Categories
erwin Expert Blog

Efficiency & Cost Reduction via Business Capability Planning

We’ve come a long way from Enterprise Architecture’s (EA) beginnings. The Enterprise Architecture domain has grown rapidly, serving to deliver strategic guidance on IT activities and planning.

Several core components of EA are by now, widely used in IT. Components such as revealing the relation between layers of applications and technology, or between processes, functions and applications, as well as data management.

In recent years, there has been increasing interest to involve top management and the lines of business, in EA. This is where business capabilities come in.

“The Business Capability is an effective way for the enterprise architect and the CIO to reveal the value of EA to the rest of top management and the business side.”

The meaning behind ‘business capability’, doesn’t stray too far from its literal interpretation. Crudely put, business capabilities are what a business is capable of doing.

Introducing Business Capabilities as part of the EA setup in an organization, has often proven to be a two-edged sword. On the one hand, it is a great way to get the right people engaged – on the other hand, if it is done wrong, EA can end up being perceived as academic and too complex. Introducing Business Capabilities is yet another example of the ‘just enough’ Enterprise Architecture mantra being of benefit, ensuring a pragmatic and ‘lean’ approach.

How will Business Capabilities help?

When introducing business capabilities, it is very helpful to communicate to the business and top management what value it brings, along with basic examples from your organization. Do this by identifying current goals in your organization, and show how using capabilities will help in addressing this goal.

Imagine you’re the CIO of a university that’s integrating with a local college, hosting some of their more advanced classes. There will undoubtedly be differences in how the university and college operate and maintain data, among other things. These differences will have to be considered to meet your goal of successfully integrating the two establishments and keep down overall IT-cost.

Therefore, a goal here will be “Eliminate added IT cost associated with integration or merger”.

In this case, either using an existing business capability model, or drafting your own, the focus should be around the relevant capabilities to meet this end – with everything else being excluded.

Associating your existing EA with the added business capabilities will highlight these differences, as the relevant processes, applications, systems, and other assets of both institutions can be mapped to the relevant capabilities.

From here, decision makers can see what applications, systems and assets will need to be kept – e.g. can we keep both IT enrollment systems since the University will only be taking on a small number of classes? Or should one be phased out?

Business Capability mapping will also highlight assets that could be better utilized. For example, since the University will now be hosting Music Technology classes, business capability mapping will indicate that there’s a set of computing equipment that is now essentially redundant. From here decision makers can decide whether it’s better to sell the assets, or repurpose them.

Trimming the fat, or phasing out these redundancies have now directly addressed management’s goal, using Business Capabilities – in a focused, simple exercise.

The Benefits of Business Capabilities

Business capabilities play a vital role in facilitating IT and Business alignment, maintaining a solid level of understanding between IT and the wider business, and keeping everyone on the same page.

More importantly, business capabilities provide a reliable, stable platform for planning. Business goals will not change quickly – they usually only change in response to significant business transformation – providing a dependable basis on which a business can consider future states.

Alex Cullen, a research director at Forrester Research has discussed the topic in the past. He said that business capabilities “can be used for discussions on what is important.”

In turn, this focus essentially leads to a better time to market and more efficient operations. “Projects go into operations more smoothly because IT and the business plan their parts of the project using the same frameworks,” continued Cullen.

A simple Capability heatmap like below, can be used to reveal important business decisions and potential avenues.

The example is a snapshot of a media companies Business Capabilities. Individual cards are color coded automatically, uncovering underlying data. Green shows what the business has determined are the top 3 capabilities to differentiate the media company from competition the next 3 years –  while orange shows IT’s current top 3 investment areas.

In this case, we can see one instance of overlap, identifying an area to be addressed. Perhaps by readjusting the priority of IT-investments moving forward.

Business Capability Modeling

How should I implement business capability modeling?

Several organizations have chosen a pragmatic, top down approach. This approach is not for all – you will lose the completeness and ability to query across all business units on any capability – but you will gain fast adoption and buy-in. Here are the 4 key steps involved:

Identify a few current key goals of your company

The first point of call for any business implementing a business capability model, is understanding where the business is right now. This provides a good indication of where the business can, and should be going. Input from those involved in strategy, and an overview of the company’s current goals is helpful here also.

Select a source for your Business Capabilities framework

Either using existing definitions in use already in your organization, or select one from free online repositories to get started.

Implement the minimum viable set

Select only the subset of business capabilities that will directly add value to the key goals identified – leave out the rest, and keep it simple. Associate your EA data with the select capabilities.

Once the capabilities are recognized, it’s important to add weight and priority to them. Two typical metrics for this are value and cost, data permitting.

Show the value!

Now, with above 3 steps targeting a few current goals, you are able to show the value of the exercise and quickly, to the different lines of business and top management. You can do this by:

  • Visualizing the capability heatmap of cost vs value to reveal. Are there any surprises in the cost of driving certain capabilities? Are these capabilities a competitive differentiator to our business or commoditized in our industry?
  • Using a pivot table to uncover the total spend on operations vs development – per business line. Where are we over and under performing?

Such goal driven, focused introduction of business capabilities is key to unleashing the value of enterprise architecture quickly. From here, the roll-out to more areas will be driven by addressing new business goals – with the backing of management.

Categories
erwin Expert Blog

At Least 15 Reasons Why Idera Has Got It All Wrong

Idera just released another er/Studio to erwin head-to-head comparison with the title “er/Studio 2016 vs. erwin 9.64 Comparison Guide,” which is now available for download.

