Making Sense of Architecture Standards

4Enterprise Architecture Standards16

Yesterday I attended the Architecture track at the Microsoft MVP (Most Valuable Professional) Summit. The format was quite different than other forums. The architect forums was based on a collaborative approach where three is no agenda or themes and it is up to the participants to create it. It was very effective and thought I would share my thoughts with the rest of you.

So I facilitated two sessions on Enterprise Architecture. The first asking the question, what is EA? And the second, what are the important standards in the EA space?

The goal of the second session wasn’t necessarily trying to get at what are the standards but rather what are the more prevalent and most impactful.

After a bit of white-boarding with the group and dialog we quickly derived to a way to classify the standards that we have been talking about.

Enterprise Architecture Standards

The image above show the segments or classification of these standards. By asking basic questions such as How, What, When, Who and Why we can also simplify this a bit. Starting from the bottom up lets talk about what was discussed and I’ll add some of my thoughts as well.

Taxonomy and Ontology

Every system has an architecture. In fact, a system could have many architectures. In IEEE 1471, an architecture is a conception of a system. There may be many conceptions of a system.

IEEE 1471

What this provides to the enterprise architect, solutions architect or domain architect is a way to have a constant set of terms for describing what it is they are building. This should be at the core to your architecture activities. Downstream benefits include further reuse of architectures, design patterns, architecture modeling and traciablity of systems to business capabilities.

The beauty of all this is that this taxonomy is flexible. Meaning that System, Mission, Environment and Architecture, are all conceptual in nature. There are no requirements ("shalls") in the standard pertaining to these entities. The requirements in the standard apply to the items below which pertain to the concrete representation of an architecture.

For more information on IEEE 1471 go to their web site at: http://www.iso-architecture.org/ieee-1471/index.html

 

Information Model and Decision Support

Zachman Framework

The Zachman Framework was brought up many times during the conversation but in various forms. We ended up classifying Zachman as decision support. The reason for this was that Zachman and other derivatives of Zachman focus more on:

  • What are the right questions
  • How do I organize those questions
  • What do those answers mean

The Zachman Framework excels at these activities. However where things start to break down is how to orchestrate those questions. Meaning what is the process in which I get the information, consume it, process it and ultimately make it actionable.

The ideal goal here would be to use the Zachman Framework in conjunction with the Process Capabilities coupled with a defined Architecture Taxonomy.

For more information visit the Zachman Framework  web site at: http://www.zachmaninternational.com/2/Zachman_Framework.asp

 

Process Framework

As mentioned above when talking about decision support, there is a need for a process to wrap how we make our decisions. This gives Enterprise Architects the ability to have repeatability in their processes.

Below you will see the TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) "crop circle" which outlines the process framework.

TOGAF ADM 8.1

ADM provides a framework which can support man other standards and frameworks. It is technology agnostic and is more focused on how architecture processes should be orchestrated. This allows organizations to:

  • Preserve existing organizational structures (if desired)
  • Use homegrown processes and existing frameworks and standards

Having this higher level process framework is essential to architects. Thee are a series of benefits for the organization:

  • Constancy in how solutions are created
  • The right people are selected for the right job
  • Proper metrics can be obtained to gauge health of the EA process
  • Predictability of results which lends to being able to apply some level of risk management to decisions

Actors

Out of all the topics, this was discussed the most. There is a great deal of ambiguity in the industry around what are the required skill sets of an architect. There are some bodies that help with that task.

  • OpenGroup ITAC Program – This is for the practitioner. When you have many years of experience and you want to be accepted in the industry as a credible architect.
  • IASA – For the aspiring architects that is largely academically focused. This program provides a program for those that have little architecture experience and want to get into architecture.

Both have a role and are valid in their own ways. However, each one of these has a specific niche.

Manage

ITIL V3 MODEL

This topic is indirectly related but still very relevant. This aspect covers PMO based processes, service management and IT Governance aspects. In the service management area specifically we are seeing closer alignment with EA. The latest version of ITIL has a
lignment with EA practices.

See my previous blog post: http://blogs.msdn.com/mikewalker/archive/2007/07/06/itil-moving-towards-enterprise-architecture.aspx

 

 

Putting it all Together

Thankfully there have been other like minded individuals folks at OpenGroup and alike that have thought about this problem. Below are some overlays and descriptions of putting these pieces together.

TOGAF + Zachman

Zachman and TOGAF Heat Map

Read this article for more information:

http://www.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf8-doc/arch/chap39.html

 

TOGAF + IEEE 1471

TOGAF and IEEE1471

TOGAF adoption of IEEE 1471 happened in 2000 with TOGAF version 6.0. There is a great article that gives an impact assessment on this and the benefits of using 1471 with TOGAF.

http://www.enterprise-architecture.info/Images/Documents/IEEE-1471-togaf-impact.pdf

 

Other Important Standards & Frameworks

It’s important to not that there are a lot of standards out there. We haven’t scratched the surface on all the various specifications and standards for EA. Below you will find other standards that you may be interested in as well.

Enterprise Architecture ISO Standards

Other EA Frameworks

  • DODAF
  • TEAF
  • FEAF
  • CADM
  • MODAF

 

Tags: Enterprise Architecture

Advertisements

0 thoughts on “Making Sense of Architecture Standards”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s