Past week was rather busy as I relocated my office; another case of changing the tires while the car is moving. It did give me time to continue to ponder how to translate business into enterprise architecture and then I.T. designs. The idea I came up with was integrating various proven models and methods into a complete methodology similar to how I would design houses decades ago.
I came to this approach as I am using a similar approach to solving another problem for another enterprise project. My project portfolio this year seems to be integrating components into complete processes or functions. May be it’s because I have a large inventory of methods, tools, techniques and processes in my professional toolkit. So today I’m looking at cataloging these into a database that will cover the various types of information these address and use.
The issue seems to be the relating business models to I.T. models. However, after years of working this I realized it’s not a direct translation. There are intermediate steps that are not in the current inventory of most corporations, nor recognized. Some of these I’ve used at other enterprises but where only internal use only as neither the business stakeholders nor the I.T. community understood or cared about them. As such they seem to be of use only for architects as present.
During this week one of my peers who are facing this challenged asked how she could align I.T. with the business. After discussing her current situation we agreed the first problem to address was having the I.T. group realize they couldn’t build business strategy from I.T. it goes the other way. The next issue to address is, understanding that an intermediate form that both could use as a neutral exchange was needed.
However, neither party recognizes the gap is too far to bridge, so a neutral exchange does not seem worth investing in yet. That’s a plus as it gives me more time to develop a robust one based upon concepts I discussed in last post.