Zachman International

The Information Age: Future Shock

Written by John A. Zachman on Wednesday, 25 November 2015. Posted in Zachman International

The Information Age

Here is a little context around the Information Age. In the interest of time and space, I will try to be brief but there is a key point I have to make. Having made this observation, I will limit my comments about the Information Age to some well-known works by Alvin Toffler, and I will probably break this blog into three separate parts based on the following, so look for those shortly:

"Future Shock" (1970) - The rate of change.
"The Third Wave" (1980) - The structure of change.
"Powershift" (1990) - The culture of change.
-Alvin Toffler

Alvin Toffler is a well-known name, certainly in the academic community. He is a sociological prognosticator, a futurist, and has written a lot of books. The ones that I refer to above are the ones he wrote that have to do with change.

The Origins of Enterprise Architecture

Written by John A. Zachman on Thursday, 19 November 2015. Posted in Zachman International

Here are some samples of seminal works that constitute the origins of Enterprise Architecture:

  1. Frederick Taylor "Principles of Scientific Management" 1911
  2. Walter A. Shewhart "The Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product" 1931 (Dr. Edward Demming's Mgr.)
  3. Peter Drucker "The Practice of Management" 1954
  4. Jay Forrester "Industrial Dynamics" 1961
  5. Peter Senge "The Fifth Discipline" 1990
  6. Eric Helfert "Techniques of Financial Analysis" 1962
  7. Robert Anthony "Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis"
  8. 1965 Sherman Blumenthal "Management Information Systems: A Framework for Planning and Development"
  9. 1969 Alvin Toffler "Future Shock"
  10. 1970 George Steiner "Comprehensive Managerial Planning" 1972
  11. Etc., etc., etc.

Defining Enterprise Architecture: The Systems Are the Enterprise

Written by John A. Zachman on Monday, 09 November 2015. Posted in Zachman International

The Enterprises of today (2015) have never been engineered. They happen... incrementally... over the life of the Enterprise as it grows and requires formalisms... “systems”, manual and/or automated. 

Defining Enterprise Architecture: Economics and the Role of I.T.

Written by John A. Zachman on Monday, 26 October 2015. Posted in Zachman International

So, why is it that an Enterprise needs Information Technology people in their Enterprise in the Information Age?

When I happen to be talking to some IT folks and I raise the question, “Why does the Enterprise need Information Technology people in their Enterprise in the Information Age?” I usually warn them at this point that I haven’t had an hour and a half or so to soften them up and I am going to make a radical comment... so don’t fall of their chairs when I say this but... 

Defining Enterprise Architecture: Misunderstandings

Written by John A. Zachman on Thursday, 15 October 2015. Posted in Zachman International

There presently appears to be a gross misunderstanding about Enterprise Architecture among management... but also among the information community as well. Enterprise Architecture is NOT an Information Technology issue... it is a Management issue. It is likely perceived to be an Information Technology issue as opposed to a Management issue for two reasons: 

Big Architecture for CEOs

Written by John A. Zachman on Thursday, 08 October 2015. Posted in Zachman International

We've been having a great GovEA Conference this year- no shortage of good speakers, exhibits and vendors.

I had the distinct pleasure of introducing my long-time friend and colleague, Scott Bernard who has been the U.S. Federal Chief Enterprise Architect for the last several years.

Enterprise Physics 101

Written by John A. Zachman on Saturday, 03 October 2015. Posted in Zachman International

Architecture Is Not a New Idea

The ideas about Architecture have been around for a long time. In the old days we used to call this kind of thing “Enterprise Analysis." The whole concept of Enterprise Analysis was, or is, you try to understand the Enterprise first, before you try to overlay infrastructure kinds of things against it.

The problem with infrastructure kinds of things is, it takes a long time to create it... and it costs a lot of money... and after you get it created... it is hard to change it. So the best thing to do is to understand what you are going to do with it before you take the time and sink the money into creating it. That is not a new idea... I think it came from Julius Caesar... or maybe it was Adam... in any case, it came from somebody a long time ago and I did not invent it. Even in the context of Enterprises, it is not a new idea. I probably spent more than 40 years of my professional life focused around these kinds of ideas in Enterprises.

