Category Archives: TOGAF®

The Open Group San Francisco Day Two Highlights

By The Open Group

Day two of The Open Group San Francisco event was held Tuesday, January 31 on another sunny, winter day in San Francisco. Tuesday’s welcome address featured Steve Nunn, President & CEO, and Jim Hietala, VP Business Development and Security, both of The Open Group, greeting attendees for a morning of sessions centered around the theme of Making Standards Work®. Nunn kicked off the morning by reporting that the first day of the conference had been very well received with copious positive feedback on Monday’s speakers.

It was also announced that the first certification courses for ArchiMate® 3.0 , an Open Group standard, kicked off at the conference. In addition, the San Francisco event marked the launch of The Open Group Open Process Automation™ Forum, a Forum of The Open Group, which will address standards development for open, secure, interoperable process control architectures. The Forum will include end users, suppliers, systems integrators, integrated DCS vendors, standards organizations and academics from a variety of industries, including food and beverage, oil and gas, pulp and paper, petrochemical, pharmaceuticals, metals and mining, and utilities.  Hietala joined Nunn on stage to discuss the launch of the Forum, which came out of a vision from ExxonMobil. The Forum has already grown rapidly, with almost 100 members. Forum Members are also attending and holding events at the annual ARC Advisory Group Industry Forum in Orlando.

The morning plenary began with Dennis Stevens from Lockheed Martin discussing “The Influence of Open Architecture Standards on the Emergence of Advance Process Control Systems.” Stevens, who is involved in The Open Group FACE™ Consortium, will also be leading the Open Process Automation Forum. Stevens opened by saying that this is a particularly exciting time in industrial automation due to of the intersection of standards, technology and automation. According to Stevens, the work that has been done in the FACE Forum over the past few years has paved the way for what also needs to be done in process automation.

Stevens noted that many of the industrial systems in use today will be facing obsolescence in the next few years due to a variety of reasons, including a proliferation of proprietary and closed systems, a lack of sophisticated development tools and the high-cost of technology refreshes. Tech trends such as the Internet of Things, cybersecurity, open source and virtualization are also forcing a need for industrial manufacturers to change. In addition, the growth of complexity in software systems and the changeover from hardware dominant to software dominant systems is also compelling factors for automation change. However, Stevens says, by reusing existing and creating new standards, there are many opportunities for cost savings and reducing complexity.

According the Stevens, the goal is to standardize the interfaces that companies can use so there is interoperability across systems built atop a common framework. By standardizing the interface only, organizations can still differentiate themselves by bringing their own business processes and designs to those systems via hardware or software components. In addition, by bringing elements from the FACE standardization model to Open Process Automation, the new forum can also take advantage of proven processes that already take into account regulations around co-opetition and anti-trust. Stevens believes that Open Process Automation will ultimately enable new markets and suppliers for process automation as well as lower the cost of doing business in industrial automation.

Following the morning break, Chair of the Department of Economics at San Jose State University Dr. Lydia Ortega took stage for the second morning session, entitled “Innovative Communities.”  Ortega took a refreshing look at what The Open Group does and how it works by applying economic theory to illustrate how the organization is an “Innovative community.” Ortega began by providing what she called an “economist’s definition” of what open standards are, which she defined as a collection of dispersed knowledge that is a building block for innovation and is continually evolving. She also described open standards as a “public good,” due to the fact that they are knowledge-based, non-rivalrous, non-excludable and produced once and available to others at marginal cost. Teamwork, consensus, community are also characterizing features of what makes the organization work. Ortega plans to continue her research into what makes The Open Group work by examining competing standards bodies and the organization’s origins among other things.

Prior to introducing the next session, Steve Nunn presented an award to Steve Whitlock, a long-time Open Group member who recently retired from Boeing, for more than 20 years of leadership, contributions and service to The Open Group. Colleagues provided additional praise for Whitlock and his willingness to lead activities on behalf of The Open Group and its members, particularly in the area of security.

The morning’s third session featured Mike Jerbic, Principal Consultant for Trusted System Consulting Group, highlighting how the “Norwegian Regional Healthcare Project & Open FAIR” have been used to analyze the cost benefits of a home treatment program for dialysis patients in Norway. Currently, due to health and privacy regulations and security requirements, patients who receive home dialysis must physically transport data regarding their treatments to hospitals, which affects the quality of patient’s lives but protects the state from security issues related to transporting data online. Jerbic and a group of economics students at San Jose State University in California did an economic analysis to examine the costs vs. benefits of the program. Using The Open Group Open FAIR™ body of knowledge to analyze the potential threats to both patient privacy and information security, the group found it would make sense to pose the program risks as an engineering problem to be solved. However, they must do additional research to weigh the benefits of potential cost savings to the state vs. the benefits of quality of life for patients.

Concluding Tuesday’s plenary sessions was a panel entitled “Open FAIR in Practice,” which extended the conversation regarding the Norwegian healthcare project by taking questions from the audience about the program. Jerbic moderated the panel, which included Ortega; Eva Kuiper, ESS GRC Security Consultant, HPE; John Linford, Lecturer, Department of Economics, San Jose State University; and Sushmitha Kasturi, Undergraduate Researches, San Jose State University.

