Enabling change in dynamic environments...5 EXECUTIVE PAPER / Architecting Modern Enterprises...

By Jazz Badeshia

Enterprise Architect – Practice Director, Consulting UKIE.

Enabling change in dynamic environments

2 EXECUTIVE PAPER / Architecting Modern Enterprises

Enterprise Architects are CXOs ‘Supercharged IT Anthropologists’

We Re-Define Enterprises:

‘… setting strategies for outcome based demand;

delivered back as outcome based demand enriched with capability …’

‘…I always love one of the sayings from our founder, Henry Ford. He said, “A business that makes nothing but money is a poor business,” and so giving back is a very important part, and that’s how you

build trust...’

Mark Fields, CEO of Ford Motor Company, US [1]


Why are we CXOs / IT Anthropologists?

We understand business dynamics and the interrelationships these business drivers have on individuals, organisations, and environments. We study and help organisations change and adapt over time to realising the positive impact of outcomes enterprises are striving to achieve. We work in ‘5 Dimensions’, business modelling, information relationships, application intent, technology frameworks, and the new Enterprise Architecture dimensional category – SECURITY.

EAs (Enterprise Architects) need to navigate the CIO paradigm, working at the C-

suite level, understanding shareholder value and talking multiple business languages

to transform and architect a new organisation out of the challenges they either creep

into or suddenly fall over board into in a sea of shark attacks.

This white paper looks to introduce a concept

called ‘Architecting Modern Enterprises’, where

I openly greet business outcomes as a

foundation for structuring future direction of

increasing value in organisations. However,

outcomes alone do not change the direction of

organisations. Outcomes need to be

structured, planned and directed, I phrase this

as outcomes delivered to the power of strategy.

The power of strategy shapes organisations

and the skill of the Enterprise Architect can

internalise the outcome to help organisations

structure strategies and deliver roadmaps for

value enhancing capabilities

OUTCOMES: Outcomes stem from changes in the contextual nature of the

industry an organisation operates in, the context of change can be external

or internal to an organisation.

STRATEGY: A Strategic framework is a representation of the context (inner

and outer), focusing of minds, to assist your organisation to follow a course

that resonates with all individuals (context).

DELIVERY: A logical but outcomes focused method to realise strategy and

outcomes for the benefit of the organisation and sometimes the context in

which the organisation operates.

‘Anthropology (noun) study of human beings,

especially their society, customs and beliefs’

‘Anthropologist (noun) a person that studies

anthropology’

Chambers Concise Dictionary & Thesaurus,

Chambers Harrap Publishers, 2001


OUTCOMES

To truly understand the meaning of outcomes, EAs should think of themselves a little like historians [2], we need to understand how

organisations have evolved and changed over time. A recent experience of mine really brings this to light. A famous retailer covered in the

media throughout the course of 2017, highlighted how their bad practices and behaviours led the organisation into a spiral of negative

branding and consequently negative performance lasting a number of years. The Grocers Conduct Authority (GCA) identifying a number

of malpractices.

Human behaviour is at the root of this impact, and largely the context of

organisations is driven by the human interaction for either the benefit or detriment

of an individual or organisation.

In particular, Andrew Pettigrew learnt from his work at ICI (Imperial Chemical

Industries), ‘recognizing the past, projects the present, toward the future, in a

particular way making some outcomes more likely than others’ [2].

While working in a completely different industry, Association Football, football clubs

are interesting organisations as their outcomes are easily measureable, categorised

into winning the league, league status, winning a domestic trophy, winning

European Trophies. It is this last category that is particularly interesting, Leeds

United in the late 1990s and early 2000s chased European glory as an outcome, but failed spectacularly as they did not understand the

strategy or did not plan for the strategy behind the outcome.

My summarised analysis below highlights [3] the demise of Leeds United

stemmed from their attempt to chase European glory, however, forgot

about domestic stability, in short Leeds United experienced:

Insufficient revenue generating capability, as shown by the large

amounts of unused stadium capacity placing it and other clubs in to

administration

Loss of revenues from relegation, through loss of TV broadcasting

revenue and loss of gate receipts as attendances fell

Excessive wage costs, partly reflecting over-optimistic aspirations

for the club by owners, management and fans

The ensuing on-field demise translated into off-field financial difficulty.

Loans were called in, and Leeds United began their journey to the lower

leagues in terms of both money and position, where they are still 10 years

on struggling to correct years of mismanagement and poor strategic

planning.

The dichotomy of examples I provide here, is to emphasize that no

industry is devoid of needing to understand how to build outcomes in the

correct manner, strategically planning will result in either, ‘rags to riches’

or ‘riches to rags’ stories. Throughout this paper, I will provide some

references to these examples of dichotomy to highlight meaning and purpose.

As I mentioned EAs will need to look at returning outcomes back to organisations with enriched capability (the re-definition effect), much

like improving working capital by x % or increasing service levels by y %. There are multiple ways we would analyse this, going from ‘root

cause analysis’, ‘scenario planning’, ‘business value matrix’ to ‘shareholder value tree’ appreciation.

‘...our strategy is that we have to drive costs

down. The only way I can see ...with a major

impact, is that we build on new technologies and

that we should go into digitisation, which is also

a standardisation process, especially as we are

a very capital-intensive industry…’

Rainer Seele CEO of OMV AG, Austria [1]


Scenario planning as a technique is all about understanding business

world uncertainties and certainties [4], or as I term it ‘disruption’. In the

case of planning for the future, it is the uncertainties that build the

colourful picture of a plausible scenario and future direction. This can

help organisations build the right growth strategies, EAs will get

organisations thinking around principles like:

Delivering Superior Value

Recognition that no specific advantage is sustainable

Learning and continuous innovation

Building relationships with customers, suppliers, employees

and other stakeholders

Our role as EAs in this phase is to lead an organisation in the following

construct:

1. Stage 1: Setting the Scene – understanding business direction, setting objectives and gaps needing to be filled

2. Stage 2: Determine the Disruption Factors – identification of the uncertain elements derived from a wide range of knowledge

bases aligned to the understanding from Stage 1; this stage is the ‘assessment of disruption’

