The four architectural layers of its architecture:
1. Business Process Architecture – activities or tasks that make up the primary business process as determined by the business process owner.
2. Data or information architecture – shared data definitions.
3. Application architecture – individual applications and their interfaces.
4. Technology architecture – infrastructure services and the technical standards on which they are based.
Enterprise architecture and its architecture are complementary. Both reflect the integration and standardization requirements of a company’s operating model, and a high-level enterprise architecture enables its department to develop solutions that meet long-term needs. When the department tries to create a detailed architecture without a clear understanding of its enterprise architecture, its department is an ornament, not a tool, for the company.
Enterprise architecture (EA) can appear to be an intimidating concept. However, EA can be distilled down to understanding what data or processes need to flow (or lack thereof), how this data/information is critical to the business, and who is responsible for overseeing its execution. To that end, the four operating models provide a strategic approach to distilling these key areas (processes, people, and technology) into a tactical diagram that relevant business stakeholders can broadly understand and align their respective domains to the business’s success. After learning about these various models, I think it would be fascinating to know the most common EA operating model currently in the business world. With the growing adoption of cloud services, I can’t help but think of the diversification and replication models as the most popular choice among organizations.
One point that this reading made was how many organizations make the mistake of attacking enterprise architecture through drawings and analyses of existing hoped-for (potential) system capabilities. However, the key to effective enterprise architecture is to identify the processes, data, technologies, and interfaces instead.
I found this really interesting, because if I were to try to explain my organizations enterprise architecture, I would probably start with drawings such as system architecture diagrams to try to explain the business processes within the organization. I also feel drawings and analyses are a common method executives/managers use to quickly gain an understanding of an organization and its processes.
The article also brings up a point about who should design the enterprise architecture : I would think that members of the IT staff would do this, since they probably have a better understanding of the IT infrastructure, and possibly the rest of the company processes (assuming those processes use the IT infrastructure in some way). However, after reading this article it makes sense that senior management should in some way be involved with the enterprise architecture of an organization.
Cyberwar and cyberterrorism can cause catastrophic damages. It can damage the financial, communication, and IT infrastructures of the country. It can cause bodily injury and property damage as well (think of the car whose control was stolen remotely, or a factory if safety controls were overridden and machines ran until failure).
Cyberterrorists can fund their entire criminal organization by doing other cybercrime, such as ransomware. In cyber insurance, war is excluded, but we do provide coverage for cyber terrorism. The main distinction is cyber war is perpetrated by rival counties, whereas cyberterrorism is perpetrated by terrorist groups.
One key point that I got from this reading was that it’s important to understand the enterprise architecture before building out the IT architecture. As the reading states “When IT units attempt to develop detailed architectures without a clear understanding of the company enterprise architecture, they may have developed the equivalent of fondue pot – and ornament rather than a tool.” This from my perspective ultimately means that organizations need to align IT infrastructure with the business goals. In this process, it is important to choose the correct operating model based on current IT infrastructure and organizational layout including customers and all other stakeholders.
Hello Dhaval,
I totally agree with you as regards your explanation on understanding the enterprise architecture prior building out the IT architecture within an organization. I am absolutely enthused in your quote which stated that “when IT units make attempt to enhance detailed architecture, they may have developed the equivalent of fondue pot and ornament rather than a tool”.
According to this reading, there are 4 common elements in Enterprise Architecture diagrams:
1. Core Business Processes
2. Shared Data Driving Core Processes
3. Key Linking and Automation Technologies
4. Key Customers
It was interesting to read how, although companies tend to incorporate the same elements in their Enterprise Architecture models, these companies will focus on and stress different elements in a way that best supports their business style. For example, MetLife uses the Coordination EA model that focuses most on key customers because of the business’s “wide range of distinctive products.” Therefore, my key take away from this is the need to learn how to balance industry standards with a specific company’s business needs to create a model that is efficient and secure, but also allows for any needed flexibility and personalized changes.