The paper is authored by Dr. Nicholas Khabbaz and François Cartier of e-Modelers, the preferred partner of Embarcadero Technologies (now part of Idera). Not exactly an impartial opinion. Keep that in mind when giving it a look.

Nonetheless, I want to thank Idera for coming out with a paper that actually compares current releases of each product, as the previous paper I read used a 5+ year old release of erwin DM that’s not even supported anymore. Thanks also to Nicholas and François for their efforts.

In my exciting new role heading up products at erwin, Inc., I lead a global group committed to growth and excellence. I am fortunate to have a team with decades of experience with the product, so I looked forward to their feedback on this new comparison. After all, we already know that our 64-bit erwin Data Modeler release is blazing the trail with the best performance in day-to-day usage and that we’re developing, selling, and supporting the #1 product in the market.

So, I was curious if they would come back with any inaccuracies. Surely there must be one or two, right?

I received 14.

Yes, 14.

Within an hour or two of the paper going out.

I was originally planning to provide a quick summary of each point, but in the interest of allowing you to do your own research, I’m providing more detail. Apologies in advance for the length.

Not a technical user? Short on time? Feel free to skip ahead to the summary and the 15th point.

Fourteen reasons why Idera has got it all wrong:

  1. While most of the info regarding semantics is mostly correct (with some omissions/inaccuracies on the erwin DM side) erwin DM has a much more logical and generally accepted organization:MODEL – SUBJECT AREA – MODEL OBJECTSDIAGRAMS (which can exist at the MODEL and SUBJECT AREA levels) are strictly a vehicle for visualization and not a construct of the model itself. er/Studio does not have a comparable feature. erwin DM users have a much more flexible and richer capability for constructing and displaying model metadata for specific goals and/or purposes.So, the paper is wrong.
  2. An erwin DM model is comparable to an er/Studio DIAGRAM, not an er/Studio MODEL. It represents either a Logical Only, Physical Only or Logical/Physical abstraction of metadata. There is no limitation (as in er/Studio) as to how erwin DM models can be related (e.g., 1 logical to many physical, 1 physical to many logical, many to many – can be logical or physical).Again, the paper is wrong.
  3. Section: Data Model Organization, Model/Submodel Organization – this is incorrect. Metadata contained in Subject Areas in erwin DM are automatically synchronized. There seems to be some confusion between the concept of Subject Areas and Diagrams within erwin DM, most likely due to a lack of understanding of these erwin DM specific concepts. Auto-populate is a visualization function and not a synchronization function.Wrong again.
  4. Despite statements to the contrary, erwin DM does provide a fully user configurable and flexible “reverse” naming standards capability (Physical to Logical).Yup, wrong.
  5. Whilst the opinions detailed in the Section on Attachments / UDPs are factually correct, there is little to no compelling value (our opinion) in the er/Studio approach vs. the erwin DM approach. We’re not alone in this opinion, although we do acknowledge that it may be relevant to some people in some specific cases.Wrong to assume this is a true differentiator.
  6. Despite statements to the contrary, erwin DM does support ALTER statement generation within Complete Compare.Wrong? Yes, wrong.
  7. erwin DM fully supports reverse engineering of a database schema (or DDL) into a Physical-only model to which any number of defined naming standards can be applied in the derivation of a Logical model (from the existing Physical model) thereby automatically generating the desired logical names. No manual process involving spreadsheets, CSV files and the Bulk Editor is required.The paper is wrong as erwin DM supports this.
  8. Automatic synchronization of model object mappings is accomplished using Design Layer models in erwin DM. Once established, these mappings are saved and synchronized via Complete Compare.So, wrong again.
  9. Despite statements to the contrary, erwin DM maintains and manages a complete log of model changes at all levels entered by all modelers. As this log is a feature of an erwin DM model, this information is available within the mart.The statements are wrong.
  10. Unlike er/Studio (and the lack of functionality described in the document), erwin DM can roll-back changes made to any model version saved in a mart – not just a Named (or Marked) version. Additionally, erwin DM has the ability to compare two model versions and to dynamically select metadata from either of the compared versions for inclusion/exclusion from a new version of the model. Although there is no specific branch/merge functionality, use of model versions, complete compare functionality and mart storage provides equivalent capability.Wrong. erwin can do this and more.
  11. It appears that e-Modelers is not current with erwin DM functionality. For instance, our API supports .NET Basic and not the deprecated capabilities of Visual Basic. Furthermore, many of er/Studio’s macros are used to provide capabilities equivalent to “built-in” erwin DM functionality. erwin DM provides automation capabilities via our API as well as from within our product (e.g., FETs, user-defined reporting capabilities) using our well documented TLX macro language.Wrong as we provide more than what was written.
  12. Section on Data to Business Process Alignment is misleading. It leverages a comparison of erwin DM to er/Studio’s Business Architect (a separate product with an additional cost) – which is truly a comparison of apples to asparagus. A better comparison, of course, would be their lackluster business process capability and ours when combined with our partner product (“Powered by erwin”) from Casewise. Our no-cost metadata bridges also provide the capability for erwin DM users to integrate their model metadata with best of breed products from vendors across the industry. Misleading, so wrong.
  13. Despite statements to the contrary, erwin Web Portal provides a full range of flexible advanced search capabilities, metadata tagging, shared bookmarks, user defined comments to facilitate stakeholder collaboration, ability to provide attachments to managed metadata, a web-based data modeling feature (Data Documenter) and the Universal Data Model Harvesting capability which allows the inclusion of non-erwin DM modeled metadata (i.e., er/Studio models, relational database schemas, unstructured “Big Data” data sources). erwin Web Portal models may be viewed in a wide variety of user-selected modeling notations (IE, IDEF1x, UML, etc.).Wrong with respect to erwin Web Portal.
  14. The list of databases supported (Appendix 3) is incorrect in that most databases left “blank” on the erwin DM side are supported via ODBC for FE and RE. Also, Microsoft SQL Azure is a natively supported database (NO “extension” is required although it is a separately licensed item.) Finally, the er/Studio side of this list is artificially enhanced by listing many databases that are no longer supported by the database vendors themselves. If you’re still running 1992’s SQL Server 4.2 on OS/2 1.3, please feel free to give me a call as I want to hear from you!Old news. And wrong.

