Blog

ABM Case Study Enterprise Architecture Stream

Posted by on 5:02 am in Case Studies, Enterprise Architecture | 2 comments

ABM Case Study Enterprise Architecture Stream

SEAS consulting team has completed  Situation Analysis (SA) with 51 clarified concerns related to ABM case study. The teams has identified multiple problems in the current ABM business which are related to people, process, information and technology areas. An Enterprise Architecture stream has been setup to take responsibility for  further in depth analysis from EA perspective and in this regard EA stream has selected TOGAF  9.1 as a framework to develop architectural artifacts. The issues faced by ABM currently are mostly related to the overall operating mechanism, structure of the organization and IT automation of the business. Following are the problems explained in details from EA perspective: ABM Operating Mechanism: ABM has some major issues related to business processes being followed by its departments. In many departments processes are executed on an ad-hoc basis, this is due to the fact that none of the processes have been documented and no availability of Standard Operating Procedures SOP for any department. For architects, this element is one of the major issues due to which ABM is not able to sustain its operation and is the main cause of disconnect between different business functions. Organization Structure: Even though ABM organization structure has the core departments to run the business but these departments are also performing support functions as well. Functions like Project Management, Demand Management, Innovation Management e.t.c ideally should be separate departments to provide support related inputs functions mentioned. Architects believe that the current organization structure needs revamp by introducing new business units to increase the overall efficiency ABM operation. IT Automation: Another area of high concern for architects is the use of technology to support business functions. After having a session with the board, it was highlighted that ABM is mostly using excel sheets to support their activities such as , sales forecasting ,production schedules, customer management and product cataloguing. On the other hand there is only one known IT system being used by Finance and that is Oracle Financials. From EA perspective, IT is core enabler for business’s smooth and sustainable operation. In the light of above issues , it is understood that the reason of not having crucial information available to the right stakeholder is due to the lack of business process automation and for the automation, business processes have to be documented and owned by the rightful owner. The approach which EA stream has defined , utilizes the TOGAF 9.1 Architecture Development Method ADM. There are multiple artifacts which are required to ensure a proper development of the architecture but for the problem on hand, EA stream has identified list of artifacts from ADM and will be using to develop the architecture. As per plan, the first most thing to deliver is the AS-IS architecture state of ABM. Due to the non-availability of the documented information related to ABM’s business structure, Enterprise Architects will have to develop a high level of AS-IS architecture state.  This will include artifacts such as Organization Structure, Value Chain, Business Functions Decomposition and Business Context Diagram.. The second deliverable through ADM, will be the TO-BE architecture state and will consist of detailed architectural artifacts. The list of TO-BE architecture artifacts will be identified once the AS-IS state is completed and the progress in this regards will be published in future...

read more

ABM Case Study Situational Analysis Update

Posted by on 1:46 pm in Case Studies, Change Management, Corporate & IT Governance, Enterprise Architecture, Innovation & Strategy | 0 comments

ABM Case Study Situational Analysis Update

The SEAS’ Consulting team participating in the ABM Health Check Engagement Simulation completed its Situation Analysis phase.  The team worked diligently across the three streams of Strategy & Innovation, Enterprise Architecture, and Change Management to examine, analyze, collate, and document its findings. The team used Kepner-Tregoe’s Situation Analysis (SA) method to complete the analysis of all issues and enumerated 53 major issues which translated into 73 clarified concerns.  The 73 concerns were further rationalized (eliminating redundancies and consolidating issues with single action to resolve) into 51 specific and prioritized concerns classified by priority, importance, & growth.  Each of the individual streams: Innovation & Strategy, Enterprise Architecture, and Change Management were pegged against these 51 concerns specifying which stream, or practice, leads the resolution of the concern and which streams, or practices, receive the analysis to complete its downstream work. As an example, one of the 51 specific concerns was: “Production Schedules/Forecasts are not used during sales cycle for new commitments.” This concern was prioritized as Seriousness (H), Urgency (H), Growth Trend (Increasing).  It was then assigned to  Business Architecture (EA) to lead its resolution.  The output of this effort will feed the Change Management team to work on the People aspect of resolving this concern such as Training & Communication.  Finally Technology Architecture (EA) will be the recipient of the output from Business Architecture & Change Management team to define the target Architecture for addressing this concern. In the coming few weeks the three streams will complete their analysis of the top concerns and develop the associated roadmaps.  Once that phase completes the consulting team will work on consolidating the deliverables into one body of work that rationalizes the analysis and proposes one roadmap as an output of the Health Check engagement. The consulting team will be posting their individual updates in the coming week to share with the society their findings and experience thus far with the case study. Stay tuned for progress as we continue our journey in solving ABM’s Business...