I also found it interesting how different companies apply the elements to their EA models. Each organization is coming from a different IT infrastructure and business model, but it is interesting to see how each company is deriving these elements and applying them to their new or existing IT & EA architecture.
Through the article, I learned about the elements in four different enterprise architecture core diagrams.
1. core business processes. 2. shared data-driven core processes. 3. key links and automation technologies. 4. focused customers. The key elements highlighted in the core diagram are specific to that company’s operating model. There is often a tendency to see similarities between the core diagram models of companies that employ the same operations. For some companies, enterprise architecture design efforts begin to build core capabilities. The entity that develops these capabilities will involve operational and organizational re-engineering. The essence of the company remains the same despite the rapidly changing conditions of the business. The goal is to digitize the core and make it predictable, reusable, and reliable.
Nice post explaining the shared operational model elements and how understanding the architecture of building these elements empowers an organization to operate in manner that is scalable in success as opposed to operating in an ad-hoc manner.
One key point from this week’s reading is the difference between organizational operating models. Between the unification model, replication model, coordination model, and diversification model, information sharing has key differences and similarities. As a security professional (either external or internal to a company), comprehension of the flow of information is key to developing data flow diagrams as well as an elaborative security architecture model.
I found the discussion following “Who Should Design Enterprise Architecture?” interesting from this reading. The authors draw attention to the manner in which enterprise architecture is created by a small team via a multitude of drawings that attempt to link existing systems in order to reduce the overall complexity of them. However, most of these simply provide the idea that complexity is being reduced, and little implementation actually results from the drawings. Having the process of designing and implementing EA by senior management instead, as the authors suggest, is far more beneficial as it reduces costs significantly through effective reusability and simplified processes and is a more effective approach to designing EA, rather than having a small IT team design it.
One key point I took from this assigned reading is how critical it is to have a well defined and integrated enterprise architecture and IT model.
For example, before Delta Airlines updated their enterprise architecture and IT systems, basically all of their different business units were separated and could not communicate easily (if at all) between each other. This caused customer and employee dissatisfaction, as well as some inherent customer turnover and revenue loss.
When Delta’s management took focus on their enterprise architecture and IT systems, they were able to solidly define their key business groups, the information that was needed for each one to run, how pieces of information overlapped between different groups, and how to implement IT systems that would communicate and run more efficiently throughout the whole company based upon its enterprise architecture.
The diagram on page nine and implementation of this newly thought-out enterprise architecture and IT system probably did not happen overnight, but it made the company noticeably more efficient in the long run. When key business groups can interact easily with each other and transmit the information necessary to create a more seamless customer experience, there is a good chance that customer satisfaction and revenue will increase, and customer turnover will decrease. There is also a good chance this is why Delta Airlines revised enterprise architecture and IT model is discussed in the “Implement the Operating Model Via Enterprise Architecture” reading.
Hello Michael,
It is definitely critical for any company to have well defined enterprise architecture. That also a great example for the Delta Airlines not have a well defined does effects the companies business operations as the Delta Airlines wasn’t able to communicate effectively to operate their business processes.
Great points raised in here, Security architecture should comprise a set of standards and processes that are not only documentable, but also repeatable. The architecture should adhere to security and technology baselines established by the organization. These baselines are driven by security and policy compliance decisions. The framework built on that foundation should be flexible enough to allow for adaptations. The focus should always be on progress, not on how to retrofit tools to meet new security standards.
One of the key point that I have got from this week reading is that there are four core common element in every enterprise architecture diagram: Core Business Process, Shared data Driving Core Processes, Key Linking and Automation Technologies, and Key customers.
Core Business Process is a small set of a process that are defined by the company across the company-wide to execute its operations. Shared Data Driving Core Process is the data that are being shared across the company as a customer or suppliers information to operate the business. Key Linking and Automation Technologies are the interfaces that are used to connect one application to another for transferring the data. Key Customers includes the major customers of the business.
