This presentation covers the organizational layout, EA Services and EA Governance processes necessary to develop and govern a technology strategy effectively.

2. Enterprise Architecture Services Federated Operating Model
Solution
Architects
• Drive the alignment of solutions to Target State
Architecture
• Design solutions aligned to EA Guiding Principles
• Escalate to Head of Architecture
Head of
Architecture
(HOA)
• Leads execution of EA program within CFIT/SSIT
• Escalates to EALT based on governance criteria
Enterprise
Architects
• Proactively lead EA development within CF/SS Domain
• CFIT EA’s are focused on Business Solutions
• SSIT EA’s are focused on Technology Solutions
• Identify opportunities to leverage existing solutions
across the enterprise
CTO
• Lead EALT
• Lead Domain Teams / Workgroups
• Lead Community of Practice
• Consistency of execution of EA across SSIT/CFIT
Core EA
Team
How is Enterprise Architecture (EA) Organized?
Responsibilities
2
EA Leadership Team (EALT)
CSIS SSS/ALS EUSSSS/IIS EUGG Commercial R&D
Architecture Domain Lead
Chief
Enterprise
Architect Arc. Performance
SSIT/CFIT
CFIT
Shared Services IT Customer Facing IT
SSIT
Operations

3. What Services Do We Provide to our Customers?
3
ADL
AS
Architecture Domain Lead
Application StrategyCTO
HOA
EA
SA
Head of Architecture
Enterprise Architect
Solution Architect
CFIT/
SSIT
Support strategic, integrated
portfolio planning processes by
alignment with architectural
direction
HOA AS
Enterprise Planning
Evaluate new and existing
technologies for enterprise
adoption; support mobilization
readiness to facilitate target state
enablement and realization
EA ADL
Technology Assessment
& Remediation
Test a certain technology or
process element to demonstrate
its feasibility
EA ADLSA
Technology Prototyping
& Proofs of Concept
Assist in post-merger technology
and process integration
AS EA
M&A Technical
Advisory
Provide as-needed consulting
services to both business and IT
stakeholders
EA SA
SWAT/Consulting
Establish and maintain enterprise
application strategy and roadmap
HOA AS
Application
Rationalization
Help establish architectural
solution design in-line with
defined standards and patterns
EA SA
Project Architecture
Delivery
Translate the business vision into
an actionable architecture and
technology strategy and multi-
year roadmaps to guide
priorities, projects, budgets and
staffing
EAHOA ADL
Strategies &
Blueprinting

4. Process Activities Value to IT/Business
What Enterprise Processes Will EA Support/Govern?
4
Portfolio
Planning
• Support the Portfolio Planning process by steering
solutions toward leveraging enterprise technology
standards
• Improved adoption of strategic enterprise standards
• Identification of opportunities to share solutions across CFITs
Technology
Acquisition
• Identify opportunities to re-use existing technologies
• Define a decommissioning plan if new technologies are
being proposed for enterprise adoption
• Transparent understanding of current Enterprise Technology
standards via the Technology Catalogue
• Improved ROI for existing technologies
Technology
Lifecycle
Management
• Establish a proactive lifecycle plan for enterprise
technologies and information
• Collaborate with procurement in the contract extension
of major technologies / enterprise license agreements
• Reduce technology and data debt/cost
• Reduce number of technologies that provide similar capabilities
• Reduce replication of data and complexity of integration
• Define a decommissioning plan prior to contract expiration
Solution
Design
• Maximize the use of enterprise technology standards
as part of solution design
• Consistent use of design patterns
• Alignment to IT and Business Strategies
• Faster solution implementation when enterprise
standards are adopted
• Transparent understanding of value is being delivered
to the business

