Download SweAF Architecture governance - Silver Bullet Solutions, Inc.

Architecture governance in
Swedish Armed Forces
Proposal by SweAF EA Core Team
2011-02-02
Background – 1(3)
In the autumn of 2010 SweAF acquired the report ”Principles and
models for Architecture governance and Corporate governance using
architecture” [AG rpt 1].
AG rpt 1 reports draws upon a set of established reference models for
Corporate governance, Information technology governance and
Architecture governance. It also suggests how Architecture can be
used as a means to support Corporate governance and Information
technology governance.
This report [AG rpt 2] is the result of a follow-on effort, presenting a
suggested approach for implementing Architecture governance in the
Swedish Armed Forces.
Background – 2(3)
The reference model for Architecture governance is agnostic wrt:
 what architecture is used for
 the content of any frameworks used to direct and support this use of
architecture
 the organization of the management (C2) of the use of architecture,
aka architecting
A SweAF-specific implementation of the reference model for
Architecture governance is not…
Background – 3(3)
The development of an architecture approach for the SweAF begun
more than 10 years ago. The approach includes a clear vision on the
purpose and role of architecture in SweAF.
There is a proposed structure for an architecture framework, with basic
architecture concepts and principles, intended to direct and support
the use of architecture according to the visison.
There are also a set of organizational directives, regulating the
mandates and responsibilities in different functions and at different
levels.
Purpose of the effort
The purpose of the effort is to present a proposal for the
implementation of the reference model for architecture governance in
the SweAF.
The effort will try to combine the reference model with the SweAF
architecture approach and organizational directives into a well
balanced and functional proposal.
Disposition
 The reference model for architecture governance
 The SweAF architecture approach
 The SweAF organizational directives
 Architecture governance in the SweAF
Architecture governance
Reference model for architecture governance
Architecture board
Framework
Architecture mgmnt
Framework
Enterprise
architects
Enterprise
management
Enterprise
Architecture
”business”
Other
stakeholders
of EA
The activity by which the current and future use of architecture, in support of
the enterprise, is directed and controlled. It is performed by a management
system involving processes for evaluating, directing and monitoring this use.
Architecture governance & corporate governance
Board
Framework
Management
Framework
Corporate business
Architecture board
Owners
Framework
Employees
Cutomers
Suppliers
Architecture mgmnt
FW
EA ”business”
Society
Swedish Armed Forces
architecture approach
SweAF architecture approach – 2001
The effort began in 1999 when SweAF commissioned FMV to develop
a Technical architecture to direct and support the development of NBD.
In its 2001 delivery, FMV provided one fundamenal conclusion: To be
successful, a technical architecture must exist within the context of an
overarching enterprise architetcure, allowing coordination of tecnical
development with other aspects of the SweAF business into a well
balanced holistic design.
FMV adviced SweAF to direct the further development of the
architetcure approach along these lines – the SweAF EA.
SweAF architecture approach – 2003
In 2003, FMV delivered a broad set of reports.
In hindsight, the most important contribution was the conclusion that the
architecture approach should be divided into two distinct lines of
development:
1. An architecture framework effort, focusing on governing principles
2. An enterprise architecture effort, focusing on developing the SweAF
EA based on the framework principles
So, the purpose of the framework is to direct and support the
development of SweAF EA which in turn supports the continuous
development of the SweAF. It was suggested that the architecture effort
in the next phase be focused on developing the architecture framework.
SweAF architecture approach – 2005
Framework foundation
Structure of the SweAF Architecture Framework (SweAF EA FW)
Use of architecture in SweAF – 2008 Vision
Req
Life-cycle managed SE-process
Target
arch
Task
Req
ProductOwner
Systems builder
TaskManager
HB
FWObjectOwner
Profile
Handbook developer
InfoOwner
FM A
FWO1
FWO2
Reference Arch
FWO3
UoD
AG
InfoOwner
AG
AG
Standards, patterns
Purpose of architecture approach – 2010
Economy
VHL
Architecture
Resources
Capability
The intent of the architecture approach is to use architecture as a means for Corporate
management of the SweAF. The use of architecture will contribute to the efficient operation of
the SweAF, enabling balance and traceability between economy, resources and capabilities.
Swedish Armed Forces
organizational directives
SweAF Org Directive - FM ArbO - 1
SweAF directives contain instructions on management and organization,
the distribution of tasks and responsibilities within the agency, delegation of
decision authority and “the general from of the SweAF business”.
SweAF Org Directive - FM ArbO - 2
Section 3 - SweAF Direction and control - states that the ”SweAF shall
have/utilize an agency-wide Enterprise management system”
”The rules and instructions governing the SweAF business shall be
implemented in an agency-wide Enterprise management system. The
system shall be based on the legislations and other rules, methods, actions
and resources that constitute the foundations of and support the SweAF
internal direction and control”.