The article thoroughly explains the significance of enterprise architecture and how different categories of architecture designs successful organizations built around their operating model. The Article further talks about enterprise architecture is making sure that an organization has the capabilities and resources to meet its objectives. More often than not, many people are under mistaken illusion that IT architecture, which ensures systems are meant to be solutioned to meet ever-changing business requirements. However, the design of enterprise architecture starts higher up in the corporate hierarchy and often does not require non-technical people to develop and implement them at all. Hence, it is increasingly essential that they are consulted with so that they can proffer details on the customer, how certain business processes work within a particular environment, and what data is needed to drive those processes. This, therefore, can offer a sound understanding of how an organization ensures IT objectives are tailor to their overall objectives and goals within the organization. The article furthered reviewed four organizations enterprise architecture and the steps being taken in making sure that their vision becomes an issue of reality and attainable in all phases of an organization’s determinations. I undoubtedly believe the organization’s industry and operating model can have a sounding impact on what their overall ending goal might look like. However, there is no request of right or wrong suggestion to how an enterprise architecture should be realistically developed in so far as it is built to meet the organizations anticipated objectives to enhance its productivity.
The article clearly articulates how Enterprise Architecture applies architecture principles and practices to assist enterprises through the business, information, process, and technology changes required to ensure strategies implementations. These practices utilize the various aspects of an enterprise to identify, motivate and achieve these changes. As a result, enterprise architecture is a powerful management tool for aligning business and technology initiatives throughout a company.
The benefits of having an Enterprise Architecture include the under listed:
1. Enterprise Architecture frees unit IT staff on mission-specific projects and innovations.
2. Enterprise Architecture enables more innovation at the departmental level.
3. Enterprise Architecture provides a more robust technology infrastructure at the central technology core.
The operating model is the first layer in the foundation for execution in enterprise architecture. The operating model is the business process standardization and integration necessary to deliver value to Customer Segments.
The four architectural layers of its architecture:
1. Business Process Architecture – activities or tasks that make up the primary business process as determined by the business process owner.
2. Data or information architecture – shared data definitions.
3. Application architecture – individual applications and their interfaces.
4. Technology architecture – infrastructure services and the technical standards on which they are based.
Enterprise architecture and its architecture are complementary. Both reflect the integration and standardization requirements of a company’s operating model, and a high-level enterprise architecture enables its department to develop solutions that meet long-term needs. When the department tries to create a detailed architecture without a clear understanding of its enterprise architecture, its department is an ornament, not a tool, for the company.
Enterprise architecture (EA) can appear to be an intimidating concept. However, EA can be distilled down to understanding what data or processes need to flow (or lack thereof), how this data/information is critical to the business, and who is responsible for overseeing its execution. To that end, the four operating models provide a strategic approach to distilling these key areas (processes, people, and technology) into a tactical diagram that relevant business stakeholders can broadly understand and align their respective domains to the business’s success. After learning about these various models, I think it would be fascinating to know the most common EA operating model currently in the business world. With the growing adoption of cloud services, I can’t help but think of the diversification and replication models as the most popular choice among organizations.
One point that this reading made was how many organizations make the mistake of attacking enterprise architecture through drawings and analyses of existing hoped-for (potential) system capabilities. However, the key to effective enterprise architecture is to identify the processes, data, technologies, and interfaces instead.
I found this really interesting, because if I were to try to explain my organizations enterprise architecture, I would probably start with drawings such as system architecture diagrams to try to explain the business processes within the organization. I also feel drawings and analyses are a common method executives/managers use to quickly gain an understanding of an organization and its processes.
The article also brings up a point about who should design the enterprise architecture : I would think that members of the IT staff would do this, since they probably have a better understanding of the IT infrastructure, and possibly the rest of the company processes (assuming those processes use the IT infrastructure in some way). However, after reading this article it makes sense that senior management should in some way be involved with the enterprise architecture of an organization.