5. Enterprise Architecture Governance Operating Model
Business & IT IT
• Defines Target State
Architecture
• Defines Enterprise Standards
• Defines Technology Lifecycle
• Defines Reference
Architectures
• Discuss emerging
business demands for
new/emerging
technologies
• Discuss improvement to
Current State
• Reports on Technology
Scorecards
• Review Solution Designs
• Reports Solution Quality
• Request exceptions to
Enterprise Standards
• Approves Enterprise Standards
• Approves Exceptions to
Enterprise Standards
• Ad-Hoc Virtual Teams
• Agile Technology Decisions
• Cross Domain Strategic Decisions
• Enterprise IT Strategies
• Ratifies Enterprise Standards
• Influence Strategic Priorities
5

6. DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
EA Lead
Executive Sponsor
Future Strategies/Technology Decisions Roadmaps
ITLT Ratification Strategies SET Innovation Alignment EALT Lead (Domain Workgroup) CFIT Lead/EALT Ratified
Data Strategy Data Strategy (2) (C. Day effort)
Integration Strategy
Search
Development Platforms Discovery Development Platforms Recommendation
Big Data/Data Lakes Metadata Management
Learning Management
API Management
Content Management
Machine Learning
Digital Health
IoT—EnterpriseIoT—Digital Manufacturing (1)
Robotics Process Automation
ITLT ITSS Gov ITLT CFIT Gov ITLT F2F
6

7. Strategy Sprint Process (High-level View)
7
STRATEGY SPRINT PROCESS
+ STRATEGY PORTFOLIO TRACKING
EPMO Portfolio
Planning
Output
• ITLT approval
• Project initiation
document (PID) [high
level business case]
EALT Strategy
Governance
Output
• Strategy roadmap
• Strategy communication
(including EA
SharePoint)
EALT Strategy
Roadmap Review
Activities
• Identify required strategies
• EALT strategy roadmaps
(6 month review cycle)
Input
• Strategy lead appointed
• ITLT sponsor confirmed
• Work group members
identified
• Define target start/
• End time
• Sprint check list and
templates
STAGE 1
Initiate
STAGE 2
Analyze
STAGE 3
Validate
STAGE 4
Approve
Strategy Review Cycle (h)

8. Typical Strategy Timeline
8
FOUR ITERATION CYCLES
Architecture
Context
INITIATE
Architecture
Delivery
ANALYZE
Transition
Planning
VALIDATE
Architecture
Governance
APPROVE

9. Strategy Sprint Process (Stage View)
* Guideline duration, dependant on subject matter.
9
STAGE 1: INITIATE
Activities
• Define scope and design
principles (inc. top key three
questions)
• Gartner/CEB overview
• Hold Working group
session(s) and agree sprint
charter
• Present charter to:
–EALT (if required)
–ITLT sponsor
Stage Deliverables
• Sprint Charter including
timeline
• ITLT Sponsor Approval
Duration*
• 1–2 weeks
STAGE 2: ANALYZE
Activities
• Establish “AS IS” and “TO
BE” Business Capabilities
and Requirements
• Establish “AS IS” IT
Capabilities (including YCO)
• Establish Future State “TO
BE” IT Architecture options
(Pros and Cons including
associated Risks)
• Present architecture options
to:
–EALT
–ITLT sponsor
Stage Deliverables
• “AS IS” IT Architecture
• “TO BE“ IT Architecture
Options presentation
• EALT Approval
• ITLT Sponsor Review
Duration*
• 2–4 weeks
STAGE 3: VALIDATE
Activities
• Carry out Innovation CTO
Team validation AND
External Gartner/CEB
Validation
• Finalize Strategy
Recommendation
–Process
–People
–Technology
–Costs
–Vendors
Stage Deliverables
• Finalized Strategy
Recommendation
Presentation
• ITLT Sponsor Review
Duration*
• 2–3 weeks
STAGE 4: APPROVE
Activities
• Pre Read and Feedback
(EALT)
• EALT Approval
• Pre Read and Feedback
(ITLT)
• ITLT approval
Stage Deliverables
• Strategy Roadmap
Document
• Strategy overview video
• Sprint Lessons Learned
Duration*
• 2–3 weeks
INPUT
EALT Strategy
Roadmap Review
Cycle
OUTPUT
• EPMO Portfolio Planning Cycle
• EALT Strategy Governance Cycle