The Information Revolution

Written by John A. Zachman on Wednesday, 16 September 2015. Posted in Zachman International

Peter Drucker points out that that this is not the first Information Revolution, this is "The NEXT Information Revolution,"(1) the fourth Information Revolution.

“The next information revolution is well underway. But it is not happening where information scientists, information executives, and the information industry in general are looking for it. It is not a revolution in technology, machinery, techniques, software or speed. It is a revolution in CONCEPTS.”

EA Profession vs. Trade

Written by John A. Zachman on Tuesday, 01 September 2015. Posted in Zachman International

I recently ran across some notes I took from a presentation at an IBM SHARE Conference, August 1991 that may shed some light on the idea of Professionalism.

Roger Greer, who at the time was the Dean of the School of Library and Information Management at the University of California (USC), made some observations about a Professionals in contrast with Labor. He defined the Professional Service Cycle as depicted in Figure 1.

Intro to EA: The Paradigm Problem

Written by John A. Zachman on Friday, 24 July 2015. Posted in Zachman International

The advent of the commercial employment of computers in the 1950’s ushered in an era of dramatic productivity improvements in both the private and public sectors. Clearly, using a computer to perform the processes of the business rather than people performing the processes is better because computers do things the same way every time whereas people make mistakes, computers perform in electrical (or electronic) cycle times and people in human cycle times and computers (in most cases) are cheaper than labor.

EA Manufacturing versus Engineering

Written by John A. Zachman on Monday, 18 May 2015. Posted in Zachman International

Manufacturing descriptive representations are holistic descriptions of individual parts such that the part (system) can be manufactured quite independently of the entirety of the Enterprise. The description of the part must be complete, “holistic,” because any characteristic that is requisite to the existence of the part, if not made explicit, is potentially defective. That is, any characteristic not made explicit is implicit and therefore, assumptions are being made which may be right ... or may be wrong. Erroneous assumptions are the sources of defects.

Enterprise Architecture is an Enterprise issue, NOT an IT model-building exercise

on Sunday, 17 May 2015. Posted in Zachman International

The common perception (or more appropriately, mis-perception) of Enterprise Architecture in the general marketplace today is that it is one of an Information Technology (IT), model-building exercise. There is validity to that perception because, in order to engineer the Enterprise, the engineering design artifacts (the descriptive representations of the Enterprise) have to be created as they are the “raw material” for doing engineering work and the IT community seems to have the skills to produce those engineering design artifacts.

Zachman Enterprise Engineering - Primitive vs. Composite Review

on Wednesday, 01 April 2015. Posted in Zachman International

It is useful to discuss the differences between Primitives and Composites because this is the paradigmatic problem of the Information community of the day.

Zachman Framework Rows. What are they?

Written by John A. Zachman on Thursday, 19 March 2015. Posted in Zachman International

Rows = Perspectives = Reification

After 30 years of talking about this, I am still shocked at the predominant misconception that the Rows of Zachman Framework define "level of detail," or "waterfall," or "decomposition." This is just not true. The Rows of the Zachman Framework define TRANSFORMATION, NOT decomposition. Level of detail is defined in the HEIGHT of each cell (or Row), NOT the height of the Framework itself. While I originally I called the Rows "Perspectives," the underlying theory that defines the Rows is the philosophical concept of Reification.

How does the Zachman Framework compare to other frameworks?

on Friday, 14 March 2014. Posted in Zachman International

In response to a PhD student's question

I was asked by a PhD student to fill out a survey for research he was doing about the Enterprise Architecture Frameworks. This is a typical question I get, and it is no wonder because of the confusion about the word "Framework." Just because Enterprise Architect Frameworks have the word "Framework" in their titles, it doesn't mean you can compare the Zachman Framework with them. The Zachman Framework is the ontology. The other frameworks are METHODOLOGICAL frameworks, and the artifacts you create by following those methodologies potentially can be mapped back onto the Zachman Framework Ontology. Nevertheless, I wanted to include my answer to this fine student and thought you'd like to see it too:

<<  1 [23  >>  

Stay Connected