CIS8090 Enterprise Architectures

Wrap Up Reviewing the Course

2

Cognitive Map of 8090 IS Architectures as

Strategy Weill, Ross & Robertson, “Enterprise

Architecture as Strategy” & “Lightweight Enterprise Architectures”

Work Systems Models S. Alter, “Work System Method”

IS architectural components and

development Mid-Range Modeling

Architectural Modeling options

ERP as instantiation of Architectures

EA Frameworks (TOGAF, FEA, Zachman,

Lightweight)

3

There Are Four Operating Models or Organizing Logics

Source: Enterprise Architecture as Strategy: Creating a Foundation for Business Execution, J. Ross, P. Weill, D. Robertson, HBS Press, 2006.

Bus

ines

s P

roce

ss In

tegr

atio

n

Hig

h

Coordination ■  Unique business units with a need

to know each other’s transactions ■  Examples: Merrill Lynch GPC,

PepsiAmericas, MetLife

■  Key IT capability: access to shared data, through standard technology interfaces

Unification ■  Single business with global process

standards and global data access ■  Examples: Southwest Airlines, Dow

Chemical, UPS Package Delivery

■  Key IT capability: enterprise systems reinforcing standard processes and providing global data access

Low

Diversification ■  Independent business units with

different customers and expertise ■  Examples: Johnson & Johnson, GE, ING

■  Key IT capability: provide economies of scale without limiting independence

Replication ■  Independent but similar business

units ■  Examples: Marriott, CEMEX, ING

DIRECT

■  Key IT capability: provide standard infrastructure and application components for global efficiencies

Low High

Business Process Standardization

4

Business Silos

Standardized Technology

Optimized Core

Business Modularity

Business Agility

25% 46% 27% 2% % of Firms

Companies gradually mature enterprise architecture and build out their platforms.

Source: Enterprise Architecture as Strategy: Creating a Foundation for Business Execution, J. Ross, P. Weill, D. Robertson, HBS Press, 2006.

Percentage of firms in each stage is updated based on a 2007 survey of 1508 IT executives.

Standardized Enterprise

Processes/Data

Standard Interfaces

and Business Componentization

Enterprise-Wide Technology Standards

Locally Optimal Business Solutions

5

Getting from ‘as-is’ to ideal state

MIT/CIS 8090 Intro

Operating Model Defines integration and standardization requirements

Foundation for Execution • Core Business processes

• IT infrastructure

Enterprise Architecture

Engagement Model

Strategic Initiative Strategic Initiative

Strategic Initiative Strategic Initiative

Strategic Initiative

Strategic Initiative

Strategic Initiative

Establishes

priorities

Learnin

g

and

exploitation

IS Architecture Standards

Professor Truex Managing Architectural Standards

Integrated process outcomes

Business unit 3

Business unit 2

Business unit 1

• IS Architecture Development• On-going process… • ≠ one time planning exercise

Professor Truex Managing Architectural Standards

Infrastructure architecture •  concerns computer and

communications/network operations and infrastructure planning activities

•  Standards

Integration architecture •  focused on systems development,

including application planning, software acquisition and maintenance

“Internal ICT standards are manifest as IS architectures standards and frameworks.” (Boh et al, 2004)

The differences are in scope, focus and benefits of each type of architecture

Focus differs

Professor Truex Managing Architectural Standards

Infrastructure architecture

Define computing

resources to be managed

Reduce # of platforms supported

Limit technology

choice

Integration Architecture

Define how IS resources

relate & are accessed across the

organization

business services

events and information

“This standardization is expected to significantly reduce the number of vendor packages and infrastructure services that perform similar functions” (Ross, 2003).

Consists of a set of architectural components, such as data, processes, and event models, application architecture and service-oriented

architectures (Brown, Johnston,

and Kelly, 2003)

Abstraction

Models �  An abstract representation of reality that

excludes much of the world’s infinite detail.

�  The purpose of a model is to reduce the complexity of understanding or interacting with a phenomenon by eliminating the detail that does not influence its relevant behavior.

11

Alter’s Work System Framework

12

Work System Snapshot

Example ADLs and foci

�  Many attempts large variety of foci �  e.g., Aesop, ArTek, C2, Darwin, LILEANNA, MetaH,

Rapide, SADL, UniCOn, Weaves, Wright �  i.e., Rapide- general purpose system description

language �  i.e., Wright- focuses on modeling connectors

8090- Enterprise Architectures Professor Duane Truex

(Medvidovic & Taylor, 2000, p. 78)

UML  Diagrams  as  ADL  surrogate  and  R-­‐form?  �  view  a  so9ware  system  from  different  perspec>ves  and  varying  

degrees  of  abstrac>on.  �  UML  is  not  a  development  method    

�  But  it  was  designed  to  be  compa>ble  with  leading  object-­‐oriented  so9ware  development  methods  like    

