How was Training?


I found the style of instruction to be supportive and informative. Kevin's spent time ensuring that each person attending the course understood the concepts and materials, not glossing over aspects that may be hard for us as a company or "selling" a prod - VP Portfolio Management, PPDI, USA, Sep 2010

Recommend PEAF?


No - It is not a straight "Yes" or "No" question. I would certainly recommend PEAF to an organisation which doesn't have a view of EA or to an organisation which is consistently getting "EA" wrong. But if you are looking to influence an organisation that is already practicing EA then it is difficult because they most likely would have chosen the path of one of the frameworks (E.g TOGAF). Hence it depends on the organisation maturity. - MBA Student, University of wales , UK , Jun 2010

  Introduction   Context   Methods   Artefacts   Culture   Environment   Adoption  




<< Previous <<

>> Next >>

Here the phases are across the top and the disciplines are down the side. The coloured humps give an indication of when each discipline is used and to what degree. Some of you will notice the similarity with RUP (Rational Unified Process). POET does not use RUP and does not mandate anyone that uses POET should adopt RUP. However, POET does recognise some important fundamentals that are present in RUP, which POET has also adopted:

      Firstly, POET (like RUP) recognises Phases vs Disciplines and that the mapping of disciplines to phases is complex and not a simple one-to-one mapping. In addition POET also adds the disciplines of Modelling, Discovery, and Governing & Lobbying.

      Secondly, POET (like RUP) is iterative and recognises that within each of the phases, the work carried out may not be of a simple waterfall nature but is more naturally of an iterative nature.

We also need to point out that while RUP is IT and Project Centric, POET is Enterprise Transformation centric, recognising that Transformation has an Enterprise scope (not just IT) and encompasses Strategising and Roadmapping as well as Project Execution.

The methods covered by any framework could be organised around Phases or Disciplines. This is a complication of using multiple frameworks without a context to place them that POET seeks to address. For example, PRINCE2 is organised around the Project Planning and Management disciplines (vertically), whereas EA frameworks such as PEAF are organised around the Strategising and Roadmapping phases (horizontally).

The disciplines which form the backbone of transformation, and are defined in more detail later, are highlighted in red.


Does your Enterprise recognise the complicated mapping of Disciplines to the Phases of Transformation?

If yes, how is this evidenced?

If not, do you think it would be a good idea?

Does your Enterprise recognise Modelling, Discovery, and Governance & Lobbying as disciplines that require an appropriate amount of time and resources to execute?

If not, does that create any problems or issues?

What needs to be done to alleviate them?



2008-2016 Pragmatic EA Ltd