| |
| |
| Adrian Grigoriu
|
Wednesday, 27 May 2009 |
|
I, typically, start with the standard research, interviews and produce what I call a Single Page Architecture, which in fact has nothing to do with IT. It is a synoptic business architecture which everybody loves. Then I try selling it to business, if left to it, since often the relationship between business and IT is not good or is channelled through a single point of contact which becomes the real bottleneck.
 Be the first to write a comment
|
|
more
|
|
|
Wednesday, 01 April 2009 |
|
One of the best remarks I had about my EA work is that while I mentioned that an EA picture is worth a thousand words, I haven’t supplied it. Point taken. Instead, I provided a general framework. Stakeholders would not be interested in the debates and subtleties of an EA framework. The framework is for the EA architect to use.
Comments (1) |
|
more
|
|
|
Wednesday, 28 January 2009 |
|
The Cloud is, in fact, a business concept even though created by the IT world. But so are SOA and Enterprise Architecture. And it should refer only to the services cloud of your Enterprise.
Be the first to write a comment |
|
more
|
|
|
Sunday, 18 January 2009 |
|
Enterprise SOA failed for lack of business support, drivers and proper preparation, given the project size and implications. The technology usually associated with SOA (ESB, BPMS, WS) for orchestration, discovery, integration is alive and well. Similarly, SOA at the application and suite levels. Take for instance the trend to design applications suites observing SOA.
Comments (1) |
|
more
|
|
|
Wednesday, 03 December 2008 |
|
Let me begin with a brief content page of a few next posts on Enterprise Architecture roadblocks, a theme I proposed a while ago.
I. Vague EA definition and scope
II. Uncertain Return Of Investment
III. Diversity and verbosity of EA frameworks, lack of consensus
IV. Design outcomes not fit for purpose
V. Ambiguity and competition with other technologies, SOA, ITIL ERP
VI. Effort governed by IT alone
VII. EA politics
VIII. Flawed Enterprise transformation planning and execution
IX. Improper EA maintenance and failure to employ proper tools
Be the first to write a comment |
|
more
|
|
|
Monday, 08 September 2008 |
|
What is blocking the Enterprise Architecture development? There are numerous factors in almost every life cycle phase of an EA development.By acknowledging the roadblocks we can mount an effective strategy to deal with them.
Comments (1) |
|
more
|
|
|
Friday, 27 June 2008 |
|
There are roadblocks all along the development lifecycle of an Enterprise Architecture, even before the effort starts.
Be the first to write a comment |
|
more
|
|
|
Friday, 30 May 2008 |
|
The SOA business services design and orchestration is what people say you must do, not buy. You do have to specify your business services first and then interconnect them with a SOA technology. Can you say implement SOA services once you specified them? You can. But you can equally say that you buy SOA technology to integrate the systems delivering the business services.
Comments (1) |
|
more
|
|
|
Thursday, 17 April 2008 |
|
The EA success should be measured against the listed benefits in the business case and deliverables in scope rather than against an abstract EA that does not have an agreed definition but promisses a lot, in vague terms.
Be the first to write a comment |
|
more
|
|
|
Thursday, 06 March 2008 |
|
The EA framework is the meta-architecture of the Enterprise or the Architecture of the Enterprise Architecture. This item explores what an EA framwork is and what is should consist of.
Be the first to write a comment |
|
more
|
|
|
Friday, 08 February 2008 |
|
Let's have a look at a few SOA benefits that are not so obvious or mentioned by everybody but which make a difference for your organization.
Comments (1) |
|
more
|
|
| << Start < Prev 1 2 3 Next > End >>
| | Results 12 - 22 of 25 |
Via Nova Architectura is not responsible for the content of blogs, but authors and readers are asked to adhere the following guidelines. Authors are strongly encouraged to check facts, cite sources, present
balanced views, acknowledge and correct errors. Respect copyright, fair use and financial disclosure laws. Please do not disparage organizations, or individuals. Being critical of someone's practice is acceptable, when it is done in a professional manner. Prevent usage of marketing statements. Comments should be relevant to the specific post they are attached to. Spam, flaming, personal attacks, and off-topic comments are not
permitted. Readers are requested to notify
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
of any violations. The editor holds the right to remove any statements that, in the editors opinion, infringe the above guideline(s). The author receives a notification of this action.
|
|
|