Jerbic also announced that a number of students from San Jose State, many of whom were in attendance, have recently either completed or begun their certification in Open FAIR.  He also talked about an Academic Program within The Open Group that is working with students on projects that are mutually beneficial, allowing The Open Group to get help with the work needed to create standards, while providing important practical work experience for students.

by-the-open-group

by-the-open-group

San Jose State University Students

Following the plenary, Tuesday’s lunchtime partner presentation featured Sean Cleary, Senior Consultant, Orbus Software, presenting on “Architecture Roadmap Visualization with ArchiMate® 3.0.”

Afternoon sessions were split into two tracks, Cognitive Computing and EA in Practice.

  • EA in Practice – Hosted by Len Fehskens of the Association of Enterprise Architects, two sessions looked at maxims and folktales for architects, presented by Fehskens, and how to enable government and management with continuous audits with Robert Weisman, CEO/COO of Build the Vision.
  • Cognitive Computing – Chris Harding from The Open Group served as host for four sessions in the track:
    • Ali Arsanjani, CTO for Analytics and Emerging Technologies, IBM – Arsanjani provided an overview of different ways that data can be structured for cognitive computing applications. According to Arsanjani, cognitive systems are meant to augment, not replace, human systems and to be of service to us. By combining human interaction and curation with automated data analysis and machine learning, companies will be able to gain greater business advantages. However, we also must also always be aware of the implications of using artificial systems and the potential consequences of doing so, he said.
    • Jitendra Maan, Enterprise Architect and Center of Excellence Lead, Tata Consultancy Services – Maan says cognitive computing signals a shift in how machines interact with humans, other machines and the environment, with potential for new categories of business outcomes and disruption. The design of automated systems is critical to how cognitive systems are expected to evolve but unlike traditional computing, cognitive will rely on a combination of natural language processing, machine learning and data. Potential business applications already in progress include service support centers, contract management, risk assessment, intelligent chat bots and conversation work flows. Maan predicts bots will actually replace many service functions in the next few years.
    • Swaminathan Chandrsekaran, Industry Apps & Solutions, IBM Watson, both of IBM – Chandrsekaran’s talk took a deeper dive into cognitive computing and the make-up of cognitive systems. Understanding, reason, learning and interaction are key to teaching cognitive systems how to work, he said. Cognitive systems are also broadly categorized around language, speech, vision and data & insights, much like the human brain. Patterns can generally be created from cognitive conversations, discovery and application extensions. Chandreskaran also shared how to model a reference architecture for a cognitive conversation pattern.
    • The Cognitive Computing panel, moderated by Harding, included afternoon speakers Arsanjani, Maan and Chandrsekaran. The panel discussed how businesses can gain advantage from cognitive computing, learned personalization and contextualization via systems training, the time it takes to train a system (now days or weeks vs. months or years), making the systems more intelligent over time, and the need to aggregate and curate data from the beginning of a project and also focus on introducing domain-relevant data, as well as the importance of good data curation.

The day concluded with a social event and dinner for attendees held at the Autodesk Gallery, a San Francisco destination that marries creativity, design and engineering in more than 20 exhibits sponsored by companies such as Lego and Mercedes Benz.

by-the-open-group

Networking at the Autodesk Gallery

The following day, the event offered track sessions in areas including  Internet of Things (IoT) and Architecture.  The Open Group San Francisco drew to a close with Members Only Meetings on February 2.

@theopengroup #ogSFO

We are looking forward to seeing you at The Open Group Berlin April 24-27, 2017! #ogBER

 

Leave a comment

Filed under ArchiMate®, Digital Transformation, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture (EA), FACE™, Internet of Things, IoT, O-BA Standard, Open Business Architecture (O-BA), Open FAIR, Open Process Automation, standards, Steve Nunn, The Open Group, The Open Group San Francisco 2016, TOGAF®, Uncategorized

TOGAF® User Group Meetings

By The Open Group

Since its inception more than two decades ago, TOGAF®, an Open Group standard, has grown to become the de facto global framework for creating Enterprise Architectures.

Thousands of companies worldwide have adopted and adapted TOGAF to transform their businesses. Facts about TOGAF include:

  • 80% of the Fortune Top 50 companies use TOGAF
  • Over 60,000 individuals hold certifications in TOGAF 9
  • TOGAF users are based in 120 countries
  • Greater than 60 accredited training courses available globally

The Open Group wants to ensure that TOGAF maintains its momentum worldwide and realizes that doing so cannot be done without capturing the voices beyond the The Open Group members.  Additionally, there is an increase in the number of licensed TOGAF professionals who want to follow up their training with a forum for discussion and sharing. Thus, there is an opportunity to provide TOGAF Users to easily Share, get Enlightenment, and Express their needs (’SEE’ TOGAF).

The starting off point for The Open Group was to begin hosting TOGAF User Group Meetings, which move in a direction where users get more involved in their structure. With these meetings, The Open Group gets an opportunity to Harvest ideas on use, Educate users, have Access to larger user base and broader set of Requirements (‘HEAR’ about TOGAF use).

The User Group Meetings are open to all interested people and are free to attend.

So there is a win-win for TOGAF Users to meet. This part of the story is yet to be written!

