#bizarch from the #entarch point of view

#bizarch from the #entarch point of view

For IASA eSummit “Business Architecture”

Alexander SAMARIN

#bizarch from the #entarch point of view 2

• An enterprise architect– from a programmer to a systems architect – have created production systems which work without me

• My professional “roles”– “cleaning lady” (at an ICT department)– “peacemaker” (between ICT and the business)– “coordinator” (without formal authority, of course)– “swiss knife” (for solving any potential problem)– “patterns detective” (seeing commons in unique cases)– “assembler” (making unique things from commodities)– “barriers breaker” (always there is a bigger system)

2016-04-20

About me


• Systems architecting • Architecture viewpoints and model kinds• Some simple relationships between model kinds• Scenarios for using architecture viewpoints together• Several paths of transformation• Conclusion

2016-04-20

Agenda


• System– set of interacting discrete parts organized as a whole which

exhibits (as the result of interaction between the parts) some emergent characteristics indispensable to achieve one or more stated purposes

• Architecting is about making essential decisions to enable desired characteristics

• It is about an understanding of the relationship between structure and behaviour, between design and outcomes

• Architect is a person who 1. translates a customer’s requirements

into a viable plan and 2. guides others in its execution

2016-04-20

Systems architecting


• Architecting socio-technical systems (i.e. any enterprise) is more complex than architecting technical systems– relationship between cause and effect can only be perceived in

retrospect– self-evolving– always have non-linear behaviour

– For want of a nail the shoe was lost.– For want of a shoe the horse was lost.– For want of a horse the rider was lost.– For want of a rider the message was lost.– For want of a message the battle was lost.– For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.– And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

• Everything must be considered together and synergetically

2016-04-20

Socio-technical systems architecting


• #entarch a system-thinking applied management discipline for coordinating people, processes, projects and products in many dimensions:

1. scope span (device, activity, …, country, market)2. value-stream span (domain-dependent)3. interoperability layer (business, information, apps, etc.)4. time span (project life-cycle, solution life-cycle, etc.)5. sector span (various industries)6. problem space (situation-specific)7. solution space (context, conception, …, operations - ZF rows)8. social space (gender equality, consensus building, conflict resolutions)9. cultural space (multi-lingual communication, national mentality, regional mentality, corporate

mentality)10. media span (physical vs analogue vs digital vs bionic)11. authority span (top management, …, workers)12. person span (aura/body, house, personal cars, etc.)13. financial span14. CX span (touch point, journey, storytelling, lifecycle)

2016-04-20

Yet another definition of #entarch


• In systems architecting the focus is changing– FROM the thing– TO how the thing changes – SUBJECT how things change together

• With new speed and scale, there is no time for human intervention anderrors in routine operations and at interfaces

• To enable innovations– “in the digital age innovation depends on

process automation”

Effect of digital

2016-04-20


• Customers• Shareholders• Corporate board• Top management• Line management• Super users• Normal users• Project managers• IT architects• Developers• Operators• …and all of them must be comfortable with the system

A lot of stakeholders

2016-04-20



2016-04-20

Agenda


• Architecture view – work product expressing the architecture of a system-in-focus

from the perspective of specific system concerns• Architecture viewpoint

– work product establishing the conventions for the construction, interpretation and use of architecture views to frame specific concerns

– Note: Architecture viewpoints are not system specific, unlike the stakeholders, concerns and architecture view

• Model kind– convention for a type of modelling– Note: Models kinds usually establish relationships between various

types of artefacts– Note: Model kinds are not system specific

2016-04-20

Nomenclature of architecture viewpoints and model kinds

(ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010)


• Concepts system or terminology or “common taxonomy”– explains for a particular subject field all the essential concepts and

relationships between them

• Spatial-like classification– defines a spatial classification of

essential parts in a particular subject field

• Business motivation– explains the reason for which a system (e.g. an enterprise) exists

and ambitions of its stakeholders– example – BMM from OMG2016-04-20

Architecture viewpoints (1)


• Business outline– describes means and methods those a system (e.g. an enterprise)

employs to earn the revenue projected in its business motivation – Note 1: This architecture viewpoint answers the question, "How is

the enterprise going to make money to survive and grow?"• Note 2: This architecture viewpoint may be actually a combination

of several model kinds.

