A question on LinkedIn recently reminded me that, as the team leader for Segment Architecture in my former EA team, I was accountable for identifying a core set of deliverables for the team. The idea was that we could focus on defining standard formats and contents for these deliverables and, in doing so, we could start to measure both our output and our quality.
We only created pre-canned templates for a few of them. This is partly because the team was not mature enough in its practices to get consistency, and partly because Enterprise Architecture itself is not mature, or accepted, enough to have stakeholders that would notice if our deliverables meet an objective standard. Also this list is not intended to be comprehensive. The goal was to describe deliverables where it may possibly make sense to go for some level of consistency. Any EA could (and often did) create deliverables that were not on the list.
Perhaps it is time to share what we came up with.
Note that this list is the result of a single team doing its work, and is not representative of any “standards” effort across other EA groups. That said, I stand beside this list. I think it is a useful start. Note that many are technical in nature. I did not, in making this list, differentiate between BA and EITA deliverables. So if you are someone who believes that EA = BA + EITA, then you will see both sets of deliverables, intermixed, in the list below. If you are someone offended by the inclusion of technical architecture deliverables in an EA list… tough. I was working with reality.
|Deliverable name||Why create it||Description|
|Architectural Point of View (or Technical Policy)||Provide clear input to Business or IT leadership on issues relevant to Enterprise Architecture||Short document describing a problem that requires attention and the opinion of EA for solving it.|
|Architectural Reference Model (or Architectural Pattern)||Provide clear input to IT project SMEs on optimal or preferable design options||Short document describing a set of concerns and a proven approach for addressing them|
|<Segment> Current State Model and Analysis||To demonstrate and communicate challenges inherent in current processes / systems / information||A collection of architectural models, including a context model, process models, and information models, as understood to currently exist , plus an analysis of issues and risks|
|<segment> Future State Vision and Model||To demonstrate the design of the future processes / systems / information needed by strategic intent.||A collection of architectural models that reflect a specific set of engineered changes|
|Governance Model and Analysis||Clarify roles and responsibilities and decision making processes for planning and oversight of initiatives||Process model, description of roles and responsibilities, and description of deliverables needed for planning, oversight and governance, along with implementation ROI and plans|
|M&A Business Case & Analysis||To provide a rationale for the acquisition of a company for the purpose of improving operational effectiveness. (M&A)||The document contains rationale including Competitive Analysis, SWOT / Twos analysis, and Strategic Alternatives Analysis|
|System Integration Recommendations Document||To set a vision for how key processes and systems shall be integrated into enterprise infrastructure (primarily M&A)||End to End business scenarios, Process and System Integration points, Risks and Issues for each integration concern, and an analysis of alternatives and recommendations|
|Value chain and operating model analysis||To clearly address gaps and strategic requirements for integrating or divesting a set of processes and/or systems (primarily M&A)||Target value chain and operating model for post-M&A future state. Mappings of key processes to or from the enterprise core diagram, and analysis of changes with the intent of composing key initiatives.|
|Enterprise Core Diagram||To clearly declare the processes and systems that are NOT core to the operations of the enterprise||A list of systems and processes mapped grouped into “ecosystems” that are clearly indicated as “core” and “edge” with analysis of governance|
|EARB Engagement Package||To demonstrate project level architectural quality to the EA Review Board||A pre-defined collection of project architectural models and artifacts.|
|Capability Model and Assessment||Provide clear basis for data collection for a segment||List of capabilities for a segment with assessment of capability maturity, etc.|
|Capability Gap Analysis||Highlight underperforming capabilities to focus investment||Map of capabilities needed by strategies, highlighting those needed investment, and listing relative and absolute program spend against each|
|<segment> Roadmap (a.k.a. Transition Plan)||To clarify the scope, timing, and dependencies between initiatives needed to deliver on a strategy||List of proposed initiatives and dependencies between them to deliver on strategic intent|
|Strategy Map and/or Balanced Scorecard||To clarify the strategies, goals, and objectives of a segment and allow for measurement and alignment||Categorized strategies, measures, and metrics for a specific timeframe and business scope|
|<segment> Process Model and Analysis||To clarify and build consensus on the business processes (as-is or to-be), and as input to process improvement / measurement||Models of processes, activities, information assets and system interaction points , and an analysis of opportunities to improve.|
|Enterprise Scenario and Analysis||To get clarity on the experience of a key stakeholder (often a customer or partner)||Textual and diagrammatic description of an experience, often with analysis to indicate opportunities|
|<segment> Information Model and Analysis||To improve understanding of requirements and the rationalization of design||Well-constructed information model, at one or more well-defined levels of abstraction, covering all aspects of a segment, aligned with EDM, along with an analysis of risks and issues|
|Platform Assessment||Capture ability of an app or platform to meet strategic needs||Collection of measurements, attributes, and mappings to an app or platform|
|Proof of Concept (POC) delivery||To create a design that demonstrates, and proves, an approach for solving difficult issues||A software deliverable and an architectural reference model (see above)|
|Record of Architectural Tradeoffs||To clearly communicate the tradeoffs made by architects on the customer’s behalf||Textual description of architectural decisions and the implications for the owner of the process / tool|