SweAF Org Directive - FM ArbO - 3
In section 9 – The chief of the Supreme Commander’s Staff – it is stated
that:
”The chief of the Supreme Commander’s Staff is responsible for the
functional area Enterprise Management”.
Ergo, the chief of the Supreme Commander’s Staff is also ultimately
responsible for the agency-wide Enterprise management system.
HQ Supr Cmdr Staff - LEDS ArbO - 1
The organizational directive for the Supreme Commander’s Staff covers
the
 roles, responsibilities and mandates
 organization and chain-of-command
 directives on processes and methods
necessary for the chief of Supreme Commander’s Staff to assume the
responsibility delegated to him.
HQ Supr Cmdr Staff - LEDS ArbO - 4
C LEDS
EKDIR
Planerings- och ekonomiavdelningen
Ledningsavdelningen
C PLANEK
Stabschefen
ÖB/GD Stöd
Samo
Utvecklingsavdelningen
Plan
Led
Nordsam
Bud
Red
Isk
Ana
Utvecklingschefen
Internationella avdelningen
Strat utv
Strat ana
C INT
CIO-avdelningen
Prot
CIO
Bilatdesk
PRIO-avdelningen
CIO-avd
C PRIO
Verksamhetsutvecklingsavd.
PRIO-avd
C VHU
VHU-avd
NATOdesk
EUdesk
Architecture governance i FM
SweAF EA supporting SweAF Corporate management
Corp Mgmnt
Portal
SweAF EA FW
SweAF EA
FWO1
AO1
FWO2
AO2
Other support
eg
SweAF ERP
SweAF Architecture board
C LEDS
Architecture
board
Assess
Direct
Monitor
Stabschefen
C PLANEK
C UTV
C INT
CIO
C PRIO
Plans
Audit & control
Directives
C VHU
Architecture management
The department heads of the HQ Supreme Commander’s Staff are to
constitute the SweAF Architecture board.
Structure of SweAF EA
Aspect
Segment
Strategic domain
Strategisk domän
Business domain
Domain
Verksamhetsdomän
Application domain
Applikationsdomän
Infrastructure domain
Infrastrukturdomän
Principles of Architecture Governance
(adopted from ISO/IEC 38500:2008)
Responsibility - Individuals and groups within the organization understand and accept their
responsibilities in respect of both supply of, and demand for Architecture. Those with responsibility for
actions also have the authority to perform those actions.
Strategy -The organization’s business strategy takes into account the current and future capabilities
of Architecture; the strategic plans for Architecture satisfy the current and ongoing needs of the
organization’s business strategy.
Acquisition - Architecture acquisitions are made for valid reasons, on the basis of appropriate and
ongoing analysis, with clear and transparent decision making. There is appropriate balance between
benefits, opportunities, costs, and risks, in both the short term and the long term.
Performance - Architecture is fit for purpose in supporting the organization, providing the services,
levels of service and service quality required to meet current and future business requirements.
Conformance - Architecture complies with all mandatory legislation and regulations. Policies and
practices are clearly defined, implemented and enforced.
Human Behaviour – Architecture policies, practices and decisions demonstrate respect for Human
Behaviour, including the current and evolving needs of all the ‘people in the process’.
SweAF Architecture management
Architecture management
Assess
Plan
Report
Direct
Monitor
Plans
Audit & Control
Directives
Use of architecture
Since, according to the SweAF Organizational directives, the responsibility of
developing the SweAF Enterprise Management System lies with the Business
development department , it is suggested that responsibility for the architecture
management be allocated to the same.
SweAF Architecture governance - Summary
Supr Cmdr Staff dept heads
•
Principles
SCS Business dev
EA FW
•
Corp Mgmnt
EA
AO1
AO2
•
This proposal for SweAF Architecture
governance draws on the SweAF reference
model for architecture governance, the
SweAF architecture approach and the 2010
set of SweAF organizational directives.
To summarize, it is proposed that the
Architecture board consist of the
department heads of the Supr Cmdr Staff
and that the Architecture management
function be allocated to the Business
development dept.
The SweAF EA is developed to facilitate the
SweAF Enterprise management (system),
directed and supported by the SweAF
Architecture framework.
Critical success factors
The most critical success factor is the establishment of a Architecture board,
responsible for making strategic, grounded and directing decisions on the use
of Architecture in the SweAF.
 Another critical success factor is the strict adherence to the architecture
governance principles, especially Responsibility
Establishing SweAF EA has to be done using a staged approach, based on
a Roadmap, managed and monitored by an informed management function
Finally, the management of the framework development and usage is critical
and needs to be continually developed. If not, we risk the benefits of the
“order” of the EA offering.