No matter where you are in your journey or what your stance is on digital architecture (is it real or just story?), this issue of CBTJ will challenge your worldview and challenge each of us “to work as the scientist rather than the consumer of the scientist’s work,” building and testing our own theories in the laboratory of our own experience.

Complex technology projects require a pushback against biases, oversimplifications, and the need for certainty that will inform many proposed solu­tions. The role of dissent is to harden and strengthen these proposals and to identify the right course of action among them.

What is the new new thing in artificial intelligence (AI)? What new methods or approaches have been invented? Based on my research, it appears that the real news in AI is processing: advances in computer speed, more solid-state technology, small embedded neural networks, and multilayer neural networks. So what does it all mean?

In Part X of this Executive Update series on statistical project manangement (SPM), we describe many of the metrics within SPM by category.

Kaine Ugwu presents a series of tips, tricks, and techniques to approach the development of a digital architecture. He offers some clear guidance on putting the experience of customers at the heart of the architecture, positioning digital as a strategic approach to reimagining business models and infusing the organization with agility. Ugwu proposes a prag­matic use of industry reference models and pinpoints the key areas that need to be addressed to kickstart this process.

Kaine Ugwu presents a series of tips, tricks, and techniques to approach the development of a digital architecture. He offers some clear guidance on putting the experience of customers at the heart of the architecture, positioning digital as a strategic approach to reimagining business models and infusing the organization with agility. Ugwu proposes a prag­matic use of industry reference models and pinpoints the key areas that need to be addressed to kickstart this process.

Mark Greville proposes an alternative to the command-and-control theater that is governance (particularly technology governance) in most large organizations. He offers examples of business-model-assassinating decisions from previous generations and lays out a path toward a scalable, sustainable, useful governance approach that avoids the bureaucracy typically associated with governance. The article explores decision dynamics and proposes the method of public self-governance to break up complex governance structures, eliminate governance body queues, accelerate change, and drive accountability and transparency via a modern, decentralized approach.

Mark Greville proposes an alternative to the command-and-control theater that is governance (particularly technology governance) in most large organizations. He offers examples of business-model-assassinating decisions from previous generations and lays out a path toward a scalable, sustainable, useful governance approach that avoids the bureaucracy typically associated with governance. The article explores decision dynamics and proposes the method of public self-governance to break up complex governance structures, eliminate governance body queues, accelerate change, and drive accountability and transparency via a modern, decentralized approach.

Dinesh Kumar comes at digital architecture from the perspective of business capability maturity: the readiness of any organization is a function of the maturity of a set of digital business capabilities. He goes on to describe the DigitalCMF, including the business capability domains, the digital business capabilities, and various assessments and tools within the framework. He outlines a roadmap using capability engineering as a way forward to assist organizations on the journey to a digital future.

Dinesh Kumar comes at digital architecture from the perspective of business capability maturity: the readiness of any organization is a function of the maturity of a set of digital business capabilities. He goes on to describe the DigitalCMF, including the business capability domains, the digital business capabilities, and various assessments and tools within the framework. He outlines a roadmap using capability engineering as a way forward to assist organizations on the journey to a digital future.

Barry M. O’Reilly calls on us to rise above the hype, myth, and storytelling that have created the concept we call “digital architecture.” He proposes that the concept is part of an ongoing storytelling process that we as humans use to understand and navigate our world; digital architecture isn’t a real thing, it’s just part of a story to help us find our path. O’Reilly cautions against adherence to dogma and the slavish belief that copy-and-paste frameworks can solve our problems. He counsels that we should recognize that we are in an infinitely repeating cycle of hype.

Barry M. O’Reilly calls on us to rise above the hype, myth, and storytelling that have created the concept we call “digital architecture.” He proposes that the concept is part of an ongoing storytelling process that we as humans use to understand and navigate our world; digital architecture isn’t a real thing, it’s just part of a story to help us find our path. O’Reilly cautions against adherence to dogma and the slavish belief that copy-and-paste frameworks can solve our problems. He counsels that we should recognize that we are in an infinitely repeating cycle of hype.

Simon Field integrates business capability modeling into SARM, a formal method for developing and evaluating competing designs for solution architectures. In this article, he shows how this technique can be used to build competing designs for “digital services.” SARM focuses on architecturally significant requirements, as these are most likely to be difficult (and expensive) to change once enshrined in the architecture. The framework uses business capabilities as a way of expressing functional suitability, which introduces a layer of abstraction difficult to achieve through other means.

Simon Field integrates business capability modeling into SARM, a formal method for developing and evaluating competing designs for solution architectures. In this article, he shows how this technique can be used to build competing designs for “digital services.” SARM focuses on architecturally significant requirements, as these are most likely to be difficult (and expensive) to change once enshrined in the architecture. The framework uses business capabilities as a way of expressing functional suitability, which introduces a layer of abstraction difficult to achieve through other means.

John Murphy proposes some practical steps to resolve the communication difficulties that still plague transformation programs. He proposes business capability modeling as a way to create shared understanding and bridge the worlds of business, process, and technology information encapsulated in business capabilities.

John Murphy proposes some practical steps to resolve the communication difficulties that still plague transformation programs. He proposes business capability modeling as a way to create shared understanding and bridge the worlds of business, process, and technology information encapsulated in business capabilities.

There appears to be a new school emerging when it comes to digital architecture; one that embraces the complex and the uncertain. Some of our authors in this issue of CBTJ would certainly identify with that school. Proponents of this new school are building in areas of common concern — systemic resil­ience, critical thinking, and mental models — and are introducing variety, design tooling, and governance models. Each is attacking a systemic issue via experimentation, letting reality be the judge of what’s useful and what should survive.

There appears to be a new school emerging when it comes to digital architecture; one that embraces the complex and the uncertain. Some of our authors in this issue of CBTJ would certainly identify with that school. Proponents of this new school are building in areas of common concern — systemic resil­ience, critical thinking, and mental models — and are introducing variety, design tooling, and governance models. Each is attacking a systemic issue via experimentation, letting reality be the judge of what’s useful and what should survive.

As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more visible as a corporate strategic tool, organizations will have to incorporate issues surrounding AI as part of corporate strategy. In this Advisor, the authors examine some best practices for the successful implementation of AI initiatives.

In this Advisor, the authors examine prevailing concepts of trust in the context of AI applications and human-computer interaction. They emphasize that trust building is a dynamic proc­ess and outline how to build initial trust in AI systems.

In this Advisor, the authors examine prevailing concepts of trust in the context of AI applications and human-computer interaction. They emphasize that trust building is a dynamic proc­ess and outline how to build initial trust in AI systems.

Data democratization means providing equal access to everyone — level­ing the playing field between parts of the organization so that all parties can get access to the data. Data democratization is also a recognition that today’s economy is truly an information one, filled with information workers — and information workers need information.

This Advisor is a call to pause — to ponder where architecture has been and where it is and to provide a framework within which to do that.

In this issue, you'll discover why it's survival of the fittest in the digital game, why software delivery talent is so hard to find, how to meet the challenges of the skills shortage, and more!

In this issue, you'll discover why it's survival of the fittest in the digital game, why software delivery talent is so hard to find, how to meet the challenges of the skills shortage, and more!