When it comes to Enterprise Architecture the Zachman Framework is the answer. Is it?
I read this interesting article by Graeme Simsion on the problems with the Zachman Framework. Although Mr. Simsion focuses on the data modeling aspects of the framework, the discussion is generally applicable to the entire framework.
In particular, the article points out three “issues” that diminish the value of the framework. I agree with two of them (I am still with the building metaphor as it does not lack in anything as compared to the urban planning metaphor but more importantly, as a metaphor it is more powerful because people have direct/every day experience/relationship with buildings rather than urban planning. But this issue is a a minor one) but particularly concerned about the “show me the money” issue.
The bane of Enterprise Architecture planning has been its inability to connect directly and clearly with value creation – or IT ROI. It is near impossible to get funding these days without that connection. But what is more disturbing is the endless diagramming that ensues once an Enterprise Architecture project is funded because in the absence of a “value connection” architects do not know:
- What they have accomplished so they can justify moving forward. To a casual observer the activity appears “endless” if not entirely meaningless
- When to stop or
- How to phase the project
- How to make the work actionable
Unfortunately, for all the high adoption rates often quoted, the Zachman Framework has not helped the cause. To the contrary it hurts the cause by taking a holistic approach that is often interpreted as “all or nothing” by architects. So they keep on plowing and asking everyone to wait for results when the architecture is “done”. Now that is a quagmire if there ever was one.
To be sure, the entire reason for an Enterprise Architecture is to take a holistic approach! But is the Zachman Framework encouraging architects to take holistic as “all or nothing”? Or are architects not getting it? Or is the lack of connection with value causing architects to keep going till they can show the “complete picture” and take that as victory?
You be the judge.