3. Stage 3: Reducing Disrupting Factors – continuing with the ‘assessment of disruption’, it is required to reduce the numerous

factors down to the dozen (+/-) most important factors, as shown in the example here (factors affecting IT Industry). The process

of deciding which factors are most important is dependent upon two characteristics, which are:

a. Degree of Disruption

b. Degree of Importance to Organisation

The decision processes taken to reduce the multiple factors all help to move the scenarios to ‘outcomes’. An ‘outcome’ will describe a

consistent set of endstates for the industry/organisation; competition, regulation, technology, economic cycles, politics, etc. are all present

in our critical uncertainties, factors critical in determining the correct strategic direction (see section on Strategy). Taking into consideration

the timeline of the planning horizon, along with industry critical metrics, such as market share, margins, customer behaviour, regulatory

intervention, etc. it will be seen how these elements serve as milestones along the way to realising the outcome.

The assessment of uncertainty can be translated into a simpler view, by constructing, a shareholder value tree out of the analysis

performed, which can then drive the basis of setting strategies and objectives of how the business can improve or where it needs to focus

its attention to enhance capabilities, an example is shown below.

Disruption

Import

ance

to O

rga

nis

ation

High

High

Low

Low

1. Mis-consulting laws

2. Terrorism

3. Hacking

4. Mis-consulting advice5. Social Unrest

6. Immigration and

Working laws

7. China/India diversify

into consulting

8. EU expansion

9. UK joins euro

10. UK leaves Euro

11. Economic cycles

12. Global recession

13. Industry

consolidation

14. Price Wars15. Competition

16. IT Spend Cycles

17. Exchange Rates

18. Monopolistic Market

19. Staff shortages

20. Retirement age

increase

21. Consumer

preference

22. Disgruntled employees

23. Cost Conscious

24. Business Practice

Change

25. Health issues

26. Marketing activities

27. New market, new

industries

28. Interaction of teams

29. Working in unstable

countries30. Staff strike

31. Consolidation of

ERP/CRM

32. Best practice role

reversal

33. Hosting

34. Hardware

Improvements

35. Simplified business

processes

36. Increasing

redundancies

37. Decreasing prices

38. Emerging markets

rise

39. Niche players in the

SME market

40. New entrants from

MNCs

41. Resellers enter

consulting

42. Sarbanes Oxley

laws43. Certification of

Consultancy Industry

44. Limiting Foreign project

members

45. Increased auditing

46. Natural disasters

47. Increased air travel

48. Increase in virtual

working


Understanding the Outcome Economy

My diagram above provides an outlook of aiming to use technology to improve organisations

underlying profit and loss capabilities, a view also shared by PwC[1]. PwC surveyed CEOs and

found they wanted more Technology and more People. Interestingly, 79% believe that Technology

will replace more human activities over the next 5 years, but conversely 67% of the CEOs also want

to increase headcount. CEOs are now focusing on an equation of ‘Technology + Talent equals

Innovation’, in a paradigm of 79% seeing their organisations growing organically and 63% of this

population looking to drive cost reductions much harder. However, CEOs are increasingly struggling

with finding the right resource, the right capability to provide this organic growth, they found the

‘hardest skill to find are those that cannot be performed by machine’. The top five skills importance

where deemed to be:

Problem Solving

Adaptability

Leadership

Creativity and Innovation

Emotional Intelligence

Unsurprisingly these are the most difficult skills to recruit.

Therefore, as EAs we help organisations on their way to understand and plan for this dynamic,

as ‘IT Anthropologists’ we appreciate these business dynamics, the table below provides a

start to structured questioning to how we need to think about Outcomes and Capabilities

KEY QUESTIONS KEY VALUE OUTCOMES KEY VALUE OBJECTIVES

What capability is being developed? Business Definition (Process Domains) Target Operating Model

Transformation Strategies

What benefit(s) does that capability

deliver

Benefits identified and qualified Opportunities and Priorities

Enterprise Roadmap

How will we measure that benefit Benefit enablers documented Current Global and UK Initiatives

Impact of Global on UK

Data and Integration Patterns

How will those benefits be realised KPIs identified with clear linkage to capabilities Initial appreciation of KPIs to Business Value

Outcomes (Drivers)


STRATEGY

The power behind strategy lies in the leaders that develop and position strategies for the greater good of the organization. We have all

seen the values of Dyson, Branson, Steve Jobs, Stelious et al and how they have shaped not only the economy, which they operate in,

but also the organisations, which have become prominent in the eyes of the world.

Every organisation needs strong leadership and direction to ensure they course their way through the challenging world outside and

maximize the internal operations. The value EAs bring in this space is paramount to turning the power of strategy in true capability enriched

outcomes. The EA ‘IT Anthropology’ behaviours during the strategy cycle of align, assimilate, and adapt, allows EAs to influence and guide

leaders (C-Suite) to ensure organisations develop the correct thinking in driving strategy to improve their bottom line, and more importantly

beat their competition.

Enterprise Architect ‘IT Anthropology’ Behaviours

EAs need to understand the external and internal perspective of any organization which would shape the

leaders thinking in developing the right capabilities, EAs would need to assimilate information and utilise

methodologies such as Lean and Six Sigma in their thinking to talk about the voice of the customer, and

the likes of Gartner to discuss Demand Driven Supply Chains or Customer Centricity, to illustrate the

distances between customers and organisations is now much closer than we think to determine the

appropriate decision making approaches. EAs need to be cognizant of cloud technology advnces and the

rapid response these systems deliver, meaning data needs to be real time and understood fast to be

ahead of the competition. EAs need to adapt to changing technology landscapes in creating flexibility to

achieve set strategies.

In shaping strategies, leaders are 1 or 2 of 10 schools of strategy, but EAs would need to be mindful of all 10 and then determine which

combination would fit the challenges and outcomes ahead. Mintzberg et al in Strategy Safari talk about 10 schools of strategy [4].

‘…Among many other

obligations, today’s CEO

has to know how to

address or manage

polarity. The customer

wants a quality product at

an affordable cost, with

transparency and a story

that is consistent with the

best values in society.

