Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Unpacking TOGAF’s ‘Phase B’ Business Transformation, Business Architecture and Business Buy-In Tom Graves :  Tetradian Con...
<ul><li>The objective </li></ul><ul><ul><li>getting buy-in from the business with TOGAF </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The problem...
The objective gaining business buy-in with TOGAF
Bredemeyer on enterprise-architecture <ul><li>“ Increasing the scope of Enterprise Architecture to encompass more discipli...
Business need for enterprise-architecture <ul><li>Business now needs a new level of architecture maturity for business-tra...
The problem TOGAF feels too IT-focussed for most business-folk
TOGAF ADM in theory... <ul><li>Four architectures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>business architecture (Phase B) </li></ul></ul><ul...
...TOGAF ADM in practice? ...and we get so tech-heavy that business don’t love us  no more... If we aren’t careful, Ol’ Pa...
IT-centric architecture: too parochial? <ul><li>Like the old  New Yorker  cover, </li></ul>...and everything else of decre...
FEAF – the hidden dimensions <ul><li>FEAF PRM  (Performance Reference Model) </li></ul>“ Technology”  (Information Technol...
TOGAF and the hidden dimensions <ul><li>TOGAF’s ‘Business Architecture’ barely touches those hidden dimensions </li></ul><...
Why we need to unpack Phase B <ul><li>The ADM’s over-emphasis on technology becomes unacceptable at this stage </li></ul><...
Beyond an IT-centric architecture <ul><li>Instead of enterprise- IT - architecture, </li></ul>...and must be willing to ex...
Finding what works Extend the Architecture Design Method (creating a broader view of business-architecture)
Extending the business-architecture <ul><li>Some examples of ideas and tools proven to work well </li></ul><ul><li>Mapping...
Finding what works A focus on function (Functional Business Model and the like)
FEAF-style reference models <ul><li>Functional Business Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>what is done, independent of organisat...
Functional Business Model <ul><li>Model is hierarchy of four levels of business </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Function, Process, A...
Functional Business Model Shows level-1 ‘Function’, level-2 ‘Process’, level-3 ‘Activity’ (level-4 ‘Tasks’ listed in text ...
Functional Cost Model <ul><li>Overlay on Functional Business Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>full cost-breakdown to level-3 (A...
Business Systems Model <ul><li>Identifies ‘clusters’ on Functional Business Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘clustered’ activi...
Business Systems Model Same colour-coding is used in detail-models, Information Systems Model Layout and content is identi...
Business System detail Icons indicate process-types: Manual processes Machine processes IT-based processes Mixed processes
Information Systems Model <ul><li>Identifies ‘chunks’ of IT functions required to support each Business System </li></ul><...
Information Systems Model Similar overall layout to Functional Business Model Same colour-coding as Business Systems Model...
Finding what works Purpose-driven architecture (vision, role, mission, goal, and an emphasis on effectiveness)
Business-driven architecture <ul><li>The anchor for a business-architecture, and for any quality-system, is business  visi...
Purpose - vision, role, mission, goal <ul><li>Vision </li></ul><ul><ul><li>never ‘achieved’, always larger than the organi...
The dimensions of SCORE <ul><li>S trengths / services / support </li></ul><ul><ul><li>existing capabilities and resources,...
Methodology - Using SCORE <ul><li>Select an issue </li></ul><ul><li>Identify, record, compare any measurable items </li></...
An emphasis on effectiveness <ul><li>Is it Efficient? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>maximises use of resources, minimises wastage ...
Finding what works Making architecture tangible (four dimensions and a tetradian)
Making architecture tangible <ul><li>Four dimensions to the structure of the enterprise: </li></ul><ul><li>Business-direct...
Map dimensions in tetrahedral form With a simple cardboard ‘tetradian’, the dimensions are  tangible ... … rotating betwee...
Each view is a subset of the whole <ul><li>Typically, each area sees up to three dimensions at one time: </li></ul><ul><li...
Extending the architecture Extending the ADM concept beyond IT
‘ Flatten out’ tetradian format to 5Ps <ul><li>Business dimension </li></ul><ul><ul><li>map as  Purpose ,  D irection </li...
