In a great LinkedIn conversation started by Kevin Smith
EA is not the glue between IT and "The Business".
EA is the glue between Strategy and Execution.
There are many comments of interest and many view - most agree they are sick of the overuse of the definition of EA as a link between business and IT
Kevin's response mid-way during the discussion:
@Tom: “It's not so much the glue itself, as tells you what that glue is - and how strong that glue is, too.”
Cool ! …….Viscosity - lubricant - oil - BINGO!!!
OK so you can only take analogies so far before they turn round and kick you in the wedding tackle but it feels nice.
EA is the oil that lubricates the enterprise allowing all parts to function well and stopping them burn out and wear down too fast.
Maybe a thesis……if I knew what a thesis was!
@Dennis: “Today, most EA work is IT centric”
I would slightly change that and say that Most EA work is beginning in IT.
@Dennis: “Generally, EA demonstrates that IT is aligned with the corporate strategy and shows a way to execute some aspects of the strategy.”
I would also change that slightly “Generally, EA demonstrates that the enterprise is aligned with the corporate strategy (only one part of which is IT) and shows a way to execute the strategy.”
@Dennis: “IMHO, the statement should say; EA is a binding force between strategy and execution ( but not the only one). Tomorrow, EA might encompass much more than it does today.”
OK - we have to be clear when we are discussing that the discussion does not flip between what EA is (in terms of what is actually should be) and what it is (in terms of what’s actually happening in lots of companies)
When I say it is, I mean it should be, not what it is, because what it is, is dependant on a specific organisation and we are not talking about specific organisations here.
@Nic:” With a good governance function, some adequate portfolio management, a clever S&P team, a responsive ICT dept/partner, and non-jerk leadership, you can probably get by without a specific person or group called "an EA" - because together those capabilites add up to the EA function.”
100% agree.
@Nic: “..efficiency..”
Here here. Other things get thrown in the mix but general if I have to choose one word I always tell people EA is about efficiency.
I would only add that for many many years organisations have concentrated on operational efficiency (e.g. cost cutting mostly) in the 21st century they had better start doing something about transformation efficiency (aka agilty) or die.
The 20th century mantra was…
“The only constant is change”
The 21st century mantra should be…
“The only constant is the acceleration of change” © Kevin Smith!
My belief:
EA is the execution plan. EA, in a simplified explanation does the following:
To execute this strategy how do we:
· Change the way we do business? Business Architecture
· Change the way we source and use our information? Information Architecture
· Change the supporting technology and solution portfolios? Technology and Solution Architecture
EA identifies the program of change required and within the program – it should identify the key projects and a high level scope (derived for future state – current state = gap). This can then lead to decisions on the viability and cost of the strategy.
Let me be clear – this is not a dream I have for EA – this is the reality of the EA programs I have delivered over the past 15 years (except for my 5 year hiatus in Gartner). I have used this method for a divestment and restructure of the company (not just IT), major org transformation due to industry deregulation, outsourcing, just to name a few.
IT is business, business is IT in our modern organisations there is no separation except as Kevin states (I think) they are listed as separate entities on the org chart. EA charts the course for the future – the destination is defined in the strategy.
Cool ! …….Viscosity - lubricant - oil - BINGO!!!
OK so you can only take analogies so far before they turn round and kick you in the wedding tackle but it feels nice.
EA is the oil that lubricates the enterprise allowing all parts to function well and stopping them burn out and wear down too fast.
Maybe a thesis……if I knew what a thesis was!
@Dennis: “Today, most EA work is IT centric”
I would slightly change that and say that Most EA work is beginning in IT.
@Dennis: “Generally, EA demonstrates that IT is aligned with the corporate strategy and shows a way to execute some aspects of the strategy.”
I would also change that slightly “Generally, EA demonstrates that the enterprise is aligned with the corporate strategy (only one part of which is IT) and shows a way to execute the strategy.”
@Dennis: “IMHO, the statement should say; EA is a binding force between strategy and execution ( but not the only one). Tomorrow, EA might encompass much more than it does today.”
OK - we have to be clear when we are discussing that the discussion does not flip between what EA is (in terms of what is actually should be) and what it is (in terms of what’s actually happening in lots of companies)
When I say it is, I mean it should be, not what it is, because what it is, is dependant on a specific organisation and we are not talking about specific organisations here.
@Nic:” With a good governance function, some adequate portfolio management, a clever S&P team, a responsive ICT dept/partner, and non-jerk leadership, you can probably get by without a specific person or group called "an EA" - because together those capabilites add up to the EA function.”
100% agree.
@Nic: “..efficiency..”
Here here. Other things get thrown in the mix but general if I have to choose one word I always tell people EA is about efficiency.
I would only add that for many many years organisations have concentrated on operational efficiency (e.g. cost cutting mostly) in the 21st century they had better start doing something about transformation efficiency (aka agilty) or die.
The 20th century mantra was…
“The only constant is change”
The 21st century mantra should be…
“The only constant is the acceleration of change” © Kevin Smith!
Comments