On Mar 7, 2011, at 6:03 PM, Pavithra wrote:
|The concept of enterprise architecture is to understand the enterprise in a holistic manner and recommend technology usage to help the businesses perform better. |
Yes that is one of the EA visions, but looking at contemporary EA's it is clear that a qualification is needed.
It is quite easy to show that the Holistics are addressed from an IT domain and to a degree engineers point-of-views. The quite a few of the companys work perspectives and viewpoints are missing in part or entirely.
Ive have started use the term Enterprise System and its Architecture (ESA) to ster away from the current EA practices/cannotations. I like to keep the underlying vision and the IT parts though , but for what they are good at.
The right tools and artifacts for the right people , supporting their work perspectives, viewpoint and other point-of-views - the vision :)
|For example, if you are managing a taxi cab business, using the best GPS system ( with indication of road and traffic condidtions and alternate route etc, audio and graphic support ) would help to get to your destination in a more efficient way. |
Now if there are two roads or destinations with the same name, or same destination with two different names, that can cause confusion and user may be prompted about such things and may need manual input choose one of the other.
The CIO need to work with Business / Stake holders / Subject matter expertise and provide best advice regarding technology usage and any ambiguity with usage of terminologies and provide pros and cons of what such confusion can lead to. In the above example, if two different destinations have the same name, your GPS system can take you to a totally different destination than you wanted to reach.
But roads and destination names are nation wide, and general public only have so much of control and adds major complexity. However within the scope of a business, the business owner has the authority to change the name, or use a unique naming convention.
A CIO should be bestowed with the powers to request such unique names. It is a feasible request. An educated business owner should respect and oblige.
An interesting story up until the point above, where Im starting to have problems. Why would a CIO take over the job of operational people, in the name of maintaing an ontology? Sounds like a awkward work specialisation practice.
Shouldnt we show (teach) operational people the power of ontology so they can do their part? and not indicate that IT and engineers do it so much better?
Maybe the terminological benefits that John S. are pointing out could be the base for a Business variant of big O?