Full 5Ps framework  (SEMPER-5) <ul><li>Place requirements at the centre </li></ul><ul><ul><li>as per TOGAF ADM </li></ul><...
A documented methodology <ul><li>A complete high-level methodology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>for each dimension... </li></ul><...
Summary <ul><li>Existing frameworks and tools  such as TOGAF are excellent for an IT-centric ‘enterprise-architecture’ </l...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Unpacking TOGAF's 'Phase B': Business Transformation, Business Architecture and Business Buy-In

15,227 views

Published on

The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) is a structured method for developing enterprise architectures. As standard, its 'Phase B', 'Business Architecture', is an IT-centric way of viewing the business: we need to 'unpack' it to move to a more holistic view of the enterprise in which IT takes a more realistic role.
[Presentation at TOGAF Conference, Paris, April 2007. Describes TOGAF 8.1, but most details apply as much to TOGAF 9. Copyright (c) Tetradian Consulting 2007]

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Unpacking TOGAF's 'Phase B': Business Transformation, Business Architecture and Business Buy-In

  1. 1. Unpacking TOGAF’s ‘Phase B’ Business Transformation, Business Architecture and Business Buy-In Tom Graves : Tetradian Consulting Europe: Colchester, England / Australia: Castlemaine, Victoria http://www.tetradian.com TOGAF Paris, April 2007 © 2007 Tetradian Consulting
  2. 2. <ul><li>The objective </li></ul><ul><ul><li>getting buy-in from the business with TOGAF </li></ul></ul><ul><li>The problem </li></ul><ul><ul><li>TOGAF feels too IT-focussed for most business-folk </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>it doesn’t connect enough with their world </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Finding what works </li></ul><ul><ul><li>re-focus on TOGAF’s ‘Phase B’ – ‘B for business’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Functional Business Model and other extensions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Extending the architecture </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reserve TOGAF for IT-centric parts of architecture </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>rethink the architecture for whole-of-enterprise </li></ul></ul>Unpacking ‘Phase B’
  3. 3. The objective gaining business buy-in with TOGAF
  4. 4. Bredemeyer on enterprise-architecture <ul><li>“ Increasing the scope of Enterprise Architecture to encompass more disciplines increases the benefits to be gained:”* </li></ul><ul><li>EA = Technical Architecture </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reduce IT complexity and costs [initial TOGAF] </li></ul></ul><ul><li>EA = Enterprise-Wide IT Architecture (EWITA) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>support IT collaboration among different parts of the enterprise [TOGAF Phase C and D] </li></ul></ul><ul><li>EA = EWITA + Business Architecture (BA) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>increase enterprise agility and alignment with business strategy [TOGAF Enterprise] </li></ul></ul>* Bredemeyer et al., “Enterprise Architecture as Business Capabilities Architecture”, http://www.bredemeyer.com, slide 10
  5. 5. Business need for enterprise-architecture <ul><li>Business now needs a new level of architecture maturity for business-transformation: </li></ul><ul><li>EA = integration across entire enterprise </li></ul><ul><ul><li>increase adaptability, resilience, management of opportunity / risk </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>increase synergies between processes and partners </li></ul></ul>...but here TOGAF starts to show its limitations – its great strength in IT-architecture can become a hindrance to business integration
  6. 6. The problem TOGAF feels too IT-focussed for most business-folk
  7. 7. TOGAF ADM in theory... <ul><li>Four architectures </li></ul><ul><ul><li>business architecture (Phase B) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>data architecture (Phase C1) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>application architecture (Phase C2) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>technology architecture (Phase D) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Architecture Design Method </li></ul><ul><ul><li>iterative, recursive </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>requirements at the centre </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>strategy, governance, migration and change-management </li></ul></ul><ul><li>‘ A well-balanced diet’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>keeps the business happy </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. ...TOGAF ADM in practice? ...and we get so tech-heavy that business don’t love us no more... If we aren’t careful, Ol’ Papa TOGAF gets us back into bad IT habits - like coffee, soda, nachos and pizzas...
