The document discusses enterprise architecture (EA) and how it can be approached in an agile manner. It provides definitions of EA, describes what EA teams typically produce. It also shares results from surveys that show many organizations have both EA programs and agile projects, but there is often a disconnect between the two. The document argues that a more disciplined and flexible approach to EA, such as the Disciplined Agile Delivery framework, can help bridge the gap between EA and agility.

1. Agile Enterprise Architecture:
Oxymoron or Savior?
Scott W. Ambler
Chief Methodologist for Agile and Lean, IBM Rational
www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/ambler
twitter.com/scottwambler
© 2012 IBM Corporation
What is Enterprise Architecture?
Enterprise Architecture Success Factors
Agile vs. Enterprise Architecture
Agile and Enterprise Architecture
Parting Thoughts
1

2. EA as a Process
The process of
translating business vision and strategy into
effective enterprise change
by
creating, communicating and improving the
key requirements, principles and models
that describe the enterprise's future state
and enable its evolution
Source: Gartner
EA as an Artifact
The organizing logic for business
processes and IT infrastructure reflecting
the integration and standardization
requirements of the company's operating
model.
The operating model is the desired state of
business process integration and business
process standardization for delivering
goods and services to customers.
Source: MIT Center for Information Systems Research (CISR)
2

3. What do Enterprise Architects Produce?
Business goals 67%
System inventory 65%
Architecture principles 64%
Development guidelines 55%
Reference architectures 44%
"As is" models 38%
"To be" models 33%
White papers 29%
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
Do you have an EA program?
No
34%
30% Yes
17% Yes, and expanding
10%
9%
No, but we’re thinking about starting one
No, but I’ve experienced EA in other organizations
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
3

4. Why Should You Care?
Complexity Agility * Collaboration * Automation
Reduce
Resources = Complexity Increase
Agility
Improve
Collaboration
Add
Automation
Economic Productivity:
Impacts 2x – 10x
Timeframe is Years Productivity:
25-100% Productivity:
Timeframe is Quarters
15-35% Productivity:
Timeframe is Months
Cost to Implement: 5-25%
25%-50% Timeframe is Weeks
Much culture change Cost to Implement:
10%-35% Cost to Implement:
Some culture change
5%-10% Cost to Implement:
Predictable
<5%
Very predictable
Organization Project Team Individual
What is Enterprise Architecture?
Enterprise Architecture Success Factors
Agile vs. Enterprise Architecture
Agile and Enterprise Architecture
Parting Thoughts
4

5. Success Factors: People Issues
#1 Active involvement of business leaders
#2 Active involvement of IT leaders
#3 Enterprise architects are active participants on project
teams
#4 Enterprise architects are trusted advisors of the
business
#5 Flexible enterprise architects
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
Success Factors: Business Issues
#6 Having a business case for EA efforts
#10 Cost reduction
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
5

6. Success Factors: Process Issues
#7 Continuous improvement/evolution of EA artifacts
#8 Architecture reviews
#9 Appropriate governance
#11 Master data management (MDM)
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
Failure Factors: Business Issues
#1 Insufficient time provided
#3 Too difficult to measure benefits
#6 No perceived benefit of EA program
#7 No executive endorsement
#10 Insufficient funding
#12 Cancelled due to political issues
#13 EA program successful but terminated
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
6

7. Failure Factors: People Issues
#2 Project teams didn't take advantage of the EA
#4 Enterprise architects perceived as "ivory tower“
#8 Enterprise architects weren't sufficiently flexible
#9 Enterprise architects perceived as impediment to
success
#11 EA perceived as not viable
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
Failure Factors: Process Issues
#5 Development teams couldn't wait for enterprise
architects
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
7

8. We need to look at the
big picture
What is Enterprise Architecture?
Enterprise Architecture Success Factors
Agile vs. Enterprise Architecture
Agile and Enterprise Architecture
Parting Thoughts
8

9. Dueling Surveys
Agilists Enterprise
Architects
“versus”
Ambysoft February 2012
Agile Mini Survey
EA Mini Survey
70% of their firms
49% of their firms have agile
have an EA projects
program underway
9

10. 15% say their EA
teams work with 34% said their
them well agile teams
work with
them well
18% think that 44% thought
their EA teams that their agile
work in an agile teams
manner addressed
architecture
well
10

11. 47% believe
33% believe their agile
their EA teams teams view EA
view agile positively
positively
We need to build bridges
11

12. What is Enterprise Architecture?
Enterprise Architecture Success Factors
Agile vs. Enterprise Architecture
Agile and Enterprise Architecture
Parting Thoughts
Focusing on construction is a great start…
12

13. Focusing on construction is a great start…
… but isn’t the real goal to deliver a consumable solution?
Eventually gradual improvement leads to a leaner approach
13