read more

5 Capability Model – Governance by Design

Posted by on 7:10 am in Corporate & IT Governance | 0 comments

5 Capability Model – Governance by Design

5 Capability Model Introduction to corporate governance and IT governance using a 5 capability model. Management capabilities Party management capabilities Offer management capabilities Financial management capabilities Transactional capabilities Expense transaction capabilities MIKE2.0 Investment & Planning September 2013 content award and inclusion under Creative Commons copyright Revenue transaction capabilities The five capability model provides the zero data loss scope for any organization or agency, the recovery time objectives for zero downtime and zero data loss.  The same five capabilities allows the financial scope in service management for full regression and Sarbanes Oxley.  Nearly all of the activities are universal across industries and geographies.   Who cares about this issue? The external stakeholders who are alert and using the audit reports and risk register as key indicators of the organizations operating practices.   There are some technical leaders who are happy to build a healthy risk register as it justifies the need for their teams. The executives and management would ideally want to have the rule without unnecessary risk,  if they are aware that basic business management systems were abandoned with the collaborative leadership models. Question for an executive sponsor You are an employer who must supply tools to allow the employees to perform the task they were hired to perform. “If the tools fail, is the employee at fault or the employer who supplied faulty tools?” Question for an employee If I am hired to perform a task and the tools are allowing me to break policies or avoid procedures.  “Am I expected to know how and when policies apply to me and my role if the applications were changed from doing this for me?” Yes, is there any reasonable expectation of success?  No, neither an employer nor an employee are setup for success. How do I address such a disconnect? Enable the rule Allow a certain degree of variance Expect an exception path Many of us are immediately sent a mental message that the term “governance by design” either hurts and constrains our stakeholders or it prevents innovation. Key driver in this approach is to enable the possibility. What if the possibility enables innovation by design? What if you also gain a way to change without slowing down your core business? What if you reduce complexity and increase agility and speed? Imagine if we got out of the weeds when we govern the enterprise? It’s about carving out the minimum viable systems and measuring at the leverage points. Segmentation Tomorrow, we will have policy based access and far fewer chances to introduce risk. Three operating models aligned to the customer market behaviors. Run your business Change your business Innovate to grow your business Ideally, using the same leverage points for a number of audit key controls or a way to monitor the organization for prevent and detect rather than respond and re-act. Governance by design implies system theory, using generic points with low disruption. An adverse impact and common behavior we see when looking through an bean counter view or in many cases the way IT stakeholders are able to report the issues. Many issues are actually a problem going undetected and making the organization less effective. Effort and Return High Effort?/Low Return? Do nothing Low Effort?/High Return? Each person changes at their own pace, people who are given the right answer first are far...

read more

Leveraging Enterprise Architecture in Enterprise Risk Management

Posted by on 6:16 am in Corporate & IT Governance, Enterprise Architecture | 0 comments

