changes Business Reference Business Line Architecture, Model Business Service Grid, Business Line Architecture Sponsorship and Leadership Service Components Application Level Service Reference Model, Repository, Service Business Patterns, etc To be completed Business and Technology Alignment: Common Goals and Shared Knowledge Focus One of the key differences between the Enterprise Architecture of the past and the expanded Enterprise Architecture is that that the EA and the Business Line Architecture are the responsibility of the organization and not the CIO or the Chief Enterprise Architect. The EA is basically a Business Architecture that translates and links with the organization’s Strategic Plan and goals that drive changes in business processes and expectations. IT goals must not be separate from business goals; what is need is a set of common goals. This approach will require a new understanding by the technology services providers of the business of government and the services that are provided to the citizens and other stakeholders. All must recognize that appropriate IT infrastructure goals and objectives are not to have better desk top systems, or faster networks, or to have interesting web sites and use latest technologies such as Web Services, but to meet the organizational mission and its set of business goals. It is important to recognize that the customer does not care who delivers the services. Users cannot be expected to fully understand the government organizational structure or whether the service comes from one or more federal agencies, or involves links to state and local information. The users simply care that a quality service be provided. Consequently, business processes that are required to provide key government services must cut across organizational and implementation boundaries, and support the capability to access information and data wherever they exist. This approach uses a Federated 7
  • 8. Information Model that allows access to many elements of the required and exposed information that can then be shared with members of the business communities. The proposed models have the ability to provide an information supply chain and provide a “standards-based” set of interoperable principles, practices that easily link the business process with a series of integration points and result in a network grid of business services around each business area. Getting to a common understanding will require business users to learn about the benefits and risks of technologies and to be involved in the ongoing transformation efforts. These key concepts are illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 4. Businesses and Technology Alignment along Common Goals Challenges Faced: The efforts involved in this next wave of government reforms could be daunting without large involvement by industry and government and the use of the best practices available. Some of the key challenges identified during these projects include: • Enterprise Architecture must become fully business-driven • EA is needed for more than just Budget: we need Active Living Blueprints! • EAs must link closely with the Mission of the Organization • EAs must map to the organization’s Strategic Plan, Goals, and Direction and fit with its annual performance plans as reflected in a Performance Reference Model • Strategy Maps can be used for linking Goals to Performance but this is a change in current practices 8
  • 9. • Agencies must align with or make recommendations to improve the proposed OMB BRM • Business Processes must fit with the way operations are done today or assume that significant changes will occur. Organizational change level must be assessed early. • Operations Concepts need to be developed and adopted. These are Context diagrams showing people involvement, level of automation, skills, etc • Translating the Business Process Models- These must use a common language and set of Models • Business Processes must drive all aspects of EA/BLA e-government Common Core Elements and Key Business Components The Common Reference Model identifying e-government elements such as e- authentication, e-records, portal processing, business process modeling, or methods to interface between and along business lines maybe very useful. As the different Departments and Agencies are developing their Enterprise Architecture and “reuse” identification and business patterns team of Solution Architects can and “have” been sharing those experiences among e-government projects. On a regular basis lessons learned and observed patterns should be placed into a “tools and tricks” knowledge management repository and integrated into a training program. The IAC can facilitate this type of activity. Integrating the Many Activities into a Business Driven Government Framework: FEAF becomes GEAF The Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework has been extremely useful but like other early versions, changes have been identified by government and also the greatest changes are needed to meet the Strategic Transformation needed by not only Federal government but also State and Local government. Services to the citizen are being provided by many parts of the government from Federal, State, and local along with a diverse set of organizations. Citizens want the service and do not care where and who provides that support and there has been strong acceptance of e-government as long as security and privacy are addressed. It is also recognized from many events from the 911 terrorist activities and continued threats to the SEC identification of improper financial reporting to the recent sniper incident in the many Washington, D. C. counties that Federal, State, and Local agencies must have aligned Enterprise Architecture. Each agency must think about it’s customers and work with other government partners to have an improved “end to end” business process. We recommend that the FEAF be revised to address many of the issues below and to be a more comprehensive process. Crossing the business lines to something missing here/????? 9