2016-04-20



• Example - BMC internal relationships from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/strategy-business-model-mihai-ionescu

2016-04-20


https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/strategy-business-model-mihai-ionescu




• Capability-as-a-discrete-unit-of-mission decomposition– describes a system (e.g. an enterprise) as an approximate

hierarchy of all the discrete-units-of-mission those a system must be doing to achieve its mission

– Note: Not all units-of-mission are implemented within an enterprise – some units-of-mission may be outsourced and some units-of-mission can be obtained from partners

– Note: If outsourcing, partnership and sharing are ignored, all enterprises in the same industry sector have the same capability-as-a-discrete-unit-of-mission decomposition (industry ref. model)

– Note: Variant “discrete-unit-of-purpose”

2016-04-20



• Functional anchor– describes a system (e.g. an enterprise) as a structure of unique

functions– Note: Function is an in-house implementation of a capability-as-a-

discrete-unit-of-mission

2016-04-20



• Operating outline– explains how a system (e.g. an enterprise) functioning to deliver

on its service or product promises in accordance with its business outline

– Note 1: This architecture viewpoint is actually a combination of several model kinds

– Note 2: A business-outline presents invariants that are (relatively) stable, while an operating-outline presents, well, operations that are much more volatile and the pre- and post-conditions of which have to satisfy these invariants

2016-04-20



• Process map– describes a system (e.g. an enterprise) as a set of processes

2016-04-20



• Capability-as-performance– describes measure of ability of a system’s part (function, process,

etc.) to do achieve a particular result– Note: this measure aggregates the usage of all sub-ordinated and

shared parts– Note: this measure is not binary; it is qualitative or quantitate

2016-04-20



• Organisational chart• Service map• Data / Information nomenclature• Events (triggers) nomenclature• …

2016-04-20




2016-04-20

Agenda


• Pattern “Strategy To Executable Portfolio (STEP)”• Pattern “Stakeholder Analysis”• Pattern “Structure IT Organisation (SITO)”• Pattern “Process Set Solidity Test (PSST)”

2016-04-20

Some simple relationships


• Business concern– dealing with the project portfolio during evolution of the strategy:

intended, emerging and realised

• Logic– explicitly linking strategic objectives, initiatives, business

capabilities, IT capabilities, IT tools and projects– add priorities

2016-04-20

Strategy To Executable Portfolio (STEP)


Business initiatives (business-specific demand)

Business capabilities(business-generic demand)

IT capabilities (IT-generic supply)

Roadmap programmes(from AS-IS to TO-BE)

Business demand IT supply

Business strategicobjectives

Governance

Maturity improvement Requested maturity Business priority

1

2

3

2

2->5

2->4

1->3

1->4

2->4

1->3

2->5

2->4

3->4

4

4

5

3

1

2

3

4

4

1

1

2

3

2

2

4

4

5

3

3->4

1->4

3->5

3->4

2->4

IT tools(IT-specific supply)

3

Programme priority

5

4

3

4

4

Logic

2016-04-20

Manage business by processes

Manage processes BPM suite


• Implications– A formal way to discover points of the most leverage – The decision-making process is explicit and transparent– A strategy adjustment and validation becomes a routine on-going

activity during its implementation (like functioning of the GPS navigator)

2016-04-20

Implications and example


• Establish explicit relationships between – Stakeholders of a system– Their concerns– Architecture viewpoints to address those concerns– Model kinds to compose each of selected viewpoints– IT tools which support the model kinds

2016-04-20

Stakeholder analysis


Matrix – stakeholders vs architecture viewpoints

2016-04-20


• Business concern: How to structure a business unit• Logic

– Collect functions – Draw a matrix of mutual relationships between those functions– The relationships may be like “synergy”– The relationship may be like “prohibition”, e.g. SoD– Find clusters in the matrix

2016-04-20

Structure IT Organisation (SITO)


• Prohibition rules:– P1 Separate doing and supervising/controlling – SoD– P2 Separate architecture/design and implementation – SoD and

quality at entry– P3 Separate implementation and operation – SoD and quality at

entry– P4 Policy vs applying it – legislation vs executive separation– P5 Specialisation