Leveraging Enterprise Architecture in Enterprise Risk Management

Enterprise risk management (ERM) is one area that I believe EAs could positively contribute to. Several years back, a manager in charge of ERM approached me enquiring how EA could benefit his department. He knew what EA was and was keen to see if he could benefit from it. His primary challenge was assessing impact of risk across the enterprise; his team was handicapped, as they did not have traceability capability. In this article, I explain how EA helped him achieve his objectives. Organizations deal with different types of risks that, if not attended to, could have adverse impact on organization performance and outcomes. Generally speaking, “risk” is the potential of undesirable outcome resulting from a given action or omission (foreseen or unforeseen). On a different note, “risk management” (RM) is the identification, assessment, and prioritization of risks followed by appropriate actions to minimize, monitor, and control the risk impact. The intention of this blog is not to explore risk management as such but rather explain how enterprise architecture (EA) could benefit risk management. Those of you seeking more details about risk management can explore other external sources. While I do not dispute that RM is not unique to EA, it is important we appreciate that EA has great potential to contribute to GRC (governance, risk and compliance) by feeding into the enterprise risks management (ERM) process. The problem with traditional RM efforts like program and project (risk management) that are usually independent, narrowly focused and functionally driven is that they work in silo and fail to integrate at enterprise level leading to fragmented view of risks each with its own classification, criteria, and measure. Ultimately, most critical risks with major business impact never make it at the enterprise level though the resulting consequences do. So what is the rationale behind leveraging EA in ERM? As we all know, EA involves blueprinting an enterprise by connecting the business, information, application, and technology layers. Usually, we achieve this iteratively through an architecture development method like TOGAF. Whenever we create (or update) and link each of these architectural layers, we get the opportunity to assess impact of change on subsequent layers. The presence of this unique traceability creates a window of opportunity for ERM. If we extend the concept further, it could help organizations identify and assess impact of risk on these architectural layers (I like to view this as enterprise assets). Why do I say so? One of the toughest challenge in ERM is modeling risk and its impact on enterprise assets. Techniques like fault tree and event tree analysis have been used to model risks before but unfortunately, they are ineffective when dealing with ERM. Likewise, newly introduced ERM frameworks like COSO have a limitation too in that they too do not provide vertical traceability between the architectural layers (business, information, application and technology). Moreover, although newly introduced GRC tools establish horizontal integration between governance, risks and compliance, these too fail to provide vertical traceability between these architectural layers. Instead, such frameworks independently focus on financial, IT and legal risks and controls. So how can we leverage EA in ERM space? EAs are aware that vertical integration between architectural layers helps to establish necessary traceability required for effective enterprise impact analysis. While considering both top-down and bottom-up traceability between architectural layers, whenever an...

read more

Change Management – Purpose and Perspectives

Posted by on 6:14 am in Change Management, Corporate & IT Governance, General | 0 comments

Change Management – Purpose and Perspectives

Change Management We have two distinct types of Change one for IT and one that is a more structured time intensive process for people and process changes.   There are times when these two processes are misunderstood and IT takes on the business change without taking the action.  The results are issues caused by an IT change.  Nuances or a quick fix in the Data Warehouse, looks like the solution to the problem, when in fact the process and people are fumbling while a report looks great.  Missing the change management for people has become a common problem for many companies. Business Change Management IT Change Management Business – Any change to people, process or technology. The people change management requires people, may include technology and may also include process, these changes are typically performed by specialized resources “Change Management” experts.  Managers of the people who need to change and change management experts are partnered for the change and work through the people parts of change in effective change programs. A business change that requires people to make adjustments to the way they perform their work, activities or process. May be prompted by a re-organization May be prompted by an acquisition May be prompted by transformation May be prompted by an audit and managed through strategy May be a change in strategy May be a change in technology An IT service management Change Release – IT change has been crafted for non-release or no data type changes Planned Maintenance Data migration – non-structure data migration 1:1 mapping Backend db performance tuning Change Management – People A scheduled release planned or in some cases not IT related and simply aligned to a release for managing the gate criteria for the people changes. Dependencies in a release Any changes to the five capability model requires “Full integration and regression testing” a reason most project teams mark “no” sox and no regression testing or no dependencies in a release A recovery time test (ideally item 2 and 3 are sequenced in a way to incorporate sarbanes-oxley testing). The changes which occur in any business function have downstream impacts when the change relates to the five capabilities.  A business process architecture allows greater visibility into the inputs and outputs for greater understanding and visibility. This is true in an integrated organization, where people are sharing the information for lower waste and greater efficiency.  At least, in an organizations where the information is integrated across business functions requires change management. The primary point for us to consider, when we think of a change and it involves people, process or technology we are talking about a concentrated communication strategy and internal sensing around changing peoples mental model. Re-educating or shifting perception and stretching a person’s comfort zone. One effective strategy in people changes would be to enable the people with the right answer as the default. allow an accessible variance Followed by an exception path Using the approach of default, allows the new information to present itself increasing confidence and prompting a user to take action in a variance or the exception path which brings attention to the exception. The biggest misconception is that people need free text in a new technology. Change isn’t something that everyone experiences the same way. In some cases, the person may not be able to change...

