Preliminary

1: Key Considerations

1.1: Enterprise

Key Element	Description
Enterprise Scope	The scope defines the boundaries and extent of the enterprise covered by the EA, influencing which stakeholders benefit from the architecture capability.
Federated Structure	A federated enterprise may consist of multiple organizations with distinct governance and management structures, complicating the integration of architecture capabilities.
Stakeholder Engagement	It is essential to identify and include all relevant stakeholders in defining and establishing the Architecture Capability to ensure broad buy-in and support.
Role of the Sponsor	Appointing a sponsor is crucial for securing necessary resources and maintaining support from business management throughout the architecture development process.
Resource Allocation	The sponsor must ensure that adequate resources are allocated to support the architecture activities, including funding, personnel, and tools.
Clear Support from Business Management	The involvement and endorsement of business management are vital for the success of the Architecture Capability and for driving alignment with strategic objectives.

Defining the scope of the enterprise is a foundational aspect of Enterprise Architecture. It impacts stakeholder engagement, resource allocation, and the overall success of architecture initiatives. Clear support and active involvement from a designated sponsor and business management are critical to navigating the complexities of a federated enterprise structure.

1.2: Organizational Context

Key Element	Description
Commercial Models	Understanding existing commercial models for EA and budgetary plans is crucial. If no plans exist, the Preliminary Phase should include developing a budget for EA activities.
Stakeholder Analysis	Identify stakeholders involved in architecture, noting their key issues, concerns, and the value they derive from the architecture capability.
Organizational Intent and Culture	Analyze the organization’s intentions and culture through business directives, strategies, principles, goals, and drivers to align the architecture framework with the organization's vision.
Current Change Execution Processes	Review existing processes that facilitate change and operations within the enterprise, focusing on their structure, rigor, and formality.
Architecture Description Methods	Assess current methods for architecture description to inform how the new framework will align or differ from existing practices.
Project Management Frameworks	Evaluate existing project management frameworks and methods to ensure compatibility with the EA framework and processes.
Systems Management Frameworks	Investigate current systems management methods to identify best practices that should be integrated into the architecture framework.
Project Portfolio Management	Review the processes and methods for managing project portfolios to ensure the architecture framework supports strategic alignment and resource allocation.
Application Portfolio Management	Understand how applications are currently managed to inform the EA framework's integration with existing application strategies.
Technology Portfolio Management	Evaluate the management of technology portfolios to align EA with existing technological investments and plans.
Information Portfolio Management	Examine how information assets are managed to ensure the architecture framework addresses information governance and management.
Systems Design and Development	Review existing frameworks and methods for systems design and development to facilitate the integration of new architecture processes.
Baseline Architecture Landscape	Assess the current state of the enterprise as represented in documentation, identifying gaps and opportunities for the new architecture framework.
Skills and Capabilities	Identify the skills and capabilities of the enterprise and specific organizations that will implement the architecture framework, ensuring adequate training and support are provided.

A comprehensive review of the organizational context is essential for tailoring the Enterprise Architecture framework effectively. Key areas of focus include understanding existing commercial models, stakeholder concerns, organizational culture, current processes, and the capabilities of the enterprise. This assessment guides decisions regarding the level of formality, sophistication, and focus required for the architecture framework, ensuring it aligns with the organization's strategic objectives and operational realities.

1.3: Requirements for Architectuere Work

Key Element	Description
Business Requirements	Clearly defined business needs and objectives that the architecture must address, ensuring alignment with the overall organizational goals and strategies.
Cultural Aspirations	Consideration of the organization's cultural values and aspirations, which may influence the architecture design and implementation process, promoting acceptance and adoption.
Organizational Intents	Understanding the organization's intentions regarding growth, efficiency, innovation, and how these will guide the architecture's development and deployment.
Strategic Intent	A clear articulation of the strategic direction of the organization, including long-term goals and objectives that the architecture should support and enable.
Forecast Financial Requirements	Projections of the financial resources needed for architecture initiatives, including budget estimates for implementation, maintenance, and ongoing support.

