How was Training?


“Intense and in all parts applyable to my own organization.” - Enterprise Architect, Malmo, Sweden, Oct 2013

Recommend PEAF?


“Yes - Much better model for learning EA than others due to simplicity of design versus convoluted other models. Anyone of reasonable intelligence can pick it up and leanr it, while other frameworks have an overly ritualized system and often require a heavy IT backgroudn to understand.” - consultant, Flynn Enterprise Management, USA, May 2010

Laying that out in a way that is probably more recognisable, we can see the familiar rows and columns of Maturity Models.

However, it is almost certain that the ones you have seen in the past have (as shown in red):

¨      Only defined these things in terms of Methods (processes) and not in terms of Artefacts, Environment and Culture.

¨      Only defined the Measures (aka evidence) and allowed for the creation of an Assessment and not the rest of the Transformational information.

One might argue that the things which are missing in most existing Maturity Models (Artefacts, Culture, Environment and Motivation, Actions, Guidance) are the things of most value! All these things are included in all Pragmatic Ontologies and Frameworks.


Do you think that Artefacts, Cultural and Environment are important?

Do you think that Motivation, Actions and Guidance are important?

What Maturity Models do you know about or use?

Do they only define Method (aka Process) Maturity?

Do they only allow you to assess maturity and not why or how to increase it?

Does that cause any problems?

If so, what will you do to alleviate them?



◄◄◄ Previous Page          

          Next Page ►►►


© 2008-2016 Pragmatic EA Ltd