Shareholders want the

best, fastest return on a

product, with better

optimisation of capital. And

these are the conflicts that

create value and generate

progress, and that are not

necessarily mutually

exclusive. Herein lies the

value of management and

the reason management is

paid to provide this

service…’

Sergio Rial CEO of

Santander Bank, Brazi3]


The Design School Strategy formation as a process of conception

The Planning School Strategy formation as a formal process

The Positioning School Strategy formation as an analytical process

The Entrepreneurial School Strategy formation as a visionary process

The Cognitive School Strategy formation as a mental process

The Learning School Strategy formation as an emergent process

The Power School Strategy formation as a process negotiation

The Cultural School Strategy formation as a collective process

The Environmental School Strategy formation as a reactive process

The Configuration School Strategy formation as a process of transformation

These scholars cut the 10 schools in to 3 groups, most leaders stumble from stage to stage, and would probably fall in to the Learning or

Cultural school (this school is about the collectiveness

of all the other schools). Therefore, our job as EAs is to

help these leaders navigate the strategy safari, my

thinking is more simplistic, success in developing and

driving strategy can be distilled into three core

categories:

1. Perspectives

2. Framework

3. Journey

EAs take the strain of working out the best strategy to

use, by using the IT Anthropology behaviours to ensure

clients are led through the challenges of transformation

programmes.

Perspectives

EAs need to drive next level thinking into understanding the outer and inner boundaries of control (the degree of disruption), effectively

the macro- (unknown disruption) and micro (known disruption)-economies in which organisations operate. The outer boundary is

concerned with social, economic, competition, political, etc. influences and inner boundary is concerned with the organisations structure,

culture, politics, power, etc. influences.

‘…Outwardly Ofcom have nothing to do with the Premier League television deal – that is the matter for the European

Union – but behind the scenes they are helping to shape the EU strategy..’

Daily Telegraph [3]


For example, the majority of organisations rely heavily on a mechanistic structure and

look for this type of organisation structure to provide rules and policies that everyone

is forced to follow. This is the industrialisation of modern day businesses. One major

problem with mechanistic organisations like large monoliths such as IBM, GE, or

public sector organisations and burgeoning ones in various industries is that they

stifle innovation; going against the very equation we now see of technology plus talent

equaling innovation.

Mechanistic structures would follow high complexity, formalisation and centralisation,

the very thing we try to achieve to build in centres of excellence, but this should not

be at the expense of innovation or competitive differentiation. Following a mechanistic

structure, organisations are actually driving its people to perform routine tasks,

behave in a programmed manner, creating slow responses to the uncertainties of

developing a new business in an already vibrant market. Therefore, slow reaction in

developing new business outcomes will hinder strategy since, markets change very quickly and therefore the confines of the mechanistic

structure would not allow organisations to adapt and mold to the changing environments. EAs bring value in redefining organisation

structures resembling organic and dynamic businesses, which are flexible and adaptive. Emphasis falling on lateral rather than vertical

communication. EAs build target operating models creating a balance between an innovative organisation built upon, expertise and

knowledge rather than authority of position, loosely defined responsibilities, and emphasis on exchanging information rather than giving

directions, and centres of excellence based on role based culture to ensure those industrialised activities really do provide the economies

of scale.

Another burgeoning consideration is the Internet of Things (IoT) and the impact of ‘Cyber

Security’ on organisations. Understanding data collected about customers will have a

significant impact on how consumers trust organisations. This data is an incredible asset for

companies and their customers. It enables businesses to deliver a better service, develop

closer relationships with their customers and earn their trust. It enables customers to get more

targeted offerings and engage with companies in ways that are more meaningful, however,

84% of people say breaches of data privacy and ethics causes them to lose trust in

organisations [1].

Therefore, it is perspectives we need to understand balancing power, politics, market

dynamics etc. from outer and inner boundaries, ensuring the world in which organisations

transform in, can actually deliver commercial value and become a leader within in their field.

Without understanding perspectives and boundaries and the span of control in which to

operate in, strategy realisation will not enable outcomes.

Framework

This part of the white paper is the 1st locked part of structure to any delivery; EAs need

structure to building any component of a target-operating model, much like a Building

Architect needs structure to ensure their buildings stand the test of time through principles, policies, and standards.

The Enterprise Architecture framework will document the strategy and vision containing the detail necessary to define the reference

architecture to deliver against the outcomes. It also defines the roadmap for continuous improvement as the organisation changes over

time against the various perspectives.

An Enterprise Architecture Strategy and Vision details the conceptual architecture proposed for the outcomes (effectively the scope of

work), thus providing a view of the longer-term architecture objectives the organisation is trying to achieve. The role of the EA will be to

create clarity so that initial work may be undertaken to verify and align the business outcomes and resource requirements, and define the

outline information requirements and associated strategies of the architecture work to be done.

‘…As technology in the workplace increases, it

will have a big impact on both people and

culture. It’ll change the type of people you

employ. It’ll change the culture of delivery within

the organisation. It’ll drive us away from

applying human thoughts to things which can

be automated in a very logical way...’

Peter Harrison Group Chief Executive of

Schroders plc. UK [1]

‘…Digital technology is central to both

our customer solutions and our

operating practices. For example, we

are implementing platforms that make

it easier for our customers to access

their information and monitor their

consumption, and to optimise their

buildings’ energy use. We also make

significant use of digital technology to

improve industrial performance, by

implementing predictive maintenance

at our plants, for example…’

Isabelle Kocher

Directeur Général du Groupe (CEO)

ENGIE of France [1]


Once the history is understood, the EA will describe the ‘TARGET’ architecture state. The EA focuses on describing the key business

opportunities or issues to be addressed by the proposed architecture development using the ‘5 Dimensions’ of Organisation architecture

domains (Business, Information, Application, Technology and Security) to describe it, as shown in the diagram below.

The methodology to develop the Enterprise Architecture Strategy and Vision can be created by multiple methods, the skill of the EA will be

to pick the correct one, typical ones used are TOGAF (The Open Group Architecture Development Method), ITIL (Information Technology

Infrastructure Library), Zachman, etc..

