Reflections on 5 years as an Enterprise Architect at a multinational

A few days ago, I was reflecting on completing five years as an Enterprise Architecture (EA) for a multinational, Medtronic. The tenure has been dynamic

• I was hired into an Offshore Development Center (ODC) when it was in a growth trajectory. 
• I had a dual focus – building teams in ODC and enabling Business Partners in Asia Pacific
• Strategy shifted when the leaders decided to outsource the ODC to a vendor
• My focus continued to be on APAC working with global EAs 
• CIO left the organization - Global EA function was disbanded. A few roles eliminated while others (including me) remained focused on our domains and regions 
• A new CIO came on board 
• The company hired another EA Leader who is bringing global teams together 
•  The new CIO wants has a mandate to resurrect the ODC strategy in India, coming a full circle

While riding waves of internal changes, the  business continues to digitize and there is a continuum of technology evaluation and investments in roadmap realization. I continue to be the ‘trusted technology advisor’ to my stakeholders and business partners.

This also brings back the key question Architects sometimes muse about

What is the average tenure of an EA?

Every new functional leader, CxO and CIO will want to leave their footprint in the organization. An EA will either align with the changes or look for greener pastures  

• Some EAs will seize transformations and take on other internal roles  
• Some will move to other organizations looking for roles that align with their personal aspirations
• A few may continue a longer tenure focused on their work-life balance 

There is no set tenure, and it really depends on the organization and individual’s alignment with the changes 

Congrats : 2011 Enterprise Architecture Awards Winners

Enterprise Architecture as a practice continues to evolve. While consultants and experts in the industry debate over the role of EA in technology and business, Architects in successful organizations continue to guide, mentor and steer their business and technology teams to leverage industry best practices.

Coagulations to Enterprise Architects for making it to the top of the 2011 list:

• American Express
• Bayer Healthcare
• First Data
• Singapore Ministry of Education
• Proctor and Gamble
• USAA 

Ref: The 2011 Enterprise Architecture Awards from InfoWorld and Forrester Research

 

Successful EAs seem to be doing the right things:

• Help define the right roadmaps and guide teams to work towards them
• Enabling "knowledge bridge" between business operations and IT
• Create a framework for strategic technology programs to coordinate technology adoption and development in a manner that maximizes value
• Moving away from being hostage to a legacy of dysfunctional IT, help the organization transform into an agile organization that embraces change
• Digitize and simplify its end-to-end processes
• Experimenting with different approaches to presenting data and collecting and maintaining architectural elements

As a consulting Enterprise Architect, I have had the pleasure of working with EA’s from organizations that continually move towards top of these lists. However, the challenge I continually see is that not all Enterprise Architecture organizations do all the right things all the time. 

Musing on accidental Enterprise Architects and Enterprise Solutions Architect

Enterprise Architects (EA's) periodically like to muse on the evolution of their roles and how they need to be aligned more with the "Business." Some get on discussion forums to debate how they/their roles need to move up the value chain, which makes for an interesting blog post but practical challenges continue to keep many EA's grounded.

Last week I was visiting clients in Washington DC area and met with their EA's whose business card reads "Enterprise Solution Architect". It was in the context of their adoption of TOGAF and ideation on how they could leverage the toolkit and frameworks better. This was a group of technologists and business analysts who had grown into the EA roles in their organization, a mid-size enterprise.

During our discussion, some were voicing concerns on the strategic-vs-tactical challenge of their roles. I got a feeling that these were accidental Enterprise Architects. For some the goal was to be the Über techie, a.k.a lead technical architect, focus on technical problems with projects and programs than on other core EA challenges within the enterprise.

Of late, I see a lot more accidental EA’s wanting to move towards their Business or Solution Architect roots (circled in image above). And in many cases, organizations are also providing the nudge. Organizations that employ experienced technologists in "Enterprise Architect" roles want them to double up by wearing technical or business analyst hats in projects and programs. In TOGAF speak; the focus of Solution Architects is on B. C. and D. dimensions. (refer image).
I guess there is some rationale here: in a tough economy, employers and managers are looking for a better ROI on their employee’s skills. Remember, Enterprise Architects are highly paid "resources" and productivity of resources is a key performance indicator.

Maybe it is just me, but in an uncertain economic climate, I see a lot more Enterprise Architects hunkering down to leverage their core competencies – technical or business skills – than stepping up to prepare their firms for growth.

TOGAF: The Open Group Architecture Framework

Enterprise Architects Enabling Strategic Global Sourcing

As the lead Architect for my firm at the client we are engaged with, I anchor a weekly pow-wow between our teams and client’s Enterprise Architects. The agenda for the sessions is open, addressing key architectural, technical and process related issues, ideation on best practices and discussions from our respective eco-systems.

During a recent session, Dave, one of the clients EA’s brought up the topic of sourcing and a viewpoint he was building for his CIO. I pointed out to Dave how the sourcing challenge EA’s at this firm are coming to grips with are not unique. I pointed him to my Cutter Journal paper on the topic (Enterprise Architects Enabling Strategic Global Sourcing) and we began brainstorming some of the ideas as it was applicable in the current context.

After the brainstorm I began musing how I hadn’t revisited my views after I had written the paper, over a year and half ago. A few of the background issues continue to plague Enterprise Architecture groups: sluggish economy and lack of hiring means Enterprise Architecture groups are not getting fresh talent. Lack of hiring at the bottom is also impacting nurturing of homegrown talent in client organizations while continued visa restrictions also means Offshoring firms are discerning when it comes to bringing talent more than needed onsite.

I had addressed some of the key issues I had seen at client organizations in the paper:

• Loss of technical expertise due to sourcing


• The need to coordinate multivendor scenarios


• Vendors lacking knowledge of organizational dynamics


• Vendors lacking specific business context


• Vendors not up to date on organizational processes, acronyms, and jargon

Since I wrote the paper, I have continued to be engaged with other clients and Enterprise Architects, who continually voice views on similar challenges I had highlighted in the paper. As I continue to brainstorm on the topic, I might revisit the views in the paper. Do send in your comments too.