For the upcoming TOGAF® User Group Meeting in San Francisco, CA on January 30, 2017, please visit here.

by-the-open-group

 

Comments Off on TOGAF® User Group Meetings

Filed under Certifications, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture (EA), Enterprise Transformation, Professional Development, Standards, The Open Group San Francisco 2017, TOGAF, TOGAF®

Tackling Transformation in Government: A Conversation with Roland Genson

By The Open Group

It’s not just industry and corporations that are undergoing massive change due to digital transformation—governments worldwide are being equally affected by the need to create more efficient processes and to provide online services to citizens.

With 28 member states and three branches of government, the European Union (EU) is a prime example of just how complex transformation can be. We spoke with Roland Genson, Director in the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union—one of the EU’s three branches—in advance of The Open Group Paris 2016 event (October 24 – 27) about the challenges the Council is facing and how they are working with the two other branches of government to achieve interoperability and Boundaryless Information Flow™.

What is the role of the General Secretariat of the Council (GSC) of the European Union? What sort of services does the Council provide?

In a nutshell, in the legislative process level at the European Union you have three institutions. The most known to the public is the European Commission, which has a role to make proposals and draft new legislation and submit it to the two co-legislators. On one side there’s the European Parliament where you have directly elected parliamentarians and on the other side, the Council of the European Union—that’s us. In the Council of the European Union you have the 28 member states represented, much like, for example, if you look at the U.S. Congress, you have the House and the Senate. As the General Secretariat, we are supporting those 28 member states in the negotiation process, meaning providing conferences, logistics and policy advice but also managing and circulating all the information they need to work in 24 European Union languages.

Why has the GSC undertaken a digital transformation? What led to that and made it necessary?

If we look back at the past, until 2014 all the institutions had their own IT strategy, their own development and so on. But today with digital transformation it’s more and more obvious that we need a fit and interoperability framework. In most of the 28 member states you have e-Government initiatives and digital transformation processes ongoing, and we are in the middle of those. We cannot just look around us and find solutions that are competitive with everyone. We believe that we have to work together on common standards and interoperability frameworks to make sure that we are able to connect to all 28 members, to connect to the other institutions, the Commission and the Parliament, otherwise it will be impossible for us—and for them—to work efficiently.

What are some of the challenges that the GSC is facing as part of the transformation?

I see at least three challenges. The first challenge is an internal one. Within our organization we need seamless information flow between all services. That’s the first place where boundaryless needs to kick in to get rid of existing silos, to eliminate disruptions  between services.

The second challenge is “Brussels-based,” which means the need to have Boundaryless Information Flow between EU institutions. When a proposal comes from the Commission, it should enter into the Council and the European Parliament without any new disruption or without any data or format conversion. Our target should be an end-to-end legislative drafting and negotiation process between the Commission, Council and the Parliament.

The third challenge is to become boundaryless with regard to the GSC’s main stakeholders, which are our member states, so that we are able to serve all 28 member states (MS) with standardized content that can immediately be used and linked within each MS subject to national needs, specifications or legal requirements.

Furthermore, as an additional challenge, we also have responsibility with regard to the European citizens, so public information that our organization deals with can easily be made available and understood for further analyses and exploitation by the interested citizen. It’s our challenge to get EU knowledge out to the civil society.

How are those challenges being addressed as part of the project? How long has your transformation project been going on?

I took over the responsibility for this newly created directorate in 2014 with a clear shift from IT to business outcome or value. A lot of organizations had gone on the same path where, until a certain point, the digital environment was mainly designed by IT departments. We really have now a situation where the business needs and expectations come first. Internal clients and our stakeholders outside are our first priority and on the basis of their perspectives we should see what standards and subsequent IT solutions allow us to get there. We started this business driven process in 2014. Moreover my concern was to have it immediately started together with the other institutions, because it doesn’t make sense for the Council alone to try to find a way for “its” future when the European Commission and the European Parliament have the same challenges. I believe progress made on interoperability solutions for European public administrations (ISA) is equally a valid framework for all institutions to set the necessary standards. And with the European Interoperability Framework, the EIF, we would also have another basis for the GSC’s digital developments. Though we started late in 2014, there are quite a number of approaches, standards and tools that we can take on board and consider as viable options for the future.

Are standards being used to address the challenges of the project?

Absolutely. For example, today we write all of our structured documents on a MS Word-based tool, specifically designed for all our services. Today, this doesn’t make sense anymore. We understand that all the content drafting shall be XML-based, and when discussing with the Commission and the European Parliament, we understand that for legislative process marking, AKOMA NTOSO is the right standard, which leads us to explore the  market, where common standards have already been shared and explored by other communities or organizations.

What role is Enterprise Architecture playing in your transformation?

Our task today is to get all key business processes designed and  documented—getting a clear view on this and assessing them according to corporate’s strategy, priorities and challenges. As mentioned before, it’s rather complicated in the sense that we have to get it aligned in-house, but also with the Commission and the European Parliament and eventually with the member states. Somehow we have to find the best and easiest standard and operating model to get there. What I would like to avoid is to set up a new set of processes which would be too rigid and would not allow us to meet the necessary flexibility some services might need.

What advice do you have for those undertaking digital transformation within government? What do people need to think about when they’re working with government entities as opposed to corporations or businesses?