Strategy development, as mentioned before is being cognizant of the past and taking the organisation forward to a new world. The

framework must show some consideration to this previous history, describing the perspectives of the current situation including problems

and successes currently experienced, review current business strategy, capturing business motivation (Drivers, Goals, Objectives, and

Metrics [to measure benefit]) against demand being requested. The EA will analyse the business capability model and identify relevant

capabilities; typically, the current analysis would include:

Stakeholders Matrix.

Business Motivation Model.

Business issues.

Opportunities and drivers for change.

Capability Model (to highlight capabilities in scope).

The EA will describe how the architecture considers the outcome requirements, explaining how the architecture will help address issues

and concerns raised and support achievement of business goals and objectives. A clear description of anticipated benefit is presented,

providing an outlook of what value to drive from the portfolio, programme or projects of work to be scheduled, as a process of building the

Enterprise Architecture Model.

Definition

StatusProcess L2

Preliminary shortlist of metrics and

KPI

Expected financial

impactValue Driver(s)

Metric/KPI

Current

Metric/KPI

Value

Targeted

Metric/KPI

Value

Estimated One

Time impact

Estimated

Annual

impact

Estimated

5 yr impact

Impact

Considerations

Number of FTEs for the process "manage

pay" per $1 billion revenue

Consolidate/outsour

ce relevant HR Cycle time in business days from Rationalize IT Cycle time in business days to resolve a


Payment errors as a percentage of total

Percentage of payroll disbursements that

Percentage of employees receiving payroll

Systems cost to perform the process

Total cost to perform the process "manage

1. Elimiation of third

party time keeping

system

2. Elimination of

ATOS service fee

3. Reduction in per

FTE payroll

processing cost

8 6 4 Wave 1

Pre-

requisitesRoadmap Wave

HR & Payroll

OptimisationFully shaped

Hire to

RetireManage Pay XXXX XXXX XXXXX

ProjectFunctional

Area

Relative

financial

impact (scale

of 1 to 10)

Risk levelStrategy

Alignment

EAs start to group the business in to streams / verticals (such as

Procure to Pay, Order to Cash, etc..) capturing key aspects of the

future mode of operation and identifying dependencies between

streams to support roadmap sequencing in the Enterprise

Architecture Strategy and Vision.

EAs will describe capability maturity increments desired by the

business to achieve their desired business outcomes (and

associated benefit).


Arriving at this point the EA would have documented the reference architecture, aligned, assimilated and adapted policies, principles and

standards that need to be referenced to describe how the target state will align to Business Strategic direction delivering the outcomes.

The ‘5 Dimensions’ of Organisations represents architectural views to address specific stakeholder viewpoints identified in the current

situation. ‘5 Dimensions’ of Organisations are categorised as:

Business Architecture: including process and organisational factors, such as roles, functions and target operating model.

The vision for business capabilities, such as strategic procurement, or integrated business planning; specifically the EA would:

o Define detailed Business Scenarios describing future state.

o Group high level requirements to business scenarios.

o Describe the future state capability maturity desired.

o Build a detailed Capability Roadmap and describe key maturity increments.

o Describe target state Conceptual business processes.

o Describe target state business operating model and relevant role changes.

o Describe anticipated business benefits in alignment with increments of capability maturity.

o Describe constraints, assumptions, risks and issues.

o Define architecture requirements.

Information Architecture: the conceptual information model and business information model. A common model for corporate

data and language rules that underpins business processes; specifically the EA would:

o Identify target information entities which will be used by referencing the Conceptual Information Model and Business

Information, creating master data principles.

o Link information entities to business capabilities and Business Processes described in the Business Architecture

section.

o Describe centre of excellence definition and governance processes (where information will be mastered and which

organisation unit and roles should govern it).

o Describe the system of record (where the information entity that is master data item and the system that is recognised

as that which holds the master data record).

o Describe the security classification for each Conceptual and/or Business Information Entity.


o Define architecture Requirements.

Application Architecture: encompassing the application reference architecture model and the application strategic intent. The

applications packages that support data transactions; specifically the EA would:

o Identify which application components will be required, referencing the Application Architecture Model.

o Describes the conceptual target state of business capabilities including future state view of single or multiple groups of

applications based on meeting business outcomes and Business Strategy.


o Show the major applications in scope of the change and how these support the business process, information flows

and roles.

o Provides a long-term view of target applications.

o Define an application roadmap to support the architecture vision.


o Define Architecture Requirements.

Technology Architecture: the lean, mobile, scalable devices, hardware, network platforms that deliver applications operations

and the technology patterns to drive better integrations; specifically the EA would:

o Identify which application components are being used by referencing the Technology Architecture Model

o Link technology to applications described in Application Architecture

o Describe what technology change is required to support target state application landscape

o List what patterns are applicable

o Define a technology roadmap to support the architecture strategy and vision



Security: strategy to protect and integrate the organisation on to a single secure solution to drive greater corporate responsibility,

gain consumer trust through being secure with all data management and IT disruptions / disaster recovery; specifically the EA

would:

o Identify which security components are being used by referencing the Application and Technology Architecture Model

(define and protect for Internet of Things within the boundaries of the scope)

o Link security to applications described in Application Architecture

o Define how sector or regional specific data security requirements (e.g. HIPPA, GDPR) will be met

o Describe what security change is required to support target state application landscape

o Define a security principles and policies to support the architecture strategy and vision



Governing for Excellence

Like all strategies and adherence to achieving the intended aims, the EA will also need to act as a keeper of the vision letting only those

perspectives that will improve or assist the Enterprise Architecture Strategy and Vision to succeed in delivering its outcomes.

The governance model defines the controls we have in place to regulate the way work is delivered. The responsibility of the EA is to have

a Governance model in place, to ensure decisions that are made throughout

a programme of work, can be traced back to an authority, terms of reference

or mandated client policy.