  9. 9. IT-centric architecture: too parochial? <ul><li>Like the old New Yorker cover, </li></ul>...and everything else of decreasing importance the further away it is from that centre... ...which is not what business wants or needs from us an IT-centric ‘enterprise-architecture’ tends to see its world as flat, with low-level technology at the centre of it all...
  10. 10. FEAF – the hidden dimensions <ul><li>FEAF PRM (Performance Reference Model) </li></ul>“ Technology” (Information Technology only, incorporating data and applications) “ Other Fixed Assets” (machines, machine-processes, vehicles etc) “ Human Capital” (people, manual processes etc) Business-architecture layers
  11. 11. TOGAF and the hidden dimensions <ul><li>TOGAF’s ‘Business Architecture’ barely touches those hidden dimensions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>no acknowledgement of people as people, no recognition of physical ‘things’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>also no awareness of non-IT-based knowledge </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Why we need to unpack Phase B <ul><li>The ADM’s over-emphasis on technology becomes unacceptable at this stage </li></ul><ul><ul><li>almost three times as much emphasis as on applications and data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>more than six times as much as the rest of the business together </li></ul></ul>
  13. 13. Beyond an IT-centric architecture <ul><li>Instead of enterprise- IT - architecture, </li></ul>...and must be willing to explore and map any aspect of the broader enterprise, to create a greater understanding of that whole. an integrated, business-oriented enterprise -architecture needs to see its ‘world’ as a whole, like a globe, with no real centre as such...
  14. 14. Finding what works Extend the Architecture Design Method (creating a broader view of business-architecture)
  15. 15. Extending the business-architecture <ul><li>Some examples of ideas and tools proven to work well </li></ul><ul><li>Mapping business-functions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>adapted from extensions of FEAF </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Functional Business Model, Costs Model, Business Systems Model, Information Model </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mapping motivation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>adapted from OMG Business Motivation Model </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>vision, role, mission, goal – and SCORE </li></ul></ul><ul><li>An emphasis on effectiveness </li></ul><ul><ul><li>efficient, reliable, elegant, appropriate, integrated </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Making architecture tangible </li></ul><ul><ul><li>a ‘home-brew’ tactic to engage business </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Finding what works A focus on function (Functional Business Model and the like)
  17. 17. FEAF-style reference models <ul><li>Functional Business Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>what is done, independent of organisation structure </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Business Systems Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ clustering’ of activities and information </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Information Systems Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ chunking’ of applications and repositories </li></ul></ul><ul><li>other technical-layer models </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Information Model, Technical Model, Services Model, etcetera </li></ul></ul>...with an emphasis on business-function
  18. 18. Functional Business Model <ul><li>Model is hierarchy of four levels of business </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Function, Process, Activity, Task </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>diagram shows Function, Process, Activity only </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Map each project, application onto Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>visually highlighted overlaps between projects </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>data overlaps indicate possible ‘multiple sources of truth’ and other data-quality issues </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>gaps indicate possible gaps in IS support </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>also may indicate potential new projects </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>example : support for quality-system corrective-action </li></ul></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Functional Business Model Shows level-1 ‘Function’, level-2 ‘Process’, level-3 ‘Activity’ (level-4 ‘Tasks’ listed in text form only)
  20. 20. Functional Cost Model <ul><li>Overlay on Functional Business Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>full cost-breakdown to level-3 (Activity) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>aggregate costs for each Function, Process </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Map costs to Activity, project, application </li></ul><ul><ul><li>enables ‘what-if?’ analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>“ what cost reductions could we achieve if…?” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>enables more precise targeting of projects </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>high-cost project targeted on low-value Activity? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>combined high-cost projects overlapping Activity? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>no applications supporting high-value Activity? </li></ul></ul></ul>
