The readings for this week are based on three topics - Gap Analysis, Migration plans and EA roadmaps. These topics are closely related to each other. The gap analysis involves finding out gaps or differences between the current and future state of EA implementation. Once the gaps are identified, the next step is the migration plan that addresses the initiatives that will be undertaken to close the gaps and move from the as-is to the to-be EA states. And, all of these activities are charted out in a document called as an EA roadmap.
As per Gartner, "An enterprise architecture (EA) road map is a planning document that lays out activities or changes over time, and often highlights the inter-dependencies between these streams of activity that convey an organization from a current state to a desired future state." This is a very important document to improve communication with the stakeholders. The EA roadmap is focused on just the 'what' part and not the 'why' part i.e. it just outlines the activities that lead an organization from its current to its future architecture state and does not document the reasons for incorporating the specific activities.
Gartner defines two kinds of roadmaps:
1. Conceptual, asset-change-focused road maps
2. Conceptual, project-timing-focused road maps
Both these roadmaps are conceptual but address different aspects of EA implementation.
The asset-change-focused roadmaps outline the list of infrastructure and solution changes in an organization from its current to its future state journey. The assets could be in any of the EA viewpoints business, technology, information or solutions architecture. It outlines what changes will take place in the future.
The project-timing-focused roadmaps are also typically the same as the asset-change roadmaps. Just that the assets/infrastructure is replaced by the projects. The progress of projects is shown over a period of time.
Both these views of roadmaps - asset and project are extremely important to the stakeholders.
There are implementation roadmaps as well which are much more detailed than the conceptual ones and which also incorporate the 'why' i.e. reasons for the various activities enlisted in the change from current to the future state.
In nut shell, roadmaps are concise documents that include graphical representations to enable an easier understanding. They basically contain the steps needed to close the gap between the current and future states. They also aid in describing the EA vision.
References:
Weiss, D., Robertson, B. (2006, September 25). Enterprise Architecture Road Maps: Closing the Gap to the Future State (ID: G00140082). Retrieved from Gartner database.
Weiss, D., Robertson, B. (2007, February 26). Use Road Maps to Chart a Course to the Future-State Architecture (ID: G00146266). Retrieved from Gartner database.
As per Gartner, "An enterprise architecture (EA) road map is a planning document that lays out activities or changes over time, and often highlights the inter-dependencies between these streams of activity that convey an organization from a current state to a desired future state." This is a very important document to improve communication with the stakeholders. The EA roadmap is focused on just the 'what' part and not the 'why' part i.e. it just outlines the activities that lead an organization from its current to its future architecture state and does not document the reasons for incorporating the specific activities.
Gartner defines two kinds of roadmaps:
1. Conceptual, asset-change-focused road maps
2. Conceptual, project-timing-focused road maps
Both these roadmaps are conceptual but address different aspects of EA implementation.
The asset-change-focused roadmaps outline the list of infrastructure and solution changes in an organization from its current to its future state journey. The assets could be in any of the EA viewpoints business, technology, information or solutions architecture. It outlines what changes will take place in the future.
The project-timing-focused roadmaps are also typically the same as the asset-change roadmaps. Just that the assets/infrastructure is replaced by the projects. The progress of projects is shown over a period of time.
Both these views of roadmaps - asset and project are extremely important to the stakeholders.
There are implementation roadmaps as well which are much more detailed than the conceptual ones and which also incorporate the 'why' i.e. reasons for the various activities enlisted in the change from current to the future state.
In nut shell, roadmaps are concise documents that include graphical representations to enable an easier understanding. They basically contain the steps needed to close the gap between the current and future states. They also aid in describing the EA vision.
References:
Weiss, D., Robertson, B. (2006, September 25). Enterprise Architecture Road Maps: Closing the Gap to the Future State (ID: G00140082). Retrieved from Gartner database.
Weiss, D., Robertson, B. (2007, February 26). Use Road Maps to Chart a Course to the Future-State Architecture (ID: G00146266). Retrieved from Gartner database.
Hi Swathika,
ReplyDeleteThis is a good overview on EA roadmaps. I was actually excited to know the different types of roadmaps that the Gartner article presented. In my current role as an EA, I have used roadmaps only a couple of times since the EA program is still new to my organization. And I used excel and powerpoint to create these instead of any roadmapping tools. Now, after reviewing this Gartner article, I have better ideas and options when it comes to EA roadmaps and it will be the same to others too. For sure, the roadmaps are very much appreciated since they convey the intended message better than any other form of documentation.
Veena.
Roadmaps are critical. We are forever moving to the future, but without a map, where we end up may be somewhere we do not want to be.
ReplyDeleteYour summary is a very good synopsis of the Gartner view. While not the only way of looking at roadmaps, it is a good way to get started.
I cant help but to come to your posts to see what you have written.Over the years, I have been privileged to see EA teams in action. One of the things I remember about our roadmaps was that they were tied into specific key performance indicators (KPI) to ensure that they were inline with the business estimated cost. If a key deliverable required additional unplanned changes, or was not implemented in time; it would impact one of the road map's KPIs. This allowed project owners the ability to focus additional resources when necessary, or give upper management quick insight into a projects health and decide on appropriate action.
ReplyDeleteHi Swathika, I agree in the value of a roadmap! One of the challenges that I often face is the change in direction against initiatives that appear in the roadmap. All too often I am facing off against change. We toyed with the idea of "evergreen" architectures and tried to implement a method that would capture the roadmap items as they changed, however it would take a huge commitment on the part of the business to maintain them differently that they did today. This was definitely not something that we could approach head-on, change needed to come from within? Can you speculate on interesting ways to solve the roadmapping problem?
ReplyDelete