read more

Impact of Disruptive Forces on Enterprise Architecture

Posted by on 9:34 am in Enterprise Architecture | 0 comments

Impact of Disruptive Forces on Enterprise Architecture

Traditionally, the focus of Enterprise Architecture (EA) has always been a combination of both business and technology architectures. In the near future, this focus will gradually shift to business design or as many of us term it business transformation. This shift entails providing existing architectural as well as new advisory services to the enterprise. EAs will not only limit their advisory services to traditional enterprise architecture domains (business, information, application, technology) but rather will engage further in driving change along strategy, market, product / services and capabilities. Below are some of the key trends we are witnessing right now: Disruptive forces like social media and mobility have major impact on enterprises Unlike before, changes to business operating models is more frequent now The shelf-life of business architecture models and artifacts is shrinking fast Understanding capabilities is central to managing impact of disruptions Unlike before, enterprise architects will increasingly focus on business design A new architecture role focusing on business design is slowly emerging Disruptive forces like social, mobility, big data, cloud, gamification etc. typically have the following characteristics: they bring along innovation, they open up new markets, and finally expose new value networks. These combined characteristics of disruptive forces eventually displace earlier offerings and technology from the existing market place. Typically, we should view disruption as a force that rips through an existing market by creating a new market altogether. Apparently, most disruptive forces tend to be “digital” or “technical” in nature mainly because they accelerate disruption by providing new and faster access channels that empower consumers and improve market penetration. In the early days, we used to believe “differentiation” alone creates a competitive advantage for enterprises. While competitive advantage may have been good enough in those early days, it is no longer adequate for enterprise that wish to dominate a market place by creating uncontested markets and making competition irrelevant. Unfortunately, differentiation on its own does not cause “disruption”. In essence, you would need a combination of both differentiation and low cost to emerge as a dominating force. In fact, to be successful, you would need to sustain the state of dominance. If you explore most existing EA practices, you will notice the focus has been blueprinting enterprise at people, process and technology layers. Unfortunately, disruption does not only occur in this layer. Typically, disruption occurs at a much higher or contextual layer where we define business operating models or as most of us term it target operating model (TOM). Very few EAs have attempted to include in their scope business motivation (strategy) and business value (value chains and networks) layers.  The absence of these layers in their blueprint means few EAs contribute towards business design or transformation. The actual business design or transformation happens at the business operating model layer. At this layer, the emphasis is much broader: designing innovative products, offering quality services, attracting customers, gaining market share, eliminating competition, reducing operational cost, adopting right-sourcing, improving scalability, increasing profitability, guaranteeing revenues etc. In here, you leverage a top-down approach to better design an enterprise that achieves a balance between product innovation, customer intimacy, and operational excellence during its lifetime. Apparently, this requires frequent redesign to ensure sustainability and this means EAs may have an active role in this space. So how will “disruptive forces” affect EA?...

read more

Decision Support Enterprise Architecture

Posted by on 7:25 am in Corporate & IT Governance, Enterprise Architecture | 0 comments

