Thinking differently about enterprise architecture 2017
-
Upload
mikkel-brahm -
Category
Business
-
view
84 -
download
0
Transcript of Thinking differently about enterprise architecture 2017
Thinking differently about Enterprise
ArchitectureDr. Mikkel H Brahm, Head of Architecture, Nordea Digital Banking
Slides available athttps://www.slideshare.net/mikkelbrahm/
thinking-differently-about-enterprise-architecture-2017
Agenda
• Orthodox thought style and taken-for-granted assumptions
• Complexity thought style and taken-for-granted assumptions
• Practical implications of adopting a different thought style
• Summary
Orthodox EAWhat characterizes this thought style?
1 Orthodox EA presumes autonomy (and rationality)Individual is primary and apart from other individuals
2 Orthodox EA presumes determinacySpontaneity and improvisation is absent or insignificant
3 Orthodox EA presumes opennessEverything can (and should) be shared and modelled
4 Orthodox EA presumes enterprise intentionalityEnterprise treated as Entity with own strategy and goals
5 Orthodox EA presumes agreement(Not aligned) Individual goals are illegitimate / selfish
Assumptions that characterise orthodox EA
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
• The individual is primary, makes meaning of experiences,and makes rational decisions about which course of action to take
• Knowable set of stimuli-response; If we know what factors into a situation,then we can predict what will happen in that situation
• Information is assumed to be shared openly / freely available,so that everything can (and should) be modelled/documented
• The Enterprise is treated as an entity with intentionality,and conflicting individual intentionality is made illegitimate
• People are assumed to agree on goals and means,or at least architecture cannot begin until agreement is reached
ComplexityWhat characterizes this thought style?
people have function for each otherwe are born into relationships to people upon whom we depend
1 Interdependence enable and constrain our actionsSocially unacceptable behavior can damage relationships
Norms what it is normal to do aka customs
+ Values how we make value judgements
culture eats strategy for breakfast
Peter Drucker
Culture the way of life / living / organizing
2 We often act habitually / acceptably to garner support. Provocative actions can lead to renegotiation of norms.
Phronesis = wisdom / practical judgmentKnowing what it is right to do = being a virtuous person
Techne = technical knowledge / knowhowCraftsmanship that can be taught
3 Power dynamics enable and constrain what it is prudent to say both for subordinates and for the power holders
4 Power is never equally distributed. Any leverage can be used to further one’s interests in any other area.
Linear causality Culture forms Behaviour OR Behaviour forms Culture
Circular or Transformative causality Culture forms Behaviour AND Behaviour forms Culture
5 Collaborative innovation hinges on mutual trustthat others can contribute what we ourselves cannot
Radically different assumptions
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
1. Mutual interdependence
2. Self-disciplining and Spontaneity
3. Hidden Transcript and Public Transcript
4. Figuration of relationships with power-differentials
5. Web of Intentionality - Collaboration and Competition
Practical implications
What difference does it make how I think?
Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Outcome
Mean /Objective
Mean /Objective
Mean Mean MeanMean
LinearCausality
=>Predictable
Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Mean Mean
Mean
Mean
Outcome
Organisation / needs in t0 = organisation / needs in t1
i.e. we control when the organization does and does not change
t0 t1
Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Idealization of stable statesSplitting thought from action as a means to control
Analyze Design Execute
Unfreeze Change Freeze
Technology and Mechanisms
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
1. Interdependence
2. Self-disciplining
3. Hidden Transcript
4. Power Figuration
5. Collaborate/compete
1. Transcription
2. Turing machines
3. Knowable but complicated
4. Scripted action & prescription
5. No responsiveness
What difference does Complexity make?
Intentionality in aWeb of Intentionality
Someone’s intention
Other people’s intentions
What difference does Complexity make?
Mean Mean
Mean
Mean
Outcome
Organisation / needs in t0 ≠ organisation / needs in t1
i.e. we have to continuously validate, learn, replan, refactor and sometimes pivot
t0 t1
Good enough to take 1 step
Step 2+ subject to change
What difference does Complexity make?
Acceptance of emergence and lack of controlLeader strategizes and influences
Analyze Design Execute
Unfreeze Change Freeze
Organization is not fozen
Organization cannot be fozen
Cross-functional groups with trustful relationshipsSynergy, Learning, Innovation, Production
SummaryTwo different ways of thinking about change
Orthodox EA(eg TOGAF/ADM)
Organization = SystemUniversal goal Linear causality
Organizational knowledgeUnfreeze > Change > Freeze
Resistance to changeAnalyze > Architect/Design > Realize
My emerging view(Complexity)
Organizing = Enabling/constrainingWeb of intentionality
Transformative causalityKnowledge withheld or shared
Influence Ongoing ChangesDomination and Resistance
Piecemeal Growth
ENTERPRISEIntentional process (of doing business)
emerging from enabling/constraining figurations of relationships always in flux
ARCHITECTUREOrganisation of structuring structures
including, but not limited to, materiality and mechanisms
Stacey, Ralph D. and Mowles, Chris (2016).Strategic management and Organisational Dynamics: The Challenge of Complexity to Ways of Thinking About Organisations. 7th ed. United Kingdom: Pearson Education.
Stacey, Ralph D (2012).Tools & Techniquesof Leadership and Management.Routledge.
Jackall, Robert (2010).Moral Mazes –The World of Corporate Managers.Oxford University Press.
Scott, John C (1990).Domination and the Arts of Resistance - Hidden transcripts.Yale University Press.
Elias, Norbert (1978).What is Sociology?Columbia University Press.
Elias, Norbert (1991).The Society of Individuals.Basil Blackwell.
Latour, Bruno (2005).Reassembling the Social – An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory.Oxford University Press.
Mead, George Herbert (1934).Mind, Self, & Society.The University of Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1977)Outline of a Theory of Practice.Cambridge University Press
Scott, John C (1998).Seeing like a State – How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed.Yale University Press.
Guenther, Milan (2013).Intersection – How Enterprise Design bridges the gap between Business, technology and People. Elsevier.
Ries, Eric (2013).The Lean Startup – How today’s Entrepreneurs use Continuous Innovation to create radically successful Businesses.Crown Business.