Cyberwar and cyberterrorism can cause catastrophic damages. It can damage the financial, communication, and IT infrastructures of the country. It can cause bodily injury and property damage as well (think of the car whose control was stolen remotely, or a factory if safety controls were overridden and machines ran until failure).
Cyberterrorists can fund their entire criminal organization by doing other cybercrime, such as ransomware. In cyber insurance, war is excluded, but we do provide coverage for cyber terrorism. The main distinction is cyber war is perpetrated by rival counties, whereas cyberterrorism is perpetrated by terrorist groups.
One key point that I got from this reading was that it’s important to understand the enterprise architecture before building out the IT architecture. As the reading states “When IT units attempt to develop detailed architectures without a clear understanding of the company enterprise architecture, they may have developed the equivalent of fondue pot – and ornament rather than a tool.” This from my perspective ultimately means that organizations need to align IT infrastructure with the business goals. In this process, it is important to choose the correct operating model based on current IT infrastructure and organizational layout including customers and all other stakeholders.
Hello Dhaval,
I totally agree with you as regards your explanation on understanding the enterprise architecture prior building out the IT architecture within an organization. I am absolutely enthused in your quote which stated that “when IT units make attempt to enhance detailed architecture, they may have developed the equivalent of fondue pot and ornament rather than a tool”.
According to this reading, there are 4 common elements in Enterprise Architecture diagrams:
1. Core Business Processes
2. Shared Data Driving Core Processes
3. Key Linking and Automation Technologies
4. Key Customers
It was interesting to read how, although companies tend to incorporate the same elements in their Enterprise Architecture models, these companies will focus on and stress different elements in a way that best supports their business style. For example, MetLife uses the Coordination EA model that focuses most on key customers because of the business’s “wide range of distinctive products.” Therefore, my key take away from this is the need to learn how to balance industry standards with a specific company’s business needs to create a model that is efficient and secure, but also allows for any needed flexibility and personalized changes.
Hi Patrick,
I also found it interesting how different companies apply the elements to their EA models. Each organization is coming from a different IT infrastructure and business model, but it is interesting to see how each company is deriving these elements and applying them to their new or existing IT & EA architecture.
Through the article, I learned about the elements in four different enterprise architecture core diagrams.
1. core business processes. 2. shared data-driven core processes. 3. key links and automation technologies. 4. focused customers. The key elements highlighted in the core diagram are specific to that company’s operating model. There is often a tendency to see similarities between the core diagram models of companies that employ the same operations. For some companies, enterprise architecture design efforts begin to build core capabilities. The entity that develops these capabilities will involve operational and organizational re-engineering. The essence of the company remains the same despite the rapidly changing conditions of the business. The goal is to digitize the core and make it predictable, reusable, and reliable.
Hi Dan,
Nice post explaining the shared operational model elements and how understanding the architecture of building these elements empowers an organization to operate in manner that is scalable in success as opposed to operating in an ad-hoc manner.
Kelly
One key point from this week’s reading is the difference between organizational operating models. Between the unification model, replication model, coordination model, and diversification model, information sharing has key differences and similarities. As a security professional (either external or internal to a company), comprehension of the flow of information is key to developing data flow diagrams as well as an elaborative security architecture model.
I found the discussion following “Who Should Design Enterprise Architecture?” interesting from this reading. The authors draw attention to the manner in which enterprise architecture is created by a small team via a multitude of drawings that attempt to link existing systems in order to reduce the overall complexity of them. However, most of these simply provide the idea that complexity is being reduced, and little implementation actually results from the drawings. Having the process of designing and implementing EA by senior management instead, as the authors suggest, is far more beneficial as it reduces costs significantly through effective reusability and simplified processes and is a more effective approach to designing EA, rather than having a small IT team design it.
One key point I took from this assigned reading is how critical it is to have a well defined and integrated enterprise architecture and IT model.