To summarize (or TL;DR if the above was too much to read):

We found 14 things wrong with the analysis. In reality, some of these points have multiple facets so it’s more than 14, but that’s a minor point. Let’s just say 14.

Don’t take my word for it, please feel free to check it out for yourself.

As we’re busy developing our new release of erwin DM, we don’t have the time to dig for more, but if you can find something else that we missed, please bring it to my attention and I’ll send you a Starbucks gift card for your effort.

One last, and 15th point from me:

When judging the best solution for your business, you should look towards the leading solution on the market today.

The solution with #1 market share and used by more than 50,000 data management professionals in 60 countries around the world.

The one where the product name is also the company name. Where increasing investment in data management reflects 100% of its focus, not just a side business.

That solution isn’t er/Studio. It’s erwin.

And that’s why there are at least 15 reasons why Idera has got it all wrong.

Thanks to Neil Buchwalter, Danny Sandwell and the rest of the erwin product organization for their efforts here.

Download the White Paper The Business Value of Data Modeling for Data Governance

Categories
erwin Expert Blog

University & Education Enterprise Architecture

Universities and higher education institutions, just like other complex organizations, must develop an efficient and cost effective method of collecting, building and sharing information to accomplish its strategic goals.

With a coordinated approach to investing in technology, processes and people across the organization they can deliver change and transformation initiatives; improving the student experience, digitizing traditional student and staff services, addressing security concerns, etc. Enterprise Architecture (EA) provides a way to achieve this.

Part of the university’s strategic planning process, enterprise architecture helps build a blueprint of the overall business and technology strategies and objectives. These objectives rely more than ever before on IT to become reality. Enterprise architecture also helps all different departments to make decisions that are more cost effective, avoid duplication of capabilities or expenditure and achieve better returns on investments.

In the past, technology-related decisions have often been siloed with each department having budget and making independent purchases. By engaging and collaborating with IT and enterprise architecture, each department’s planning and investment decision-making can benefit directly from certain risks and solutions already being identified.

It becomes much quicker and easier to align capabilities across different departments and ensure technology-enabled solutions are focused on transforming the teaching and learning experience for both students and staff.

Why Focus on Enterprise Architecture Today?

Universities benefit a lot from having all departments making coordinated technology investments that support their strategic goals and meet the requirements of the wider stakeholder groups.

Enterprise architecture supports this by providing an overarching view of the organization’s technology, business, information and application requirements.

Education institutions who are yet to employ a recognized EA function tend to have the IT organization build and manage a plethora of different diagrams and lists to help manage change, and over time they become more mature in this work until they put in place dedicated EA resources to support planning and decision-making.

Otherwise, University EA teams tend to be formally established in anticipation of an upcoming transformation or change event. Either way, enterprise architecture can be introduced as part of the existing strategic planning approach as a way to improve strategic business outcomes.

There is a wide range of opportunities and/or challenges that can drive an organization to become more mature in its enterprise architecture efforts such as:

  • Managing the increasing trend of business departments, selecting and adopting Software-as-a-Service applications independent of IT (also known as shadow IT).
  • Enabling new digital learning capabilities and personalized learning tools.
  • Better organization, availability and timeliness of data related to students, enrollment, finance, staffing etc.
  • Improved planning and visibility of the impact of budget changes on student services.
  • Ensuring that all departments can support and share data with students and staff where Bring Your Own Device is prevalent.
  • Desire to better integrate multiple different applications and solutions into a single, consistent platform.

Getting Started on University / Education Enterprise Architecture

If you’re starting out from nothing, it’s critical to secure backing from senior-level stakeholders to secure the resources required to get started, but also to help champion EA across the organization – this is often down to the CIO.

You can increase your chances of success by focusing on a small area of the organization at first with enterprise architecture, since its very important to prove the value of EA to the wider organization before tackling enterprise-wide initiatives. Focus on one or two a manageable key areas that will deliver benefit, and then gradually increase the scope of enterprise architecture over time.

There are many identifiable areas where EA can help to increase efficiency and eliminate costs across the university:

  • Identifying and reducing duplicate systems and capabilities, where different departments each have their own systems that provide similar functions. Moving to one single system across all departments can reduce costs and complexity.
  • Ensuring that technology investment decisions are aligned with the requirements of its stakeholders so that it is fully utilized. This helps to avoid wasting time and budget on solutions that are not aligned with strategic objectives.
  • Identifying areas for collaboration and teamwork in designing, acquiring and implementing new systems and technology-enabled capabilities. Often, different departments within the university have similar needs that can be met in a more cost-effective manner when the different stakeholders collaborate through EA.