The requirements for architecture work must stem from clear business imperatives that define the desired outcomes and resource needs. This involves a detailed articulation of business requirements, cultural aspirations, organizational intents, strategic objectives, and financial forecasts. By establishing these elements, the architecture sponsor can identify key stakeholders and decision-makers, facilitating a collaborative approach to defining and establishing the Architecture Capability within the organization.

1.4: Principles

Key Element	Description
Definition	Architecture Principles are foundational guidelines that shape and constrain any architecture work undertaken within the enterprise, ensuring alignment with business goals and strategies.
Relationship with Business Principles	Architecture Principles are informed by business principles, goals, and strategic drivers. They may restate or cross-reference these business elements to ensure coherence and alignment.
Currentness and Clarity	Architects must ensure that the definitions of business principles, goals, and strategic drivers are up-to-date and clarify any ambiguities to support effective architecture development.
Architecture Governance	The governance body responsible for overseeing architecture will typically approve the Architecture Principles and address any architecture-related issues, ensuring compliance and effectiveness.
TOGAF Reference	The details surrounding Architecture Principles, their definition, and their connection to governance are further elaborated in the TOGAF Standard—ADM Techniques and Enterprise Architecture Capability and Governance.

The Architecture Principles established in the Preliminary Phase are critical for guiding the development of Enterprise Architecture. They are influenced by, and should align with, the broader business principles and strategic objectives of the organization. Effective governance of these principles is essential for ensuring their proper application and for addressing any arising issues during the architecture work. This alignment and governance foster a cohesive approach to achieving the enterprise's goals.

1.5: Management Frameworls

Key Element	Description
TOGAF ADM Overview	TOGAF ADM is a generic method designed for enterprises across various industries and geographies. It can function independently but is also adaptable for integration with other frameworks.
Coexistence with Other Frameworks	The TOGAF framework should complement and enhance the operational capabilities of other existing management frameworks within the organization, whether formal or informal.
Integration of IT Components	Most organizations have solution development methods that incorporate IT components, linking various domains (People, Processes, Technology) to deliver business capabilities.
Recommended Frameworks to Coordinate	Key frameworks to align with TOGAF include:
	- Business Capability Management: Identifies necessary business capabilities to deliver value, including return on investment and performance measures.
	- Project/Portfolio Management Methods: Focus on managing change initiatives within the organization.
	- Operations Management Methods: Detail how the organization runs day-to-day operations, including IT processes.
	- Solution Development Methods: Formalize the delivery of business systems based on the IT architecture.
Significance of Business Capability	Business Capability Management overlaps with other frameworks, emphasizing the delivery of performance-measured business value and the overall impact of architecture on the enterprise as a whole.
Architect’s Role	Enterprise Architects must consider the broader implications of architecture beyond IT implementation, ensuring alignment with organizational strategies and operations.
Preliminary Phase Adaptation	The Preliminary Phase involves tailoring the ADM to fit the specific needs of the organization, which may include utilizing TOGAF deliverables or integrating those from other frameworks.

The TOGAF ADM serves as a flexible framework that supports the integration of various management methodologies essential for delivering business value. Architects must ensure that the TOGAF framework aligns with other operational frameworks and business capabilities, thereby enhancing the overall architecture’s effectiveness across the enterprise. This holistic approach ensures that all aspects of the organization are considered during architecture development, leading to more sustainable and impactful outcomes.

