Embracing EA and TOGAF Aid Companies in Improving Innovation, Market Response, and Governance advances in enterprise architecture and The Open Group's Architectural Framework
Embracing EA and TOGAF Aid Companies in ImprovingInnovation, Market Response, and GovernanceTranscript of a sponsored BrieﬁngsDirect Conference on advances in enterprise architecture andThe Open Groups Architectural FrameworkListen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Sponsor: The Open Group Join The Open Group in Austin, Texas July 18-22 to learn more about enterprise architecture, cloud computing, and TOGAF9. To register, go to http://www.opengroup.org/austin2011/register.htmDana Gardner: Hi. This is Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions, and youre listening to BrieﬁngsDirect. Today, we present a sponsored podcast discussion in conjunction with the latest Open Group Conference in Austin, Texas, the week of July 18, 2011. Weve assembled a panel to examine the maturing use of TOGAF. Thats The Open Group Architecture Framework, and how enterprise architects and business leaders are advancing and exploiting the latest Framework, Version 9.Well further explore how the full embrace of TOGAF, its principles and methodologies, arebeneﬁting companies in their pursuit of improved innovation, responsiveness to markets, andoperational governance. [Disclosure: The Open Group is a sponsor of BrieﬁngsDirect podcasts.]Is enterprise architecture (EA) joining other business transformation agents as a part of a largerand extended strategic value? How? And what exactly are the best practitioners of TOGAFgetting for their efforts in terms of business achievements?Here with us to delve into advanced use and expanded beneﬁts of EA frameworks and what thatsdoing for their user organizations is Chris Forde, Vice President of Enterprise Architecture andMembership Capabilities for The Open Group, based in Shanghai. Welcome, Chris.Chris Forde: Good morning, Dana.Gardner: Were also here with Jason Uppal. He is the Chief Architect at QR Systems, based inToronto. Welcome, Jason.Jason Uppal: Thank you, Dana.
Gardner: Jason, let’s cut to the quick here. We hear an awful lot about architecture. We hear about planning and methodologies, putting the right frameworks in place, but is TOGAF having an impact on the bottom line in the organizations that are employing it? Uppal: One of the things with a framework like a TOGAF is that, onthe outside, it’s a framework. At the same time, when you apply this along with the otherdisciplines, its making big difference in the organization, partially it’s because its allowing theIT organizations to step up to the plate within the core enterprise as a whole and ask how theycan actually exploit the current assets that they already have.And secondly, how do they make sure the new assets that they do bring into the organization arealigned to the business needs.One of the examples where EA has a huge impact in many of the organizations that I haveexperience with is that, with key EA methods, were able to capture the innovation that exists inthe organization and make that innovation real, as opposed to just suggestions that are thrown ina box, and nobody ever sees them.Gardner: What is it about capturing that innovation that gets us to something we can measure interms of an achievable bottom-line beneﬁt?Evolve over timeUppal: Say you deﬁne an end-to-end process using architecture development method (ADM) methods in TOGAF. What it does is give me a way to capture that innovation at the lowest level and then evolve it over time. Those people who are part of the innovation at the beginning see their innovation or idea progressing through the organization, as the innovation gets aligned to value statements, and value statements get aligned to their capabilities, and the strategies, and the projects, and hence to the end of the day. Therefore, if I make a suggestion of some sort, that innovation or idea is seen throughout the organization through the methods like ADM, and the linkage isexplicit and very visible to the people. Therefore, they feel comfortable that their ideas are goingsomewhere, they are just not getting stuck.Forde: Theres an additional point here, Dana, to underscore the answer that Jason gave to yourquestion. In the end result, what you want to be seeing out of your architectural program ismoving the KPIs for the business, the business levers that they are expecting to be moved out. Ifthat is related to cost reduction or is related to top-line numbers or whatever, that explicit linkagethrough to the business levers in an architecture program is critical.Gardner: Chris, you have a good view on the global markets and the variability of goals here.Many companies are looking to either cut cost or improve productivity. Others are looking to