10. 10
Example/Templates:

11. 11
Example/Templates:

12. 12
Example/Templates:

13. 13
Understanding
TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP
Decommissioning
Costs
Implementation
Costs
Yearly Cost of Ownership

14. 14
Understanding
TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP
Decommissioning
Costs
Implementation
Costs
Small
Medium
Large
X-Large
XX-Large
Yearly Cost of Ownership
Customizations
Costs
Support
Costs (BAU)
Licenses /
Maintenance
Costs

15. 15
Understanding
TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP
Decommissioning
Costs
Implementation
Costs
Small
Medium
Large
X-Large
XX-Large
<100K
100K – 250K
250K – 500K
500K – 1M
> 1M
Yearly Cost of Ownership
Customizations
Costs
Support
Costs (BAU)
Licenses /
Maintenance
Costs

16. 16
Understanding
TOTAL COST OF
OWNERSHIP
Decommissioning
Costs
Implementation
Costs
Yearly Cost of Ownership
Customizations
Costs
Support
Costs (BAU)
Licenses /
Maintenance
Costs
4
3
2
1 L
S
XL
S
S
M
M
XL
S
L
M
S
L
S
M
S
L
M
XL
S

17. 17
Example/Templates:
 No change needed (Perfect
alignment between current state
and future state)
 Agreed future state with no
immediate change (An evolution
strategy meaning “as and when”
approach to change working
towards the defined future target
architecture)
 Agreed future state overview
and further investigate needed
(High level sprint breaks down in
to more detailed sprints)
 Agreed future state with
immediate change (An Fully
actionable strategy resulting in the
creation of projects and funding)
 Agreed future state with mixed
change (Partial actionable
strategy resulting in the creation of
projects and funding to address
certain key areas of the future
target architecture)
 Rejected future state
recommendations (Reinitiate
spring analyse phase)
Suggested Possible
Outcomes

18. EA — Technology Lifecycle Stages
Watch Prove Invest Tolerate Migrate Eliminate
Rejected
Prohibited
AZ are aware of the
technology and are
monitoring the
capability and/or
roadmap
AZ are performing an
evaluation such as Proof
of Concept, Proof of
Technology or Pilot
This technology is
strategic to AZ and is
preferred for deployment
This technology is not
strategic to AZ but is
allowed to be deployed
AZ has this technology
deployed but it is a target
for migration and should
not be used
AZ has this technology
deployed but it is a target
for migration and should
not be used
Retire
AZ has evaluated this
technology but decided
it to be inappropriate
and should not be used
AZ no longer has this
technology in the estate
and it should not be
used
TIL/CFIT/SSIT EALT
18

19. Integration Pattern / Use Case Technology Watching Proving Invest Tolerate Migrate Eliminate Rejected Prohibited
Messaging Oracle SOA
Publish / Subscribe Oracle SOA
Request / Response Oracle SOA
Business Process Orchestration Oracle SOA
Business Process Management Oracle SOA
Request / Response Oracle SOA
Transformation Oracle SOA
Routing & Abstraction Oracle SOA
ESB Oracle SOA
File Transfer GlobalScape
B2B GlobalScape
API Gateway / Security IBM DataPower
API Management IBM DataPower
ESB MuleSoft
API Gateway / Security MuleSoft
API Management MuleSoft
Micro Services MuleSoft
API Management APIGee Sense
API Gateway / Security APIGee Edge
Cloud SnapLogic
Hybrid Integration SnapLogic
Connector SnapLogic
Citizen Integration SnapLogic
Simple ETL SnapLogic
B2B Cyclone
EDI Cyclone
File Transfer Cyclone
File Transfer AZIA
Cloud ETL Talend
On-Premise ETL Talend
Hybrid Integration Talend
Big Data Talend
On Premise ETL Informatica
Cloud ETL Informatica
Big Data Informatica
Data Virtualisation Cisco Composite
Data Federation Cisco Composite
Messaging SAP PI
Request / Response SAP PI
Publish / Subscribe SAP PI
Transformation SAP PI
Routing & Abstraction SAP PI
ESB SAP PI
EDI SAP PI
Enterprise Scheduling Tivoli Workload Scheduler
Enterprise Scheduling BMC Control-M
ETL SAP BODS
Technology Standards Example
19

