I was thinking and working a lot about target architectures. Usually it is expected that you as architect will define a kind of map, which can be interpreted anyone in the company and reach the shiny targets on low cost zero time and no business outages. I would not say that it is not possible, rather if you plan cost, timing and migration phases but it is far to be simple. The real issue is that a target architecture is a collection of demands driving to ideal situation, which is not necessarily the place you would be; and the price tag, the duration and the full freeze of "disturbing" changes to reach the ideal situation makes most of the target architectures unreal. Let's see why!

The best answer in IT for the question is 0 with a carry flag. Team building approaches have different answers they think it is more than 2 what is the math answer. Is there any cases when the result is less?

Assuming that the result is the value for money or the ability to change ratio in the architecture then yes, there are many cases when the performance will be much worse if you have 1+1 instead of tan appropriate 1.

The following stories are not real they did not happen neither mine nor your past!

The third part of the series about architecure management directive. It shows the teams you have to organise and the mechanisms to operate to reach ideal point of transparent and clear decisions and rationales. The roles you see can be found in TOGAF while the processes are following the main disciplines of democratic voting.

2018.08.02: In the past weeks there were many small changes to make the portal more usable.

The first part of preparing architecture directive discusses how to set up the architect's virtual organisation. This article gives you the details of functional and virtual roles played by architects, which will be the basis of the next chapter, the decision making mechanism.

Beyond the Domain and Enterprise Architect roles that was introduced before, here you will meat a new, the Lead Architect.

The control of a large force is the same principle as the control of a few men: it is merely a question of dividing up their numbers.

Sun Tzu: The art of war

What should it mean in the field of architecture management? What to divide and how? How to keep control about a large Enterprise Architecture? Finally the recipe is the same as for war forces: you need an organisation, a kind of "command hierarchy" which enables the appropriate control over the entire Enterprise Architecture. This is the first part of a series about preparing Architecture Management Directive, which was one of the topic selected by you in the What would you like to read more? questionnaire.

Rules and exceptions in enterprise architecture

The exception proves the rule. I do not want to argue about this statement but I'd like to understand how exceptions behave and when they show that something is bad. This train of thought will be about principles and processes we are closed around. Certainly the principles mean architecture principles in this portal and the processes are mostly those ones, which you find around the architecture management: orders, development change requests, infrastructure changes and so.

The automatic answer for the question is: yes, certainly. The actual cultural flow as that each time you have to play the role of team members. At every day; in every projects and activities. Are there any issues with this approach? Unfortunately yes. Come to read them.

Based on some readers responses the ideas came up to ask you what could be the most interesting topic for you to read. The following poll does not mean that the other topics will not be processed later neither that others will not be published beforehead or in parallel. Certainly if you feel something is more interested for you beyond the polls just let us know by writing an email or opening a discussion in the forum!

Here are some thought about the important question frequently raised - and we are not brave enough in to go into details. Large organisation are facing with the issue of complex "hairball" architecture, which is not performing well. Frequently the changes, which entitled to fix the performance results more issues and even worse performance. Performance: this case it could mean all the business aspects, including reposnse times, TCO, time-to-market and so, finally the aspect of Ability to change.

How do you recognise the good architects? What are their characteristics? There are some certain things, which as all certainties are so dangerous because of the different interpretations. On simple certainty is: an architect is the "owner" of the architecture. Fine. "Owner" as a farmer, or "owner" as an investor? Both the farmer and the investor would have similar target, to increase the earning, while their approaches, actions, interpretations, viewpoints are so different. After discussing many interesting topics and tasks the architects are working about and sometimes defining their roles it is the best time to pull the "ideal" architect out of the shadow!

Page 3 of 5

Architect Archers

Architect Archers are Enterprise Architect professionals and mentors.

Our mission is to build Your Archers team while defining, aiming and hit your Enterprise Targets.

© 2017 Architect Archers