Integrating Zachman and TOGAF-ADM
•Download as PPT, PDF•
34 likes•13,610 views
This presentation summarises earlier work (June 2007) on a restructure of IT-oriented frameworks and methods - Zachman and TOGAF 8 - for better alignment with whole-of-enterprise architecture. [Review copyright (c) Tetradian 2007; original Zachman Framework copyright Zachman Associates; original TOGAF copyright The Open Group]
![Integrating Zachman and TOGAF-ADM Tom Graves, Tetradian Consulting 26 June 2007 http://www.tetradian.com [email_address] 23/06/09 © Tetradian 2007](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/tet-zach-togaf-070626-090623015108-phpapp02/85/Integrating-Zachman-and-TOGAF-ADM-1-320.jpg)
![Zachman and TOGAF - overview ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],23/06/09 © Tetradian 2007]()
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Integrating Zachman and TOGAF-ADM
Similar to Integrating Zachman and TOGAF-ADM (20)
More from Tetradian Consulting
More from Tetradian Consulting (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Integrating Zachman and TOGAF-ADM
- 1. Integrating Zachman and TOGAF-ADM Tom Graves, Tetradian Consulting 26 June 2007 http://www.tetradian.com [email_address] 23/06/09 © Tetradian 2007
- 3. 1. The Zachman-framework grid 23/06/09 © Tetradian 2007 © John A Zachman Although the examples provided in each cell here are IT-oriented, the framework itself is not intended to be IT-specific
- 19. Use TOGAF-ADM cycle for governance 23/06/09 © Tetradian 2007 Statement of Architecture Work (for iteration) Stakeholder review for ‘current state’ Stakeholder review for ‘future state’ Gap-analysis / requirements review Solution design review Project plan review Project architecture compliance review Benefits realisation (‘lessons learned’ etc) Architecture Charter Governance-artefacts define methodology’s phase-boundaries
- 26. Phases B-D: Develop the architecture 23/06/09 © Tetradian 2007 Scan down columns to identify primitives Scan across rows to identify composites … review links to primitives above For each item in main emphasis… … look below for implied primitives / composites
- 37. More detail on amended Zachman Rows, Columns and Segments 23/06/09 © Tetradian 2007
Editor's Notes
- Zachman-style architecture is primarily concerned with the first four rows: contextual, conceptual, logical and physical. This makes practical sense, because below this level we’re not so much dealing with architecture as the everyday operations of the organisation. But to make it work in DoCS’ context, we’ve added an extra row above, to carry core decisions such as the Government Priority, the DoCS Values and key strategies to which everything should ultimately connect. It’s also a placeholder for key cross-functional themes or viewpoints – security, OH&S, quality, environment, privacy, corporate social responsibility and so on – to which, again, everything the organisation is and does will need to support, and against which everything will need to be tested.
- We’ve left the core questions of the framework untouched, but expanded their meanings – in other words, added a kind of extra dimension to the columns. ‘ What’ is not just about data, but also about things, about people, about values. ‘ How’, as a function, a ‘means’, is as likely to be done by a person as by IT. ‘ Where’ could be a physical location, a virtual address such as for an email or a website, or a relationship between people. ‘ Who’ in the original framework was supposedly always a person; but it’s better to describe it as an ‘actor’ and its capability – maybe IT as much as a person. ‘ When’ is an event happening in any kind of timescale – maybe years, in DoCS. And ‘Why’ is not about ‘ends and means’ – as in the original – but ‘ends and measures ’: how we identify and verify conformance to requirements, decisions, business-rules and the like.