The General Secretariat of the Council is probably one of the smallest organizations in Brussels but when we look at the “Council” and the “European Council,” the two institutions we serve, the challenge ahead is quite impressive. We have to serve hundreds of ministers plus a community of national officials, front line delegates and back office support, which easily covers more than 200,000 people. Obviously we cannot enter into negotiations with 28 member states to see what would be the best standard or framework but we cannot ignore that things are going on. What we try to do is to identify digital champions and undertake a number of exchange of views  to see what to move on.

As an example, we had a visit to Austria, as the Austrian government is already far advanced in digital transformation. We will have next year the Estonian presidency for the European Union. Estonia is also a digital champion, so we will try to learn from their experience and take advantage of their presidency in order to launch new services and test to see if things meet the needs of most member states. If not, we will swiftly adapt and explore something else. It will be a different, an experimental approach. We need to engage with Member States and vice versa, to trigger a greater awareness of what delegations would like to achieve in terms of content and knowledge delivery.

What role can standards play in helping government with transformation efforts?

For me it’s rather obvious, that if we agree on the same standards in our organizations, all stakeholders would know what the criteria would be, for example when launching a public procurement. It would make multilateral interactions a lot easier. We would not just look at one specific tool or software and see what is compatible, we’d just refer to the standards as a basis. Everyone would know about that standard and subsequently be ensured that products based on that standard are interoperable, are compatible with the institutions or with my neighbor states. Standards also offer semantics. We work in 24 languages. If we want to be sure that one terminology is always used in the same way in different languages, we also need to invest a lot in semantic interoperability.

What standards are you looking at or currently using?

We plan to use TOGAF®, an Open Group standard, in close collaboration with our colleagues on the IT-side for business process management. We want to have a well-documented process map of the organization to allow this smart integration, interoperability and processing of the information. It’s the business architecture part of TOGAF.

Are there other things that governments need to consider when doing transformation projects?

In my view, what is crucial is to have a genuine engagement of all stakeholders at the highest level.. The three Secretary-Generals from the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council expressed their commitment in this respect. To make the expected progress, we equally need a full commitment by all Council members, e.g. national delegations. So we will learn from them and they will learn from us and we will be able to achieve results together to transform our organization. For me, this is crucial. It’s a change in the mindset, but we need to adapt to be able to quickly exchange best practices, lessons and failures, as a way to make progress.

@theopengroup #ogPARIS

by-the-open-groupRoland Genson is director at the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union, in charge of the Council’s document processing, recording, archiving, transparency and of the GSC’s libraries. He drives the redesign of the GSC’s knowledge and information management in order to align the organisation with digital innovation and with Member States expectations in this respect.

Until 2014, he was a GSC director covering Schengen, judicial cooperation and internal security cooperation under the Justice and Home Affairs policy framework.

From 1987 to 2007, he served in the Luxembourg law enforcement sector and than at the Ministry of Justice.

He is also a lecturer at the Universities of Luxemburg and of Liège.

Mr. Genson will be a keynote speaker at The Open Group Paris 2016 event on October 24.

 

Comments Off on Tackling Transformation in Government: A Conversation with Roland Genson

Filed under Boundaryless Information Flow™, Business Transformation, Digital Transformation, e-Government, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture (EA), EU, European Commission, European Union, Interoperability, IT, standards, The Open Group, The Open Group Paris 2016, TOGAF®, Uncategorized

The Open Group Austin 2016 Event Highlights

By Loren K. Baynes, Director, Global Marketing Communications, The Open Group

During the week of July 18th, The Open Group hosted over 200  attendees from 12 countries at the Four Seasons hotel on the beautiful banks of Lady Bird Lake in Austin, Texas, USA.

On Monday, July 18, Steve Nunn, President and CEO of The Open Group, welcomed the audience and set the stage for all the great upcoming speakers and content.

Steve’s remarks included the recent release of the Open Business Architecture (O-BA) Preliminary Standard Part I to Support Business Transformation.  This is the first in a series of installments that will help Business Architects get to grips with transformation initiatives and manage the demands of key stakeholders within the organization. Steve also referenced William Ulrich, President, Business Architecture Guild, who consulted on the development of the standard.

The plenary began with Jeff Scott, President, Business Innovation Partners, with his presentation “The Future of Business Architecture, Challenges and Opportunities”.  Jeff stated some interesting facts, which included noting that Architects are among the best and brightest members of our organizations.  He also stated that Business Architects need support from a wide group of senior managers, not just the CEO. The ultimate goal of Business Architecture is not to model the organization but to unlock organizational capacity and move forward.

By Loren K. Baynes

Jeff Scott

The Business Architecture (BA) theme continued with Aaron Rorstrom, Principal Enterprise Architect, Capgemini.  Aaron further elaborated on The Open Business Architecture (O-BA) Standard.  The O-BA Standard provides guidance to companies for establishing BA practice and addresses three transformation challenges: consistent communication, alignment and governance, systemic nature.

The sessions were followed by Q&A moderated by Steve Nunn.

Up next was “ArchiMate® 3.0 – A New Standard for Architecture” with Marc Lankhorst, Managing Consultant and Service Line Manager, Enterprise Architect, BiZZdesign and Iver Band, Enterprise Architect, Cambia Health Solutions.

Marc and Iver discussed practical experiences and a Healthcare case study, which included a discussion on personal health and wellness websites.