Outcomes of University and Education Enterprise Architecture

Whether focusing on a small area of the organization or the entire enterprise, the same high-level process applies to achieving strategic outcomes.

Firstly, build a blueprint of the current-state architecture (how the enterprise looks today). Secondly, define the desired future-state architecture (how you want the enterprise to look like tomorrow). Thirdly, identify the gaps between the two and create a roadmap that outlines how you will move forward (gap analysis and roadmapping).

Current State Architecture

Before you can visualize how you want the university to look and perform tomorrow, it is necessary to build a blueprint of how it looks and performs today.

The goal is to capture enough information to form a baseline architecture of the enterprise that can be analyzed and used to guide strategy decisions for moving toward the desired future state. As a general rule, you try to build “just enough” architecture assets and documentation to support the scope of the work and unnecessarily detailed analysis which will become obsolete very quickly.

Future State Architecture

The future state is a description of how the enterprise should/could look and perform in the future. This should explain how the business, application, information and technology domains will look at a high level.

Its entirely possible to produce multiple future state architectures for scenario planning purposes. Again, it is best practice to build “just enough” architecture assets to model the future state enterprise – it is very easy to get carried away capturing every detail.

Gap Analysis

Gap analysis is the process whereby you identify and document the differences between the current and future state architectures. The idea is to build up a picture of all the elements of the enterprise architecture that need to be addressed in order to bring the desired future organization to reality.

For example, gap analysis will highlight where a new application is required to support a critical business capability, and also highlight any application that is critical today but will be redundant in the future.

You can consolidate similar gaps into a single concept by analyzing their relationships and likely solutions, allowing you to solve multiple gaps with one solution.

Building an Architecture Roadmap

Now that you have identified the gaps in your architecture you can begin to build roadmaps that visually communicate how and when to tackle each piece of work on a timeline based view.

EA Business Capability & Goals Roadmap

But how can you decide which projects to tackle first? Analyzing the business value of each project against the estimated cost of delivering it can help you define the scope of work to implement. This is important since it is highly unlikely that you will have the resources to complete all of projects identified.

The roadmap acts as a schedule for the EA team to work to. The architecture team can collaborate around the roadmap using a kanban board to track the progress of completed tasks that can be shared with all stakeholders.

Collaboration with Stakeholders

A critical enabler of enterprise architecture within any university or education institution is collaboration. With only a small team working on EA, the ability to collaborate easily and effectively with each other and also with the wider stakeholder group is incredibly important to the success of any EA initiative.

By sharing architecture assets with senior decision-makers and/or heads of departments, and capturing their feedback and comments directly, the organization can act with much greater agility when planning and responding to change. 

Enterprise Architecture Supporting Tools

Many universities start out using Excel spreadsheets and Word documents but soon realize that they can’t continue without them constantly getting out of sync. Diagramming tools go halfway to solving the problems by providing a repository to store assets, but they don’t allow you to analyze enterprise architecture information, identify the gaps in your architecture or build a roadmap as outlined above.

Modern Software-as-a-Service EA tools like Corso are helping Universities and Education institutions with smaller EA teams to benefit from robust capabilities that were previously only afforded by corporate enterprises, but with the added benefits of collaboration features built-in to web-based applications. By eliminating the upfront costs in favor of a monthly subscription fee the barriers to adoption are much less (cost, risk, return on investment).We’ve heard many times from different universities that they tried the “traditional” EA tools but they are extremely expensive to acquire and implement, and ongoing maintenance, upgrades and administration work is a big barrier to getting started.

Now, what used to be one of IT’s most fortified Ivory Towers is more accessible than ever. Some modern tools have even taken cues from popular, easy to use and familiar User Interfaces (such as Apple’s iOS/OSX, Google/Android and Windows), meaning the discipline   more collaborative. Even non EA professionals can get involved and make good use of the tool, with varying license types to accommodate levels of usage.

Summary

Enterprise architecture provides the critical bridge for any university or higher education institution to achieve its strategic objectives, aligning business requirements with IT capabilities and investments.

By collaborating with all departments, EA helps guide decision-making so that investments and changes are not made in isolation, but instead consider all stakeholders’ requirements for additional benefit.

It also provides a blueprint of the university allowing you to see the real impact of change, identify where gaps and opportunities exist, and understand how and where digital solutions can be implemented for the benefit of all stakeholders (students, staff, partners, community etc).

Categories
erwin Expert Blog

From Office Tools to Enterprise Architecture

In Enterprise Architecture (EA), Office tools often act as an easy entry point to the discipline. In most cases, low maturity EA initiatives make use of the tools they already have

Excel, Powerpoint, Word and Visio are often used in faux-tandem – meaning documents from any or all of the four suites are often bolted on together without any way to effectively manage them, and what was initially a quick fix can quickly turn into a long headache.

So why do people settle for the MS Office approach?

In short, people use Microsoft Office tools in place of recognized EA tools because they’re quick and easy to get started with. It’s easy to get a copy and/or a license, the learning curve is small, and thanks to its use in early education, a lot of people are familiar with it already.