1.6: Dependencies and interactions between various management frameworks

Key Element	Description
Framework Dependencies	The management frameworks—Enterprise Architecture, Portfolio Management, and Operations Management—must work in harmony to ensure effective corporate initiatives and infrastructure integration.
Role of Enterprise Architecture	EA provides a structured context for all corporate initiatives, ensuring alignment with the enterprise's strategic plan and direction.
Portfolio Management Framework	This framework delivers the components of the architecture, using solution development methodologies to plan, create, and deliver architectural elements as specified in project and portfolio charters.
Involvement of Business Planners	Business planners support the architecture process by retaining resource approval at various stages, ensuring alignment between strategic direction and architecture implementation.
Solution Development Methodology	Utilized within the Portfolio Management Framework, this methodology encompasses a range of deliverables beyond IT, such as new buildings, skills, equipment, and marketing initiatives.
Integrated Business Planning	EA structures business planning into an integrated framework, validating the business plan and providing feedback to corporate planners, reinforcing the importance of EA in organizational strategy.
Capability-Based Planning	A popular technique for business planning that aligns with the EA framework, ensuring that organizational capabilities are effectively planned and integrated.
TOGAF’s Role	TOGAF provides the EA framework, guiding the organization in its architectural endeavors, while aligning with project/portfolio management frameworks for delivery.
Project Management Frameworks	Often based on PMI or PRINCE2 methodologies, these frameworks provide detailed direction to plan and build necessary deliverables, ensuring that each fits into the overall EA context.
Operations Management Framework	Receives architectural deliverables and integrates them into the corporate infrastructure, often leveraging IT service management standards such as ITIL and ISO/IEC 20000:2011.
Continuous Improvement	The integration of these frameworks supports a feedback loop that helps improve both architecture and project outcomes over time.

The integration of Enterprise Architecture with Portfolio Management and Operations Management frameworks creates a cohesive approach to managing and delivering organizational initiatives. Business planners play a crucial role throughout this process, ensuring that resources align with strategic goals. The use of TOGAF provides structure and guidance for architectural endeavors, while project management methodologies ensure that deliverables are well-defined and contextually relevant. This holistic framework allows for continuous feedback and improvement, enhancing overall organizational performance.

1.7: Planning for Enterprise Architecture/Business Change Maturity Evaluation

Overview of Capability Maturity Models (CMMs) Capability Maturity Models are frameworks that help organizations assess their maturity in exercising various capabilities. They provide a structured way to evaluate how well an organization can execute specific factors essential for effective enterprise architecture (EA) and business change.

---

Key Features of Capability Maturity Models:

1. Assessment Framework:

   • CMMs identify specific factors necessary for exercising capabilities within an organization.

   • They measure the organization’s ability to perform these factors, thus providing an indicator of maturity.

2. Sequential Improvement Steps:

   • The models offer recommendations for a series of steps that organizations can take to improve their maturity level.

   • This structured approach allows organizations to incrementally enhance their capabilities.

3. Insight for Executives:

   • CMMs serve as valuable tools for executives, offering insights into how they can pragmatically improve their organization’s capabilities.

   • They can guide decision-making regarding resource allocation and strategic initiatives.

---

Enterprise Architecture Maturity Models:

1. Characteristics of a Good EA Maturity Model:

   • A robust EA maturity model encompasses the necessary characteristics for developing and utilizing enterprise architecture effectively.

   • It should be adaptable, allowing organizations to customize it based on their specific needs and contexts.

2. Customization of Existing Models:

   • Organizations are encouraged to leverage existing maturity models and tailor them to fit their unique circumstances.

   • This customization ensures that the model aligns with the organization's objectives and operational realities.

---

Recommended Models:

1. National Association of State CIOs (NASCIO):

   • This model provides a comprehensive framework for evaluating and improving enterprise architecture capabilities within state governments.

2. U.S. Department of Commerce Architecture Capability Maturity Model:

   • This model focuses on assessing architecture capabilities in a governmental context, applicable to various organizational environments.

3. U.S. Federal Enterprise Architecture Maturity Model:

   • Originally developed for federal agencies, this model can be applied in industry settings, offering insights into best practices for EA maturity.

