Enterprise Architecture 101: Digital Strategy Execution enabled by an ARB

A while ago, I had blogged a Pulse article about Digital Strategy Execution (ref link). This is a topic I continue to observe and reflect on since organizations continue to execute their corporate digitization strategies.

The Editor at Cutter Consortium reached out to me asking if I could expand on the topic, especially in the context of Architecture governance. This viewpoint - Digital Strategy Execution via Architecture Review Board (ARB) - was recently published as an executive update by Cutter Consortium.  I realize the report is firewalled, so for those without access to Cutter’s subscription, here is a detailed summary. I have also posted some of the diagrams from the report in a slideshare (link)
Enabling digital strategies requires CIOs, Enterprise Architects and IT leaders to engage with business stakeholders. Such engagement of IS with business stakeholders must be governed by the organization’s processes, operating model, and technology governance to ensure robust, scalable architectures. The resultant roadmaps should also be governed by a well-functioning ARB.

Digitization and Information Systems

There are lots of discussions and viewpoints on ‘digital strategies,’ and they must be contextualized for an organization. Examples of such user stories include medical insurance companies motivating consumers to video-chat with doctors, auto insurers offering “usage-based insurance” after analysis of driver data from devices on cars, and banks minimizing foot traffic at the branches while enhancing digital transactions. As an enterprise architect responsible for governance at a multinational organization, I had an opportunity to review several digital transformations. Most of them seem to fall into three distinct categories (see Figure):

Lights-on digitization (a.k.a IS led digitization)

Digital excellence

Customer-centric digitization

Most lights-on digitization efforts - like migrating application platforms to cloud hosting, introducing new software as a service (SaaS), enhanced data management, automation of existing processes etc - are driven by IT leaders, who should take the opportunity to align these with other transformations.

Technology and business leaders continually scan the external landscape for new and innovative solutions. Digital excellence initiatives include the introduction of innovative vendor solutions that can drive business growth. Examples include use of blockchain technology, tools to analyze big/unstructured data; speech recognition and interactive voice response (IVR) enabled processes, and incremental use of virtual assistants and transcription or translation services.

Customer-centric digitization programs aim to enhance digital engagement with the company’s customers, business partners, vendors, suppliers, and other third parties. These initiatives require strong business insights and are generally sponsored and steered by senior executives. IT leaders facilitate ideation and technology foresight, and ensure seamless introduction of these solutions.

Customer-centric digitization might also be designed to address threats from digital innovators. For instance, the travel and hospitality industry is reacting to disruptors like Uber, Lyft, and Airbnb. Innovations in robotics, Internet of Things, and artificial intelligence–driven planning and modeling are beginning to disrupt the existing ways of working in manufacturing industries.

In the report, I expand the context of Architecture Governance (figure) and execution that requires executive support and an operational cadence. Digital strategies and roadmaps continually evolve and change in response to economic conditions, changing customer preferences, competitive pressures, and external market forces. Therefore, the basic design of an ARB should be simple but extensible. Please feel free to review the references:

• "Digital" isn’t just IT done the right way ! (link)
• What is Digital Strategy Execution? And what it means to IS Executives (link)
• What I learnt in a year running an Architecture Review Board (ARB)

---

Thanks for reading! 

Please share your views on Digitization & Governance. You may Like, Share, Tweet and Comment below to continue this conversation | Reposted from my Linkedin Pulse blog |

Recent Q&A on Enterprise Architecture

Here are my recent responses to questions on Enterprise Architecture asked by fellow EA's on Quora. Do keep the questions coming. I will try and respond here or on Quora or Linkedin Pulse. 

---

Is TOGAF 10 (or 9.2) coming out any time soon? Is now a good time for certification?

Like most professional groups, the Open Group periodically updates the focus based on emerging body of knowledge.

You should decouple the timing of “new updates” from the reason why you are trying to get certified. You are trying to get certified to gain knowledge and skills, and demonstrate the abilities to current and prospective employers.

With this in mind, one can argue now is a good time as any to go for a TOGAF certification!

