»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
Strategic Architecture is very important part of SOEA – Part 4
Jul 21st, 2009 by Awel Dico

Strategic architecture is a part of the Service Oriented Enterprise Architecture Framework (SOEAF) I discussed earlier. In this post I want to share my thoughts on why Strategic Architecture is a very important part of Enterprise Architecture (EA). Many EA discussions I heard this week at The Open Group Architecture Practitioners conference in Toronto indicates that majority of current EA work lack the business architecture component and it is more focused on Information Technology aspect of an enterprise. Because of this it is extremely hard for majority of current EA team to show value to the business in a reasonable amount of time. EA must turn its focus on the Strategic Architecture if it hast to deliver value to the business. If strategic architecture is done in alignment with a business strategy, then the other down stream architectural works (Information systems architecture and technology architecture) will be driven by the business need enabling business and information technology alignment. That is why the strategic architecture is part of SOEAF. If enterprise architecture lacks the strategic aspect driven by the business strategy, then it is highly unlikely that the EA team will deliver much value to the business – rather produce the usual siloed solutions within a segment/domain of the enterprise and as a result reuse across the enterprise cannot be achieved. It is thus very important that each domain/segment architecture is driven by the strategic architecture (which by itself is driven by the business strategy).  The usual solution architectures are part of domain (or segment) – which means collectively they contribute to the overall enterprise solution with the cross-segment reuse potential facilitated by enterprise architecture governance.

If strategic level business architecture is not done as a part of enterprise architecture, then the following could be some of the risks:

  • The segment/domain architectures will be disconnected with no sharable business or IT services.
  • It costs more when cross-segment integration is required. How much it costs the business if the enterprise maintains, for example, four billing systems – which is the case in some telecommunication organizations.
  • Business may make wrong technology decisions because of the disconnection between EA and business.  A good example is the case with the cloud services where the business directly buys services in a cloud (e.g. Salesforce.com services) and fall in to vendor lock-in situation. The vendor lock-in is highly likely if there is no strategic alignment between business and IT facilitated by Enterprise Architecture. That is why SOEAF includes strategic architecture that deals with strategic aspects of business and Information Technology. With the power of the strategic work, the enterprise can benefit from cloud service providers without risking the vendor lock-in situation.  
  • Enterprise cannot see one common view of its customers – For example, I am a customer of one service provider where I have two services (i.e. wireless and landline phone services). My profile is maintained in two places as if I am two customer because the two business lines (business segments) are architected in siloed fashion with no enterprise strategic architecture. One business segment have no idea that I am a loyal customer of the other segment of the same enterprise. Does this ring a bell to you? – “One moment, I will transfer you to the wireless department” says the landline department of the same company; due to the lack of cross-selling capability of the enterprise. You are put on hold with music waiting for the other customer service (wireless) to serve you. You have no time to wait and you hang-up the phone. What a loss – the enterprise just lost one customer!

Yes, it takes a lot of work and re-organization to incorporate such a strategic architecture in an organization with more than one business segments. It may also cost more initially for the transformation. But all the effort and cost invested in strategic architecture pays off overtime with much more stability  and competitive advantage for the business of the enterprise.

Awel Dico