For example, before Delta Airlines updated their enterprise architecture and IT systems, basically all of their different business units were separated and could not communicate easily (if at all) between each other. This caused customer and employee dissatisfaction, as well as some inherent customer turnover and revenue loss.
When Delta’s management took focus on their enterprise architecture and IT systems, they were able to solidly define their key business groups, the information that was needed for each one to run, how pieces of information overlapped between different groups, and how to implement IT systems that would communicate and run more efficiently throughout the whole company based upon its enterprise architecture.
The diagram on page nine and implementation of this newly thought-out enterprise architecture and IT system probably did not happen overnight, but it made the company noticeably more efficient in the long run. When key business groups can interact easily with each other and transmit the information necessary to create a more seamless customer experience, there is a good chance that customer satisfaction and revenue will increase, and customer turnover will decrease. There is also a good chance this is why Delta Airlines revised enterprise architecture and IT model is discussed in the “Implement the Operating Model Via Enterprise Architecture” reading.
Hello Michael,
It is definitely critical for any company to have well defined enterprise architecture. That also a great example for the Delta Airlines not have a well defined does effects the companies business operations as the Delta Airlines wasn’t able to communicate effectively to operate their business processes.
Great points raised in here, Security architecture should comprise a set of standards and processes that are not only documentable, but also repeatable. The architecture should adhere to security and technology baselines established by the organization. These baselines are driven by security and policy compliance decisions. The framework built on that foundation should be flexible enough to allow for adaptations. The focus should always be on progress, not on how to retrofit tools to meet new security standards.
One of the key point that I have got from this week reading is that there are four core common element in every enterprise architecture diagram: Core Business Process, Shared data Driving Core Processes, Key Linking and Automation Technologies, and Key customers.
Core Business Process is a small set of a process that are defined by the company across the company-wide to execute its operations. Shared Data Driving Core Process is the data that are being shared across the company as a customer or suppliers information to operate the business. Key Linking and Automation Technologies are the interfaces that are used to connect one application to another for transferring the data. Key Customers includes the major customers of the business.
The article thoroughly explains the significance of enterprise architecture and how different categories of architecture designs successful organizations built around their operating model. The Article further talks about enterprise architecture is making sure that an organization has the capabilities and resources to meet its objectives. More often than not, many people are under mistaken illusion that IT architecture, which ensures systems are meant to be solutioned to meet ever-changing business requirements. However, the design of enterprise architecture starts higher up in the corporate hierarchy and often does not require non-technical people to develop and implement them at all. Hence, it is increasingly essential that they are consulted with so that they can proffer details on the customer, how certain business processes work within a particular environment, and what data is needed to drive those processes. This, therefore, can offer a sound understanding of how an organization ensures IT objectives are tailor to their overall objectives and goals within the organization. The article furthered reviewed four organizations enterprise architecture and the steps being taken in making sure that their vision becomes an issue of reality and attainable in all phases of an organization’s determinations. I undoubtedly believe the organization’s industry and operating model can have a sounding impact on what their overall ending goal might look like. However, there is no request of right or wrong suggestion to how an enterprise architecture should be realistically developed in so far as it is built to meet the organizations anticipated objectives to enhance its productivity.
The article clearly articulates how Enterprise Architecture applies architecture principles and practices to assist enterprises through the business, information, process, and technology changes required to ensure strategies implementations. These practices utilize the various aspects of an enterprise to identify, motivate and achieve these changes. As a result, enterprise architecture is a powerful management tool for aligning business and technology initiatives throughout a company.
The benefits of having an Enterprise Architecture include the under listed:
1. Enterprise Architecture frees unit IT staff on mission-specific projects and innovations.
2. Enterprise Architecture enables more innovation at the departmental level.
3. Enterprise Architecture provides a more robust technology infrastructure at the central technology core.
The operating model is the first layer in the foundation for execution in enterprise architecture. The operating model is the business process standardization and integration necessary to deliver value to Customer Segments.