Decision Support Enterprise Architecture

 Enterprise Architecture is a framework of decision making through its models/view which are the integral part of EA discipline. The EA models/views should be relevant to the management deicions making needs and thus they should be designed based on the suitable metamodels. These metamodels, in turn need to be properly and continuously maintained. While there exits several methods for the metamodel development and matinetanance, these typically focus on internal metamodel qualities and model engineering processes, rather than on the actual decision making needs and their impact on the metamodels used. These metamodels, in turn need to be properly and continuously maintained. While there exists several methods for the metamodel development and matinetanance, these typically focus on internal metamodel qualities and model engineering processes, rather than on the actual decision making needs and their impact on the metamodels used. From previous many years, Enterprise Architecture (EA) has grown into an established approach for management of information systems in enterprises. EA is a model-based in the sense that diagrammatic descriptions of the systems and their environment, constitute the core of the approach. The purpose of EA models/views is to increase the general understanding of an organization’s business along with its information system landscape, the objective is to make corporate decision making easy and responsive. The backbone of any EA model is its metamodel, the design and structure of this metamodel greatly affects the way organization prepare its decision reports. The metamodel has to be interoperable and traceable, to get the optimum value out of it. There are few popular frameworks which propose a metamodel of their own e.g Defence Framework(DoDAF) and MODAF, while some have focus on development and maintenance processes which can be applicable to many metamodels such as FEA and TOGAF. In any case, regardless of implicit or explicit frameworks, metamodels play an important role in overall EA efforts. For any EA model to gain success, the metamodel for it must support decision making for the business and IT of the organization. An overly done metamodel will complicate its maintenance and very simplistic metamodel will kill the purpose of EA. A middle approach is required when designing, so that it fits the purpose for the organization. To keep a metamodel align with business needs, the information prescribed by the metamodel must be relevant to management decision. Business expects a tangible value from the EA effort and  business , to some extent is interested in how there organization is operating holistically and in integrated form but what they are mostly interested in is, what decisions they should make to enhance the productivity of the operating structure. Some of the crucial areas where business has their eyes on when decision making is done is as follow: Overall cost reduction of their operation Mitigating future risks both internally and externally to the organization Elimination in complexity of its processes and functions Maximizing  reusability of its assets throughout the organization Reducing overall cost of ownership Smoothly implementation of change management activities Enabling governance over its operations Timely valid decision making A metamodel to be designed must factor in above business elements and accordingly should be designed to have a good enough level of details which should facilitate decision making. The principals of utilizing captured metamodel data should be based on some decision making theories....

read more

Building Strategic Process Architecture

Posted by on 5:54 am in Enterprise Architecture, Innovation & Strategy | 0 comments

Building Strategic Process Architecture

Now a days companies are developing Process Architecture (PA) under the overall umbrella of organization’s Enterprise Architecture initiative. PA is an important architectural element for any organization which has to be done with proper planning and followed by strong methodologies. But before doing that what do we actually mean by the PA, what is its definition and how does it actually helps organizations in their decision making, be it strategic or tactical. There are many definitions for PA and each of them different perspective addressed: 1. The architecture of the business processes of an enterprise is defined as the type of processes it contains and the relationships among them . [Barrow 2007] 2. Process architecture is the picture that says what process types there are in the organization and what there dynamic relationships are: a network of instance at work, all operating at the same time, some activating others and some interacting [Ould 2005] 3. Process architecture is a methodology for identifying and aligning and organization’s key business processes against business requirements and to determine how to organize and implement formal process management [performance Design lab 2011] 4. Process architecture is a schematic that shows the ways in which the business processes of an enterprise are grouped ad inter-lined [Frolov, et al.2009] 5. Process architecture is the structural design of the general process systems and applies fields such as computers (software, hardware, networks etc.) business processes (enterprise architecture, policy and procedures, logistics, project management and any other process system of varying degrees of complexity [Dawis, et al, 2001]   The above definitions though proposed by different thought leaders but each of them is targeting mix of business areas. Although none is wrong but it doesn’t show unique form which can be used as baseline definition for PA. For me PA , it has to have all the aspects of process design to make PA genuinely a value added architectural block for EA. So this is how I see it ” PA is an architecture building block consisting of (people, process, information and technology) PPIT in an integrative arrangement, defined through strategic and tactical relationships between  PPIT “ Having said that PA has its AS-IS and TO-BE state, both are to be developed from organizations strategic and tactical direction’s perspective. There has to be two main objectives of the PA development for organizations: a)      To satisfy customers demands b)      To achieve more efficient processing A sound and consistent strategic PA has following attributes which must be inline and should be defined in structural manner 1. Business Events: All the business events which are occurring for current state or which may occur in anticipated future, should be defined, classified and described 2. Inputs: All inputs which will trigger or facilitate the execution of a process, must be defined and categorized according to the strategic importance in a business domain 3. Outputs: All outputs which are delivered as a result of process execution should be defined and mapped to target audience, be it internal or external 4. Process Interactions: all interactions which occur between processes must be defined and categorized in terms of strategic or tactic process interdependencies 5. Roles: all roles human/system should be defined and described based on their work involvement and strategic actions in executing a process.   There are three strategic elements related to the process architecture implementation:...