14. Agile Architecture Strategies
Look beyond technology
Initial requirements envisioning
Initial architecture envisioning
Prove the architecture with working code
Architecture spikes
Think about the future, but wait to act
Architects also code
Architecture owners, not architects
Travel light
Take a multi-view approach
What is Enterprise Architecture?
Enterprise Architecture Success Factors
Agile vs. Enterprise Architecture
Agile and Enterprise Architecture
Parting Thoughts
14

15. Sometimes
the situation isn’t always
so simple…
Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD):
The Foundation for Agility@Scale
Team size Compliance requirement
Under 10 1000’s of Critical,
developers developers Low risk
audited
Geographical distribution Domain Complexity
Straight Intricate,
Co-located Global -forward emerging
Disciplined
Enterprise discipline Agile Organization distribution
Project Enterprise
Delivery (outsourcing, partnerships)
focus focus Collaborative Contractual
Organizational complexity Technical complexity
Flexible Rigid Heterogeneous,
Homogenous legacy
15

16. A more disciplined
approach to agile solution
delivery will help
scott_ambler [at] ca.ibm.com
twitter.com/scottwambler
www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/ambler/
www.ibm.com/rational/agile/
www.jazz.net
16

17. Backup Slides
© 2012 IBM Corporation
Some agile whitepapers on IBM.com
The Agile Scaling Model (ASM): Adapting Agile Methods for Complex Environments
– ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/common/ssi/sa/wh/n/raw14204usen/RAW14204USEN.PDF
Scaling Agile: An Executive Guide
– ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/sa/wh/n/raw14211usen/RAW14211USEN.PDF
Improving Software Economics: Top 10 Principles of Achieving Agility at Scale
– ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/raw14148usen/RAW14148USEN.PDF
Enable the Agile Enterprise Through Incremental Adoption of Practices
– http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/raw14077usen/RAW14077USEN.PDF
Disciplined Agile Delivery: An Introduction
– http://public.dhe.ibm.com/common/ssi/ecm/en/raw14261usen/RAW14261USEN.PDF
17

18. Disciplined Agile Delivery
The Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD)
process framework is a people-first,
learning-oriented hybrid agile approach
to IT solution delivery. It has a risk-value
lifecycle, is goal-driven, scalable, and is
enterprise aware.
www.disciplinedagiledelivery.com
Agile Scaling Model (ASM)
Agile Development
Focus is on construction
Goal is to develop a high-quality system in an evolutionary,
collaborative, and self-organizing manner
Value-driven lifecycle with regular production of working
software
Small, co-located team developing straightforward software
Agile Delivery
Extends agile development to address full system lifecycle
Risk and value-driven lifecycle
Self organization within an appropriate governance
framework
Small, co-located team delivering a straightforward solution
Agility at Scale
Disciplined agile delivery and one or more scaling factors
applies
18

19. The Surveys
Data, summary, and slides downloadable from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/
Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
– 374 respondents
Ambysoft February 2012 Agile Mini Survey
– 61 respondents
Ambysoft February 2012 EA Mini Survey
– 59 respondents
For existing Enterprise Architecture (EA) programs, what has
improved? (Rating between -10 and +10)
1. System integration (3.6)
2. IT governance (3.3)
3. Team follows common technology infrastructure (3.3)
4. Business efficiency (3.2)
5. Data integrity (3.2)
6. Continuity of organizational knowledge (3.0)
7. Business governance (3.0)
8. Audit compliance (2.9)
9. Risk management (2.9)
10. Technical integrity (2.8)
11. Operating costs (2.5)
12. Enterprise decision making (2.5)
13. Reduction of waste (2.3)
14. Support for multi-vendor projects (1.8)
15. Outsourcing initiatives (1.3)
16. Reduction of technical complexity (0.8)
Source: Dr Dobb’s January 2010 State of the IT Union Survey
19

20. Legal Stuff
© Copyright IBM Corporation 2012. All rights reserved.
The information contained in these materials is provided for informational purposes only, and
is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind, express or implied. IBM shall not be
responsible
for any damages arising out of the use of, or otherwise related to, these materials. Nothing
contained in these materials is intended to, nor shall have the effect of, creating any
warranties or representations from IBM or its suppliers or licensors, or altering the terms and
conditions of the applicable license agreement governing the use of IBM software.
References in these materials
to IBM products, programs, or services do not imply that they will be available in all countries
in which IBM operates. Product release dates and/or capabilities referenced in these
materials may change at any time at IBM’s sole discretion based on market opportunities or
other factors, and are not intended to be a commitment to future product or feature
availability in any way.
IBM, the IBM logo, the on-demand business logo, Rational, the Rational logo, and other IBM
products and services are trademarks of the International Business Machines Corporation,
in the United States, other countries or both. Other company, product, or service names may
be trademarks or service marks of others.
20