---

Capability Maturity Models play a crucial role in assessing and enhancing an organization's enterprise architecture capabilities. By identifying key factors and recommending incremental steps for improvement, these models provide a valuable framework for executives looking to advance their organization's maturity. Organizations should consider utilizing and customizing established models, such as those from NASCIO or the U.S. Department of Commerce, to create a tailored approach that fits their specific needs.

2: Activities

1. Scoping the Enterprise Organizations Impacted

Scoping the impact of an architecture initiative across the enterprise is essential to understand how various units and stakeholders will be affected. This involves categorizing the different types of enterprise units and identifying relevant communities and governance structures.

---

Steps to Scope the Enterprise Organizations Impacted

1. Identify Core Enterprise Units

   • Definition: These are the primary organizational units most directly impacted by the architecture initiative. They are expected to derive the most value from the changes implemented.

   • Actions:

     • Conduct stakeholder interviews or workshops to gather input on which units are most affected.

     • Analyze existing business processes to identify which units will see the most significant changes.

     • Examples of core units might include departments directly involved in the primary business functions, such as operations, finance, or IT.

2. Identify Soft Enterprise Units

   • Definition: These units will experience changes in their capabilities due to the initiative but are not the primary focus. They interact with core units and will need to adapt to the changes.

   • Actions:

     • Identify departments that provide support or collaborate with core units (e.g., HR, Marketing).

     • Assess how these units will be impacted by changes in processes or technologies, even if not directly involved.

     • Engage with representatives from these units to understand their concerns and needs.

3. Identify Extended Enterprise Units

   • Definition: These units are outside the immediate scope of the enterprise but will still be affected by the architecture changes. This could include partners, suppliers, or customers.

   • Actions:

     • Map out relationships with external entities that might be influenced by changes in internal architecture.

     • Identify stakeholders in these units who need to be engaged in the process, such as vendors who integrate with enterprise systems.

     • Understand the implications for their enterprise architecture and how it may need to adapt.

4. Identify Communities Involved

   • Definition: Communities consist of stakeholder groups that may be impacted by the changes, encompassing a wide range of interests and concerns.

   • Actions:

     • Identify professional groups, user communities, and industry bodies that represent stakeholders affected by the initiative.

     • Engage with these communities to gather insights on their needs and expectations.

     • Create a stakeholder map that reflects the relationship between these communities and the enterprise.

5. Identify Governance Involved

   • Definition: Governance includes the frameworks, legal considerations, and geographical factors that guide decision-making and compliance within the architecture initiative.

   • Actions:

     • Review existing governance structures and policies that may affect the initiative, such as data protection regulations or industry standards.

     • Identify any legal frameworks that need to be considered, especially if the changes impact multiple jurisdictions.

     • Assess the geographical scope of the initiative and how it may affect local practices, laws, or regulations.

---

Summary of Scope Identification

• Core Enterprise Units: Directly impacted and receiving maximum value.

• Soft Enterprise Units: Supportive units adapting to changes without direct involvement.

• Extended Enterprise Units: External units affected by internal changes.

• Communities Involved: Stakeholder groups representing broader interests.

• Governance Considerations: Legal frameworks and geographical impacts that influence decision-making.

---

Once the scope of impacted organizations is defined, it is essential to communicate these findings to stakeholders effectively. This information will guide the architecture initiative, ensure alignment among various units, and support the development of appropriate communication and governance strategies throughout the project lifecycle.

2. Confirming Governance and Support Frameworks

Establishing a robust governance framework is essential for guiding the implementation and adherence to the architecture framework within an organization. This involves understanding how architectural materials are managed, the relationships among various governance processes, and how to facilitate the necessary organizational changes. Here’s a structured approach to confirming governance and support frameworks:

---

Steps to Confirm Governance and Support Frameworks

1. Define Architecture Governance Framework

   • Centralized vs. Federated: Determine whether the governance model will be centralized (all decisions made by a central authority) or federated (decisions are distributed across various units).

