<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Real-world Enterprise Architecture part I: journey vs destination</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mwdadvisors.com/blog/2007/05/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mwdadvisors.com/blog/2007/05/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part.html</link>
	<description>Thoughts on BPM, collaboration, analytics and information management, technology trends and the business value of IT</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 07:21:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emergent architecture: yak-yak and yawn? &#171; On IT-business alignment and related things</title>
		<link>http://www.mwdadvisors.com/blog/2007/05/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part.html/comment-page-1#comment-803</link>
		<dc:creator>Emergent architecture: yak-yak and yawn? &#171; On IT-business alignment and related things</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 15:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mwdtemp.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part-i-journey-vs-destination/#comment-803</guid>
		<description>[...] are your EA services? Steve Jones: Enterprise Architecture &#8211; a tool not a destination MWD: Real-world Enterprise Architecture part I: journey vs destination (May 2007) MWD: Real-world Enterprise Architecture part II: conversation, federation, road trips [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] are your EA services? Steve Jones: Enterprise Architecture &#8211; a tool not a destination MWD: Real-world Enterprise Architecture part I: journey vs destination (May 2007) MWD: Real-world Enterprise Architecture part II: conversation, federation, road trips [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donna Burbank</title>
		<link>http://www.mwdadvisors.com/blog/2007/05/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part.html/comment-page-1#comment-289</link>
		<dc:creator>Donna Burbank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 14:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mwdtemp.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part-i-journey-vs-destination/#comment-289</guid>
		<description>A pleasure speaking with you, Neil.  It was interesting to exchange thoughts on what &quot;real-world&quot; Enterprise Architecture means to both technical architects and the business that they support.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I agree that while the Zachman Framework has been instrumental in providing a structure to the analysis  of IT systems, many have mistakenly made the assumption that to implement true enterprise architecture, they need to support every row and column of the framework.  I often hear from clients and colleagues: &quot;No, we&#039;re not doing Enterprise Architecture, we&#039;re just building data models and process models&quot;.  That&#039;s enterprise architecture!  Perhaps not the full capital-EA, full Zachman framework infrastructure, but data and process are critical pieces to help understand the organization.  I don&#039;t know of any organization in the world who has built out every row and column in full level of detail in a single consolidated view.  But building various perspectives of the framework that are relevant to one&#039;s role, such as data, process, assets, and organizations are critical steps that are certainly part of an enterprise architecture.  Perhaps someday there will be enough critical mass with standards and tools that integrate to build a complete view of the organization but, for now, we need to build the pieces that are relevant to our jobs today.  And we can proudly call ourselves &quot;enterprise architects&quot; in doing that.  And more importantly, as you point out, we can solve some real business needs in the process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A pleasure speaking with you, Neil.  It was interesting to exchange thoughts on what &#8220;real-world&#8221; Enterprise Architecture means to both technical architects and the business that they support.</p>
<p>I agree that while the Zachman Framework has been instrumental in providing a structure to the analysis  of IT systems, many have mistakenly made the assumption that to implement true enterprise architecture, they need to support every row and column of the framework.  I often hear from clients and colleagues: &#8220;No, we&#8217;re not doing Enterprise Architecture, we&#8217;re just building data models and process models&#8221;.  That&#8217;s enterprise architecture!  Perhaps not the full capital-EA, full Zachman framework infrastructure, but data and process are critical pieces to help understand the organization.  I don&#8217;t know of any organization in the world who has built out every row and column in full level of detail in a single consolidated view.  But building various perspectives of the framework that are relevant to one&#8217;s role, such as data, process, assets, and organizations are critical steps that are certainly part of an enterprise architecture.  Perhaps someday there will be enough critical mass with standards and tools that integrate to build a complete view of the organization but, for now, we need to build the pieces that are relevant to our jobs today.  And we can proudly call ourselves &#8220;enterprise architects&#8221; in doing that.  And more importantly, as you point out, we can solve some real business needs in the process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donna Burbank</title>
		<link>http://www.mwdadvisors.com/blog/2007/05/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part.html/comment-page-1#comment-290</link>
		<dc:creator>Donna Burbank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2007 14:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mwdtemp.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/real-world-enterprise-architecture-part-i-journey-vs-destination/#comment-290</guid>
		<description>A pleasure speaking with you, Neil.  It was interesting to exchange thoughts on what &quot;real-world&quot; Enterprise Architecture means to both technical architects and the business that they support.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;I agree that while the Zachman Framework has been instrumental in providing a structure to the analysis  of IT systems, many have mistakenly made the assumption that to implement true enterprise architecture, they need to support every row and column of the framework.  I often hear from clients and colleagues: &quot;No, we&#039;re not doing Enterprise Architecture, we&#039;re just building data models and process models&quot;.  That&#039;s enterprise architecture!  Perhaps not the full capital-EA, full Zachman framework infrastructure, but data and process are critical pieces to help understand the organization.  I don&#039;t know of any organization in the world who has built out every row and column in full level of detail in a single consolidated view.  But building various perspectives of the framework that are relevant to one&#039;s role, such as data, process, assets, and organizations are critical steps that are certainly part of an enterprise architecture.  Perhaps someday there will be enough critical mass with standards and tools that integrate to build a complete view of the organization but, for now, we need to build the pieces that are relevant to our jobs today.  And we can proudly call ourselves &quot;enterprise architects&quot; in doing that.  And more importantly, as you point out, we can solve some real business needs in the process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A pleasure speaking with you, Neil.  It was interesting to exchange thoughts on what &#8220;real-world&#8221; Enterprise Architecture means to both technical architects and the business that they support.</p>
<p>I agree that while the Zachman Framework has been instrumental in providing a structure to the analysis  of IT systems, many have mistakenly made the assumption that to implement true enterprise architecture, they need to support every row and column of the framework.  I often hear from clients and colleagues: &#8220;No, we&#8217;re not doing Enterprise Architecture, we&#8217;re just building data models and process models&#8221;.  That&#8217;s enterprise architecture!  Perhaps not the full capital-EA, full Zachman framework infrastructure, but data and process are critical pieces to help understand the organization.  I don&#8217;t know of any organization in the world who has built out every row and column in full level of detail in a single consolidated view.  But building various perspectives of the framework that are relevant to one&#8217;s role, such as data, process, assets, and organizations are critical steps that are certainly part of an enterprise architecture.  Perhaps someday there will be enough critical mass with standards and tools that integrate to build a complete view of the organization but, for now, we need to build the pieces that are relevant to our jobs today.  And we can proudly call ourselves &#8220;enterprise architects&#8221; in doing that.  And more importantly, as you point out, we can solve some real business needs in the process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