EA Strategy Roadmap Gateway is fundamentally about decision-making and

controlling activity, and should not be confused with business-as-usual

management. It is the strategic task of setting goals, direction, limitations and

the framework of accountability. This governance gateway determines ‘what’

the client does and what it should become in the future, rather than ‘how’ it

operates. It provides oversight, approval, and control that regulates and

controls the day-to-day activities.

Fundamentally, the EA is the gatekeeper to:

chart the governance mechanisms regulating how day-to-day work is achieved, and

Providing guidance for colleagues to help them in decision making.

‘…Focus on a few key objectives … I only have three

things to do. I have to choose the right people, allocate

the right number of dollars, and transmit ideas from one

division to another with the speed of light. So I’m really in

the business of being the gatekeeper and the transmitter

of ideas…’

Jack Welch, Former Chairman and CEO of General

Electric, 1981-2001.


In practical terms, the EA is there to help answer questions such as:

“Why are we doing this?” - Are we meeting our customers’ objectives?

“Does this feel right?” - Who bears the risk?

“Who else needs to know?” Whom do we need to tell about this?

This will also help to identify not only the ‘who’, but the ‘when’ to ask such questions.

The EA should pull together a set of standardised Terms of Reference (ToRs) (see example below) describing the purpose, remit,

accountabilities and methodologies for each meeting during the governance activity. Having standard ToRs encourages consistency,

improves transparency, challenges the purpose, identifies duplications and provides accurate reporting of decisions made and where

required escalations to the next level.

‘…Corporate governance is only part of the larger economic context in which firms operate that includes, for

example, macroeconomic policies and the degree of competition in product and factor markets. The corporate

governance framework also depends on the legal, regulatory and institutional environment. In addition factors

such as business ethics and corporate awareness of the environment and societal interests of the

communities in which a company operates can also have an impact on its reputation and its long term

success…’

Definition of Corporate Governance

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development)


Journey

In driving to an Enterprise Architecture Strategy and Vision and coming out with a roadmap for delivering programmes, the EA needs to

instil the ‘path of agile delivery’ in the wake of ‘business modulation’. The ‘path of agile of delivery’ is effectively making use of the V-

Model concepts (see next section) and ‘business modulation’ is managing the amplitude of business change, power and politics within

that context of business transformation.

The influence of power and politics has a great impact on the framework for delivery and the results that delivery will produce. Change

gets stuck because processes can become so hardened, in ways that do not create receptivity to change. Meaning the development of

organisations is hindered by the power of people involved in the process. These old stakeholders are linked to existing processes

where an entrenched view within these constituencies minds act as blinkers to understanding external dynamics of the changing

environment. Meaning some of the personnel within new business opportunities and those related to achieving a new paradigm their

personal power is threatened, and the only way old stakeholders know how to protect their patch is to put up barriers and resistance to

change. Personal agendas matter; surprisingly few people put the companys best interests above themselves during any change

intiative. To quote sport and the Secret Footballer:

However, the only way to fight power is to fight it with power itself, meaning dynamic people and an innovative mind-set at the heart of

an organisation is a necessity to driving change and change power dynamics for the benefit of creating better results.

Organisations would do well to utilise some of the research done by Hammer where his paper on: ‘Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate,

Obliterate’ [6] illustrates organisations should radically redesign the business processes to reflect the new dynamic ways of doing business

harnessing the power of the right personnel and technologies, advocating an ALL or NOTHING approach.

Clearly, this research is in tune with:

In addition, aligned to Oracle’s accelerators, utilising ‘modern best practice’ [7], driving change positively and reducing time taken to

deliver transformations. Taking leading out of the box technology and having this implemented by skilled resources taking a ’path of

agile delivery’ to deliver results and innovation quickly.

Hammer, would argue that reengineering relies on recognising and

challenging old assumptions and rules that will make the

businesses under-perform and breaking away from them, i.e.

moving away from the old way of managing businesses and

allowing some entrepreneurial flair to exist in helping innovation

and flexibility to flourish. Therefore, by reviewing and changing the

scope of the business and re-organising the business network

structure, organisations can reengineer their business processes

once more but this time looking to enhance capabilities.

‘…If there is one thing I have learned, is that every player in every dressing room has an agenda…everyone

is in it for themselves…’ [5]

Secret Footballer– Tales from the Secret Footballer, Guardian Faber, 2013

‘Use computers to redesign – not just automate – existing

business processes’ [6]

M. Hammer – Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate, Obliterate, HBR, July-Aug ’90

𝑇𝑒𝑐ℎ𝑛𝑜𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑦 + 𝑇𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 𝐼𝑛𝑛𝑜𝑣𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛


Taking a path of agile delivery organisations should be looking to seek efficiencies (evolutionary

curve) in the first instance, streamlining core business practices. Thus, the main objective is to

optimise achieving operational brilliance within the span of control. Seeking efficiency is about

concentrating on the internal aspects of the organisational boundary. However, having realised

what it takes to achieve operational brilliance internally; organisations should understand the

dynamics of the external environment where organisations begin to change their business

network (reach) and scope. By attempting to redesign these aspects, organisations would then

take on a ‘revolutionary curve’ and look to develop its business that would be enhancing

capabilities and delivering value add and more revenues. It is the skill of the EA to determine

when an organisations business dynamics needs to follow a revolutionary curve or a smaller

evolutionary progression, in the context of managing the business modulation via the path of

agile delivery.

It must be recognised that gaining such reward from revolutionary activities would come at a

significant effort of attempting change, and this is where issues lie, leaders need to keep the

faith and desire to transform their organisations to develop significant capabilities.

‘…I think that the biggest change

that I see happening in the next 20

years is that there is going to be

big overlapping among the

different industries. So, there is

going to be fierce competition

among the mature industries – for

example, telecoms will fight with

energy companies, energy

companies will fight with the

automotive companies, and so

on…’

Francesco Venturini CEO of Enel

Green Power, Italy [1]

‘…Ephemeralization, a term coined by R. Buckminster Fuller, is the ability of technological advancement to do

"more and more with less and less until eventually you can do everything with nothing," that is, an accelerating

increase in the efficiency of achieving the same or more output (products, services, information, etc.) while

requiring less input (effort, time, resources, etc.)…’ [8]


D2 = Disruption and Delivery

Managing Strategic Problems: Managing Forces of Disruption

Factors relating to the transformations of businesses can be linked to that of IT projects and successful completion of such projects.