---

Why do big companies fear using SaaS products? 

Not all large enterprises are hesitant to adopt SaaS solutions. However, the adoption in some companies operating in highly regulated environments may be slower than the rest.

SalesForce. com has been reporting record profits due to wider adoption of its SaaS CRM platform by large, multinational corporations. In my role of an Enterprise Architect for a multinational, I have been involved in evaluating SaaS solutions for several functional capabilities.

Check out my recent blog post on the topic: Evaluating SaaS solutions? Watch for these 5 challenges The key watchouts/points I highlight include:

#1. Configurations and customizations can add to cost and complexity

#2. Synchronizing upgrade calendars

#3. Don’t underestimate integration complexity

#4. Do not underestimate the need for a “service” to manage the SaaS service

#5. Watchout for the TCO

---

What is the best source for successful examples of real life it-architecture products e.g. system definitions, UML diagrams, Business Processes?

Agree with Eduardo . Many of the corporate artifacts are and generally not published. IT Consulting firms manage their internal knowledge repositories where consultants share artifacts with colleagues (after scrubbing client specific details).

Perhaps the best source for general reference is the DODAF artifact list (DODAF Viewpoints and Models) And DODAF references published by vendors e.g An IBM Rational approach to the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) Part 1: Operational view

What I learnt in a year running an Architecture Review Board (ARB)

Among my first tasks after joining the Enterprise Architecture team for my employer - a multinational Ag Biz company - was to redefine the Architecture Review Board (ARB), a need that was triggered by a review of our Enterprise Architecture program.

The head of architecture explained the company’s “history” of architecture governance and the shifting focus of the architecture function. As in many large multinational enterprises, the company’s IS team continues to evolve to mirror changing business drivers. The pendulum had swung from extremely governed to the laissez faire model, and I was tasked with operationalizing a fit-for-purpose ARB.

So, what did I learn?

As should be expected of any global organization, the architecture landscape is complex. Running the ARB process gave me a ringside view into changes being introduced into the landscape.

To appreciate the value chain, understand organization change

• The architecture tradeoffs used to review proposals and the ARB recommendations are a good dipstick into the stakeholders’ appetite for change.
• The ARB is integrated into the portfolio and program management processes. Hence, ARB members can try and understand Who (stakeholder/sponsor) is paying for the change, and Why (the value expected from the investment)

Appreciate the subtleties of “business” engagement

Passionate debates on engaging with business frequently surface in online Enterprise Architecture forums. Some of it is because the term ‘business engagement’ is nebulous, and may be used to describe several things

• People – Business user of a business system or process
• Functions - Business function like Finance, HR, Supply Chain etc, or Business unit - like the British or Turkish subsidiary of a multinational or the “Houston manufacturing plant”
• Leaders and leadership teams – Ranging from top tier CxO reporting to the CEO/Board to leaders of functional or business units and others in between

During ARB reviews, I sometimes find it easier to just work with the sponsor - people with money or people who know people with money - than to debate how to engage “business”. The assumption is simple: sponsors follow the money.

Aspire for a “seat at the table” but be pragmatic

Engaging business to “define strategies” is another topic of continual debates in Enterprise Architecture forums. In reality, a seat at the table may be more about effective realization of strategy than about ideating on business scenarios in an ivory tower. For example, a few scenarios:

• M&A: Mergers & Acquisitions are generally strategic business decisions involving a handful of people - the board, CEO, CXO, a business head or two and handpicked lawyers and accountant with sundry advisors.
• Decision to expand or divest business: Also strategic business decisions involving only a handful of people.
• Decisions to enter new line of business. E.g a software services company deciding to operate data centers or expand into “cloud operations” or an AgBiz company introducing a complementary solution for farmers

In these scenarios, EA’s and other senior managers may be engaged to enable execution *after* such strategic decisions are taken.

In this article, I try and highlight a few of my empirical observations and learnings. A more detailed discussion of Architecture Review Board and my case study can be found in this month's Cutter IT Journal article (Enabling Successful EA Governance -link).

Cross post from my Linkedin Pulse