Visio, Powerpoint, Excel: short-term gains versus long-term maintenance issues

However, as with many key business decisions, whether or not an organization should move away from Office Tools into something more comprehensive, presents a trade-off that decision makers must consider. Many smaller businesses for example, might not see any real reason to mature their Enterprise Architecture approach, and could survive dealing with their Architecture on an adhoc basis.

However, any growing organization, or organization with ambitions to grow will find that the Office Tools approach to EA can hastily become unsustainable. The most common issue for such businesses is trouble connecting data.

The reality of trying to blend a medley of different tools and pieces of software is always more messy hodgepodge, than it is a palatable smorgasbord. Even in the Office approach, whereby tools are all united under one banner and brand, each part of the Office Suite is essentially a separate entity. They can’t ‘talk’ to one another, they can’t update and respond to changes in one another, and their formats are often incompatible. They must all be maintained in isolation.

This alone can open a Pandora’s box of related issues. Once such being that, if one person is maintaining the architecture, then that person’s workload is increased as they have to make updates across the assortment of tools. Adversely, if the organization’s architecture is maintained by more than one person, the lack of communication between the tools will also create a barrier to collaboration between the team.

EA Naming Difference Complications

In the example above, confusion may arise as to whether SAP and AP refer to the same components. Even minor discrepancies like this can stall progress, and often, the reality is much worse. Then there are the issues of maintaining unregulated standards in Visio, as well as aligning Visio itself with Spreadsheets.

Adding all of this to the greater potential for miscommunication, lost/dead links, updates falling out of sync, and differences between how individuals make and keep records, it’s not hard to see why the Office Tools approach to EA can quickly snowball out of control.

Businesses can often get to the point where different diagrams, analyses and other data representations pertaining to the architecture of the organization are made in varying areas of the business, and when the time comes for them to be compared and correlated, they don’t always line up.

The Alternative? Agile Enterprise Architecture

If you haven’t ran into any of the aforementioned problems, you might be thinking an alternative is unnecessary. But as alluded to earlier, the issues that plague low maturity Enterprise Architecture in repurposed tools will inevitability be surfaced as the business grows.

A business with a wider reach, will have more data to keep track of, and more critical decisions to make regarding the architecture of the business. Relying on immature EA in light of this is naive at best, and downright irresponsible at worst.

Unsurprisingly though, the alternative to these enterprise architecture headaches, is a tool designed from the ground up to handle Enterprise Architecture. A tool that natively supports drawing diagrams, roadmaps, analysis and kanbans, and a tool that recognizes and accounts for the iterative and collaborative nature of the discipline.

What issues could I run into?

Perhaps the biggest issue is that of budget. Traditional EA tools often occupied Ivory Towers in terms of their accessibility. This made them hard pitches for stakeholders, as the benefits of the tools were difficult to convey to those who wouldn’t be using them. And on top of that, most tools were costly, making it look an even less appealing investment if the Enterprise Architecture department wasn’t at the later stages of maturity, and able to make full use of the suite.

Add this to the looming threat of installation costs (financial, time, etc.), and maintenance costs, those totally out of control hodgepodges of Powerpoint slides, Excel sheets and other documents start to look a little more manageable.

Historically, the gap between EA immaturity, and maturity, was simply too far to bridge.

However, more modern, more agile EA tools have tackled these issues. Lower price points mean even small to medium sized businesses (SMBs) can now afford to enjoy the benefits. SaaS-based EA tools even avoid the hefty initial fees and on site maintenance, as their web-based nature doesn’t require anything to be installed.

Additionally, web-based tools hurdle concerns pertaining to platform. Users are free to use the operating system of their choice, and still benefit from the same level of collaboration as if the organization were exclusively using Windows-based PCs.

This even extends to mobile devices, so that you can take your Enterprise Architecture on the go.

With support for importing data from other tools considered, modern, agile EA tools even eliminate much of the down time in productivity associated with moving to new systems. Once a login is created, the platform is already ready to go.

Those with strong, native support for collaboration excel here, too. This can ensure all the relevant stakeholders can be involved in EA schemes and projects on the front line – through real time multi-user updates and in tool comment and suggestion support. license types accounting for this are available too, with pay for what you use pricing models making collaboration affordable with dedicated ‘user’ and ‘reviewer’ license types.

Categories
erwin Expert Blog

A New Day for erwin

As I’m sure you know by now, we’re now known as erwin, Inc. You really don’t need an introduction, because in many ways we are the same as we were before. The same team full of passionate people dedicated to the industry-leading product who love to work with our customers and partners around the world.

In other ways, over time you’ll see some key differences and not just with our erwin.com email addresses.

The way that our new company can build value is to invest in its solution, its partners, and its people. This means maintaining our leadership while also maturing our strategy. Adding new products and new partnerships. This is something that, based upon feedback, was missing for the past few years. We will be changing that at our new home.

But we can’t throw out the old, because that’s what made us the tremendous success that we are. We will be increasing our focus on our channel partners and also continue to deliver a superior level of customer service. Our passion remains as does our commitment to you, so stay tuned as things develop.

It’s a new day for erwin and the sun is shining!

Categories
erwin Expert Blog

9 Must-Join Groups for Enterprise Architects

Linkedin can be a great place to find new opportunities, and let new opportunities find you. That said, many people assume that’s all it’s for. Used correctly, Linkedin can be a great source of new knowledge, and a good way to keep an eye out for industry trends.