  • 10. What is missing in the FEAF that would make up a GEAF? The following list includes some of the key new concepts that come from the FEA RM or are part of our recommendations. • Must focus on Citizen Services and the fact that the Enterprise Architecture must take a strategic approach that integrates the President’s Management Agenda (Federal Strategic Plan) and the Department Strategy along with the goals established by Business Line and the Business Communities. • Provide information about how the Reference Models are used at the “initial” Target Architecture that is integrated to the existing Department/Agency architecture. • Business Case must be linked to changes in process that lead to new achievement goals that are related to outcomes that can be measured at some time in the future. • The set of changes that are needed must be linked to the business cases and related to the budget with a series value propositions related to the Transformation Expectations. The Sequencing Plan should address all aspects of Business Transformation. • Strong focus on information sharing between federal agencies and state, local, and other organizations within Business Communities: citizen/Users and Service Providers. Must look at the Business Lines using Business Lines Channels that allow the government to • Service Component Approach: must link the EA activities with the Software/Service Development Life Cycle. • Business Architecture strengthened and common “vocabulary” based on Reference Model- Business Areas and concepts from Business Process Management standards world ebXML, UBL, BPMI, etc • Architecture Management elements should be discussed including concepts like Governance, performance-contracting, development and reuse of service components and managed services, and the processes used to manage and introduce new technologies in a systematic way. Business Areas: Business Communities and Business Line Channels One of the key recommendations that appears in a number of papers involves ideas to approach to link cross-cutting business areas with a business service grid along a series of business line channels that integrate within the business community. The recommendation is to adapt practices from the supply chain business concepts to form information supply chains and use concepts of trading communities along with research on Virtual Enterprises to create a Government Business Service Grid. There is already a strong effort in the Science community that can be leveraged. These business communities will have to evolve starting with a focus on “people to people” interaction where there is effort defining and aligning around shared concepts. Once there is an agreement on business goals and the information that needs to be shared, a target “end to end” information flow can be created and strategic information integration on how to make the transformation in a series of small steps. What can result is a series of Virtual Communication Channels and Communities. These can result in the formation of Virtual Enterprises based on “agreed” policies and principles that will result in the 10
  • 11. transformation of government not at just the Federal level but also at the State and local level. One of the key elements of this type of architecture is the ability to see and access information from throughout the business line network using a Federated approach as shown in Figure 5 below. Object Metamodel Relational Metamodel Datatype Metamodel XML Metamodel Unstructured Tacit Information e-mail Fax Paging Calendaring OODBMS RDBMS Data Dictionary XML Document Collaboration Figure 5: Federated Information Modeling: Allows Transition from existing data to integrated Information Structures 11
  • 12. Topics and Papers in this Series The papers have been grouped into five topic clusters to allow for the easy expansion and growth. This grouping also allows the teams, stakeholders, and participant involvement to continue along one of the focus areas. A. Business/Performance Cluster: Paper Title: Using the BRM in the Conceptual and Strategic Stage: Preparing Both an EA and Business Line Architecture (BLA) based on Services A Business Reference Model (BRM) was recently been introduced by OMB. Close behind is a new Performance Reference Model (PRM) and policy to apply during the budget cycle that will introduce those concepts into the Enterprise Architecture and at the same time lead or participate in Business Line Architectures. This paper places these reference models in context and recommends an approach that can use them in Modernization efforts and Performance Management activities. It recommends that strategic goals be closely tied to the Business and Mission focused Enterprise Architecture and that measures for the organization be built around the Enterprise Architecture plans to move from current state to an improved target state. Paper Title: Performance Reference Model Use and Integration with EA and Business Line Architectures The paper discusses the steps that are needed to use the Performance Reference Model (PRM) and to align it with the Business Process Improvements, Strategic Changes, and the ongoing GPRA-Goal Driven activities. The enablers and inhibitors to deploying the PRM are discussed along with a set of recommendations such as the creation of a Performance Reference Model Users Guide, training program/workshops, and the creation of interoperable performance exchange standard based on extending the XML- based standards such as XBRL. The recommended Performance Reference Model Users Guide should describe processes that can be utilized to track organizational performance on an ongoing basis as part of the Agency’s Enterprise Architecture, including during the transition and project execution phase of an Enterprise Architecture Migration Plan. A subset of this PRM will be the specific data used in the A-11 Exhibit 300 business case and in the Agency’s Portfolio Management and Capital Planning Processes. Other issues that need to be address such as the needed for special metrics and processes will also be needed to address Business Lines and virtual enterprise integration issues are identified. 12