expand. Others are looking to manage how to keep operations aﬂoat. There are so many differentvariables. How do things like the TOGAF 9 and EA have a common beneﬁt to all of thosevarious pursuits? What is the common denominator that makes EA so powerful?Forde: Going back to the framework reference, what we have with TOGAF 9 is a number of assets, but primarily it’s a tool that’s available to be customized, and its expected to be customized. If you come to the toolset with a problem, you need to focus the framework on the area thats going to help you get rapid value to solving your particular problem set. So once you get into that particular space, then you can look at migrating out from that entry point, if thats the approach, to expanding your use of the framework, the methods, the capabilities, that are implicit and explicit in the framework to address other areas.You can start at the top and work your way down through the framework, from this kind of übervalue proposition, right down through delivery to the departmental level or whatever. Or, you cancome into the bottom, in the infrastructure layer, in IT for example, and work your way up. Or,you can come in at the middle. The question is what is impeding your company’s growth or yourdepartment’s growth, if those are the issues that are facing you.One of the reasons that this framework is so useful in so many different dimensions is that it is aframework. It’s designed to be customized, and is applicable to many different problems.Gardner: Back to you, Jason. When we think about a beginning effort, perhaps a crawl-walk-run approach to EA and TOGAF, the promise is that further development, advancement,understanding, implementation will lead to larger, more strategic goals.Let’s deﬁne what it means to get to that level of maturity. When we think about an advanced userof TOGAF, what does that mean? Then, well get into how they can then leverage that to furthergoals. But, what do we really mean by an advanced user at this point?Advanced userUppal: When we think about an advanced user, in our practice we look at it from differentpoints of view and ask what value Im delivering to the organization. It could very well bedelivering value to a CTO in the organization. That is not to say thats not an advanced user,because that’s strictly focused on technology.But then, the CTO focus is that it allows us to focus on the current assets that are underdeployment in the organization. How do you get the most out of them? So, that’s an advanceduser who can ﬁgure out how to standardize and scale those assets into a scalable way so thereforethey become reusable in the organization.
As we move up the food chain from very technology-centric view of a more optimized andtransformed scale, advanced user at that point is looking at and saying that now I have aframework like TOGAF, that advanced user has all these tools in their back pocket.Now, depending on the stakeholder that theyre working with, be that a CEO, a CFO, or a juniormanager in the line of business, I can actually focus them on deﬁning a speciﬁc capability thatthey are working towards and create transition roadmaps. Once those transition roadmaps areestablished, then I can drive that through.An advanced user in the organization is somebody who has all these tools available to them,frameworks available to them, but at the same time, are very focused on a speciﬁc value deliverypoint in their scope.One beauty of TOGAF is that, because we get to deﬁne what enterprise is and we are not toldthat we have to interview the CEO on day one, I can deﬁne an enterprise from a manager’s pointof view or a CFO’s point of view and work within that framework. That to me is an advanceduser.Gardner: When we talk about applied architecture, what does that mean? How is it that wemove from concept into execution?Uppal: The frameworks that we have are well thought-out frameworks. So, it moves theconversation away from this framework debate and very quickly moves our conversation intowhat we do with it.When we talk about a framework like TOGAF, now I can look at and say that if I wanted toapply it now, I have an executive who has deﬁned a business strategy, which typically is a twopage PowerPoint presentation, sometimes accompanied by Excel. That’s a good starting point foran enterprise architect.Now, I use methods like TOGAF to deﬁne the capabilities in that strategy that they are trying tooptimize, where they are, and what they want to transition to.Very creativeThis is where a framework allows me to be very creative, deﬁning the capabilities and thetransition points, and giving a roadmap to get to those transitions. That is the cleverness andcuteness of architecture work, and the real skills of an architect comes into, not in deﬁning theframework, but deﬁning the application of the framework to a speciﬁc business strategy.Gardner: Jason, we mentioned that there is a great deal of variability in what differentcompanies in different regions and in different industries need to accomplish, but one of thecommon questions I get a lot these days is what to outsource and what to manage internally andhow to decide the boundaries between a core competency and extended outsourcing or hybridcomputing types of models?