  21. 21. Business Systems Model <ul><li>Identifies ‘clusters’ on Functional Business Model </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘clustered’ activities perform similar functions or share a lot of information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>each ‘cluster’ is called a business system </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Groups together activities that are likely to be supported by the same information systems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>leads to purchase or development of computer systems that do not overlap in functionality </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Overview model: colour-coded Function Model </li></ul><ul><li>Detailed model for each Business System </li></ul><ul><ul><li>model includes text descriptions of business systems </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. Business Systems Model Same colour-coding is used in detail-models, Information Systems Model Layout and content is identical to Functional Business Model Colour-codes for business-system ‘clusters’
  23. 23. Business System detail Icons indicate process-types: Manual processes Machine processes IT-based processes Mixed processes
  24. 24. Information Systems Model <ul><li>Identifies ‘chunks’ of IT functions required to support each Business System </li></ul><ul><ul><li>each 'chunk' is an information system </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Information systems do not imply what IT application will be used </li></ul><ul><ul><li>describe broadly what we want IT apps to do </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Define information systems for the whole without reference to existing IT applications, to ensure: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>apps perform functions that make sense to do together </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>apps do not overlap in functionality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>apps cover all the functionality we require </li></ul></ul>
  25. 25. Information Systems Model Similar overall layout to Functional Business Model Same colour-coding as Business Systems Model (unrepresented Business Systems assumed to need no Information System support)
  26. 26. Finding what works Purpose-driven architecture (vision, role, mission, goal, and an emphasis on effectiveness)
  27. 27. Business-driven architecture <ul><li>The anchor for a business-architecture, and for any quality-system, is business vision and business purpose </li></ul><ul><li>Clarity on business purpose </li></ul><ul><ul><li>importance of an emotive ‘vision’ to support motivation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>provides point of contact with customers, partners, suppliers, other stakeholders </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Need for audit-trail of purpose for all activities </li></ul><ul><ul><li>suggested structure of vision / role / mission / goal </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Purpose is dynamic </li></ul><ul><ul><li>systematic foresight tools to track strategic ‘weak signals’ </li></ul></ul>More information: http://tetradian.com/vrmg
  28. 28. Purpose - vision, role, mission, goal <ul><li>Vision </li></ul><ul><ul><li>never ‘achieved’, always larger than the organisation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Role </li></ul><ul><ul><li>what the organisation does and does not do towards the Vision </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Mission </li></ul><ul><ul><li>condition or capability to be created and maintained </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Goal </li></ul><ul><ul><li>time-limited, identifiable condition </li></ul></ul>Use SWOT or SCORE checklist to assess and validate strategy
  29. 29. The dimensions of SCORE <ul><li>S trengths / services / support </li></ul><ul><ul><li>existing capabilities and resources, potential for synergies </li></ul></ul><ul><li>C hallenges / capabilities needed </li></ul><ul><ul><li>‘ weaknesses’ indicate needed capabilities and resources </li></ul></ul><ul><li>O ptions / opportunities and risks </li></ul><ul><ul><li>opportunity is also risk, risk is also opportunity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>R esponses / returns / rewards </li></ul><ul><ul><li>probable or emergent consequences of action or inaction </li></ul></ul><ul><li>E ffectiveness </li></ul><ul><ul><li>efficient, reliable, elegant, appropriate, integrated </li></ul></ul><ul><li>all linked together as a unified whole </li></ul>
  30. 30. Methodology - Using SCORE <ul><li>Select an issue </li></ul><ul><li>Identify, record, compare any measurable items </li></ul><ul><ul><li>new capabilities, etc </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>compare against previous SCORE assessments </li></ul></ul>More information: http://tetradian.com/score efficient reliable elegant appropriate integrated <ul><li>Assess impact of each item on effectiveness </li></ul>strength challenge option response effectiveness <ul><li>Start checklist anywhere </li></ul><ul><ul><li>often start with Strengths, or Options, but not required </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Work through the list </li></ul><ul><ul><li>repeat/iterate in any order </li></ul></ul>