  • 13. B. Information Sharing Cluster: Paper Title: E-government Information and Data Viewpoints: Federated Information Model Integrates Structured, Semi-Structured and Unstructured Information Sources An important key to many of the e-government interactions is the consistent quality of information coming from many sources and being available where it is needed and when it is needed. Today, there are tremendous information gaps and the three forms of information – 1) structured (relational and object models), 2) emerging XML-standards- based semi-structured information, and 3) unstructured text and graphics with some catalog information -- are all islands both within Departments and Agencies and across the Federal lines of business. Information integration can be done in many ways, but one of the universal needs is for a common approach to information and data modeling. The Industry Advisory Council (IAC) of FGIPC is recommending in this paper an approach and a Federated Information Model that can be populated along government Business Lines and be used across U.S. Federal, State, Local and International e-government initiatives. The approach is based on both sound information and data base theory, a serious need, and an approach that correlates with standards organizations to create an open and extendable family of information models. These models can be one element of each organization’s push for information integration and increased consistency, commonality, and visibility. This is one step of many that is needed and the IAC welcomes the opportunity to partner in further refinement of the concepts and practices presented here. Paper Title: Interfaces, Interoperability, and Integration Strategy: Using Business Line Channels Who could have predicted in 2000 that a consolidation of agencies would be required to address terrorism within our homeland and begin the integration of select government systems? This major consolidation move by government proves the old adage, “The only thing constant is change.” This is the conceptual portion of a proposed roadmap for an information interoperability reference model for building and handling change in a proactive rather than a reactive manner. The proposed roadmap imparts a regular and visible approach to defining interfaces, providing an interoperability reference model, and choice from a set of integration strategies and patterns. This paper focuses on the key conceptual elements of the process and technologies that can be used to define the interfaces, establish and interoperability framework and define an integration strategy along a business line such as Homeland Security, between companion e-government projects and to address your cross-agency, Department or Government integration issues. Provided are some common concepts and best practices for government leaders and technical developers alike. Existing government information systems offer diffused and distributed content that is difficult to manage, coordinate, and evolve. Much of this information suffers from 13
  • 14. timeliness and consistency problems. Today, heroic efforts by government and contract personnel make systems work but the integration patterns and experiences are not captured and a consistent process applied. Continuing to attempt to solve our interface problems with one-on-one tactics or without enterprise planning will put at risk the large- scale eGov efforts, such as Homeland Security, in addition to being extremely costly and difficult. This paper outlines an overall context for these critical elements and suggests an approach where industry can support in the definition of these items that complement the Federated Information Model. The outline calls for an open approach with registered “interface contracts” and a cross-business line integration strategy. The following outlines a model for tighter interagency interoperability, a roadmap for eGov, usable at both federal and state level. Paper Title: Interoperability and Information (I2) Sharing: Architecture Alignment for Business Line Channel Planning and Strategy Two of the critical concepts in the BRM Reference Models are the introduction of Business Lines and Access Channels. This paper discusses the Planning and Strategy that is needed not just within the Federal business space but also with the communication with State and Local enterprises and along with business partners and providing access channels to citizens. The value of an EA is as a tool for ensuring interoperability and “end to end “ mission fulfillment, requiring an extended enterprise view. This extended enterprise view may go from local-to state-to Federal or in the other direction with other off and on- ramps. At the abstract level we must be able to plan the set of “topic” and “business- mission focused” virtual communication channels that are the backbone of the business lines and access channels as input and output channels to the Enterprise Architecture. The paper defines a simple set of Enterprise Architecture/Business Line Architecture information assessment activities, use of templates; common issues involved in the analysis, and alignment steps. These templates and process steps are offered in the hope that there can be the “common shared” elements between the major EA approaches (FEA/FEAF, NASCIO, DOD C4ISR, etc.). C. Service Component Cluster: Paper Title: Composing, Adapting, and Evolving Web-Based Components Component-based reuse can have tremendous benefits for the e-government and overall government IT Budget. It also greatly changes the development life cycle and capital planning processes and introduces new dependencies. Web-based components have a 14