A quick search on Linkedin for the Enterprise Architect job title returns over 70,000 results – a healthy number to say the least. And the easiest way to connect to fellow Enterprise Architects? Linkedin Groups.

(Note: Some of the groups mentioned have been made public, meaning any LinkedIn member is free to join. Others we’ve included are private, meaning you can click to join them but will have to wait to be approved to join by the group’s owner or moderator.)

erwin/Corso

Shameless self promotion to start. If you’re at all interested in Enterprise Architecture, and what we do, one of the best ways to keep up to date is to give our company page a follow. Feel free to comment and discuss anything Enterprise Architecture related.

And now for the rest…

1. The Enterprise Architecture Network

Members: 100,000 +
Created: October 2007

One of the biggest and best sources of Enterprise Architecture information. Have a general interest in Enterprise Architecture? This group is for you and always your first port of call.

2. Enterprise Architecture Forum

Members: 20,000+
Created: October 2007

Cast in the same mould as The Enterprise Architecture Network – This group is a place to discuss Enterprise Architecture Frameworks, Enterprise Architecture Methodologies and new advances on Enterprise Architecture.

3. ArchiMate

Members: 7,000+
Created: January 2008

ArchiMate® is the open and independent graphical modeling language for enterprise architecture governed by The Open Group. This groups offers its members a competitive source of information.

4. TOGAF

Members: 13,000+
Created: February 2008

TOGAF is a framework, a detailed method and a set of supporting tools for developing enterprise architecture. LinkedIn’s largest TOGAF interest group – join this one if you want to get involved in TOGAF discussions.

5. The Open Group

Members: 11,000+
Created: October 2008

The Open Group is a global consortium, leading the development of open, vendor-neutral IT standards and certifications. The Open Group is a fantastic open source for EA practitioners to ask for advice and get specific product information.

6. TOGAF for Architecture

Members: 30,000+
Created: march 2008

The principle group for TOGAF for Architecture – Members of this group may expect to be invited for review engagements in the development of best practice publications.

7. Enterprise Architecture Group

Members: 16,000
Created: April 2008

A hot bed for EA practitioners and the like. Exclusively about EA; request to join this group if you want to get involved.

8. Association Enterprise Architects

Members: 6,000
Created: January 2008

Calls itself the ‘definitive professional association for Enterprise Architects’. This group’s aim is to increase job opportunities for all of its members and ‘increase their market value by advancing professional excellence’.

9. Gartner Enterprise Architecture (Xchange)

Members: 4,413
Created: May 2008

This EA networking group is great for reaching out and building your professional network of colleagues with similar EA opportunities and challenges. Share, learn and engage in an open forum of collaboration.

Categories
Enterprise Architecture erwin Expert Blog

Digital Transformation & Agile Enterprise Architecture

Digital transformation remains a hot topic as the convergence of new customer preferences and expectations, and the increasing number of touchpoints is driving business and technology decision-making like never before.

Rising to this challenge in the digital business world requires a laser-like focus on the customer and innovation opportunities, which means change is a necessity. Digital transformation is the crux to drive organizational, process and technology changes that help ensure the customer is more closely connected to, and better served by, the business.

Technology organizations will even begin to attribute their own revenue streams as digital business models play a much larger role in organizations of all sizes.

As such, enterprise architecture (EA) is extremely well positioned to support change and innovation initiatives, but how can EAs position themselves to influence and even lead digital transformation?

This will become increasingly relevant if analyst figures are anything to go by. IDC have forecasted that the percentage of enterprises creating advanced digital transformation initiatives will reach 50% by 2020, up from 22%. Additionally, Forrester sets out that only 27% of today’s businesses have a coherent digital strategy for how they will create customer value in the digital business world – a number which will only increase.

Digital Transformation Enterprise Architecture

Enterprise Architecture For Digital Transformation

Digital Transformation can be seen as customer and market pressures driving technology and organizational change and innovation that is necessary for the business to satisfy and delight its customer base (it is quite a mouthful I admit).

Architects should view the enterprise as a complex, living system and technology-enabled transformation requires a much more agile approach than traditional EA has been able to offer in the past. Focusing more on solving business problems than on extensive documentation, and taking a data-driven approach to transformation will allow EA to drive digital transformation.

Starting out on a transformation journey pursuing increased productivity alone is not going to deliver the kind of outcomes that will delight customers and set the foundations for competitiveness and growth. Instead, focus on the business opportunities that will allow you to better serve and delight the customer base, open up new products or services to the existing base, or open up a new customer segment entirely.

There is still much work to be done to break down the silos that exist; every department or line of business has its requirements and to a certain extent their own way of working, supported by applications that are siloed, resting on infrastructure silos.

In this type of environment the world is revolving around the organization’s infrastructure. But today, digital business often starts where the customer first touches the business online or via an app. This must be the new focus and the traditional silos need to be fixed in order to truly transform for the customer.

Transformation Requires Agile Enterprise Architecture

With as many articles and posts about digital transformation and EA, you’d think there was a defined clear path to follow on the journey to becoming a digitized business. Yet we all know there’s no recipe that can guarantee digital success.

One thing is for sure however, those organizations that can establish business agility as a strategic capability will be best placed to respond to the opportunities from digital transformation. An agile business means being responsive to new opportunities, resilient to risks, and innovative in the face of transformation requirements.