�  e.g.,  Ra>onal  Unified  Process  (RUP)  –  an  itera>ve  so9ware  development  process  framework    

�  UML  2.2  has  14  diagram  types  in  two  categories.  �  7    sta>c  –  structural  types  

�  Emphasizes  the  sta(c  structure  of  the  system  using  objects,  aRributes,  opera>ons  and  rela>onships  

�  7  dynamic  –  behavior  types    �  Emphasizes  the  dynamic  behavior  of  the  system  by  showing    

collabora>ons  among  objects  and  changes  to  internal  states  of  objects  –  sequence  diagrams,  ac>vity  diagrams,  state  machine  diagrams  

The challenge mapping Enterprise Architectures with UML

�  “ UML is a general modeling language and does not provide all concepts that are important to architecture description.” (p. 1, Roh, Kim and Jeon, 2004)

�  “Architectural Description Languages (ADL) describe the structure of a software system at a level of abstraction that is more closest to the intuition of a system designer.” (Arvind W. Kiwelekar, 2010)

� So, what is the problem ? �  ADLs designed to model software systems �  UML designed to model software systems �  EAs model?

Zachman Framework P

art

icip

an

t’s

pe

rsp

ecti

ves

in

bu

ild

ing

EA

s

Different descriptions for different purposes Cells are model types

Professor Truex Enterprise Architectures

Architecture Management & Planning

IT Hardware Inventory

Network Map

Connectivity Diagrams

Topology Map

Skills Inventory

Vendor & New Technology Research

Departmental Fixed Asset Inventory

Corporate Fixed Asset Inventory

Organizational Charts

Framework or Reference Model

Business Unit & Departmental

Interviews

Configuration Management

.

Buy List

Standards

Project Inventories

PCUM

Term Formula

Percent Complete

Cost Performance Indexor Performance Factor

Checklist ActionsRatio of work accomplished in terms of the total amount of work to do.

Symbol

% Done

CPI or PF

TCPI or VF

BCWPBAC

Average PerformanceBCWPcum

Duration (wks or mos) Since ACWP Began

BCWPcumDuration (wks or mos)

From Time Now to Manager's Stated Completion Date

SC or S/CSchedule Correlation

BCWPACWP

Ratio of work accomplished against money spent (an efficiency ra ting: Work Done for Resources Expended)

To CompletePerformance Index

or Verification Factor

BAC - BCWPEAC - ACWP

Ratio of work remaining against money remaining (Efficiency whic h must be achieved to complete the remaining work with the expected remain ing money)

Schedule Performance Index SPI Ratio of work accomplished against what should have been done (E fficiency Rating: Work done as compared to what should have been done)

BCWPBCWS

SV

Ratio of Schedule Variance (SV) in terms of average amount of wo rk accomplished (in weeks or months). It indicates a correlation t o program true schedule condition

IEACIndependent EstimateAt Completion

BACPF

Calculation of a projected Estimate At Completion to compare wit h the CAM's Estimate At Completion:1) Ration of total work to be done against experienced cost eff iciency2) Sunk costs added to a ratio of remaining work against weight ed cost and schedule efficiencies

1)

2)BAC - BCWP.8CPI + .2SPI

ACWP +

Average Expected Performance To Finish

Average rate at which work has been accomplished since work bega n

Average rate at which work must be accomplished in the future to finish on the date the CAM has forecasted for completion of the work.PTO GO

PCUM

PCUM

Term Formula

Percent Complete

Cost Performance Indexor Performance Factor

Checklist ActionsRatio of work accomplished in terms of the total amount of work to do.

Symbol

% Done

CPI or PF

TCPI or VF

BCWPBAC

Average PerformanceBCWPcum

Duration (wks or mos) Since ACWP Began

BCWPcumDuration (wks or mos)

From Time Now to Manager's Stated Completion Date

SC or S/CSchedule Correlation

BCWPACWP

Ratio of work accomplished against money spent (an efficiency ra ting: Work Done for Resources Expended)

To CompletePerformance Index

or Verification Factor

BAC - BCWPEAC - ACWP

Ratio of work remaining against money remaining (Efficiency whic h must be achieved to complete the remaining work with the expected remain ing money)

Schedule Performance Index SPI Ratio of work accomplished against what should have been done (E fficiency Rating: Work done as compared to what should have been done)

BCWPBCWS

SV

Ratio of Schedule Variance (SV) in terms of average amount of wo rk accomplished (in weeks or months). It indicates a correlation t o program true schedule condition

IEACIndependent EstimateAt Completion

BACPF

Calculation of a projected Estimate At Completion to compare wit h the CAM's Estimate At Completion:1) Ration of total work to be done against experienced cost eff iciency2) Sunk costs added to a ratio of remaining work against weight ed cost and schedule efficiencies

1)

2)BAC - BCWP.8CPI + .2SPI

ACWP +

Average Expected Performance To Finish

Average rate at which work has been accomplished since work bega n

Average rate at which work must be accomplished in the future to finish on the date the CAM has forecasted for completion of the work.PTO GO