20. Invest
Tolerate
Migrate
Eliminate
Retired
Prove
Watch
Reject
Prohibit
Infrastructure Application SecurityCollaborationInformationIntegrationEnterprise
155 626968 2569
Technology Lifecycle Analysis — By Owning Domain Team
20
Total
125
(33%)
16
(4%)
2
(1%)
5
(1%)
90
(24%)
13
(3%)
55
(15%)
50
(13%)
0
(0%)
41
(26%)
8
(5%)
0
(0%)
3
(2%)
49
(32%)
6
(4%)
26
(17%)
23
(15%)
0
(0%)
25
(40%)
5
(8%)
1
(2%)
0
(0%)
1
(2%)
0
(0%)
17
(27%)
13
(21%)
0
(0%)
19
(28%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
29
(42%)
6
(9%)
5
(7%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
19
(28%)
3
(4%)
1
(1%)
2
(3%)
10
(15%)
1
(1%)
6
(9%)
13
(19%)
0
(0%)
21
(84%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
1
(4%)
0
(0%)
1
(4%)
1
(4%)
0
(0%)
19
(28%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
29
(42%)
6
(9%)
5
(7%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
379

21. 21
Example/Templates:

22. • Ad-Hoc Virtual Teams
• Agile Technology Decisions
• Cross Domain Strategic Decisions
• Enterprise IT Strategies
• Defines Target State
Architecture
• Defines Enterprise Standards
• Defines Technology Lifecycle
• Defines Reference
Architectures
Business & IT IT
• Review Solution Designs
• Reports Solution Quality
• Request exceptions to
Enterprise Standards
• Approves Enterprise Standards
• Approves Exceptions to
Enterprise Standards
Enterprise Architecture Governance Operating Model
22
• Discuss emerging
business demands for
new/emerging
technologies
• Discuss improvement to
Current State
• Reports on Technology
Scorecards
• Ratifies Enterprise Standards
• Influence Strategic Priorities

23. Enterprise Architecture Guiding Principles

24. Assessment Dashboard
24
System Name
Implementing
Project
IT Area
Assessment
Date
Principles
Score
Maintain-
ability
Score
Fit for
Purpose
Score
Standards
Score
Total
Quality
Score
Low Scores In:
System A Project 1 Ops 4/6/2017 4.56 3.90 4.33 5.00 90
System B Project 2 Comm 5/4/2017 4.56 4.33 3.67 5.00 87
System C Project 3 Ops 5/18/2017 4.75 5.00 4.00 3.50 85 Standards - UX Experience (2)
System E Project 5 RDI 4/27/2017 3.56 3.33 4.33 4.50 80
Maintainability - Software and Data
Integration (2),
Principles - Foster Reuse (2)
System G Project 7 Ops 5/18/2017 4.56 3.60 3.67 2.75 74
Maintainability - Design for Change (2),
Standards - Infrastructure - GIS (2)
System H Project 8 EUGG 4/28/2017 4.00 3.60 3.00 4.00 73
Fit For Purpose - Solution Options
Considered (2),
Maintainability - Appropriately
Documented (2),
Maintainability - Data Quality (1),
Principles - Design from Outside-In (2)
System I Project 9 CSIS 4/6/2017 3.00 3.40 3.33 4.00 68
Fit For Purpose - Solution Options
Considered (2),
Principles - Accessable anytime,
anywhere, any device (2),
Principles - Enterprise First (1),
Principles - Foster Reuse (1)

25. QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS?

26. Leo Barella
VP - Chief Enterprise
Architect
THANK YOU
Presentation Designed &
Developed by: