How Architects Can Survive and Thrive in the Digital Era: A Conversation with Peter Beijer

By The Open Group

Peter Beijer believes your job as an Enterprise Architect may be in jeopardy.

According to Beijer, Chief Technologist for the Office of the CTO for HP Enterprise and leader of the company’s architecture capabilities in EMEA, architects are being forced to change and evolve their role due to the digital revolution that all industries are currently facing.

Beijer believes that for Enterprise Architects to survive, they must do three things. First, they must learn to adapt and engage with the changes being brought by the digital shift and new development environments. Second, they must reach out and engage with today’s new business leaders to better understand the problems and opportunities that businesses and customers are facing. Finally, they must better develop their own personal brands in order to showcase their experience and credentials and show their worth to their organizations.

We spoke with Beijer in advance of The Open Group Paris 2016 event (October 24 – 27) to learn more about how he sees the state of the Enterprise Architecture profession today and what Enterprise Architects can to do remain relevant in the midst of a rapidly changing IT and business climate.

How are the current changes in IT affecting Enterprise Architects?

There is a digital shift going on—the whole world is going digital, and digital means a  business transformation for a lot of companies because they may get involved with human-centric customer engagement models that have very different dynamics than what they’re used to, so the skills of the Architecture profession are changing a lot. You have to be much more empathetic to be able to understand what the customers’ customer is doing and there is a whole new range of possibilities and platforms with technologies—it’s becoming very, very diverse.

That asks for more insight from architects to be able to do things. IT as such is changing—there are many forces driving that change. Everything is getting smaller, we are living on top of a mountain of data (which is self-propelling) and there’s also the societal impact of IT and the amount of information available to people. This whole change from the industrial way of doing computing, which was meant to help us do things, has transformed into an information society driven not by scarcity but by abundance. There’s an abundance of information, technology and platforms, and they have become very easily accessible to all of us. For example, where once we needed highly skilled specialists we can now do things now ourselves on a smartphone everywhere.

Within an enterprise, there has been a classic division between the business and IT, and we have always preached the paradigm, ‘We should align IT with the business.” But in fact business has become IT. However, the business people now have easy access to these new digital platforms so the IT department is lagging behind fixing legacy systems. Traditionally the role of the architect was always meant to collaborate with the business people to see how technology can advance the business.

But since IT has become so readily available—you can install mobile platforms, Cloud, or a business app by the press of a finger on an iPhone—what happens is business people are doing these things themselves more and more. Of course that is the very extreme end of the spectrum, but the net effect to the IT department is that business users want solutions more rapidly, more easily—they are not waiting for cumbersome projects.

For the architect, it’s ‘Welcome to the new world of IT.’ And you can question whether the architect is still needed when the click of a button allows you to engage with Amazon Web Services or Microsoft Azure or any other platform. So as the Architect, you’ve always done your projects, you’ve always carefully facilitated the discussions and guided decisions when defining solutions, and now you find yourself in a rapidly changing world where business people are building solutions themselves. You find yourself increasingly useless and no longer relevant.

On the other hand, if you pick up a role that articulates the value of these new technologies in the new business contexts that are emerging, you really have to change your job a lot to become meaningful. The fundamental value of architecting has not changed, but the spectrum of choices, the moving parts, the building blocks have greatly increased and it is against a background where everybody wants things very quick and very cheap. We are now living in a world where everybody says ‘Let’s fail fast and try many ideas.’ The architect by nature is more ‘Slow down. Are we making the right decision? Are we making the right choices?’ This is a bit counter or averse to the natural DNA of an architect. And that’s why the profession needs a wake up call.

How then can Architects remain relevant and meaningful within organizations? Why has it been so difficult for Enterprise Architects to show their value in companies?

That has always been a problem to show your business value as an Enterprise Architect. It has to do with making yourself relevant and being recognized by the organization. The question is, how do you do that?

First of all, the architect should actually be the first person to call on the business leader. Over the years, the discipline has been degraded a bit. Traditionally, we were the people that were engaging with the business, but the IT world has become very technical and in many organizations the architect has been degraded into a technical role while the original role of the architect was a liaison between business stakeholders and technical stakeholders. What the architect must do is to engage again with the business and build trust and confidence that they can make a difference in solving a problem, that they understand business language and that they can become empathetic.

That is one of the key skills that an architect must learn—to become empathetic and to understand what others do. They also need to understand the risks in building a system because things are going faster. They’re less cumbersome than in the early days but would a business really bet its success on not using an architect and run into risk on a project? You really need an architect to understand this whole playing field and the forces within the projects, the business opportunity, the key stakeholders, the customers’ customers and what technology can mean for them. Architects must understand the business language and build a level of trust where the business can have a dialogue where together they can explore the possibilities and see how they can make things happen. These are a couple of skills that architects need to develop.

How can Architects work on developing empathy as a skill?

That’s not an easy thing. That is because they must be much more business focused, learn much more business acumen, see how major trends in the industry effect the strategic intent of the company they’re working for. What is the whole value chain, or better, what is the value network? With the connectedness of today’s businesses we  think in terms of networks rather than of chains. Diving in and understanding these concepts and problems from a business perspective is one of the key skills they have to learn.

How do you then develop empathy? You have to work with these [business] people, you have to facilitate and guide dialogues so you can learn about those things and interact with the business. You have to actually think beyond the technology. It’s much more about understanding the usage of technology—the human/technology meta-narrative, so to speak. In the early days, people adapted to technologies. Nowadays, the technology must adapt to people and as an architect you have to understand that. The dialogues of that are on a much higher level of abstraction, so it is essential for architects to facilitate that dialogue but you also have to rapidly tie that down to technology possibilities. For example, how does a choice for a certain technology affect the value network that your organization is relying and expending on? Will it create a business blockage for the future?

What can Architects do to better showcase their skills and show their value to their organizations?

How can you step forward and say, ‘I have these skills’? This is where The Open Group Certified Architect program steps in because we provide a certification where we really evaluate the architect’s experience in doing these types of things.

As an architect, if you want to become relevant, you must adopt a skillset, and with that skillset you can qualify as an Open Certified Architect (Open CA). It’s about the skillset, the portfolio of experience you have built up as a professional can you prove that you have done that? Using those skills and experiences is a guide for an organization where they can have a resource pool of architects. In my organization, we are pretty serious about certification—we use it as a tool for career progression.

A profession framework gives organizations a consistent approach to industry recognized standards, the roles, the way people work, the methods they use, but also to develop training and education to get people there. It’s a quality assurance for professionals because that evaluation is done in a peer-based way where the certification of architects is evaluated by other architects. With certification, we have clearly defined standards—what is the industry consensus on a good approach for how people should work, the level of interaction needed with the business. The evaluation is probing whether you’re doing that, whether you’re capable of defining projects, delivering projects with a large degree of success. One of the key components is the conformance requirements for the Open Certified Architect—it basically tells you what skills and experience are necessary to seriously call yourself an “Architect.” 

If an organization wants to develop the career progression of architects and the standards for the way they work, a profession framework is a necessary instrument to develop and maintain the profession within an organization. Using a framework based on industry consensus, as with The Open Group, provides a good reference.  It is a very prestigious certification!

Within the Open CA program in The Open Group, we have 37 architecture methods that are recognized by the Specification Authority based on industry consensus. The methods help you establish architectural decisions, validate architectures to manage stakeholder requirements, basically define the transition from old to new or how to architect a solution for a business problem. Working according to an architecture method gives you a large degree of predictability for success instead of shooting from the hip and praying for the best. If organizations adopt a profession framework, they create an environment that enables people to practice and mature their profession. You create much more consistency with role definitions. A lot of organizations struggle with defining roles for their job families, so adopting a profession framework where the skills are clearly articulated and defined and can be evaluated by the means of a certification program can really increase the effectiveness of your workforce. And in developing standards, you can provide employees a roadmap for their career progression.

What steps can Enterprise Architects take to grow their careers over the next 5-10 years and continue to show value as the industry is changing?

The obvious answer for me is of course to get your Open Certified Architect certification. Once you have it, there is a three-year recertification that is not as cumbersome as the original certification. The initial certification a significant step for an architect. If you are an Open Certified Architect, you are a “Real Architect.” But it does require you to re-certify every three years, and that is a very short document that proves you are still architecting and maintaining your profession. Compare it to peer-reviewed professions such as lawyers and medical doctors.

One of the things we evaluate in that recertification is: Do you follow the industry? Are you following industry conferences? Are you following webinars? Are you maintaining your skills as an architect? Are you following the state of the art of the new disciplines related to architecture? The other thing we really encourage, because it’s a peer-driven evaluation, is that we encourage people to sit on boards to evaluate other architects going through the certification process.

So you keep your profession up to date, you understand what’s going on, you have to engage with your clients and give some evidence that you are still doing Architecture related work. You have to maintain your knowledge and experiences. As the industry is evolving toward a digital shift, of course everyone has to take webinars and keep up on industry trends, but to keep the Open Certified Architect certification, we ask you to do that otherwise you are no longer conforming to the conformance requirements.

@theopengroup #ogPARIS

by-the-open-groupDr. Peter Beijer is Chief Technologist in Hewlett Packard Enterprise, leading the Architecture Capability for Enterprise Services in Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA). Recognized pioneer in HPE’s Solution Architecture Blueprinting methodology and core contributor to the development of the architecture profession. He is Chair of the Open CA Specification Authority.  Dr. Beijer received a doctorate (Ph.D) from the University of Amsterdam.

Leave a comment

Filed under Certifications, EA, Enterprise Architecture, Open CA, Standards, The Open Group, The Open Group Paris 2016, Uncategorized

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.

 

Leave a comment

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

Transitioning The Open Group Examinations from Prometric to Pearson VUE

By Andrew Josey, VP, Standards & Certification and Deborah Schoonover, Director, Certification, The Open Group

The Open Group is moving to Pearson VUE as its new examination provider for IT certification exams.

At the time of writing this article (October 2016), we are in a period of dual operation, with most exams available at both Prometric and Pearson VUE.  Through January 31, 2017, you will have the option to take exams at Prometric testing centers, as you have in the past, and must do so if you are holding a Prometric voucher. There’s no change to the exam registration process with Prometric. Effective February 1, 2017, Pearson VUE will be the sole provider of our certification exams.

As part of the transition to Pearson VUE, we are changing the registration process. To take an exam at a Pearson VUE testing center, you will need an Open Group web account, even if you plan on registering for an exam by phone or in person, so that we can ensure your certification history is kept in sync. You can register for an Open Group web account at www.opengroup.org (select login).

In the rest of this article we cover a number of key questions about the transition.

Q: When are The Open Group exams moving to Pearson VUE?

A: Most Open Group exams are currently available at Pearson VUE today and the remaining exams will be soon. We are running a dual operation, with many exams being offered at both Prometric and Pearson VUE during this transition period. See our exam registration page for a current listing of where different exams are being offered: https://certification.opengroup.org/take-exam.

The Open Group exams will be offered at Prometric through January 31, 2017. After that date, exams will only be available at Pearson VUE.

Q: Can I use my exam voucher at either exam provider today?

A: No, you must use your voucher at the designated exam provider. If your exam voucher code starts with “OG”, then it is for Pearson VUE, otherwise it must be used at Prometric, for exams scheduled through January 31, 2017.

Q: Am I required to have an exam voucher to take an exam at Pearson VUE?

A: No, you can also pay by credit card when registering for the exams.

Q: How do I know if my exam voucher is for Prometric or Pearson VUE?

A: If your exam voucher code starts with “OG”, then it is for Pearson VUE. All other codes are Prometric vouchers.

Q: Can I exchange my Prometric voucher for a Pearson VUE voucher?

A: No. Prior to January 31, 2017 you should use your Prometric voucher to book an exam at Prometric. Starting February 1, 2017, your Prometric voucher will be automatically accepted at Pearson VUE (if the code starts with any of the following two characters: 23, 50, 93, 95, 96, 98, 2X, 9X, SX, ZC, ZX). You won’t need to exchange your Prometric voucher, you will be able to use it directly within the Pearson VUE exam registration system.

Q: Will my Prometric voucher be accepted at Pearson VUE?

A: If you received your voucher from an Open Group Accredited Training Course Provider, then yes, your Prometric voucher will be accepted at Pearson VUE after January 2017. If your voucher is valid and unused, then starting February 1, 2017 you will be able to use you voucher to book an exam with Pearson VUE.

Prometric vouchers beginning with any of the following two characters: 23, 50, 93, 95, 96, 98, 2X, 9X, SX, ZC, ZX will be automatically usable at and accepted for exam registration at Pearson VUE after January 31, 2017.

If your voucher begins with any of the following two characters: ER, G2, G3, GP, or P2, then NO, your voucher will not be accepted at Pearson VUE. These vouchers must be used at Prometric by January 31, 2017.

Q: How do I use my Prometric voucher at Pearson VUE?

A: Starting February 1, 2017, if your Prometric voucher is unexpired and unredeemed, you will be able to use it directly when registering at Pearson VUE. Go to https://certification.opengroup.org/take-exam for instructions on how to register. When you get to the payment screen, enter your Prometric voucher number.

Q: What do I do if my Prometric voucher expires after January 31, 2017?

A: If your Prometric voucher has an expiration date after January 31, 2017 and the voucher code starts with the any of the following two characters, your voucher will be accepted at Pearson VUE starting February 1, 2017:

23, 50, 93, 95, 96, 98, 2X, 9X, SX, ZC, ZX

If you have one of the above voucher codes and wish to take your exam before February, you must schedule your exam at a Prometric test center.

If your Prometric voucher starts with any of the codes listed below, the voucher was purchased directly from Prometric and must be used at a Prometric test center by January 31, 2017:

ER, G2, G3, GP, P2

Any vouchers starting with code ER, G2, G3, GP, or P2 that are not used by January 31, 2017 will cease to be valid.

Q: Can I use my Prometric voucher to register in January for an exam in February?

A: No. Your Prometric voucher will not be accepted at Pearson VUE until February 1, 2017.

Q: If I failed the Combined exam at Prometric, can I retake the failed part at Pearson VUE?

A: Yes, you can retake the failed part at Pearson Vue. If the account you use to log in to Pearson VUE contains the email address you used when you took your exam at Prometric, then we will be able to match your new exam results to your prior results.

See our Pearson VUE Frequently Asked Questions for more information about taking an exam at Pearson VUE or our exam registration page to Register for an Exam at Pearson VUE.

@theopengroup

By Andrew JoseyAndrew Josey is VP, Standards and Certification overseeing all certification and testing programs of The Open Group. He also manages the standards process for The Open Group.

Since joining the company in 1996, Andrew has been closely involved with the standards development, certification and testing activities of The Open Group. He has led many standards development projects including specification and certification development for the ArchiMate®, TOGAF®, POSIX® and UNIX® programs.

He is a member of the IEEE, USENIX, UKUUG, and the Association of Enterprise Architects (AEA).  He holds an MSc in Computer Science from University College London.

 

 

by-andrew-josey-and-deborah-schoonoverDeborah Schoonover is the Director of Certification at The Open Group, responsible for the development and operation of The Open Group’s certification and accreditation programs. In this role, she engages with various working groups to define each program and the policies and legal documents that underpin the program, defines the business requirements for and oversees development of the underlying software systems, and oversees operational delivery of the certification services.

Prior to joining The Open Group, Deborah held development, quality management, and marketing roles at Cadence Design Systems. Deborah holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Computer Science from Lehigh University and a Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree from Boston University.

 

 

1 Comment

Filed under Certifications, Pearson VUE, Prometric, Standards, The Open Group, Uncategorized

The Role of Enterprise Architecture in Platform 3.0 Transformation

By Stuart Macgregor, CEO, Real IRM and The Open Group South Africa

Our transition to the highly-connected realm of Platform 3.0 will radically disrupt the way that we approach Enterprise Architecture (EA).

The current architectures and methodologies will simply not hold up in the era of Platform 3.0 – characterised by the forces of big data, mobility, the Internet of Things, and social media colliding.

In the Platform 3.0 era, power shifts to the customer – as we choose from a range of services offered conveniently via digital channels. By embracing Platform 3.0, organisations can respond to newly-empowered customers. New entrants can scale at unprecedented rates, and incumbents can pivot business models rapidly, while entering and exiting new markets as opportunities emerge.

EA plays an essential role in making these possibilities a reality. EA infuses IT into the DNA of the business. No longer is it about ‘IT’ and ‘business’. Technology is absolutely integral to the entire business, and business leaders are quickly realising the fundamental truth that ‘if you can’t change the system, you can’t change the business’.

A new and exciting Platform 3.0 architectural reality is emerging. It’s composed of microservices and platforms that are combined in radical new ways to serve point-in-time needs – powering new-found business opportunities and revenue streams, dramatically transforming your organisation.

Platform 3.0 refers to radically different ways for the organisation to securely engage with partners, suppliers, and others in your value chain or ecosystem.”

Managing volatile change

But, while driven by an urgent need to transform, to become faster and more agile, large organisations are often constrained by legacy infrastructure.

With an EA-focused approach, organisations can take a step back, and design a set of architectures to manage the volatile change that’s inherent in today’s quickly-digitising industries. EA allows business systems in different departments to be united, creating what The Open Group (the vendor-neutral global IT standards and certifications consortium) aptly describes as a “boundaryless” flow of information throughout the organisation.

Platform 3.0 refers to radically different ways for the organisation to securely engage with partners, suppliers, and others in your value chain or ecosystem. For a retailer, stock suppliers could access real-time views of your inventory levels and automatically prepare new orders. Or a factory, for example, could allow downstream distributors a view of the production facility, to know when the latest batch run will be ready for collection.

In almost every industry, there are a number of new disruptors offering complementary service offerings to incumbent players (such as Fintech players in the Banking industry). To embrace partnerships, venture-capital opportunities, and acquisitions, organisations need extensible architectural platforms.

More and more transactions are moving between organisations via connected, instantaneous, automated platforms. We’re seeing the fulfilment of The Open Group vision of Boundaryless Information Flow™ between organisations and fuels greater efficiencies.

Architecting for an uncertain future

We need to architect for an uncertain future, resigning ourselves to not always knowing what will come next, but being prepared with an architectural approach that enables the discovery of next-generation digital business opportunities.

By exploring open standards, this transformation can be accelerated. The concept of ‘openness’ is at the very heart of Platform 3.0-based business transformation. As different business systems fall into and out of favour, you’ll want to benefit from new innovations by quickly unplugging one piece of the infrastructure, and plugging in a new piece.

Open standards allow us to evolve from our tired and traditional applications, to dynamic catalogues of microservices and APIs that spark continuous business evolution and renewal. Open standards help up to reach a state of radical simplicity with our architecture.

The old-world view of an application is transformed into new applications – volatile and continually morphing – combining sets of APIs that run microservices, and serve a particular business need at a particular point-in-time. These APIs and microservices will form the basis for whatever application we’d like to build on top of it.

Architects need to prepare themselves and their organisations for an uncertain future, where technology’s evolution and businesses’ changing demands are not clearly known. By starting with a clear understanding of the essential building blocks, and the frameworks to re-assemble these in new ways in the future, one can architect for the uncertain future lying in wait.

Platform 3.0 requires a shift towards “human-centered architectures”: where we start acknowledging that there’s no single version of the truth. Depending on one’s role and skill-set, and the level of detail they require, everyone will perceive the organisation’s structure and processes differently.

But ultimately, it’s not about the user, or the technology, or the architecture itself. The true value resides in the content, and not the applications that house, transmit or present that content. Human-centered architectural principles place the emphasis on the content, and the way in which different individuals (from inside or outside the organisation) need to use that content in their respective roles.

As the EA practice formalises intellectual capital in the form of business models and rules, we create an environment for machine learning and artificial intelligence to play an essential role in the future of the organisation. Many describe this as the future of Platform 3.0, perhaps even the beginning of Platform 4.0?

Where this will eventually lead us is both exciting and terrifying.

@theopengroup

by-stuart-macgregor-ceo-real-irm

Stuart Macgregor is the CEO, Real IRM Solutions and  The Open Group South Africa. Through his personal achievements, he has gained the reputation of an Enterprise Architecture and IT Governance specialist, both in South Africa and internationally.

Macgregor participated in the development of the Microsoft Enterprise Computing Roadmap in Seattle. He was then invited by John Zachman to Scottsdale, Arizona to present a paper on using the Zachman framework to implement ERP systems. In addition, Macgregor was selected as a member of both the SAP AG Global Customer Council for Knowledge Management, and of the panel that developed COBIT 3rd Edition Management Guidelines. He has also assisted a global Life Sciences manufacturer to define their IT Governance framework, a major financial institution to define their global, regional and local IT organizational designs and strategy. He was also selected as a core member of the team that developed the South African Breweries (SABMiller) plc global IT strategy.

Stuart, as the lead researcher, assisted the IT Governance Institute map CobiT 4.0 to TOGAF®, an Open Group standard. This mapping document was published by ISACA and The Open Group. He participated in the COBIT 5 development workshop held in London in 2010.

1 Comment

Filed under architecture, Boundaryless Information Flow™, digital business, EA, Enterprise Architecture, Future Technologies, Internet of Things, interoperability, Open Platform 3.0, Platform 3.0, Standards, The Open Group, Uncategorized

The Open Group Paris Event to Take Place in October 2016

The Open Group, the vendor-neutral IT consortium, is hosting its next global event in Paris, France, between October 24-27, 2016. The event, taking place at the Hyatt Regency Paris Étoile, will focus on e-Government, as well as how to address the dimensions of e-Society, e-Technology and e-Management.

Industry experts will look at issues surrounding business transformation, business analysis, information sharing, e-Health, privacy and cybersecurity. Sessions will examine the strategic execution and the application of emerging technologies and management techniques to e-Government. Presentations will also include the latest on the European Interoperability Reference Architecture (EIRA) and the Regulatory Impact of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) on Personal Data Architecture.

The event features key industry speakers including:

  • Rob Akershoek, ‎Solution Architect (IT4IT), Shell
  • Robert Weisman, University of Ottawa
  • Roland Genson, Director, General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union
  • Olivier Flous, Vice President of Engineering, Thales Group

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

The focus of Monday’s keynote sessions will be Standardized Boundaryless Information Flow™ and how Enterprise Architecture can be used in e-Government. There will also be a significant emphasis on business transformation, with the Tuesday plenary and tracks looking at successful case studies, standards as enablers, and architecting the digital business.

Further topics to be covered at the event include:

  • IT4IT™ – managing the businesses of IT, vendor adoption of IT4IT™ and a CIO-level view of the standard
  • Open Platform 3.0™ – the customer experience and digital business, architecting Smart Cities and how to use IoT technologies
  • ArchiMate® – new features of ArchiMate® 3.0 and a look at open standards in practice
  • Open Business Architecture – examining the new Open Business Architecture standard and how to address enterprise transformation

Member meetings will take place throughout the course of the three-day event for ArchiMate®, Architecture, Healthcare, IT4IT™, Open Platform 3.0™, Open Trusted Technology and Security Forum members.

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

@theopengroup #ogPARIS

 

makingstandardswork

Comments Off on The Open Group Paris Event to Take Place in October 2016

Filed under ArchiMate®, Boundaryless Information Flow™, digital strategy, Digital Transformation, e-Government, Enterprise Architecture, Healthcare, Interoperability, IoT, IT4IT, Open Platform 3.0, Security, Standards, The Open Group, The Open Group Paris 2016, Uncategorized

IT4IT™ and TOGAF® – How Do They Fit Together?

By Michael Fulton, President, Americas Division of CC and C Solutions

In my role leading work in both the Enterprise Architecture space as well as the IT Transformation space, I am frequently asked how IT4IT™ and TOGAF®, an Open Group standard, fit together, and how the Enterprise Architecture profession fits into the IT4IT context.

My experience working with clients in this space has led me to look this question from two key perspectives.

The first perspective is from the vantage point of the CIO using IT4IT to look at his or her organization for improvement opportunities. At this level of enquiry there are two primary views: the IT Value Chain and the Level 1 Reference Architecture.

By Mike Fulton, President, C C and C SolutionsBy Michael Fulton, President, CC and C Solutions

By Mike Fulton, President, C C and C SolutionsFrom this perspective, Enterprise Architecture is a small piece of the overall big picture.

There are 29 functional components in the Level 1 reference architecture of which EA is simply one of many.  Within the EA functional component it is appropriate to use whatever architecture framework we see fit, to guide process or best practices for Enterprise Architecture.

TOGAF, along with counterparts like DODAF, FEAF, Zachman and others, simply fits into this box and needs to be integrated with other parts of the IT organization through the development of the Service Architecture.

For a CIO, IT4IT gives me a way to look across my organization, and to assess all its functional components for quality or maturity (or whatever other factor is important) and to decide where my biggest pain points are.

IT4IT also gives the CIO a very clear way to understand the data needed to manage an IT organization and provides a framework for evaluating how well that data is flowing across the different organizational silos.

A second perspective for which IT4IT is useful is that of an Enterprise Architect.  As an Enterprise Architect, it would be my job to look across the entire enterprise.  We use the Porter Value Chain here as one simple representation of a way to segment your Enterprise Architecture according to TOGAF.

 

By Michael Fulton, President, CC and C SolutionsAs you can see from the highlight on the diagram, IT is one of several areas in the business.  Each of these areas might have an industry reference model appropriate for use for one or several of the areas.

Examples include ARTS, BIAN, SCOR, VCG, APQC or many others.  IT4IT in this context is simply a reference architecture for managing the Technology Development (or IT) support function.  IT4IT provides us with the details we need to truly understand how IT needs to work.

 

By Michael Fulton, President, CC and C Solutions

Neither perspective on how to use IT4IT is more or less important.

The CIO can get significant value from using IT4IT in a top-down manner as a strategic assessment tool to drive improvement across the IT function and help transform the IT Operating Model.

The Enterprise Architect can get significant value from using IT4IT in more of a bottom-up manner as a reference model to speed up architecture work and to drive vendor integration and standardization in the IT Management tool space.

Regardless of whether you use IT4IT in a top down or bottom up manner, it helps to understand how the pieces fit together for you and your organization.

 

By Michael Fulton, President, CC and C SolutionsMichael Fulton is currently President, Americas Division of CC and C Solutions, a global Enterprise Architecture and IT Transformation Consulting and Training company.  Michael is an experienced architect with almost 10 years of experience in Enterprise Architecture and over 20 years of IT experience. He is TOGAF Certified, IT4IT Certified and a Cloud Certified Architect and has led IT4IT Architecture, Cloud Architecture, IT Strategic Planning, Disruptive Cost Innovation, IT Leadership Development, and EA Capability & Training Development at Fortune 50 Company. Michael also spent time working across the entire IT Lifecycle, including time in Service Management, Program Management, Project Management, Application Development, and IT Operations. Mike is an experienced speaker and trainer, a practiced leadership and strategy coach and mentor and is well known across the industry. He brings a strategic viewpoint and the ability to communicate with all levels of the organization.

@theopengroup

 

 

2 Comments

Filed under EA, Enterprise Architecture, IT, it transformation, IT4IT, Standards, The Open Group, Uncategorized

The Enviable Pedigree of UNIX® and POSIX®

By Andrew Josey, VP, Standards and Certification, The Open Group

Technology can be a fickle thing. Spurred by perpetual innovation, the one constant in the tech industry is change. As such, we can expect that whatever is the hottest thing in the industry today—Cloud, Big Data, Mobile, Social, what have you—will be yesterday’s news within a few years’ time. That is how the industry moves and sustains itself, with constant development and creativity—all of which is only getting faster and faster.

But today’s breakthroughs would be nowhere and would not have been possible without what came before them—a fact we sometimes forget. Mainframes led to personal computers, which gave way to laptops, then tablets and smartphones, and now the Internet of Things. Today much of the interoperability we enjoy between our devices and systems—whether at home, the office or across the globe—owes itself to efforts in the 1980s and 1990s to make an interoperable operating system (OS) that could be used across diverse computing environments—the UNIX operating system.

Created at AT&T Bell Laboratories in the early 1970s, the UNIX operating system was developed as a self-contained system that could be easily adapted and run on commodity hardware. By the 1980s, UNIX workstations were widely used in academia and commercially, with a large number of system suppliers, such as HP, IBM, and Sun Microsystems (now Oracle), developing their own flavors of the OS.

At the same time, a number of organizations began standardization efforts around the system. By the late 1980s, three separate organizations were publishing different standards for the UNIX operating system, including IEEE, ISO/IEC JTC1 and X/Open (which eventually became The Open Group).

As part of the standardization efforts undertaken by IEEE, it developed a small set of application programming interfaces (APIs). This effort was known as POSIX, or Portable Operation System Interface. Published in 1988, the POSIX.1 standard was the first attempt outside the work at AT&T and BSD (the UNIX derivative developed at the University of California at Berkeley) to create common APIs for UNIX systems. In parallel, X/Open (an industry consortium consisting at that time of over twenty UNIX suppliers) began developing a set of standards aligned with POSIX that consisted of a superset of the POSIX APIs.  The X/Open standard was known as the X/Open Portability Guide and had an emphasis on usability. ISO also got involved in the efforts, by taking the POSIX standard and internationalizing it.

In 1995, the Single UNIX Specification was created to represent the core of the UNIX brand. Born of a superset of POSIX APIs, the specification provided a richer set of requirements than POSIX for functionality, scalability, reliability and portability for multiuser computing systems. At the same time, the UNIX trademark was transferred to X/Open (now The Open Group). Today, The Open Group holds the trademark in trust for the industry, and suppliers that develop UNIX systems undergo certification, which includes over 40,000 tests, to assure their compatibility and conformance to the standard.

These tri-furcated efforts by separate standards organizations continued through most of the 1990s, with the people involved in developing the standards constantly bouncing between organizations and separate meetings. In late 1997, a number of vendors became tired of having three separate parallel efforts to keep track of and they suggested all three organizations come together to work on one standard.

In 1998, The Open Group, which had formed through the merger of X/Open and the Open Software Foundation, met with the ISO/IEC JTC 1 and IEEE technical experts for an inaugural meeting at IBM’s offices in Austin, Texas. At this meeting, it was agreed that they would work together on a single set of standards that each organization could approve and publish. Since then the approach to specification development has been “write once, adopt everywhere,” with the deliverables being a set of specifications that carry the IEEE POSIX designation, The Open Group Technical Standard designation, and the ISO/IEC designation. Known as the Austin Group, the three bodies still work together today to progress both the joint standard. The new standard not only streamlined the documentation needed to work with the APIs but simplified what was available to the market under one common standard.

A constant evolution

As an operating system that forms the foundational underpinnings of many prominent computing systems, the UNIX OS has always had a number of advantages over other operating systems. One of the advantages is that those APIs have made it possible to write code that conforms to the standard that can run on multiple systems made by different vendors. If you write your code to the UNIX standard, it will run on systems made by IBM, HP, Oracle and Apple, since they all follow the UNIX standard and have submitted their operating systems for formal certification. Free OSs such as Linux and BSD also support the majority of the UNIX and POSIX APIs, so those systems are also compatible with all the others. That level of portability is key for the industry and users, enabling application portability across a wide range of systems.

In addition, UNIX is known for its stability and reliability—even at great scale. Apple claims over 80 million Mac OS X systems in use today – all of them UNIX certified. In addition, the UNIX OS forms the basis for many “big iron” systems. The operating systems’ high through-put and processing power have made it an ideal OS for everything from supercomputing to systems used by the government and financial sectors—all of which require high reliability, scale and fast data processing.

The standard has also been developed such that it allows users to “slice and dice” portions of it for use even when they don’t require the full functionality of the system, since one size does not fit all. Known as “profiles,” these subsets of the standard API sets can be used for any number of applications or devices. So although not full UNIX systems, we see a lot of devices out there with the standard APIs inside them, notably set top boxes, home routers, in-flight entertainment systems and many smart phones.

Although the UNIX and POSIX standards tend to be hidden, deeply embedded in the technologies and devices they enable today, they have been responsible for a great many advances across industries from science to entertainment. Consider the following:

  • Apple’s Mac OS X, the second widely most used desktop system today is a certified UNIX system
  • The first Internet server for the World Wide Web developed by Tim Berners Lee was developed on a UNIX system
  • The establishment of the World Wide Web was driven by the availability of connected UNIX systems
  • IBM’s Deep Blue supercomputer, a UNIX system, was the first computer to beat World Chess Champion Gary Kasparov in 1997
  • Both DNA and RNA were sequenced using a UNIX system
  • For eight consecutive years (1995-2002), each film nominated for an Academy Award for Distinguished Achievement in Visual Effects was created on Silicon Graphics computers running the UNIX OS.

Despite what one might think, both the UNIX and POSIX standards are continually under development still even today.  The community for each is very active—meeting more than 40 times a year to continue developing the specifications.

Things are always changing, so there are new areas of functionality to standardize. The standard is also large so there is a lot of maintenance and ways to improve clarity and portability across systems.

Although it might seem that once a technology becomes standardized it becomes static, standardization usually has the opposite effect—once there is a standard, the market tends to grow even more because organizations know that the technology is trusted and stable enough to build upon. Once the platform is there, you can add things to it and run things above it. We have about 2,000 application interfaces in UNIX today.

And as Internet-worked devices continue to proliferate in today’s connected world, chances are many of these systems that need big processing power, high reliability and huge scale are going to have a piece of the UNIX standard behind them—even if it’s deep beneath the covers.

By Andrew JoseyAndrew Josey is VP, Standards and Certification at The Open Group overseeing all certification and testing programs. He also manages the standards process for The Open Group.

Since joining the company in 1996, Andrew has been closely involved with the standards development, certification and testing activities of The Open Group. He has led many standards development projects including specification and certification development for the ArchiMate®, TOGAF®, POSIX® and UNIX® programs.

He is a member of the IEEE, USENIX, UKUUG, and the Association of Enterprise Architects (AEA).  He holds an MSc in Computer Science from University College London.

@theopengroup

1 Comment

Filed under Association of Enterprise Architects, Certifications, digital business, EA, enterprise architecture, Internet of Things, IoT, IT, operating system, Oracle, Single UNIX Specification, standards, Uncategorized, UNIX