   • Light vs. Heavy: Assess whether the governance framework will be light (minimal oversight) or heavy (rigorous controls).

   • Actions:

     • Consult with stakeholders to understand their preferences and needs regarding governance structure.

     • Analyze existing frameworks to identify which model best aligns with organizational culture and objectives.

2. Establish Governance Repository Characteristics

   • Artifact Management: Identify how architectural materials such as standards, guidelines, models, and compliance reports will be stored and managed.

   • Relationships and Status Recording: Define how relationships between artifacts will be documented, including ownership, versioning, and change history.

   • Actions:

     • Develop a governance repository that supports tracking and managing architectural artifacts throughout their lifecycle.

     • Specify the metadata requirements for artifacts, such as ownership, status, and compliance.

3. Identify Governance Processes

   • Types of Processes: Establish the types of governance processes that will be needed, such as:

     • Dispensation: Handling exceptions to architectural standards.

     • Compliance: Ensuring adherence to established guidelines.

     • Take-On: The process for integrating new artifacts into the governance framework.

     • Retirement: The process for phasing out outdated artifacts.

   • Actions:

     • Develop process documentation that outlines the steps involved in each governance process.

     • Assign roles and responsibilities for managing these processes to ensure accountability.

4. Assess Existing Governance Models

   • Evaluation of Current State: Review the organization’s current governance and support models to understand their strengths and weaknesses.

   • Potential Changes: Identify what changes will be necessary to accommodate the new architecture framework.

   • Actions:

     • Conduct interviews or workshops with stakeholders to gather insights on the current governance landscape.

     • Analyze gaps between current practices and the requirements of the new architecture framework.

5. Consult Sponsors and Stakeholders

   • Impact Assessment: Engage with sponsors and stakeholders to discuss potential impacts of adopting the new architectural framework on existing governance and support structures.

   • Collaboration: Foster collaboration among stakeholders to ensure their concerns and insights are taken into account.

   • Actions:

     • Schedule meetings or focus groups to discuss governance implications.

     • Document feedback and integrate it into the governance framework design.

6. Agree on Architecture Touchpoints and Impacts

   • Stakeholder Agreement: Ensure that relevant stakeholders understand and agree on the architecture touchpoints and likely impacts of the governance framework.

   • Documentation: Capture agreements and decisions made during discussions to create a reference for future governance activities.

   • Actions:

     • Create a summary document that outlines agreed-upon governance structures, processes, and responsibilities.

     • Share this document with stakeholders for validation and sign-off.

---

Summary of Governance and Support Framework Confirmation

• Architecture Governance Framework: Define the structure (centralized vs. federated) and approach (light vs. heavy) for governance.

• Governance Repository: Establish characteristics for artifact management and status tracking.

• Governance Processes: Identify and document essential governance processes and assign responsibilities.

• Existing Governance Assessment: Evaluate current models and determine necessary changes.

• Stakeholder Consultation: Engage with sponsors and stakeholders to understand impacts and gather feedback.

• Agreement on Touchpoints: Ensure stakeholders agree on governance touchpoints and impacts, documenting decisions for future reference.

---

By following these steps, the organization can establish a solid governance and support framework that aligns with the new architecture framework, ensuring effective oversight and management of architectural initiatives.

3. Establishing and Organizing an Enterprise Architecture Team

• Evaluate Current State: Assess existing enterprise and business capabilities.

• Maturity Assessment: Conduct an enterprise architecture or business change maturity evaluation if necessary.

• Identify Gaps: Pinpoint deficiencies in current work areas.

• Role Allocation: Assign key roles and responsibilities for managing and governing the enterprise architecture capability.

• Manage Change Requests: Define and communicate requests for changes to current business programs and projects. This includes:

  • Informing architecture teams of stakeholder needs.

  • Requesting impact assessments on their plans.

  • Identifying shared interests and potential conflicts.