How does the applied architecture come to the rescue, when this sort of question, which I think isfundamental to an enterprise, comes up?Uppal: That’s a great question. That’s one of the area where if architects do their job well, wecan help the organization move much further along. Because, what we do in the business space,and we have done it many times with the framework, is to look at the value chain of theorganization. And looking at the value chain, then to map that out to the capabilities required.Once we know those capabilities, then I can squarely put that question to the executives and say,"Tell me which capability you want to be the best at. Tell me what capability you want to leadthe market in. And, tell me which capability you want to be mediocre and just be at below thebenchmark in industry."Once I get an understanding of which capability I want to be the best at, thats where I want tofocus my energy. Those ones that I am prepared to live with being mediocre, then I can putanother strategy into place and ask how I outsource these things, and focus my outsourcing dealon the cost and service.This is opposed to having very confused contract with the outsourcer, where one day Imoutsourcing for the cost reasons. The other day, Im outsourcing for growth reasons. It becomesvery difﬁcult for an organization to manage the contracts and bend it to provide the support.That conversation, at the beginning, is getting executives to commit to which capability theywant to be best at. That is a good conversation for an enterprise architect.My personal experience has been that if I get a call back from the executive, and they say theywant to be best at every one of them, then I say, "Well, you really don’t have a clue what you aretalking about. You can’t be super fast and super good at every single thing that you do."Gardner: So making those choices is what’s critical. Some of the confusion I also hear about inthe ﬁeld is how to do a cost-beneﬁt analysis about what processes I might keep internal, versuseither hybrid or external source processes?Is there something about the applied architecture and TOGAF 9 that sets up some system ofrecord or methodology approach that allows that cost-beneﬁt analysis of these situations to bemade in advance? Is there anything that the planning process brings to the table in trying to makeproper decisions about sourcing?Capability-based planningUppal: Absolutely. This is where the whole of our capability-based planning conversation is. Itwas introduced in TOGAF 9, and we got more legs to go into developing that concept further, aswe learn how best to do some of these things.
When I look at a capability-based planning, I expect my executives to look at it from a point ofview and ask what are the opportunities and threats. What it is that you can get out there in theindustry, if you have this capability in your back pocket? Don’t worry about how we are going toget it ﬁrst, let’s decide that it’s worth getting it.Then, we focus the organization into the long haul and say, well, if we don’t have this capabilityand nobody in the industry has this capability, if we do have it, what will it do for us? It providesus another view, a long-term view, of the organization. How are we going to focus our attentionon the capabilities?One of the beauties of doing EA is, is that when we start EA at the starting point of a strategicintent, that gives us a good 10-15 year view of what our business is going to be like. When westart architecture at the business strategy level, that gives us a six months to ﬁve-year view.Enterprise architects are very effective at having two views of the world -- a 5, 10, or 15 yearview of the world, and a 6 months to 3 year view of the world. If we don’t focus on the strategicintent, well never know what is possible, and we would always be working on what is possiblewithin our organization, as opposed to thinking of what is possible in the industry as a whole.Gardner: So, in a sense, you have multiple future tracks or trajectories that you can evaluate,but without a framework, without an architectural approach, you would never be able to havethat set of choices before you.Chris Forde, any thoughts on what Jason’s been saying in terms of the sourcing and cost beneﬁtsand risks analysis that go into that?Forde: In the kinds of environment that most organizations are operating in -- government, for-proﬁt, not-for-proﬁt organizations -- everybody is trying to understand what it is they need to begood at and what it is their partners are very good at that they can leverage. Their choices aroundthis are of course critical.One of the things that you need to consider is that if you are going to give x out and have thepower to manage that and operate whatever it is, whatever process it might be, what do you haveto be good at in order to make them effective? One of the things you need to be good at ismanaging third parties.One of the advanced uses of an EA is applying the architecture to those management processes.In the maturity of things you can see potentially an effective organization managing a number ofpartners through an architected approach to things. So when we talked about what do advancedusers do, what I am offering is that an advanced use of EA is in the application of it to third-partymanagement.Gardner: So the emphasis is on the process, not necessarily who is executing on that process?