  31. 31. An emphasis on effectiveness <ul><li>Is it Efficient? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>maximises use of resources, minimises wastage of resources </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Is it Reliable? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>predictable, consistent, self-correcting, supports ‘single source of truth’ </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Is it Elegant? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>clarity, simplicity, consistency, self-adjusting for human factors </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Is it Appropriate? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>supports and maximises support for business purpose </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Is it Integrated? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>creates, supports and maximises synergy across all systems </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Aim is to ensure systems fit in with everything else </li></ul>More information: http://tetradian.com/score
  32. 32. Finding what works Making architecture tangible (four dimensions and a tetradian)
  33. 33. Making architecture tangible <ul><li>Four dimensions to the structure of the enterprise: </li></ul><ul><li>Business-direction dimension (purpose) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Business drivers/goals, strategy/tactics, performance, etc </li></ul></ul><ul><li>People dimension (relationships) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>skill-sets, teamwork, social networks, rostering, etc </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Knowledge dimension (conversations) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>information-technology, tacit knowledge, business meaning </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Physical dimension (transactions) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>machinery, warehousing/stock, logistics, lead-times, etc </li></ul></ul><ul><li>and the integration of these into a coherent whole </li></ul>
  34. 34. Map dimensions in tetrahedral form With a simple cardboard ‘tetradian’, the dimensions are tangible ... … rotating between different views… … for a fifth dimension, a sense of the whole… ...IT Architecture and Business Architecture, together, and more... … the architecture seen and felt from every direction. More information: http://tetradian.com/name
  35. 35. Each view is a subset of the whole <ul><li>Typically, each area sees up to three dimensions at one time: </li></ul><ul><li>an Operations area sees only People, Machines, IT/Knowledge (as on right) </li></ul><ul><li>an IT area sees only IT/Knowledge, Machines and Business </li></ul><ul><li>an HR area sees only People, Business, perhaps IT/Knowledge </li></ul>The business system is comprised of all four dimensions, always; the architecture must model this whole, as a whole.
  36. 36. Extending the architecture Extending the ADM concept beyond IT
  37. 37. ‘ Flatten out’ tetradian format to 5Ps <ul><li>Business dimension </li></ul><ul><ul><li>map as Purpose , D irection </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Relational dimension </li></ul><ul><ul><li>map as P eople </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Knowledge dimension </li></ul><ul><ul><li>map as Preparation , K nowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Physical dimension </li></ul><ul><ul><li>map as Process , T asks </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Integration between dimensions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>map as Performance , M etrics </li></ul></ul>Underscored letter in dimension-name is key-code in SEMPER-5 model – see next slide
  38. 38. Full 5Ps framework (SEMPER-5) <ul><li>Place requirements at the centre </li></ul><ul><ul><li>as per TOGAF ADM </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Identify architecture artefacts </li></ul><ul><ul><li>distinct for each dimension </li></ul></ul><ul><li>View each dimension from effectiveness perspectives </li></ul><ul><ul><li>efficient, reliable, elegant, appropriate, integrated </li></ul></ul>
  39. 39. A documented methodology <ul><li>A complete high-level methodology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>for each dimension... </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>purpose, people, preparation, process, performance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>for each view, from each effectiveness-perspective... </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>efficient, reliable, elegant, appropriate, integrated </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>describe principles, practice and broader applications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>procedure: purpose, people, preparation, process, performance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Use as an adjunct to ADM’s Phase A and B </li></ul><ul><li>Documented in book form </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Real Enterprise-Architecture: beyond IT to the whole enterprise” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>free download from the Tetradian website </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>http://tetradian.com/download/real-ea_v1.pdf </li></ul></ul></ul>
  40. 40. Summary <ul><li>Existing frameworks and tools such as TOGAF are excellent for an IT-centric ‘enterprise-architecture’ </li></ul><ul><li>Those frameworks and tools are not well-suited at present for use beyond that scope </li></ul><ul><li>An integrated approach to enterprise-architecture is essential for further synergies across organisations </li></ul><ul><li>The ‘ four dimensions ’ model provides a simple starter-framework for an integrated architecture </li></ul><ul><li>The 5Ps methodology (SEMPER-5) provides detailed ideas on how to apply this in architecture practice </li></ul><ul><li>Many thanks! </li></ul>

×