In this weeks reading there was a comprehensive look at developing an CRV, common requirements vision. This is an interesting perspective on the business when developing an enterprise architecture practice. I would venture to guess, this is also a living document that is meant to change over time. A refresh kicked off by the occurrence of significant changes in organizational structure or external market factors. Should the document not be updated, the strategic direction that is outlined would certainly loose focus.
In my experience, this form of the CRV document is almost non-existent and usually defined in other types of strategy documents. Often road mapping is an annual activity whereas the business objectives are defined. Another form where strategies are codified reside within the Reference Architecture, Capability Target Architecture and Domain Architectures. These often supply a more comprehensive view of what EA is bringing to the table. The formalization of this type of document (e.g. VITA, ) seems to be heavily embraced by government. As for Gartner’s analysis, they define this as a critical component when operating an architecture practice [1]. The document is a great way to gain ground on several different fronts. Treating the CRV as a standard covers several areas [2]:
Context of the reason for enterprise architecture in the current organization.
Environmental Trends driving the strategy
Enterprise Business Strategies that are put in place as a response to the trends.
Development of a Matrix to define the relationships and their affinities to each of the business strategies against the environmental trends. This is reminiscent of the Zachman framework when put to action by mapping goals to events.
Business Information Requirements describes how EA will guide the the strategy and support the organization with the structure and processes.
Development of a Matrix to accommodate the relationships between the defined strategies and the business requirements. Again, Zachman in nature, mapping goals to processes.
The Vision statement describes the future state and the benefit to the organization for pursuing this strategy.
Next Steps are laid out to identify the current state and make the analysis actionable.
Context of the reason for enterprise architecture in the current organization.
Environmental Trends driving the strategy
Enterprise Business Strategies that are put in place as a response to the trends.
Development of a Matrix to define the relationships and their affinities to each of the business strategies against the environmental trends. This is reminiscent of the Zachman framework when put to action by mapping goals to events.
Business Information Requirements describes how EA will guide the the strategy and support the organization with the structure and processes.
Development of a Matrix to accommodate the relationships between the defined strategies and the business requirements. Again, Zachman in nature, mapping goals to processes.
The Vision statement describes the future state and the benefit to the organization for pursuing this strategy.
Next Steps are laid out to identify the current state and make the analysis actionable.
The breakdown of the CRV appears comprehensive, but extremely time consuming. I do think this would be a critical document when standing up any enterprise architecture practice and helps the implementer to analyze and assess if an organization really even needs a formalized EA practice. Gartner does a nice job of defining the critical components and lays them out in a consumable format. It also does a great job of leveraging the foundations of EA through the use of matrices as found in Zachman’s work. According to an analysis by Microsoft, the Gartner model after the merger with Meta displays it’s focus on practice guidance and excels in that space. [3]
[1] Philip Allega, August 2010, Business Architecture is Part of Enterprise Architecture, http://blogs.gartner.com/philip-allega/2010/08/30/business-architecture-is-part-of-enterprise-architecture/
[2] Philip Allega, August 2006, Building a ‘Fast Path’ Common Requirements Vision, ID Number: G0014211
[3] Roger Sessions, ObjectWatch Inc, May 2007, A Comparison of the Top Four Enterprise-Architecture Methodologies, https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb466232.aspx
Views: 0