Framework necessaryForde: Correct, because you need a framework. Think about what most major Fortune 500companies in the United States do. They have multiple, multiple IT partners for applicationdevelopment and potentially for operations. They split the network out. They split the desktopout. This creates an amazing degree of complexity around multiple contracts. If you have anintegrator, that’s great, but how do you manage the integrator?There’s a whole slew of complex problems. What weve learned over the years is that the originalidea of “outsourcing,” or whatever the term that’s going to be used, we tend to think of that in theabstract, as one activity, when in fact it might be anywhere from 5-25 partners. Coordinating thatcomplexity is a major issue for organizations, and taking an architected approach to that problemis an advanced use of EA.Gardner: So stated another way, Jason, the process is important, but the management ofprocesses is perhaps your most important core competency. Is that fair, and how does EA supportthat need for a core competency of managing processes across multiple organizations?Uppal: That’s absolutely correct. Chris is right. For example, there are two capabilities anorganization decided on, one that they wanted to be very, very good at.We worked with a large concrete manufacturing company in the northern part of the country. Ifyoure a concrete manufacturing company, your biggest cost is the cement. If you can exploityour capability to optimize the cement and substitute products with the chemicals and get thesame performance, you can actually get a lot more return and higher margins for the sameconcrete. Join The Open Group in Austin, Texas July 18-22 to learn more about enterprise architecture, cloud computing, and TOGAF9. To register, go to http://www.opengroup.org/austin2011/register.htmIn this organization, the concrete manufacturing process itself was core competency. That had tobe kept in-house. The infrastructure is essential to make the concrete, but it wasn’t the corecompetency of the organization. So those things had to be outsourced.In this organization we have to build a process -- how to manage the outsourcer and, at the sametime, have a capability and a process. Also, how to become best concrete manufacturers. Thosetwo essential capabilities were identiﬁed.An EA framework like TOGAF actually allows you to build both of those capabilities, because itdoesn’t care. It just thinks, okay, I have a capability to build, and I am going to give you a set ofinstructions, the way you do it. The next thing is the cleverness of the architect -- how he uses histools to actually deﬁne the best possible solutions.
Gardner: Of course, it’s not just enough to identify and implement myriad sourcing or complexsourcing activities, but you need to monitor and have an operational governance oversightcapability as well. Is there something in TOGAF 9 speciﬁcally that lends itself to taking this intothe operational and then creating ongoing efﬁciencies as a result?Uppal: Absolutely, because this is one of the areas where in ADM, when we get back to ourimplementation of governance, and post implementation of governance, value realization, howdo we actually manage the architecture over the life of it? This is one of the areas where TOGAF9 has done a considerably good job, and weve still got a long way to go in how we actuallymonitor and what value is being realized.Very explicitOur governance model is very explicit about who does what and when and how you monitor it.We extended this conversation using TOGAF 9 many times. At the end, when the capability isdeployed, the initial value statement that was created in the business architecture is given back tothe executive who asked for that capability.We say, "This is what the beneﬁts of these capabilities are and you signed off at the beginning.Now, youre going to ﬁnd out that you got the capability. We are going to pass this thing intostrategic planning next year, because for next years planning starting point, this is going to beyour baseline." So not only is the governance just to make sure it’s via monitoring, but did weactually get the business scores that we anticipated out of it.Gardner: Another area that’s of great interest to me nowadays is looking at the IT organizationas they pursue things like cloud, software as a service (SaaS), and hybrid models. Do they gathera core competency at how to manage these multiple partners, as Chris pointed out, or doesanother part of the company that may have been dealing with outsourcing at a business processlevel teach the IT department how to do this?Any sense from either of our panelists on whether IT becomes a leader or a laggard in how tomanage these relationships, and how important is managing the IT element of that in the longrun? Let’s start with you, Jason.Uppal: It depends on the industry the IT is in. For example, if youre an organization that is veryengineering focused, engineers have a lot more experience managing outsourcing deals than ITorganizations do. In that case, the engineering leads this conversation.But in most organizations, which are service-oriented organizations, engineering has not been aprimary discipline, and IT has a lot of experience managing outside contracts. In that case, thewhole cloud conversation becomes a very effective conversation within the IT organization.
When we think about cloud, we have actually done cloud before. This is not a new thing, exceptthat before we looked at it from a hosting point of view and from a SaaS point of view. Now,cloud is going in a much further extended way, where entire capability is provided to you. Thatcapability is not only that the infrastructure is being used for somebody else, but the entireindustry’s knowledge is in that capability.This is becoming a very popular thing, and rightfully so, not because it’s a sexy thing to have. Inhealthcare, especially in countries where it’s a socialized healthcare and its not monopolized,they are sharing this knowledge in the cloud space with all the hospitals. Its becoming a veryproductive thing, and enterprise architects are driving it, because were thinking of capabilities,not components.Gardner: Chris Forde, similar question. How do you see the role of IT shifting or changing as aresult of the need to manage more processes across multiple sources?Forde: It’s an interesting question. I tend to agree with the earlier part of Jason’s response. I amnot disagreeing with any of it, actually, but the point that he made about it is that its a "itdepends" answer.IT interactionUnder normal circumstances the IT organizations are very good at interacting with othertechnology areas of the business. From what Ive seen with the organizations I have dealt with,typically they see slices of business processes, rather than the end-to-end process entirely.Even within the IT organizations typically, because of the size of many organizations, you havesome sort of division of responsibilities. As far as Jason’s emphasis on capabilities and businessprocesses, of course the capabilities and processes transcend functional areas in an organization.To the extent that a business unit or a business area has a process owner end to end, they maywell be better positioned to manage the BPMO type of things. If theres a heavy technologyorientation around the process outsourcing, then you will see the IT organization being involvedto one extent or another.The real question is, where is the most effective knowledge, skill, and experience aroundmanaging these outsourcing capabilities? It may be in the IT organization or it may be in thebusiness unit, but you have to assess where that is.Thats one of the functions that the architecture approaches. You need to assess what it is thatsgoing to make you successful in this. If what you need happens to be in the IT organization, thengo with that ability. If it is more effective in the business unit, then go with that. And perhaps theanswer is that you need to combine or create a new functional organization for the speciﬁcpurpose of meeting that activity and outsource need.