There are limitations to achieving business agility through EA, though. Those being:

  • EA is often buried deep within the IT team
  • EA has a poor connection to the business organization
  • EA is too focused on producing extensive documentation rather than delivering business outcomes
  • EA sits in an ivory tower

However, thinking about agility at the meta layer helps to describe an enterprise that is inherently agile, flexible and architected for continuing change and transformation. Start to think of business agility as a meta requirement, where requirement change must be supported. Even meta processes, where process change must be supported.

The agile EA needs to be oriented towards how things change, rather than the things themselves to help build an enterprise architecture and organization that can act with agility. Architects can focus on specifying technology that is inherently flexible so that it is capable of supporting the expected change.

EAs that can architect their organization for increased business agility can position themselves to influence and even lead digital transformation agenda, by providing the decision support system to focus and deliver on the right digital strategies.

enterprise architecture business process

Categories
erwin Expert Blog

How to Submit an Enhancement Request for erwin® Data Modeler

Anyone who uses any application sooner or later thinks, “I wish I could do this or that,” or “If I was writing this application, I’d do this or that in a different way.” Admit it, being a Database Developer or Modeler, you have a lot of expertise and ideas that you feel would benefit you and your colleagues if only you could get your idea heard by your peers and/or the erwin product designers.

So what is the best way to “get it out there” for others to consider? You certainly want the erwin Product Manager and Developers to know your thoughts, but you also want your peers to be able to be aware, and to possibly comment, criticize, or praise your suggestion.

For erwin, the process used to be to contact erwin Technical Support and open an “issue/case/ticket.” You typically would get a response back in about a month or two. This served the purpose of communicating it to the erwin development team, but it didn’t share your ideas with your peers. User groups were a way to share your ideas and engender conversation, but it seems we all have smaller and smaller travel budgets, so unless you are fortunate to be in a major metropolitan area with an active user group, these opportunities are becoming fewer as well.

Enter the Data Modeling Message Board in the erwin Modeling Community on erwin.com. In particular, enter the Idea section. We now encourage everyone to leave their idea in the Idea section of the Data Modeling and erwin User Communities’ Idea Walls. Why did we change this? With the advent of social media, keeping one idea internally on one record in one place handled by one person at a time is just an inferior communications and organizational method to having your idea “socialized” in a community setting.

The benefits of having your idea socialized on the Data Modeling Message boards are as follows:

  • Your idea is uniquely identified by a combination of the date/time stamp, the title, and your name. It is immediately visible by everyone in the community in a designated place easily accessible and very obvious. Comments from your peers, either alternative suggestions, workarounds, criticism, or improvement suggestions, are also posted in a similar way and you get notified by email when they occur. From erwin Development and Product Management’s point of view, it is instantly obvious which ideas resonate with other erwin users so it’s easy to gauge the community’s sentiment.
  • Ideas are visible on the main Community Page on the right side bar entitled Recent Ideas. The special Idea section can be accessed, among other ways, by clicking on Show All link under this summary section. Here you can search/filter titles and sort by newest/older date, activity (number of comments), or title. Furthermore, you can Like, Bookmark, or Reply to an idea with a comment.
  • Lastly, you can view all the Ideas in a tabular or tile view, and you can the status of what is Planned, Delivered, Under Review, Wish Listed, and so on.

Some customers say they liked talking to Technical Support while submitting an enhancement request or idea. If you feel that way, by all means contact us by Chat or phone, and we will be happy to talk with you and kick around ideas, suggestion, and workarounds. We love to talk to you! But, in the end, if it boils down to a new functionality request, we encourage you to record your idea in the erwin Community Idea Wall because it’s the fastest, most productive, most interactive, and generally superior way to share it with erwin product management, development, and your peers.

We look forward to your ideas to improve our erwin Data Modeler!

Categories
Enterprise Architecture erwin Expert Blog

A Business Outcome Driven Enterprise Architecture Approach

Experts are invaluable. They’re the people who have demonstrated time and time again that they can be trusted in their relevant field. However, dialogue between experts and non-experts is not always as straightforward as we’d like it to be.

We’ve all experienced it, and perhaps we’ve also been guilty of it ourselves – that is, speaking about a topic with the presumption that your audience is already caught up.

Enterprise architecture (and its architects) is no different in this regard, and perhaps more guilty than most. Enterprise Architects (EA) can often fall into the trap of demonstrating the technical wizardry behind building processes, and understandably so. This is the side of EA than an Enterprise Architect sees.

However, this generally isn’t the side that stakeholders want to see. Perhaps this is a crude analogy, but in health, you’re not too concerned with the biology behind why you’re all bunged up. The experts know why, but you just want to feel better.

You just want the outcome.

Enterprise architecture is no different. In this case, patients stakeholders want to see the solution. They want to see how a new or revised enterprise architecture initiative will bring the organization closer to it’s desired business outcomes.

This is why the traditional, standardized framework-centric take on EA has its limits (but that doesn’t mean enterprise architecture frameworks are obsolete). IT thought leader and leading Gartner researcher, Brian Burke (above) previously shed some light on this:

“Focusing on a standard EA framework doesn’t work,” he said. “In the past EA practicioners focused on deliverables that were useful to enterprise architects but not valuable to senior management and/or did not respond to a specific business IT need.

“We’ve witnessed a change in mind-set, execution and delivery of EA. The value of EA is not in simply ‘doing EA’, but rather in how it can help evolve the business and enable senior executives to respond to business threats and opportunities.”