ArchiMate®, an Open Group standard, provides a language with concepts to describe architectures; a framework to organize these concepts; a graphical notation for these concepts; a vision on visualizations for different stakeholders. ArchiMate 3.0 has recently been released due to: the increasing demand for relating Enterprise Architecture (EA) to business strategy; technology innovations that mix IT and physical world; usage in new domains (i.e. manufacturing, healthcare, retail); improved consistency and comprehensibility; improved alignment between Open Group standards, notably TOGAF®.

The final session of Monday’s plenary featured a panel on “Architecture Standards Development” with Marc Lankhorst, Iver Band, Mike Lambert (Fellow of The Open Group) and Harry Hendrickx (Business Architect, Hewlett Packard Enterprise).  Moderated by Chris Forde, GM, Asia Pacific and VP, Enterprise Architecture, The Open Group, the panel represented a diverse group of the population contributing to the development of open standards.

In the afternoon, sessions were divided into tracks – Security, ArchiMate, Open Business Architecture.

Don Bartusiak, Chief Engineer, Process Control, ExxonMobil Research & Engineering presented “Security in Industrial Controls – Bringing Open Standards to Process Control Systems”.  Don went into detail on the Breakthrough R&D project which is designed to make step-change improvement to reduce cost to replace and to increase value generation via control system.  ExxonMobil is working with The Open Group and others to start-up a consortium of end user companies, system integrators, suppliers, and standards organizations for sustained success of the architecture.

Also featured was “Applying Open FAIR in Industrial Control System Risk Scenarios” by Jim Hietala, VP, Business Development and Security, The Open Group.  The focus of ICS systems is reliability and safety.  Jim also shared some scenarios of recent real life cyberattacks.

The evening concluded with guests enjoying a lively networking reception at the Four Seasons.

Day two on Tuesday, July 19 kicked off the Open Source/Open Standards day with a discussion between Steve Nunn and Andras Szakal, VP & CTO, IBM U.S. Federal. Steve and Andras shared their views on Executable Standards: convergence of creation of open source and innovation standards; the difference between Executable Standards and traditional standards (i.e. paper standards); emergence of open source; ensuring interoperability and standardization becomes more effective of time. They further explored open technology as driving the software defined enterprise with SOA, social, Open Cloud architecture, e-Business, mobile, big data & analytics, and dynamic cloud.

A panel session continued the conversation on Open Standards and Open Source.  The panel was moderated by Dave Lounsbury, CTO and VP, Services for The Open Group.  Panelists were Phil Beauvoir, Archi Product Manager, Consultant; John Stough, Senior Software Architect, JHNA, Inc.; Karl Schopmeyer, Independent Consultant and representing Executable Standards activity in The Open Group.  Topics included describing Archi, Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE™, a consortium of The Open Group) and OpenPegasus™, an open-source implementation of the DMTF, CIM and WBEM standards.

The Open Group solves business problems with the development and use of open standards.  Interoperability is key.  Generally, no big barriers exist, but there are some limitations and those must be realized and understood.

Steve presented Karl with a plaque in recognition of his outstanding leadership for over 20 years of The Open Group Enterprise Management Forum and OpenPegasus Project.

Rick Solis, IT Business Architect, ExxonMobil Global Services Co. presented “Driving IT Strategic Planning at IT4IT™ with ExxonMobil”.  Business is looking for IT to be more efficient and add value. ExxonMobil has been successfully leveraging IT4IT concepts and value chain. The IT4IT™ vision is a vendor-neutral Reference Architecture for managing the business of IT.  Rich emphasized people need to think about the value streams in the organization that add up to the business value.  Furthermore, it is key to think seamlessly across the organization.

Joanne Woytek, Program Manager for the NASA SEWP Program, NASA spoke about “Enabling Trust in the Supply Chain”.  SEWP (Solutions for Enterprise-Wide Procurement) is the second biggest IT contract in the US government.  Joanne gave a brief history of their use of standards, experience with identifying risks and goal to improve acquisition process for government and industry.

Andras Szakal again took the stage to discuss mitigating maliciously tainted and counterfeit products with standards and accreditation programs.  The Open Trusted Technology Provider™ Standard (O-TTPS) is an open standard to enhance the security of the global supply chain and the integrity of Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) Information and Communication Technology (ICT). It has been approved as an ISO/IEC international standard.

Afternoon tracks consisted of Healthcare, IT4IT™, Open Platform 3.0™ and Professional Development.  Speakers came from organizations such as IBM, Salesforce, Huawei, HPE and Conexiam.

The evening culminated with an authentic Texas BBQ and live band at Laguna Gloria, a historic lakefront landmark with strong ties to Texas culture.

By Loren K. Baynes

The Open Group Austin 2016 at Laguna Gloria

Wednesday, July 20 was another very full day.  Tracks featured Academia Partnering, Enterprise Architecture, Open Platform 3.0 (Internet of Things, Cloud, Big Data, Smart Cities), ArchiMate®.  Other companies represented include San Jose State University, Quest Diagnostics, Boeing, Nationwide and Asurion.

The presentations are freely available only to members of The Open Group and event attendees.  For the full agenda, please click here.