Im hedging a little bit, Dana, in saying that it depends.Gardner: It certainly raises some very interesting issues. At the same time that were seeing thisbig question mark around sourcing and how to do that well, were also in a period where moreorganizations are being data-driven and looking to have deeper, more accessible, and real-timeanalytics applied to their business decisions. Just as with sourcing, IT also has an integral role inthis, having been perhaps the architects or implementators of warehousing, data marts, andbusiness intelligence (BI).Back to you Jason. As we enter into a phase where organizations are also trying to measure andget scientiﬁc and data-driven about their decisions, how does IT, and more importantly, how doesTOGAF and EA come to help them do that?Uppal: We have a number of experiences like that, Dana. One is a ﬁnancial servicesorganization. The entire organization’s function is that they manage some 100-plus billion dollarsworth of assets. In that kind of organization, all the decision making process is based on the datathat they get. And 95 percent of the data is not within the organization. It is vendor data thattheyre getting from outside.So in that kind of conversation, we look and say that the organization needs a capability tomanage data. Once we deﬁne a capability, then we start putting metrics on this thing. What doesthis capability need to be able to do?In this particular example, we put a metric on this and said that the data gets identiﬁed in themorning, by the afternoon we bring it into the organization, and by the end of the day we get ridof it. That’s how fast the data has to be procured, transformed into the organization, brought it in,and delivered it to end-use. That end-user makes the decision whether we will never look at thedata again.Data capabilityHaving that fast speed of data management capability in the organization, and this is one of theareas where architects can take a look at, this is the capability you need. Now I can give you aroadmap to get to that capability.Gardner: Chris Forde, how do you see the need for a data-driven enterprise coincide with ITand EA?Forde: For most, if not all, companies, information and data are critical to their operation andplanning activities, both on a day-to-day basis, month-to-month, annually, and in longer timespans. So the information needs of a company are absolutely critical in any architected approachto solutioning or value-add type of activities.
I don’t think I would accept the assumption that the IT department is best-placed to understandwhat those information needs are. The IT organization may be well-placed to provide input intowhat technologies could be applied to those problems, but if the information needs are normallybeing applied to business problems, as opposed to technology problems, I would suggest that it isprobably the business units that are best-placed to decide what their information needs are andhow best to apply them.The technologist’s role, at least in the model Im suggesting, is to be supportive in that anddeliver the right technology, at the right time, for the right purpose.Gardner: Then, how would a well-advanced applied architecture methodology and frameworkhelp those business units attain their information needs, but also be in a position to exploit IT’shelping hand when needed?Forde: Its mostly providing the context to frame the problem in a way that it can be addressed,chunked down to reasonable delivery timeframes, and then marshaling the resources to bring thatto reality.From a pure framework and applied methodology standpoint, if youre coming at it from anidealized situation, youre going to be doing it from a strategic business need and youre going tobe talking to the business units about what their capability and functional needs are. And at thattime, youre really in the place of what business processes theyre dealing with and whatinformation they need in order to accomplish what the particular set of goals is.This is way in advance of any particular technology choice being made. Thats the idealizedsituation, but that’s typically what most frameworks, and in particular, the TOGAF 9 Frameworkfrom The Open Group, would go for.Gardner: Were just beginning these conversations about advanced concepts in EA and there aregoing to be quite a bit more offerings and feedback and collaboration around this subject at TheOpen Group Conference in Austin. Perhaps before we sign off, Jason, you can give us a quickencapsulation of what you will be discussing in terms of your presentation at the conference.Uppal: One of the things that weve been looking at from the industry’s point of view is sayingthat this conversation around the frameworks is a done deal now, because everybody acceptedthat we have good enough frameworks. Were moving to the next phase of what we do with theseframeworks.In our future conferences, were going to be addressing that and saying what people arespeciﬁcally doing with these frameworks, not to debate the framework itself, but the applicationof it.Continuous planning