Brian Burke’s statements are echoed across the industry. Enterprise architecture has got to become more about business outcomes and the deliverables that steer an organization toward them.

Enterprise Architecture Deliverables

Gartner have actually outlined the deliverables behind the wheel – categorizing five different deliverables that will aid in EAs delivering business value.

Measurable Deliverables – Deliverables that measure EAs direct impact on a business.

Actionable Deliverables – Deliverables that drive change in relation to business outcomes.

Diagnostic Deliverables – Analytic tools purposed for determining the knock on effects of business decisions.

Enabling Deliverables – The collected information (e.g. from performance metrics) that enable diagnostic deliverables. Essentially the basis on which the analysis in diagnostic deliverables is formed.

Operational Deliverables – Deliverables focused internally, on the EA teams themselves. They help define where an EA team is now and an outline of what should be done to move forward.

Just Enough Enterprise Architecture

Frameworks can still be implemented, however. But they should be implemented malleably, as opposed to being rigid as not to undermine EAs rule of best practice – “Just Enough” enterprise architecture .

“Just enough” enterprise architecture is an EA mantra for avoiding the problems that come with over analysis. Problems such as delayed decision making and missed opportunity thanks to a symptom colloquially dubbed “analysis paralysis.”

A deliverable/business outcome approach can help address which tangents are most important to the organization, and therefore indicate which is best to follow. Then, rather than doing everything in a blanket, one size fits all take on EA, enterprise architects can be far more precise, saving themselves time, and moving projects through the pipeline more quickly.

Business Outcome Driven EA and Alignment

A businesses outcome based approach to EA will also help align the business needs with the IT department as a whole. By focusing on what the business needs, you’ll be able to prime the IT & Technology services, as well as application portfolios in order to achieve what you set out to do in order to progress as departments, and the organization as a whole.

Business Outcome EA and Innovation

Innovation is becoming increasingly more important in business. It should now, ideally, permeate every inch of an organization both encouraging and enabling innovation indiscriminately across processes. Enterprise architecture is no different in this regard – there’s even a case for innovation being even more important to EA, as they administer the foundations in which to implement new ideas.

The business outcome approach to EA, can provide a platform upon which innovation can be carried out.

enterprise architecture business process

Categories
erwin Expert Blog

What’s the Best Way to Get Answers to Your erwin® Data Modeling Questions?

So, you are in the middle of a modeling session, and something you are doing triggers a question in your mind. What are the resources to get answers to those questions, and what resource is best to use for which situation?

Probably the easiest way to seek an answer is to hit the “F1” key to activate erwin Data Modeler’s context-sensitive “Help” system. erwin will automatically search for help about the functionality you are using without your having to determine the best search terms. Beginning with erwin r9.6, the Help system is online and dynamic (if you are not online, Help defaults to the content packaged and installed with the product), receiving regular updates.

If the context-sensitive Help does not give you the answer you need, the next step is to go to “Help/Help Topics” in the Help system, and either do a search, or look through the indexes for the functionality you are exercising. The benefits to the Help system build into the product is that it is quick and available 24/7.

If the Help system does not answer your question, the next step is to go to the erwin Technical Support Web Page. This one-stop-shopping page offers a variety of immediate tips and a variety of options tailored to the complexity and urgency of your question.

The top left resource is our Knowledge Base Search. Our engineers regularly publish new Technical Documents on tips, techniques, and problems as we encounter questions from customers. This regularly evolving source of knowledge is also available 24/7 and is quick and easy to use. To make your search as productive as possible, especially when using multiple terms, click on the Search Tips link (below the search box) and/or click on the Most Viewed/Recent Articles for popular and the latest breaking knowledge. When you run your search, we also provide tips on how to expand your search beyond our Knowledge Base by using a popular search engine.

If the Knowledge Base search does not supply the answer to your question, or if your question is relatively esoteric, you can also try asking your colleagues in the erwin Community, which resides next to the Knowledge Base search box. While this won’t provide an immediate response, it will enable you to access the knowledge of a large cross-section of fellow erwin users. This is especially helpful when looking for feedback on how others have accomplished a specific task.

If the above search options fail, then please contact us. The quickest way to do this is to click on the “Support Chat” button directly below the Knowledge Base search box. A erwin Technical Support Engineer generally responds within 30 seconds. You can ask your question immediately with no case-opening formalities. If the question is complex and requires talking, screen sharing, files to be transmitted, tracking, etc., the engineer will open a case for you and then call you back to proceed.

If you initially know your question is complex, the best step may be to open a case via the “Open a Support Ticket” option in the bottom right, next to the Chat area. This allows you to express your question in your own words, provides a record of the complex details, and provides functionality for screen sharing, transmission of files, and a tracking process that is monitored by management. It also enables the content to be shared with other engineers, in case the original engineer needs to engage senior resources or send the matter to our Sustaining Engineering Developers.

Each of the above contact techniques offers different speeds of response, ease of contact, and communications methods. Our mission is to provide the best possible answer in the most professional manner in the shortest possible time to help you meet your data modeling and data governance needs. Being aware of all these options may help you decide which will be most productive, depending on your question’s complexity and urgency.

Lastly, if you want to escalate your matter at any time, there is a “Contact A Manager” button on the same Support page, which sends an email directly to the Support Manager and Principal erwin Engineers.

We look forward to hearing from you!