The Complete Pragmatic Family of Frameworks

◄◄◄ Previous Page         


          Next Page ►►►

There are two types of Enterprise Architects:

¨      Type 1 - This type of EA is responsible for increasing an Enterprises Maturity in its use of EA.

¨      Type 2 - This type of EA is responsible for “doing” Enterprise Architecture.

Most (99.999%) Enterprises only ever recruit for a Type 2 Enterprise Architect - and therein lies the problem…

Whilst the job of the Type 2 EA is massively important and the things they produce are of massive benefit to the Enterprise, they are, in most cases, severely limited by the context of Methods, Artefacts, Culture and Environment that they are forced to work within.

But I hear you cry:

“A good workman never blames his tools”

This is a common saying (“tools” = “context”) and does have some validity.

However, it is also true to say that if you force a surgeon to:

¨      Save time - by not washing his hands before an operation (Immature Methods),

¨      Save money - by using untested blood and medicine (Immature Artefacts).

¨      Not care - about the Hippocratic Oath (Immature Culture).

¨      Save money - by using carving knife instead of a scalpel (Immature Environment).

You can hardly complain when patients keep dying.

Stopping patients dying is not achieved by replacing the Surgeon with another surgeon operating (no pun intended!) in the same context. Stopping patients dying is achieved by improving the Methods, Artefacts, Culture and Environment that they are forced to work within.

It is not in the Surgeon’s power to increase the maturity of the Methods, Artefacts, Culture and Environment that surgeons are forced to work within, that is the job of Management -either with the guidance of Surgeons (hopefully!!) or by Management giving the Surgeons a mandate and resources to do so themselves.

I say hopefully because the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK demonstrates time and time again Management’s utter lack of involving and listening to people who actually do the work regarding how to increase its maturity. But this is only one sad example of a much bigger cultural problem which exists all over the world today. A culture which effectively says, that people who are more senior are the ones who somehow magically know how to improve things. This used to be the case many decades ago when the Manager did know everything because he did the job himself for 40 years before he became the Manger, but in the 21st century Managers do not get appointed on that basis. They get appointed for all manner of strange reasons, all of which do nothing to help them actually do their job properly.

As we have said before, every Enterprise is already “doing” EA (operating on patients), it’s just a question of their maturity in How they do it.

And in the same way that a surgeon cannot improve his context without a mandate, the same is true of a Type 2 EA. If the Type 2 EA’s job description does not give him a mandate to increase maturity, then he is doomed to work within the constraints of his predecessor and almost certainly produce the same results. This always seems to come as a complete shock to Management who then blame that EA and go recruiting for a “better” one. Doh!

What is happening is that Management (because of Cognitive Dissonance) is actually ignoring the fundamental problem - which is themselves!

“We have seen the enemy, and the enemy is us!”

- W.E.Deming

We could also say:

“A good manager never blames”


Questions to ponder...

Does your Enterprise recognize these two types of EA?

How much time is spent on the duties of Type 1 vs Type 2?

If you spent more time improving EA, would that reduce the amount of time spent 'Doing' EA?

◄◄◄ Previous Page          

          Next Page ►►►


© 2008-2019 Pragmatic EA Ltd