• Synergy rules:– S1 Close work– S2 Architecture role to guide– S3 Synergy between technical and administrative activities (how

you do something may be more important what you do)

2016-04-20

Example of rules


• Matrix

• Clusters

2016-04-20

Example of matrix

#bizarch from the #entarch point of view 302016-04-20

Process Set Solidity Test (PSST)

• To check that your set of processes / functions / capabilities is complete – map functions vs primary artefacts



2016-04-20

Agenda


1. Creating from scratch2. Changing operating outline3. Changing business outline4. Building systems via incorporation

2016-04-20

Scenarios for using architecture viewpoints in architecting


• Synonyms – greenfield – top-down – design of business

• Examples– start-up (medium-term and long-term)– sports event (short- and medium-term)– military mission– ad-hoc working group– development project

2016-04-20

Creating from scratch


1. Business motivation viewpoint (A system-in-focus is mainly considered as a black-box via “external” viewpoints)– Stakeholders (external)– Mission– Vision

2016-04-20

Algorithm of creating (1)


2. Business outline (a system-in-focus is considered as a grey-box via “high-level structural details” viewpoints)

2016-04-20


a) Define your capability-as-a-discrete-unit-of-mission (high-level) – take an industry model if available

b) Define B2C (including customer segments, channels, relationships, value proposition)

c) Define B2C servicesd) Link B2C services with some capabilities-as-a-

discrete-unit-mission (high-level) to be implemented in-house as functions

e) Define B2B (including key partners, their offers, etc.)

f) Define B2B servicesg) Link B2B services with some capabilities-as-a-

discrete-unit-of-mission (high-level) to be implemented in-house as functions

h) Understand your functional anchor (high-level), i.e. key activitiesCheck: Capability-as-a-discrete-unit-of-mission (high-level) = Functional anchor (high-level) + B2B offers

i) Identify value-streams (or processes L1& L2) in functional anchor (high-level)Hint: they start from B2C services

j) Capability-as-performance (qualitative evaluation of the functional anchor)

k) Financial flows (high-level for cost structure and revenue streams)+$$ B2C services-$$ functional anchor-$$ B2B offers


3. Operating outline (a system-in-focus is mainly considered as a white-box via “high-level behavioural details” viewpoints)a) Functional anchor (detailed)b) Capability-as-performance (qualitative) c) Defined your processes (L3, etc.)d) Isolate shared servicese) Derive organisational structure (units and key positions)f) Data / information (syntax, semantic and lifecycles)g) Select technologiesh) Capability-as-performance (quantitative) – use some simulationi) Restart from c) if the top management not happy with the

performance figures 2016-04-20



4. Governance outline5. Implementation plan

– macro-planning architecture viewpoint– project portfolio architecture viewpoint– application architecture viewpoint– data/information architecture viewpoint– technology architecture viewpoint

2016-04-20



• Slide 6 from http://www.slideshare.net/TheDesignOfBusiness/introducing-the-open-group-it4it-standard

• https://www.salesforce.com/blog/2016/04/how-salesforce-does-enterprise-architecture-.html

• https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/design-direct-monitor-enterprise-digital-using-sarath-chandran

2016-04-20

Examples

http://www.slideshare.net/TheDesignOfBusiness/introducing-the-open-group-it4it-standard

https://www.salesforce.com/blog/2016/04/how-salesforce-does-enterprise-architecture-.html

https://www.salesforce.com/blog/2016/04/how-salesforce-does-enterprise-architecture-.html

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/design-direct-monitor-enterprise-digital-using-sarath-chandran




• Creating a new enterprise • Contracting key partners (venues, clubs, national

associations)• Services to be delivered (VIP, broadcast, ticketing, etc.)• Developing the organisational structure• Contracting people (including volunteers)• Travel, accommodations, logistic for staff and VIP• Setting-up venues• Operating, i.e. executing the event• Dismantling venues• Post-event placement of volunteers• Liquidating the enterprise2016-04-20

Example: sports event


• Changing operating outline– Synonyms

• modernizing, optimizing, refactoring, restructuring, rationalisation, standardisation, etc.

