The differences between underlying and taken for granted assuptions in an orthodox and a complexity based view on Enterprise Architecture and how these differences impact our practice.

1. Thinking differently about
Enterprise Architecture
Dr. Mikkel H Brahm, Head of Architecture, Nordea Digital Banking
Slides available at
https://www.slideshare.net/mikkelbrahm/
thinking-differently-about-enterprise-architecture-2017

2. Agenda
• Orthodox thought style and taken-for-granted assumptions
• Complexity thought style and taken-for-granted assumptions
• Practical implications of adopting a different thought style
• Summary

3. Orthodox EA
What characterizes this thought style?

4. 1 Orthodox EA presumes autonomy (and rationality)
Individual is primary and apart from other individuals

5. 2 Orthodox EA presumes determinacy
Spontaneity and improvisation is absent or insignificant

6. 3 Orthodox EA presumes openness
Everything can (and should) be shared and modelled

7. 4 Orthodox EA presumes enterprise intentionality
Enterprise treated as Entity with own strategy and goals

8. 5 Orthodox EA presumes agreement
(Not aligned) Individual goals are illegitimate / selfish

9. Assumptions that characterise orthodox EA
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
• The individual is primary, makes meaning of experiences,
and makes rational decisions about which course of action to take
• Knowable set of stimuli-response; If we know what factors into a situation,
then we can predict what will happen in that situation
• Information is assumed to be shared openly / freely available,
so that everything can (and should) be modelled/documented
• The Enterprise is treated as an entity with intentionality,
and conflicting individual intentionality is made illegitimate
• People are assumed to agree on goals and means,
or at least architecture cannot begin until agreement is reached

10. Complexity
What characterizes this thought style?

11. people have function for each other
we are born into relationships to people upon whom we depend

12. 1 Interdependence enable and constrain our actions
Socially unacceptable behavior can damage relationships

13. Norms what it is normal to do aka customs
+ Values how we make value judgements
culture eats strategy for breakfast
Peter Drucker
Culture the way of life / living / organizing

14. 2 We often act habitually / acceptably to garner support.
Provocative actions can lead to renegotiation of norms.

15. Phronesis = wisdom / practical judgment
Knowing what it is right to do = being a virtuous person
Techne = technical knowledge / knowhow
Craftsmanship that can be taught

16. 3 Power dynamics enable and constrain what it is prudent
to say both for subordinates and for the power holders

18. 4 Power is never equally distributed. Any leverage can be
used to further one’s interests in any other area.

19. Linear causality
Culture forms Behaviour OR Behaviour forms Culture
Circular or Transformative causality
Culture forms Behaviour AND Behaviour forms Culture

20. 5 Collaborative innovation hinges on mutual trust
that others can contribute what we ourselves cannot

21. Radically different assumptions
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
1. Mutual interdependence
2. Self-disciplining and Spontaneity
3. Hidden Transcript and Public Transcript
4. Figuration of relationships with power-differentials
5. Web of Intentionality - Collaboration and Competition

22. Practical implications
What difference does it make how I think?

23. Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Outcome
Mean /
Objective
Mean /
Objective
Mean Mean MeanMean
Linear
Causality
=>
Predictable

24. Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Mean Mean
Mean
Mean
Outcome
Organisation / needs in t0 = organisation / needs in t1
i.e. we control when the organization does and does not change
t0 t1

25. Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Idealization of stable states
Splitting thought from action as a means to control
Analyze Design Execute
Unfreeze Change Freeze

26. Technology and Mechanisms
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
1. Interdependence
2. Self-disciplining
3. Hidden Transcript
4. Power Figuration
5. Collaborate/compete
1. Transcription
2. Turing machines
3. Knowable but complicated
4. Scripted action & prescription
5. No responsiveness

27. What difference does Complexity make?
Intentionality in a
Web of Intentionality
Someone’s
intention
Other people’s
intentions

28. What difference does Complexity make?
Mean Mean
Mean
Mean
Outcome
Organisation / needs in t0 ≠ organisation / needs in t1
i.e. we have to continuously validate, learn, replan, refactor and sometimes pivot
t0 t1
Good enough
to take 1 step
Step 2+ subject
to change

29. What difference does Complexity make?
Acceptance of emergence and lack of control
Leader strategizes and influences
Analyze Design Execute
Unfreeze Change Freeze
Organization is
not fozen
Organization
cannot be fozen
Cross-functional groups with trustful relationships
Synergy, Learning, Innovation, Production

30. Summary
Two different ways of thinking about change

31. Orthodox EA
(eg TOGAF/ADM)
Organization = System
Universal goal
Linear causality
Organizational knowledge
Unfreeze > Change > Freeze
Resistance to change
Analyze > Architect/Design > Realize
My emerging view
(Complexity)
Organizing = Enabling/constraining
Web of intentionality
Transformative causality
Knowledge withheld or shared
Influence Ongoing Changes
Domination and Resistance
Piecemeal Growth

32. ENTERPRISE
Intentional process (of doing business)
emerging from enabling/constraining figurations of relationships always in flux
ARCHITECTURE
Organisation of structuring structures
including, but not limited to, materiality and mechanisms

33. Stacey, Ralph D. and Mowles, Chris (2016).
Strategic management and Organisational
Dynamics: The Challenge of Complexity to Ways of
Thinking About Organisations. 7th ed. United
Kingdom: Pearson Education.
Stacey, Ralph D (2012).
Tools & Techniques
of Leadership and Management.
Routledge.
Jackall, Robert (2010).
Moral Mazes –
The World of Corporate Managers.
Oxford University Press.
Scott, John C (1990).
Domination and the Arts of Resistance -
Hidden transcripts.
Yale University Press.
Elias, Norbert (1978).
What is Sociology?
Columbia University Press.
Elias, Norbert (1991).
The Society of Individuals.
Basil Blackwell.
Latour, Bruno (2005).
Reassembling the Social – An introduction
to Actor-Network-Theory.
Oxford University Press.
Mead, George Herbert (1934).
Mind, Self, & Society.
The University of Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1977)
Outline of a Theory of Practice.
Cambridge University Press
Scott, John C (1998).
Seeing like a State – How Certain Schemes
to Improve the Human Condition Have
Failed.
Yale University Press.
Guenther, Milan (2013).
Intersection – How Enterprise Design bridges
the gap between Business, technology and
People. Elsevier.
Ries, Eric (2013).
The Lean Startup – How today’s Entrepreneurs use
Continuous Innovation to create radically successful
Businesses.
Crown Business.