  • Submitting formal change requests for stakeholder activities.

• Determine Constraints: Identify any limitations affecting enterprise architecture efforts.

• Stakeholder Review: Present findings and gain approval from sponsors and the board.

• Budget Evaluation: Assess and confirm budgetary needs for enterprise architecture initiatives.

4. Identifying and Establishing Architecture Principles

• Foundation for Governance: Architecture principles, rooted in business principles, form the basis for Architecture Governance.

• Alignment with TOGAF: These principles should follow the TOGAF Standard's ADM Techniques.

• Context Understanding: Before defining principles, ensure a thorough understanding of the organization's context.

• Principle Definition: Develop a set of architecture principles that aligns with the enterprise’s specific needs and objectives.

5. Tailoring the TOGAF Framework and Other Architecture Frameworks

Determine Tailoring Needs: Assess the extent of customization required for the TOGAF framework based on organizational needs.

• Terminology Tailoring:

  • Use terms that are widely understood across the enterprise.

  • Develop a standardized terminology set for describing architectural content.

  • Consider creating and updating an Enterprise Glossary throughout the architecture process.

• Process Tailoring:

  • Adapt the TOGAF ADM (Architecture Development Method) to fit specific organizational processes.

  • Remove redundant tasks, add organization-specific tasks (e.g., checkpoints), and align ADM processes with external frameworks.

  • Address key process touchpoints such as:

    • Links to portfolio management (projects and services).

    • Integration with the project lifecycle.

    • Handover to operations and management processes (e.g., configuration, change, service management).

    • Procurement process alignment.

• Content Tailoring:

  • Use the TOGAF Architecture Content Framework and Enterprise Continuum as a foundation.

  • Customize content structure and classification to support organization-specific needs.

  • Allow for the adoption of third-party content frameworks if necessary.

6. Developing a Strategy and Implementation Plan for Enterprise Architecture Tools and Techniques

• Tools Strategy Development: Create a tools strategy that aligns with the enterprise's scale, sophistication, and culture. It should reflect stakeholder needs and the required level of formality for effective decision-making and artifact ownership.

• Stakeholder-Centric Approach: Ensure the strategy takes into account the articulation requirements of stakeholders, enabling quicker decisions and better ownership of architectural outputs.

• Comprehensive Tool Coverage: The strategy should cover various tools and techniques, including:

  • Management and decision-making techniques.

  • Workshop and business modeling tools.

  • Infrastructure modeling and office productivity tools.

  • Formal architecture-specific tools.

  • Balanced Scorecard, which is widely used for performance measurement and can be applied to architecture projects.

• Implementation Considerations:

  • Tools can range from common office software to specialized architecture tools.

  • Change management of deliverables is essential, requiring control and governance over the produced artifacts.

• Security and Access Management: Since some artifacts may contain sensitive information, access must be carefully controlled, and security measures should be aligned with the content's sensitivity level.

6.1 Challenges in Tools Standardization for Enterprise Architecture

• Tool Standardization Dilemma: Enterprises face challenges in deciding whether to standardize on a single tool or adopt a multi-tool suite for developing enterprise architectures and generating various architectural views.

• Advantages of Single Tool:

  • Reduced training requirements.

  • Shared licenses and potential for quantity discounts.

  • Simplified maintenance.

  • Easier data interchange across teams.

• Drawbacks of Single Tool:

  • Endorsing a single tool could stifle competition and innovation in the tools market.

  • A single tool may not be flexible enough to accommodate varying architecture maturity levels or specific needs across different parts of the enterprise.

• Multi-Tool Approach Benefits:

  • Different tools can align better with the diverse maturity levels, capabilities, and objectives of teams focused on enterprise, business, and technology architecture.

Enterprise Architecture teams that successfully align tools with their architecture maturity, capabilities, and goals are more likely to meet their specific needs, avoiding the limitations of a "one size fits all" approach.