– Examples• BPR, CPI, TQM, etc.

• Changing business outline– Synonyms

• rethinking, reimagining, reinventing, innovations, etc.– Examples

• disruptive strategy

2016-04-20

Two variants of “Creating from scratch”


• Synonyms– bottom-up– integration– “old-farm renovation”

• Examples – silos removal– M & A – system of systems, i.e. no control

over constituting systems – supply-chain – smart-city– smart-energy– healthcare– e-government

2016-04-20

Building systems via incorporation


• Question: What should be done to say “all the interacting discrete parts of the system-in-focus work as a whole”?

• Answer: all the interacting discrete parts of the system-in-focus must be incorporated structurally and behaviorally to guarantee the desired characteristics

• Question: What are the system-forming factors for a this system-in-focus?

• Answer: – Start with “dimensions” as integration pillars– Determine “dimensions” which are most

import for the system-in-focus– Integrate between “dimensions”

2016-04-20

General approach for this scenario


• Energy stream or “domains” (energy generation, energy transmission, energy delivery, energy consumption)

• Operating span or “zones” (process, field, station, operation, enterprise, market)

• Interoperability layers (business, functions, information, communication, components)

2016-04-20

Dimensions in reference classificationIEC SyC “Smart Energy”


• Interoperability layers business, functions, information, communication, components

• Operating span or “Hierarchy Levels” (product, field device, control device, station, work-centre, enterprise, connected-world)

• Value stream

2016-04-20

Dimensions in reference classificationGermany, Industry 4.0


• Proximity (aura/body, home, personal vehicle, public building, global)

• Enablers (monitoring, audio-visual interaction, assistance systems, data acquisition, mechatronics and control, data aggregation and storage, defined function control and support, complex cross-function service control and support, integral service programs)

• Interoperability layers (business, functions, information, communication, components)

2016-04-20

Dimensions in reference classificationIEC SyC “Ambient Assisted Living”


• Align terminology or, even better, make an ontology– concept system architecture viewpoint

• Understand concerns of all people involved– stakeholders analysis architecture viewpoint

• Develop common syntax, semantic and lifecycles for all assets– data/information nomenclature architecture viewpoint

• List external and internal (change lifecycle phases) events– event nomenclature architecture viewpoint

• Analyse functions for all existing parts– functional anchor architecture viewpoint– use-cases architecture viewpoint

2016-04-20

Algorithm of incorporation (1)(a happy path only)


• Consider implementation of functions as services– service map architecture viewpoint

• Consider implementation of services (actually some of their operations) as processes– process map architecture viewpoint

• Find dependencies between functions and events (e.g. function is invoked because of an event) and express them via different coordination techniques (flow-chart, schedule, decision, etc.)– various model kinds for coordination

• Find implicit processes and make them explicit– process map architecture viewpoint

2016-04-20

Algorithm of incorporation (2)


• Analyse future system-in-focus functions– functional anchor architecture viewpoint– use-cases architecture viewpoint

• Consider implementation of functions as services– service map architecture viewpoint

• Consider implementation of services (actually some of their operations) as processes– process map architecture viewpoint

• Find shared services– service map architecture viewpoint

2016-04-20



• Find various gaps – integration points– coordination points– touch points– missing parts

• Road mapping to close the gaps• Consider data-level integration, application-level

integration and process-level integration• Important!

– Use the same methodology to model artefacts. Thus, different people in similar situations will find similar solutions or propose innovations.

2016-04-20



• But, there are a few real-life difficulties: you have – to do many puzzles at the same time – to use pieces from other puzzles – to propose new pieces – to optimise the number of pieces – to transform some puzzles – etc.

• It should be a lot of fun!