In parallel with the Wednesday tracks, The Open Group hosted the third TOGAF® User Group Meeting.  The meeting is a lively, interactive, engaging discussion about TOGAF, an Open Group standard.  Steve Nunn welcomed the group and announced there are almost 58,000 people certified in TOGAF.  It is a very large community with global demand and interest.  The key motivation for offering the meeting is to hear from people who aren’t necessarily ‘living and breathing’ TOGAF. The goal is to share what has worked, hasn’t worked and meet other folks who have learned a lot from TOGAF.

Terry Blevins, Fellow of The Open Group, was the emcee.  The format was an “Oxford Style” debate with Paul Homan, Enterprise Architect, IBM and Chris Armstrong, President, Armstrong Processing Group (APG).  The Proposition Declaration: Business Architecture and Business Architects should be within the business side of an organization. Chris took the ‘pro’ position and Paul was ‘con’.

Chris believes there is no misalignment with Business and IT; business got exactly what they wanted.  Paul queried where do the Business Architectures live within the organization? BA is a business-wide asset.  There is a need to do all that in one place.

Following the debate, there was an open floor with audience questions and challenges. Questions and answers covered strategy in Architecture and role of the Architect.

The meeting also featured an ‘Ask the Experts’ panel with Chris Forde; Jason Uppal, Chief Architect, QRS; Bill Estrem, TOGAF Trainer, Metaplexity Associates; Len Fehskens, Chief Editor, Journal of Enterprise Architecture, along with Chris Armstrong and Paul.

Organizations in attendance included BMC Software, City of Austin, Texas Dept. of Transportation, General Motors, Texas Mutual Insurance, HPE, IBM.

A more detailed blog of the TOGAF User Group meeting will be forthcoming.

A special ‘thank you’ to all of our sponsors and exhibitors:  avolution, BiZZdesign, Good e-Learning, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, AEA, Orbus Software, Van Haren Publishing

@the opengroup #ogAUS

Hope to see you at The Open Group Paris 2016! #ogPARIS

By Loren K. BaynesLoren K. Baynes, Director, Global Marketing Communications, joined The Open Group in 2013 and spearheads corporate marketing initiatives, primarily the website, blog, media relations and social media. Loren has over 20 years experience in brand marketing and public relations and, prior to The Open Group, was with The Walt Disney Company for over 10 years. Loren holds a Bachelor of Business Administration from Texas A&M University. She is based in the US.

 

 

Comments Off on The Open Group Austin 2016 Event Highlights

Filed under Accreditations, ArchiMate, ArchiMate®, Association of Enterprise Architects (AEA), Business Architecture, Business Transformation, Certifications, Cloud, COTS, Cybersecurity, digital technologies, Digital Transformation, enterprise architecture, Enterprise Architecture (EA), Internet of Things, Interoperability, Jeff Kyle, O-TTPS, Open FAIR, Open Platform 3.0, Professional Development, Security, Standards, Steve Nunn, The Open Group Austin 2016, TOGAF®, TOGAF®

The Open Group Austin Event to Take Place July 18-21, 2016

The Open Group, the vendor-neutral IT consortium, is hosting its latest event in Austin, TX, USA July 18—21, 2016. The event, taking place at Austin’s Four Seasons Hotel, will focus on open standards, open source and how to enable Boundaryless Information Flow™.

Industry experts will explain how organizations can use openness as an advantage and how the use of both open standards and open source can help enterprises support their digital business strategies. Sessions will look at the opportunities, advantages, risks and challenges of openness within organizations.

The event features key industry speakers including:

  • Steve Nunn,  President & CEO, The Open Group
  • Dr. Ben Calloni, Fellow, Cybersecurity, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics
  • Rick Solis, IT Business Architect, ExxonMobil Global Services Co
  • Zahid Hossain, Director, IT Architecture, Nationwide
  • William Wimsatt, Oracle Business Architect, Oracle

Full details on the agenda and speakers can be found here.

The Open Business Architecture Standard (O-BA) and ArchiMate® 3.0, a new standard for Architecture, will be the focus of Monday’s keynote sessions. There will also be a significant emphasis on IT4IT™, with the Tuesday plenary and tracks looking at using and implementing the IT4IT™ Reference Architecture Version 2.0 standard.

Further topics to be covered at the event include:

  • Open Platform 3.0™ – driving Lean Digital Architecture and large scale enterprise managed cloud integration
  • ArchiMate® – New features and practical use cases

Member meetings will take place throughout the course of the three-day event as well as the next TOGAF® User Group meeting taking place on July 20.

Registration for The Open Group Austin event is open now, is available to members and non-members, and can be found here.

By The Open Group

@theopengroup #ogAUS

For media queries, please contact:

Holly Hunter
Hotwire PR
+44 207 608 4638
UKOpengroup@hotwirepr.com

Comments Off on The Open Group Austin Event to Take Place July 18-21, 2016

Filed under ArchiMate, Boundaryless Information Flow™, Business Architecture, Certifications, Digital Transformation, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture (EA), Internet of Things, IT4IT, Steve Nunn, The Open Group, The Open Group Austin 2016, TOGAF®, TOGAF®, Uncategorized

What’s New in ArchiMate® 3.0

By The Open Group

This summer The Open Group ArchiMate® Forum will make available the latest version of the ArchiMate Specification®, version 3.0, with a series of announcements and events to take place throughout the months of June and July. The official announcement was featured at the IRM Enterprise Architecture Europe Conference in London on June 14.  Additionally, a live webinar is scheduled for June 15 to promote the new standard. The webinar will include practical applications for the new standard, as well as its relevance for business modeling and business transformation support. A white paper will also be published and available here. In July, the Monday plenary and tracks at The Open Group Austin 2016 event will be dedicated to speakers, panels and use cases for the new standard.