Except in this case the successful completion of business projects would be deemed by its viability and sustainability as a transformed

business for many years to come. Therefore, problems such as business buy-in, selecting right resources, relationship management,

stakeholder perceptions, to name but a few, are critical to successfully building a business, the figure below highlights some of the issues

that jeopardise the successful transformations of businesses and projects alike.

Having used this analogy between IT projects and

business strategy it is clear to see that a number of

similar problems can be faced by each activity. The

diagram clearly illustrates how an organisation can

become out of control through a sequence of events

that have either been attributed to lack of buy-in or

personal power prevailing to the business not

actually taking the transformation seriously (the

Secret Footballer example), not managing the

factors of disruption. This clearly results in an

organisation becoming lost and the required

outcomes to successfully operate the business will

never be realised, because organisations (leaders /

management) lose sight with the degree of

importance a disruption has on the outcomes.

Therefore, learning from over 20 years of consulting, I use technology (in this case, utilising Oracle) as a driver for change, much like

cloud services (Software, Platform, and Infrastructure -as a Service) is changing business thinking in the 21st century. Leading to re-

addressing processes and looking to deploy and recruit key resources (internally and externally) meaning the EA must manage the

amplitude of the business modulation and keep it within the span of control to ensure the whole strategy for organisational change can

follow the Enterprise Architecture Strategy and Vision, taking organisations through a revolutionary change. What I am implying, the

strategy of organisations should be pulled along by the driving force of IT; using the levers of processes and individuals to realise the

outcomes. EAs often have to step back and change the structure of the processes before one was able to change the strategy, which

would then reinforce structural changes. Meaning EAs need to make organisations understand their market dynamics, allowing them to

develop significant changes to processes being developed leading to organisations resembling a more organic, dynamic, flexible, and

innovative structures, more conducive and receptive to enhanced capabilities to meet the outcomes.

‘…we are concerned the board must evolve with the right skill set and expertise, which provides a package

of knowledge to help the club achieve a higher level of growth going forward…’

Chairman, Crewe Alexander Football Club [3]


Delivering Strategic Programmes: V-Model

This part of the white paper is the 2nd locked part of structure to any delivery; the EAs at this stage of the re-definition lifecycle will provide

the handshake to the ‘Delivery’ team. A core component of delivery will be to utilise the V Model.

The V Model is a modified representation of a traditional system development lifecycle that aligns activities and outputs in the start-up

stages of a project, up to the actual building of the

capabilities. The diagram below pulls together the

stages of discussion so far, into a complete view of

the re-definition lifecycle.

It should become clear now, that EAs are embedded

in helping organisations realise benefits and

supporting them in developing capabilities over the

course of a delivery lifecycle, that takes into

consideration the strategy development as well as

seeing the strategy to fruition via programme

delivery.

Breaking down the V-Model further, there are four

levels of qualification to ensure the solution being

developed is assured to deliver against the

outcomes and create the capabilities being sought.

The left hand side of the model describes the breakdown from outcomes to the creation of system artefacts. The right hand side illustrates

the corresponding verification and validation required as the system is configured and deployed.

EAs would operate at the highest level of the model to provide an assurance role to the solution being delivered, as controll ing both

gateways during the solution delivery process. The expectation will be that consulting or service integrator (SI) partners will plan and

perform the day-to-day delivery work that goes into designing, configuring and building solutions and capabilities.


Assurance Gateways

EAs focus must be firmly on helping organisations to achieve their target business outcomes. In the Enterprise Architecture Strategy and

Vision EAs assist, organisations articulate the changes in capability they need to achieve, and will guide them by defining the high-level

technology changes that will enable the business improvements required. EAs will focus on the higher-value activities of engaging with

organisations (at the C-suite level), understanding their business, and helping them achieve their strategic aims.

When the programme moves to the lower levels of the model, the traceability matrix will help manage the interaction of the organisational

business transformation team and the consulting vendor, to produce the products and artefacts that go into delivering a new solution or

capability. While the EA role will shift toward quality assurance, assuring the products that the programme delivers, and in some cases,

also the process that the delivery team has undertaken to achieve those products. ‘Assurance’ means EAs should:

Review and quality-assure delivery contractual deliverables, ensuring that each is fit for purpose and meets strategic needs

Make sure delivery teams are aware of their responsibility to adhere to the Enterprise Architecture Strategy and Vision

Be accountable for the programme or project adhering to all relevant governance, particularly stage-gate governance

Make sure the delivery teams reports progress against plan throughout the engagement

Maintain visibility of delivery-managed working logs such as RAID logs, action plans, and defect logs

EAs should expect to assure the quality of products delivered throughout the engagement, and where necessary be prepared to reject

products that are not of sufficient quality. Product assurance will be conducted through ensuring traceability from business (objectives)

specifications through to acceptance verification. Validation is necessary for the solution (product) delivered by a programme, and, for

the satellite systems, which interface with the solution.

Specific products that the delivery team will be expected to deliver will depend on the nature of the programme or project and will be

defined with the organisation. Deliverables that would typically be expected to be quality-assured could include:

Detailed programme and project implementation plans

Objectives capture documentation

Outline and Detailed solution designs

Validation strategies and plans

Validation reports and defect logs

Change requests and impact assessments

Validation will provide documented evidence of compliance with the functional and operational requirements approved for the

implementation of capabilities. The EA will drive the qualification processes as the programme charts through its stages, the diagram

above categorises four levels of qualification:

Design

Installation

Operational

Performance

Detailed Design

Functional

Specification

Tech Design

Specification Test Procedure

Additional

Information

Process Level 1 Process Level 2 id Process Level 3 id Process Level 4

id

Global

Process

Owner

Related

Design

Principle

Business

Requirement

Category

Pain point Category Root cause Category Related

Site

Solution

Category

Doc. ID/

version

Doc. ID/

version

Doc ID/

version

Doc ID/

version

Comments

Order To Cash B.1 B.1.1 B.1.1.1 Efficiency -

removal of

repetitive

manual

processes

Complete

organization

setup

Delays in Sales Order

Processing

Lack of automated

interfaces

ALL System

Order To Cash B.1 B.1.1 B.1.1.2 Common data

- single

consistent

definitions

Single view of

Customer,

Vendors and

Contracts

Delays in Sales Order

Processing

Lack of automated

interfaces

All

Traceability matrix


These qualification gates provide programmes the necessary assurance to move from one stage to the next:

Qualification Validation

Design The design of the Target Process Solution Design specifications, along with relevant

extensions to third party systems.