2016-04-20



• The users told us that their processes are unique thus they need different applications

• We modelled their processes with the same modelling procedure

• We found the same services and very similar processes

2016-04-20

Example – replacing 23 electronic publishing applications


• Orchestration-centric– temporal-based – flow-chat-based– pattern-based

• State-centric– life-cycle-based

• Decision-centric– rule-based– behaviour-based– managerial – instinct-based

2016-04-20

About coordination techniques (1)


• Various– resource-based – goal-based – event-based

2016-04-20

About coordination techniques (2)


Coordination technique

Level of coordination

Type of coordination

Nature of coordination

Horizon of coordination

Intensity of coordination

Scope of coordination

Flexibility of coordination

Orchestration strong imperative explicit future high group low

State strong imperative explicit now low individual low

Decision weak declarative both now low individual low

Event weak declarative implicit now various individual++ high

2016-04-20

Comparison of coordination techniques

– level: weak (crowd) or strong (army)– type: imperative (working instruction) or declarative (a set of constrains)– nature: explicit (as state laws or directives) or implicit (tacit, social)– horizon: now or future– intensity: low or high or various– scope: individual or group (set)– flexibility: low or high



2016-04-20

Agenda

Several paths of transformation

2016-04-20 #bizarch from the #entarch point of view 56

• Because it is not possible to define everything in advance, it is necessary to considered the following paths1. Process-innovation centric2. ERP-decomposition centric3. Off-The-Shelf (OTS) product centric4. Project-opportunity centric5. Operational-improvement centric

1. Areas of least resistance2. Performance errors hunting3. Points of most leverage

• And be capable to handle all of them TOGETHER

To know about each path


• Initiators • Pre-requisites• Benefits• Potential targets / examples• Risk factors• Expected ROI• Priority

Generic approach


• Following the enterprise pattern STEP • Establish dependencies between the following enterprise

artefacts– business process (E2E, macro-process, individual process, etc.)– legacy application (including functionality in ERP)– capability (business and technical ones)– tools and technologies– business benefits

• Quantify those dependencies

Business-innovation centric path

2016-04-20 #bizarch from the #entarch point of view

E2E or macro process (P1)

Innovation (I2)

benefits from

B1

Innovation (I1) is built on

is enabled by

E2E or macro process (P2)

Capability (C1)

Technology / tool (T1)


Capability (C2)

59

ERP-decomposition centric path


ERP functionality (F1)

Capability (C2)

is improved by

B2

Capability (C1)



is enabled by

ERP functionality (M2)

60

OTS-product-centric path


OTS product

Capabilities (C1)

Capabilities (C2)

E2E process (Pn)

ERP functionality (Fn)

is provided by

is improved by

B3

61

BPM-suite

Project-opportunity centric examples


Project (J1)

Capability (C2)

requires

Capability (C1)


is enabled by

OTS product

B4

Operational-improvement centric


Capabilities (C1)

Capabilities (C2)

E2E process (Pn) can be improved by

B51. Areas of least resistance2. Performance errors hunting3. Points of most leverage

What is a capability?


• Capability is a measure of the ability of a part of a system-in-focus to achieve a particular result– A lot of people are able to play football – How many of them are capable to play at the Champions League

final?

• The most popular measure is the maturity level• Thus to know your gaps and how to close them (i.e. a

capability may be improved) Capabilities (C1)

Capabilities (C2)

E2E process (Pn)

needs level 4 of C1

needs level 3 of C2

current level of C1 is 3

current level of C2 is 3

Important for any transformation


• Consider all paths together• Capability as a unifying artefact• Combine business improvements with technological

changes• Quick experimenting• Know your gaps and manage how to close them

• Paths of transformation help to the typical #bizarch problems mentioned in the presentation “Architecture of Business in a Dynamic Market” given by Dr Poulin

65



2016-04-20

Agenda

Conclusion


• Formalise your artefacts – syntax and semantic• Define their lifecycles• All artefacts must be versionable throughout their lifecycle• All artefacts must evolve to become digital, externalised,

virtual and cloudable• All relationships between artefacts must be modelled

explicitly• All models must be made to be machine-assisted executable• Next step is “software-defined enterprise” to be

presented at a conference in Portugal, June 23th

Q & A



• Personal website: http://www.samarin.biz• Blog http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandersamarin• E-mail: [email protected]• Twitter: @samarin • Mobile: +41 76 573 40 61• Book: www.samarin.biz/book

Thank you

2016-04-20

http://www.samarin.biz/

http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/

http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.com/

http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandersamarin

http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandersamarin

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.twitter.com/samarin

http://www.samarin.biz/book