The ArchiMate Specification is a modeling language that enables Enterprise Architects to describe, analyze and visualize relationships among architecture domains using easy to understand visuals representations. It provides a common language for describing how various parts of the enterprise are constructed and how they operate, including business processes, organizational structures, information flows, IT systems, and technical and physical infrastructures. In a time when many enterprises are undergoing rapid change, ArchiMate models help stakeholders design, assess and communicate those changes within and between architecture domains, as well as examine the potential consequences and impact of decisions throughout an organization.

The latest evolution of the standard continues to improve collaboration across multiple functions including strategists and business executives, enterprise and business architects, portfolio and project managers, information and applications architects, technology stakeholders and solutions architects. New features in the specification include:

  • Elements for modeling enterprises at a strategic level, including mapping capabilities, resources and outcomes
  • Modeling support for physical materials and equipment
  • Improved consistency and structure within the language
  • Improved usability and alignment with other standards, such as TOGAF®, BPMN, UML and BMM

This version of the specification will also include refinements such as:

  • Improvements and new elements to represent how architectures evolve over time through implementation and migration
  • Improved grouping capabilities for connecting different elements to see how they’re related
  • Cross-layer dependencies, alignments and relationships (to correlate business applications and technology, for example)
  • Mechanisms for customizing the language for specialized or domain-specific purposes and address specific real case situations.

The ArchiMate Specification is unique in that it provides a graphical language for representing enterprise architectures over time, including strategy, transformation and migration planning, as well as the motivation and rationale for the architecture. The standard has been designed to be as compact as possible, yet still usable for most enterprise architecture modeling needs.

ArchiMate 3.0 also furthers the relationship between the ArchiMate language and the TOGAF ADM.

By The Open Group

 

Certification programs for version 3.0 of the specification will follow this fall. In the meantime, current certification programs will remain active. Once available, a bridge certification will be also available for those choosing to transition from the current version of the specification to 3.0.

For more on ArchiMate, please visit: http://www.opengroup.org/subjectareas/enterprise/archimate.

@theopengroup @ArchiMate_r  #ArchiMate #ogAUS

1 Comment

Filed under ArchiMate, ArchiMate®, Certifications, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture (EA), Enterprise Transformation, IT, Standards, TOGAF®

TOGAF® User Group Meeting – The Open Group London 2016

By The Open Group

On April 27, the second TOGAF® User Group Meeting was held at The Open Group London 2016. The session brought together TOGAF users and stakeholders to share information, best practices and learning, for the development of individual practitioners’ knowledge and the standard as a whole. Discussions revolved around how to better use TOGAF in practice within different organizations and industries, success stories and areas of improvement, as well as suggestions as to how the standard can be improved upon in the future.

Central Hall Westminster conservatory was packed, as Steve Nunn, President and CEO of The Open Group, opened the meeting with a warm welcome to the community. He heralded the session as an initiative that was ‘trailblazing’ the way for the development of TOGAF®, an Open Group standard, which now has more than 55,000 certifications.

The session was hosted by Terry Blevins, a Fellow of The Open Group and Director of The Open Group Governing Board. Terry has been involved in development of the TOGAF standard for years and has been a major contributor to its development. He stressed that as the community continues to grow, it’s so important to hear real-world experiences of those using the standard to get a broader perspective on what works, what doesn’t, and how it can evolve.

To achieve this, the TOGAF User Group staged an ‘Open Debate’. Fashioned on an Oxford-style debate, it was designed to tap into people’s feelings about the TOGAF standard and allow questions and different points of view to be shared around the room. Standard debating rules were explained, before the proposition declaration was laid out:

“The TOGAF® Architecture Development Method (ADM) is not agile and therefore there is a need to change the specification to make it agile.”

Arguing ‘For’ the proposition was Chris Armstrong, President of Armstrong Process Group, Inc. and internationally recognized thought leader and expert in iterative software development, Enterprise Architecture, object-orientated analysis and design, the Unified Modelling Language, use case driver requirements and process implementation.

Arguing ‘Against’ the proposition was Paul Homan, Technology Strategy Consultant for IBM for eight years. He is a Certified Distinguished IT Architect, specializing in Enterprise Architecture joining IBM from end-user environments, having worked as Chief Architect in both the UK Post Office and Royal Mail. Not only has he established Enterprise Architecture practices, but also lived with the results.

By The Open Group

Open Debate with Paul Homan and Chris Armstrong

In order to understand the audience’s view at the outset of the debate, attendees were asked to vote on their existing standpoint. A few hands showed support for changing the specification to make it agile, and a few abstained. However, most hands were raised against the proposition, agreeing that the ADM was already agile in nature.

