Choosing EA Means Choosing Change: Are You Ready?

by Jeroen van Tyn, Senior Consultant, Cutter Consortium

When I've been involved with clients trying to establish an EA function, they usually fall into one of two categories: either they basically have no architecture occurring at the enterprise level, or they have a fairly new practice in place with a handful of people having some amount of experience and/or knowledge of architecture. In either case, they are usually looking for leadership in making a change.

This leadership thing is tricky. I firmly believe that it is useless in the long run to outsource enterprise architecture: at some point (hoping it's sooner than later) an organization has to take control of its own destiny and either grow or acquire the capability to manage its architecture assets and practices. On the other hand, the reason organizations look to the outside is to help them establish that very capability.

So here's a situation where someone from outside the organization is asked to provide leadership to a practice that itself must become "leaderful." The point is, when an organization establishes an EA function, it is making a choice to adopt a different approach. This inevitably means that some of the approaches that people have been using all along will not be sufficient. An organization will have to change and then learn to lead that change.

This means that people within the organization will have to step up to the plate, learn what's different about an architectural approach, figure out what parts of their current practices to keep or toss, and acquire the skills necessary to be successful -- either as architects themselves or at a minimum as contributors in an architecture-driven environment. For the willing, this can be a tremendously stimulating and rewarding time.

There can be a downside to this, however. One situation is where the organization becomes dependent on outside leadership and doesn't groom and grow its own people to take over. Another is where individuals are not willing to change their approach but continue to serve in positions of responsibility and authority. Both instances represent a failure to fundamentally embrace the change that is being sought in the first place; in the first case by not leading the way, and in the latter by getting in the way.

The bottom line is this: if you embark on an EA effort, understand what you're signing up for. The fact that you're undertaking EA means that you're deciding to take a different approach. In addition, different means change: if you set out to change, make sure you're ready and willing to change.

I welcome your comments on this issue of the Cutter Edge and encourage you to send your insights on the market in general to me at jvantyn@cutter.com.

-- Jeroen van Tyn, Senior Consultant, Cutter Consortium