PCUM

Budgets

Version Control

Forecasted Cost Estimate At Completion EAC

Work Variance Schedule Variance SV

Cost Variance Cost Variance CV

Completion Var Variance At Completion VAC

Data Element Term AcronymData Element Term Acronym

Data Element Term AcronymData Element Term AcronymScheduled Work Budgeted Cost for Work Scheduled BCWS

Earned Value Budgeted Cost for Work Performed BCWP

Actuals Actual Cost of Work Performed ACWP

Authorized Work Budget At Completion BAC

Life Cycle Management

Architecture Management & Planning

Today…

1. Overview and Introduction

2. Marketing Activities

3. Program Requirements

4. Planned Program

5. Business Issues

6. Proposal Requirements

7. Cost and Pricing

A. Target Program Summary

A. Customer Organization and Environment

A. Scope of Work A. Win Strategy A. Desirability of Project/ Task

A. Proposal Manager and Key Team Members

A. Executive Cost Summary

B. Program Description

E. Customer Source Selection Process

B. Overview of Program Requirements

B. Teaming Approach

B. NDA/ Teaming Agreements

B. Proposal Plan B. Contingencies

B. Background and History

C. Customer Hot Buttons and Selection Criteria

C. Integrated Customer Solution Worksheet

C. Technical Approach

C. Cost to Bid C. Proposal Requirements and Summary Volume Outline

C. Material and/or Subcontractor Costs

C. Solicitation Schedule

D. Competitor Analysis

D. Customer Solution “Actions Required” Plan

D. Management and Organizational Overview

D. Risk Analysis and Mitigation Plan

D. Special Requirements (i.e., Orals, E-mail, etc.)

D. Fee and Operating Profit Summary

D. Opportunity Rating Summary

F. Customer Analysis and Bidder Comparison

E. Personnel and Staffing Approach

E. Unusual Costing Factors/ Concerns

E. Capture Program Status

F. Capture Program Status

F. Related Experience and Past Performance Approach

F. BAFO Requirements (Discounting, etc.)

G. Cost/Price Approach

IT Software / Applications Inventory

$ $ $

$ $ $ $

$ $ $ $ $

$ $ $ $

Professor Truex Enterprise Architectures

Architecture Evaluation- Two Techniques

�  Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method (ATAM) �  Qualitative approach to prioritizing requirements

�  Cost Benefit Analysis Method (CBAM) �  Takes the output of the ATAM and adds economic

analysis in the form of cost benefit tradeoffs

Professor Truex

The Plan/The Challenge: CIS 8090 - Enterprise Architectures

Why = theory Basic Building Blocks

How = practice Integrate

Theory and Practice

Understand the meaning scope and reach or EAs

The ‘Why’’What’ and ‘How’ of EAs-from a managerial and an architect’s perspective

EA Frameworks- The components and structure of an EA

EA standards

Modeling R-forms that are in a typical EAs

•  The view from many authors and sources-academic, govt. and practitioner communities?

•  What roles do we as IS/IT professionals in creating and managing the EA?

•  Hands-on development of high level, mid-level and lower level R-forms?

•  Framework choice and TOC •  Work System Models •  Core diagram and Reference Model •  ULMs

Enterprise Architectures

Professor Truex CIS 8090

Prof Truex … 1.  Began each day with an intro/agenda) and ended the day with a wrap-up

(the big picture)

2.  Introduced the day’s concept with opening questions

3.  Regularly re-visited material and examined the bigger picture.

•  brought in experience, readings and issues from the outside and from contemporary events

4.  Provided lectures from the text and other sources

•  In advance and on-line

5.  Directed case and lecture discussion

6.  Created the learning environment –TLD…

7.  Was well-prepared for class; and was available to discuss the ‘real time’ student concerns

8.  Provided bizarre sense of humor and stories. ==> HumoUr.

9.  Provided clear grading guidelines and regular detailed feedback

10. Genuinely cared about your learning

Professor Truex CIS 8090

Wrap Up…a final, ‘final word’

�  Recall that: �  success is measured not by heights achieved but by

obstacles overcome.

�  You have each overcome differing obstacles, and I hope, you have learned.

Professor Truex CIS 8090

So…remember… �  If you have learned and have enjoyed in the process when you fill

out the course evaluation my name is ….

�  … Duane Truex �  If not….

�  my name is �  Balasubramain Ramesh (-;

�  Course Evaluation: the MOST important % participation and questions:…. �  Questions: #34, (Importance of the course) and �  #35 (overall assessment of the Professor) �  Question #5, Prof. Prepared?, �  Question #11 Prof. Explain clearly?, �  Question #18, Prof. Know if we were following/awake/present/…alive? �  Question #28, Makes me work harder…?

Professor Truex

Thank You ! Enjoy the next term and do keep in touch