Chris then had seven minutes to argue his case – that the TOGAF ADM is not agile and needs to change. He conceded that very few people would steadfastly ignore change within their organization and aim to respond to it badly, however in the whole 692 pages of TOGAF version 9.1, agile is only mentioned twice, agility 6 times and lean is not mentioned at all. Furthermore, the mere fact that there are 692 pages could be taken to indicate the lack of agility altogether. The crop circle diagram that underpins the whole framework appears linear and waterfall in appearance, and so lacking in agility by nature. He argued that the only way that the TOGAF ADM can realistically support an agile enterprise is by becoming agile itself.

Likewise, Paul put his seven-minute case forward – arguing that the TOGAF ADM is agile and does not require any changes to make it so. He made the point that as an architect, everything has to have a reference system, and that the TOGAF ADM is a framework for developing architecture, not a style guide. The specification is actually part of a wider ecosystem of material, including pocket guides, whitepapers, translations and qualifications, and all of these items help to move the enterprise away from project management bureaucracy, towards agile project development. Enterprise Architects, he said, should live by the oath: ‘I will apply for the benefit of the enterprise, all architecture practices that are required’. This is so as to make agile more meaningful and relevant. Instead of relying on the framework, agility is created through just enough architecture, coupled with the interpretation and implementation of the framework by the practitioner. Therefore, skills are the most important element in these projects.

Following these opening statements, TOGAF users were encouraged to ask questions to the pair. A couple of these, included below, give a flavor of the discussion:

Q: Chris, you counted the number of times TOGAF uses the word agile – but how many occurrences are there where it says you cannot be agile and processes must take a long time?

A: Chris –Just because TOGAF does not say you cannot be agile, does not mean it is agile itself. The best laid plans will not work if the people delivering it do not see where they fit in and translate their work to the project they are implementing. We are not recognizing significant changes in delivery from the waterfall practices of many years ago.

Paul – It’s a prioritization exercise – we need to worry about the behaviors of practitioners and the interaction of enterprise architecture functions within a project, rather than the spec and other incentives. Accessibility is key – we can help people access this body of knowledge without having to rethink the whole body of knowledge

Q: The TOGAF standard is a reference model and we need to adapt to the particular needs of each organization, so how do you handle that?

A: Paul – It’s all about consumption. We have to consider that somebody has to be able to consume the guidance that we want to provide as EAs within a development project. We want them to be aware of what matters to us from an EA perspective – we shouldn’t be trying to out-design them, we should just think about what is relevant to us that they are potentially not aware of. This comes back to understanding your consumer.

It’s a bit like someone that comes to service the heating in a house. The consumer is the house owner and the servicer has a tool bag, which in this case is the TOGAF standard. It has all the tools in it you might need. Boilers will change, but what is really changing in an agile world is that customer experience is evolving. This would include their presentation, reliability and professionalism – customers get a good experience from behaviors and style, not the toolset. The tool bag will remain the same, but behavior and how it is applied needs to change and get better.

Q: Chris, are you saying that we should be working in a completely agile fashion and that waterfall methods are no longer relevant?

Chris – We need to acknowledge the complexity of various different organizations, and we need to find the balance between always evolving technology and approval times, for example. Agility in enterprise architecture is often compensating for a lack of agility throughout the rest of the enterprise – maybe solution delivery teams wouldn’t have to be so agile if everywhere else in the company was a bit more agile.

Q: The crop circle is a waterfall model, this is reflected in the spec itself, but if you keep the framework are we missing the opportunity to address different levels of agility?

Chris –  We need to change the crop circle. This might be met with great resistance but it implies that you have to wait to complete one phase to start the next one – you should be doing certain processes every day and not waiting to go from one stage to another.

Paul – The reader is lulled into the idea that there is a sequence and you must complete one phase before another. I think that there is always going to be a weakness in condensing a large body of knowledge into one diagram, and there is always going to be approximation which is what has happened from TOGAF® 9.1 into the crop circle. There are things we can assume – but this is why the spec says it’s not intended to be waterfall.

The two speakers then summarized their arguments. Paul reinforced his argument that the ADM is fit for purpose as a Hippocratic Oath for EAs, but what matters is the changes in our behavior to complement this. Chris stated that the spec does need to change, to add supplemental guidance so people can be guided in how to implement TOGAF as an agile framework.

When it came to the final vote from the audience, more people had been persuaded by the ‘for’ argument, to change the ADM spec, however the ‘against’ argument still had more support in the room. This conclusion demonstrated that there was a display of two sound and compelling arguments for each side, and Terry noted that more time for questions would be needed at the next debate!

Following the debate came two breakout sessions; ‘The Roles of People in TOGAF Driven Architecture Initiatives’ from Len Fehskens, Editor, Journal of Enterprise Architecture (AEA), and ‘Using TOGAF® for Digital Business Transformation’ from Sonia Gonzalez, The Open Group Architecture Forum Director. These sessions were used to open up a freer dialogue between users, to discuss their ideas and experiences around  the TOGAF standard.

Check out video highlights of the debate here!

Please join us at the next TOGAF® User Group Meeting taking place at The Open Group Austin 2016 July 18 – 21!

@theopengroup #ogLON #ogAUS

 

 

Comments Off on TOGAF® User Group Meeting – The Open Group London 2016

Filed under Association of Enterprise Architects (AEA), Certifications, Enterprise Architecture, Enterprise Architecture (EA), Professional Development, standards, Steve Nunn, The Open Group London 2016, TOGAF®, TOGAF®, Uncategorized