Enterprise Architecture Approaches and Vantage Points

1. There are broad approaches to Enterprise or Endeavor Architecture (EA), and narrow approaches to EA, representing the “vantage point” of the Architect(s) .  See the article on this at http://www.cutter.com/research/2008/edge080129.html
As I remember the progression of EA and such over the past few decades, it looks like this.  Feel free to comment with date corrections, descriptions, insertions, etc.
  • Broad EA Efforts look at the enterprise as a whole, and thus consider the enterprise a single system, object, or thing, which needs to be managed in relationship to other enterprises out in the broader environment
    • U.S. Military Warfighting Architecture Efforts - Force Structure Management (FSM) Process (1950s – Current) [Warfighting Architecture Development, consisting of Military Doctrine analysis and development, Mission Analysis and Development, Establishing Table of Organization and Equipment (TOE) for Doctrine and Mission alignment, Modified TOE (MTOE) budgeted for a specific mission, Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) for the peacetime/garrison support of a wartime mission, Joint Table of Allowances (JTA) for task forces and joint activities across multiple DoD Military Services
    • Roy Roebuck’s General Endeavor Management (GEM) Approach (1981 – Current), also successively called 32nd AADCOM MIP/FIP, USAREUR TAPES, DISA GEM/DEM, OWIS GEM/DEM/BEAM/EMA, SAIC GEM, JECPO (DISA/DLA) NextGen EA, TranTech TEMS, CommIT FEB CCEA and TEAM, BRMi EMI, and Lattice, Inc. Enterprise Engineering.
    • 32nd Army Air Defense Command (32nd AADCOM) Management Improvement Program (MIP) and then Functional Improvement Program (FIP) (1982-1988). Used GEM Approach, incorporating and integrating: Army FSM Guidance; Army Financial Management Guidance; Internal Controls Program Guidance; Army Manpower and Equipment Management Guidance; Army/DoD Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBES) Guidance; Army Force Modernization (i.e., for Patriot Missile System) Guidance; Army Productivity and Capital Investment Guidance; Army Reports Control Guidance; Army Recordkeeping System Guidance; Army Information Resource Management (IRM) Guidance for the Information Mission Area (IMA)
    • DoD Business Management Modernization Program (BMMP) and Business Enterprise Architecture (BEA) (2002 – Current) [DoD Business Transformation Agency (BTA) now has BMMP/BEA responsibility. BTA and BEA are “business-equivalent” efforts matching closely to the FSM process used for warfighting architecture.
    • Federal Executive Branch (FEB) Continuity Communication EA (CCEA) (2004 -2005). Applied the GEM approach to support Business Continuity of the FEB.
  • Specialized approaches build architectures of an enterprise that are focused on a single portion of the enterprise or a primary purpose
    • IT Focused EA Efforts:
      • Zachman Framework (1987 – Current)
      • GEM-derived USAREUR TAPES (1988-1992) and subsequent Army DOIMIS and DoD ADAPT derivatives of TAPES
      • DoD CIM (1988 – 1994)
      • DISA TAFIM (1993-1995)
      • DoD C4ISR (1996 – 2003)
      • CIO Council FEAF (1997 – 2005)
      • OMB FEA (2001 – Current)
      • DoDAF (2003-Current)
      • OpenGroup TOGAF (1998 – Current)
      • ArchiMate (2004 – Current)
      • UK MODAF (2005 – Current)
      • NATO NAF (2007 – Current)
 2. EA Market Segmentation (Vantage Points).  As to the Target Audiences for EA, the EA should be able to answer the questions of the following segments of the enteprise:  EA Audience Level, EA Part, EA User Type, EA Interest Level.
Audience Level of Detail:
  • A. Populace, For Marketing EA
  • B. Executive Overview, For Marketing and Orientation
  • C. Private Organization Marketing Departments, For EA Business Development and EA Orientation
  • D. Client Managers and Leaders, For EA Business Development and Client EA Orientation
  • E. Client Workforce, For Client Orientation
  • F. Client CIO/CTO/CKO and their staffs, For Client EA Orientation
  • G. Client User Training, For Client EA Implementation and Use
  • H. Client IT Staff Training, For Client EA Implementation and Use
  • I. EA Architects, For Internal EA Practice Development and EA Deployment
  • J. EA Implementers and Meta-Architects, For Internal EA Practice Development and EA Approach Extension and Tailoring
  • K. EA Certifications, For Internal EA Practice Development of Self-Sustaining EA Cadre.
EA Documentation part sequence
  • 1. EA Concept
  • 2. EA Methodology
  • 3. EA Metaschema/Metamodel/Model
  • 4. EA Supporting Technology
  • 5. EA Implementation and Domain Unification
  • 6. EA Enterprise, and Domain Operation, Maintenance, and Assessment
  • 7. EA Enterprise, and Domain Closure
Intended EA Users:
  • a. Public Sector, Government
  • b. Private Sector, Commercial
  • c. Non-Profit Sector
  • d. Groups, Communities
  • e. Volunteers
  • f. Individuals
EA Interest Level (Influence Points), as appropriate to the above type of organization, of:
  • i. Owners, Investors (such as pension fund managers or other blocks of stockholders), or Citizens, and their analysts
  • ii. Boards of Directors or Legislatures, and their analysts
  • iii. Chief Executive Officer or equivalent, their Deputies and Assistants, Chief Operations Officers, Chiefs of Staff, and their analysts
  • iv. Senior Functional Executives (e.g., CFO, CIO, CHCO, CTO, CKO) and their analysts
  • v. Senior Functional Managers, at Staff, Program, and Project operations levels, and their analysts
  • vi. Supervisors of Offices and Teams
  • vii. Knowledge, Service, and Industrial Workforce
  • viii. Improvement Activists (e.g., for economy, ecology, environment, governance, industry, society, rights, education, nutrition, health)
  • ix. General Public