Required business processes will be specified through detail design documents and

gap specifications, leading to configuration of the solution design and final

configuration instructions.

These design specifications will include details of the system and will be traceable to

the functional specification and the business objectives.

Extension components and non-standard feature design and code reviews will be

performed and documented.

Installation The solution should test to ensure it is built and operates as an integrated business

solution and to verify that the implemented solution is functioning according to the

Functional Specification and the detailed requirements in the High Level Design.

The solution should be verified to ensure performance under load, to a standard

acceptable to justified requirements.

Verification should be justified, defined and executed to challenge the extended

components for detection of incorrect operation. Justification of tests will be through

functional risk assessment, grading risk of failure for each scenario.

Tests should be designed, executed and registered in a traceability matrix to ensure

coverage and completeness.

Operational The solution should verify through testing as acceptable to the business and operable

with a reasonable set of data, according to the agreed Enterprise Architecture

Strategy and Vision.

Tests should be designed, executed and registered in a traceability matrix to ensure

coverage and completeness.

Performance The solution should verify the capabilities have delivered against the outcomes and

can be measured on an on-going basis through a benefits realisation validation

process, and aligns to the Enterprise Architecture Strategy and Vision. Measuring the

KPIs using SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Timeliness)

principles.

Definition

StatusProcess L2

Preliminary shortlist of metrics and

KPI

Expected financial

impactValue Driver(s)

Metric/KPI

Current

Metric/KPI

Value

Targeted

Metric/KPI

Value

Estimated One

Time impact

Estimated

Annual

impact

Estimated

5 yr impact

Impact

Considerations


pay" per $1 billion revenue

Consolidate/outsour

ce relevant HR Cycle time in business days from Rationalize IT Cycle time in business days to resolve a


Payment errors as a percentage of total

Percentage of payroll disbursements that

Percentage of employees receiving payroll

Systems cost to perform the process

Total cost to perform the process "manage

1. Elimiation of third

party time keeping

system

2. Elimination of

ATOS service fee

3. Reduction in per

FTE payroll

processing cost

8 6 4 Wave 1

Pre-

requisitesRoadmap Wave

HR & Payroll

OptimisationFully shaped

Hire to

RetireManage Pay XXXX XXXX XXXXX

ProjectFunctional

Area

Relative

financial

impact (scale

of 1 to 10)

Risk levelStrategy

Alignment


CONCLUSION

This paper has highlighted the importance of the

Enterprise Architect and the role this resource plays,

in providing organisations a clear agile path to

achieve its outcomes, through a structured model and

a number of techniques / frameworks along the way

to achieve success.

The support of senior leaders is critical in providing a

holistic perspective. Senior leaders must openly back and understand the re-definition lifecycle and its importance of communicating

future strategies, generating value and moving the organisation forward into new paradigms.

Outcomes: Making use of techniques like scenario planning, business value matrix, determining which disruptions are important to an

organisation to allow leaders to set correct outcomes, objectives, and goals for organisations to meet shareholder value expectations,

outcomes will be cognizant against industry and organisational cultures and philosophy.

Strategy: Understanding Perspectives, Frameworks and the Journey an organisation needs to take, ensuring they can begin driving

outcomes enriched with capabilities. The EA at this stage is critical to ensuring strategy can power outcomes and business direction;

delivering against the core values sought by the organisation. Skills sets around ‘IT Anthropology Behaviours’ are core to driving senior

leaders in realising the strategy; structuring and governing the business across ‘5 Dimensions’ for success with an operating model that

can truly perform in the new world context an organisation will be moving towards. The journey is a constant reinforcement that

Technology + Talent equals Innovation that will drive enhanced capability because of the revolutionary change in the organisations

network of operation.

‘…You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change

something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete…’

Richard Buckminster Fuller, July 12 1895 – July 1 1983, American

architect, systems theorist, author, designer, and inventor


Delivery: The first component around delivery is the management of forces of disruption and creating governance excellence throughout

the re-definition lifecycle, ensuring you can control the programme of work within the boundaries of control defined by the organisation.

The second part is about constant solution validation and taking the transformation journey through a traceability structure to ensure we

qualify from one stage to the next, and actually deliver on the outcomes we set out to enrich with capabilities, that can be ‘SMART’-ly

measured.

Finally, this papers construction is on the same principles documented. My outcome directive was to give back to my fellow colleagues

(clients, employers, suppliers, all) the lessons I have learnt so far. Achieving transformations though understanding perspectives, being

cognizant of the impact transformations have on the lives of individuals with the sole aim to improve the life of humans and payback to

society the kindness and support shown to me in my continuing journey…

‘…Good architecture should be a projection of life itself, and that implies an intimate knowledge

of biological, social, technical and artistic problems…’

Walter Gropius, 18 May 1883- 5 July 1969, German Architect and Founder of Bauhaus School

and Pioneer of Mastering Modernist Architecture


STARTING YOUR RE-DEFINTIION JOURNEY…

Oracle Consulting Enterprise Architects are skilled ‘IT Anthropologists’ and understand your business landscape, to make your

organisation a ‘Modern Enterprise’ delivering outcomes to the power of strategy. Enhancing your capabilities and creating value from the

start of strategy definition to the end of the roadmap, underpinned by a continuous improvement programme to transform your business

as the leading competitor in your field.