read more

Innovation Management and Business Transformation

Posted by on 8:32 am in Innovation & Strategy | 0 comments

Innovation Management and Business Transformation

People often think that Innovation and Transformation are similar concepts when in reality they are opposing forces.  These forces need to be managed correctly in order for the organization to thrive and propel itself forward. SEAS presented at an Innovation Conference on this topic: managing the Ying-Yang of Innovation & Transformation.  You can access the presentation here....

read more

Dubai ‘smart city’: are we there yet?

Posted by on 9:34 am in Enterprise Architecture, Innovation & Strategy | 0 comments

Dubai ‘smart city’: are we there yet?

A “smart city” vision is born as a response to the challenges that arise from the steadily growing number of people living in urban clusters. While an exact definition has yet to be formed, a smart city provides high quality of life to its citizens with the following six drivers acting as forces of innovation: 1. Smart mobility 2. Smart environment 3. Smart people 4. Smart living 5. Smart governance The main goal is to create a competitive and attractive business environment by leveraging on the human capital of the city, while allowing for wider participation in various aspects of public life. This includes developing novel ways to implement transportation systems and establishing an increased focus on natural resource preservation. An Information and Communications Technology (ICT) infrastructure is the basis of the smart city foundation because it provides advanced services in Intelligent Transport System (ITS), environmental and energy monitoring, building management, health care, public safety and security, and remote working and e-commerce domains. In other words, this type of infrastructure can play a key role in intertwining all the actors of a smart city to support the provision of ubiquitous services. According to United Nations estimates, the number of urban residents will rise to 5 billion by 2030 and 80 percent of the world population will live in urban areas by 2050. “City” has gradually replaced “Country” as the main unit on the perspective of global competitiveness due to the growing contribution of national Gross Domestic Product. In recent years, this urbanization trend has also affected developing countries. For instance, in China, urban population has grown to more thank 600 million, equaling 50 percent of the population living in urban areas. That is, urbanization has become an irresistible element globally when it comes to development of a country. The concept of a city taking the lead, in contrast to the countryside, Dubai has its position set to be a city of “now” and enjoys wealth of praise for its advanced ICT infrastructure. Dubai is the most liked urban city for the Middle East as well as all of Asia, in terms of where people move to pursue better quality of life and career opportunities. E-government has already been a great success for the Dubai government, and taking it in consideration, the government has embarked bigger initiative of e-services to transform Dubai into a “smart city.” How “smart” is Dubai already? Despite the success of Dubai’s government initiatives, a smart city initiative has its own challenges and obstacles. One has to critically analyze what status Dubai is considered now and what should it be anticipating when it comes to moving toward becoming a smart city. To perform such an analysis, there needs to be a smart city evaluation before entering into building e-services. The goal, of course, should be to ease the life its citizens at the most optimal level. The assessment needs to be done from a four dimensional view, which will clearly indicate where does Dubai stands now. A. Smart Environment This dimension stands for the status of the innovative environment in a city, with the infrastructure of supporting communication and service delivery among government, businesses, and citizens. B. Smart Business This dimension stands for the status of information, and innovation momentum of the businesses, which are influential to...

read more