  • 15. special appeal as an emerging approach. Components must be incorporated into business processes that meet the unique government mission needs and be adaptable and tailorable to unique elements of each agency. Components must also evolve to meet the changing business requirements, adapt to new standards and technology options, and include the normal preventive and corrective maintenance steps. This paper 1) outlines the enablers and inhibitors to components in general and to web service-oriented components, 2) recommends aspects to include in the Application-Capability Reference Model, and 3) identifies the elements of the FEAF and Guidebook needed to assure critical components and their dependencies are owned as part of “contractual” arrangement a Component Specification by “Contract” with register component owners and users. D. Cross-Cutting Issues Cluster: Paper Title: Security Architecture for Business Lines and Cross- agency Information Exchanges Security Architecture must be integrated as a cross-cutting issue across all elements of the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework and provide a common Reference Architecture compatible with the Federal Self-Assessment Framework, Common Criteria that is adaptable to ever changing threats and emerging technologies. The paper provides initial concepts needed for a Security Service Framework along with process changes that are needed for updates into the FEAF 2.0 draft. The integration of Security thinking and practices as an “aspect” of all the Enterprise Architecture is key. The paper weaves the Security Architecture process with the Enterprise Architecture. Paper Title: Information Assurance and Security: Critical Elements Needed for HLS and Continuity of Operations Moreover, providing an Enterprise Architecture Security Business Reference Model will identify and define the Security Information Services (SIS) for use throughout the Government. This will facilitate cooperation amongst people, processes, and technology to produce IT solutions that achieve individual, organizational, business, and cross- agency goals while also connecting security requirements with the right to privacy. The intent of this framework is to overlay it upon the objective Enterprise Architecture and while simultaneously addressing the government’s Critical Infrastructure functional needs, for a secure environment, during Crisis and Contingency Operations, of: WARNING, DETECTING, DEFENDING, and RESTORING. E. Enterprise Management Activities Cluster: Paper Title: Advancing Enterprise Architecture Maturity: Lessons and Leadership Challenges Ahead This paper looks at the recent past and the critical leadership needed for even greater transformation within the extended government enterprise where the focus begins with 15
  • 16. the citizens service needs and the combined delivery between federal agencies, state, local with a collaborative government environment. While a few agencies have made great progress on their Enterprise Architecture following the FEAF 1.1 process, others found great difficult getting started, developing target architectures, and overcoming the resistance to the broader business/mission approach required for Enterprise Architecture. This paper provides some sound recommendations about steps that can be taken to advance the Enterprise Architecture maturity and deliver the expected performance transformation. The paper takes a broad perspective and has gathered successful practices from government and industry. Recommendations for improvements in the FEAF to be a Government Enterprise Architecture Framework process and guidebook are identified as key next steps along with the alignment with the NASCIO and DOD approaches and strong guidance on governance and technology management aspects. Paper Title: Solutions Need: Imagination, and Positive Attitude The era of EA with Business Line architectures can result in significant government transformation. EA efforts must lead to solutions and outcomes. This requires leadership by government and contractors that are aligned along a vision that is aligned with the FEA Target Architecture. Each Department, Agency, and Business Line must be envisioned with an imagination of “positive” changes. Government and industry representatives must take a positive attitude on the application of Enterprise Architecture. The past Enterprise Architecture had mixed success. Experience from those EA programs can be leveraged. The new features involved with EA must be clearly communicated. As new approaches such as e-government or transformation are communicated throughout the government, the natural pessimist and cynics may raise issues or share their negative beliefs. Increasing optimism and hope must be addressed by first listened to the “issue”, by refining Enterprise Architecture approach to address the concern, or explaining the approach more thoroughly. The vision must be based on a strong belief that the positive elements of the new approach will result in new It also will require recognition and incentives for those advocates who managed to overcome obstacles to apply Enterprise Architecture in earlier and present efforts. Enterprise Architecture awards like e-gov awards may be very critical to such a process and other forms of positive evaluation that is integrated into job descriptions are necessary. But positive attitude and solutions with solid outcomes are critical! 16

×