Our Oracle Consulting Enterprise Architecture Practice consists of four key services to help you improve your business:

Solution Leadership: Leading you through the complete re-definition

journey and delivering a solution that can provide strategy to meet your

outcomes with enhanced / enriched capabilities

Health Checks: Our EAs also provide capabilities in checking your

journey and providing feedback on meeting your outcomes, objectives

and goals

Architecture Governance: A governance service to ensure you can

build your solution and meet your stakeholder commitments, with a

robust assurance model

Partner Management: Keeping your service integration partners

honest, and making sure they have the necessary knowledge

connection to drive value out of your solution deployment.

Oracle has the necessary skill set to deliver your complete re-definition

journey, underpinned by our Oracle True Cloud Method (TCM)

specifically designed to deliver maximum effectiveness when enabling

Oracle’s own cloud services. It is based on Oracle Consulting’s cumulative experiences in implementing cloud applications over the last

several years.

TCM© is Oracle Consulting’s Solution First approach, based on both Oracles Modern Best Practices and

Oracle Consulting’s pre-built solutions. Visualisation techniques are used to allow our clients to

understand the new standard solution from the very start, and modern best practices are assessed for

business value to determine where to focus process optimisation. The Oracle True Cloud Method will

help clients to take ownership of the new way of working in the Cloud.


We ‘Engage’, to understand your business landscape and validate your outcomes are achievable through a purpose built

strategy and vision

We ‘Focus’, with Solution First using Oracle Modern Best Practices combined with our additional pre-built solutions. By doing

so Oracle Consulting guides you through the adoption of Oracle Modern Best Practice processes removing the need for

extensive requirement gathering and design effort, and aligning smartly with your objectives and goals.

We ‘Refine’, by utilising Visualisation of the Oracle Modern Best Practices; you obtain a clear understanding of the working

application so that informed decisions can be made on how best to adopt these.

We ‘Enable’, with attention and effort spent on optimising those processes that drive value for your organization, whereas

transactional automation-ready processes are adopted out of the box.

We get you ‘Live’ and have you ‘Operate’, via Cloud Adoption to assist you in taking ownership of the new application and of

new ways of working in the Cloud, in order to maximise end-user adoption and ongoing value of the solution.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Jazz Badeshia is an Enterprise Architect Practice Director for Oracle Consulting in UK and Ireland. He has more than 20 years of

experience as an Enterprise Architect and strategist, with focus specifically on business transformation covering finance, manufacturing

and supply chain domains. Jazz advises clients in multiple industries, including retail, life sciences, logistics, food and beverage, and

public sector.

Jazz’s journey so far:

20 years ERP consulting experience

8 consulting Organizations1

7 implementation methods2

2 Indian consulting houses3

20 blue chip clients

12 successful projects

2 failed projects

1 Software Solution: Oracle

35,000 consulting hours and counting…4

Jazz can be contacted at [email protected]

END NOTES

[1] – PwC, 20th Annual Global CEO Survey, 2017.

[2] – S. Cummings and D. Wilson, Images of Strategy, Blackwell Publishing, UK, 2003.

[3] – J. Badeshia, A Strategic Risk Assessment of Football, Warwick University, UK, 2006.

[4] – Strategy Safari, Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, Lampel Prentice Hall, 1998.

[5] – Secret Footballer – Tales from the Secret Footballer, Guardian Faber Publishing, 2013.

[6] – M. Hammer, Reengineering Work: Don’t Automate, Obliterate, Harvard Business Review, July-August, 1990.

[7] – Oracle Modern Best Practice Link, https://www.oracle.com/uk/applications/modern-best-practice/index.html#close

[8] – R. B. Fuller, Nine Chains to the Moon, Anchor Books, 1938, 1973, pp252-259

1 Logica, Druid, Atos Origin, IBM, Deloitte, Accenture, Infinity Consultancy (own business), Oracle Consulting

2 Oracle Application Implementation Methods, R2I, Accenture Delivery Methods, IndustryPrint, Prince2, KPE, TCM

3 Wipro, Cognizant

4 Charles Q. Choi, June 6, 2011, Too Hard for Science: Seeing if 10,000 hours makes you an expert

(http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/06/06/too-hard-for-science-seeing-if-10000-hours-make-you-an-

expert/)

mailto:[email protected]

https://www.oracle.com/uk/applications/modern-best-practice/index.html#close

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/06/06/too-hard-for-science-seeing-if-10000-hours-make-you-an-expert/

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2011/06/06/too-hard-for-science-seeing-if-10000-hours-make-you-an-expert/


About Oracle Consulting

Oracle Consulting is the #1 Consulting Organisation for Oracle Cloud Implemenation. The team is focused exclusively on Oracle Cloud

solutions and staffed with the experts that others turn to for best practices. With our global scale of more than 7,000 experts in 175

countries serving more than 20 million users, we know how to get you up and running in the Oracle Cloud as quickly and cost effectively

as possible.

Oracle Consulting uses field-tested methodology and a network of worldwide experts to develop solutions that address your challenges

and strategic initiatives, providing you with a complete, transformational cloud journey that modernizes your business.

Accelerate Change. Drive Agility.

Strategize, accelerate, and transform your future.

Create your cloud strategy. Define a cloud migration strategy and develop use cases.

Accelerate time to market. Improve business agility and react quickly to changes in the market.

Transform while reducing TCO. Optimize business process while gaining predictability of costs.

Would like to find out more? Get in touch with our EA Team now.

Paul Mardle Jazz Badeshia

UK Head of Enterprise Architecture UK Enterprise Architect Practice Director

[email protected] [email protected]




CONNECT WITH US

Call +1.800.ORACLE1 or visit oracle.com.

Outside North America, find your local office at oracle.com/contact.

blogs.oracle.com/oracle facebook.com/oracle twitter.com/oracle

Copyright © 2018, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names

may be trademarks of their respective owners. 0818

https://www.oracle.com/

http://www.oracle.com/contact

Enabling change in dynamic environments...5 EXECUTIVE PAPER / Architecting Modern Enterprises...

Documents

Transcript of Enabling change in dynamic environments...5 EXECUTIVE PAPER / Architecting Modern Enterprises...