In Austin well be looking at how were using a TOGAF framework to improve ongoing annualbusiness and IT planning. We have a speciﬁc example that we are going to bring out where welooked at an organization that was doing once-a-year planning. That was not a very effective wayfor the organizations. They wanted to change it to continuous planning, which means planningthat happens throughout the year.We identiﬁed four or ﬁve very speciﬁc measurable goals that the program had, such as accuracyof your plan, business goals being achieved by the plan, time and cost to manage and govern theplan, and stakeholders’ satisfaction. Those are the areas that we are deﬁning as to how theTOGAF like framework will be applied to solve a speciﬁc problem like enterprise planning andgovernance.Thats something we will be bringing to our conference in Austin and that event will be held on aSunday. In the future, well be doing a lot more of those speciﬁc applications of a framework likea TOGAF to a unique set of problems that are very tangible and they very quickly resonate withthe executives, not in IT, but in the entire organization.Forde: Can I follow along with a little bit of a plug here, Dana.Gardner: Certainly.Forde: Jason is going to be talking as a senior architect on the applied side of TOGAF on thisSunday. For the Monday plenary, this is basically the rundown. We have David Baker, aPrincipal from PricewaterhouseCoopers, talking about business driven architecture for strategictransformations.Following that, Tim Barnes, the Chief Architect at Devon Energy out of Canada, covering whatthey are doing from an EA perspective with their organization.Then, were going to wrap up the morning with Mike Wolf, the Principal Architect for EAStrategy and Architecture at Microsoft, talking about IT Architecture to the EnterpriseArchitecture.This is a very powerful lineup of people addressing this business focus in EA and the applicationof it for strategic transformations, which I think are issues that many, many organizations arestruggling with.Gardner: Looking at, again, the question I started us off with, how do TOGAF and EA affect thebottom line? Weve heard about how it affects the implementation for business transformationprocesses. Weve talked about operational governance. We looked at how sourcing, businessprocess management and implementation, and ongoing reﬁnement are impacted. We also got intodata and how analytics and information sharing are affected. Then, as Jason just mentioned,planning and strategy as a core function across a variety of different types of business problems.
So, I don’t think we can in any way say that theres a minor impact on the bottom line from this.Last word to you, Jason.Uppal: This is a time now for the enterprise architects to really step up to the plate and beaccountable for real performance inﬂuence on the organization’s bottom line.If we can improve things like exploiting assets better today than what we have, improve ourplanning program, and have very measurable and unambiguous performance indicator that werecommitting to, this is a huge step forward for enterprise architects and moving away fromtechnology and frameworks to real-time problems that resonate with executives and align tobusiness and in IT.Gardner: Well, great. Youve been listening to a sponsored podcast discussion in conjunctionwith The Open Group Conference in Austin, Texas, the week of July 18, 2011.I would like to thank our guests. We have been joined by Chris Forde, Vice President ofEnterprise Architecture and Membership Capabilities for The Open Group. Thanks, Chris.Forde: Thanks, Dana.Gardner: And also Jason Uppal. He is the Chief Architect at QR Systems. Thank you, Jason.Uppal: Thank you, Dana.Gardner: This is Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions. Thanks for joining,and come back next time.Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes/iPod and Podcast.com. Sponsor: The Open GroupTranscript of a sponsored BrieﬁngsDirect Conference on advances in enterprise architecture andThe Open Groups Architectural Framework. Copyright Interarbor Solutions, LLC, 2005-2011.All rights reserved. Join The Open Group in Austin, Texas July 18-22 to learn more about enterprise architecture, cloud computing, and TOGAF9. To register, go to http://www.opengroup.org/austin2011/register.htmYou may also be interested in: • Exploring the Role and Impact of the Open Trusted Technology Forum to Ensure Secure IT Products in Global Supply Chains
• Open Group Cloud Panel Forecasts Cloud as Spurring Useful Transition Phase for Enterprise IT Architecture• Examining the Current State of the Enterprise Architecture Profession with The Open Groups Steve Nunn• Expert Panel: As Cyber Security Risks Grow, Architected Protection and Best Practices Must Keep Pace