ArchiMate and TOGAF What is the added value?
Why use TOGAF next to ArchiMate? ArchiMate provides a (visual) language ArchiMate provides a content framework TOGAF provides a process TOGAF provides a way of handling programs and project portfolios TOGAF provides connection to strategy If you work alone as an architect If you work on a single project Don t care about TOGAF! 2
Why use TOGAF? TOGAF starts its architecture cycle with a business problem and a vision to solve that business problem TOGAF starts an Architecture project to solve the business problem TOGAF creates projects, instead of projects creating Architecture TOGAF sets KPI s for the result of its own efforts TOGAF monitors the results of its own efforts in terms of a business outcome or realized KPI s 3
The TOGAF Architecture Development Method Creating and governing the architecture process Creating architectures Creating and governing project portfolios 4
What is typical in the TOGAF approach? TOGAF starts with a business problem to solve That is why it is strategic Architects are involved in the definition of the vision Realism is brought to the vision TOGAF performs architecture as a project So no standalone architects The architecture project defines the IT projects Current practice is the other way around TOGAF positions the architect as a peer for the program manager Balancing the interest of time/money and quality Architects are supported by stakeholders 13
What does this process add? Setting up an Architecture Capability Create a vision in close cooperation with the stakeholders Create an Architecture that meets this vision More and more detailed viewpoints than in ArchiMate Template guidelines for deliverables Create a project portfolio to implement this vision Check that the concerns of stakeholders are met Take care that the Architecture is correctly implemented Monitor the results of the Architecture and take measures to correct 14
Where is the Fit with ArchiMate 15
Where does ArchiMate fit in TOGAF? ArchiMate 2.0 includes extensions that close the gap with TOGAF Make a choice between the TOGAF Architecture Content Framework and ArchiMate ArchiMate and the TOGAF ACF are not fully compatible Main issue between the two frameworks in the distinction between Logical and Physical But other concepts do match quite well This is caused by the fact that ArchiMate and TOGAF ACF are coming from different Architecture traditions 16
ArchiMate 1.0 Metamodel
ArchiMate 2.0 Extensions Migration & Implementation Motivation
TOGAF Content Metamodel Overview 19
TOGAF Detailled Content Metamodel TOGAF Detailled Content Metamodel 20
ArchiMate & TOGAF ACF Archimate Buss. Appl. Technology layer Artifact Infrastructure Service Communication Path Network System Software Device Node Data Object Application service Application component Representation Business object TOGAF ACF Data archit. Data entity X X Logical data component X Physical data component X X Information system service X Applic. arch. Logical application component X Physical application component Platform Service X X Technol. arch. Logical technology component X X 21 Physical technology component X X X
ArchiMate & TOGAF ACF Data Entity An encapsulation of data that is recognized by a business domain expert as a thing. Logical data entities can be tied to applications, repositories, and services and may be structured according to implementation considerations. Logical Data Component A boundary zone that encapsulates related data entities to form a logical location to be held; for example, external procurement information. Physical Data Component A boundary zone that encapsulates related data entities to form a physical location to be held. For example, a purchase order business object, comprising purchase order header and item business object nodes. Mapping Data Entity to Business Object is not right (data versus information) Mapping Logical Data Component to Data object is no problem; but contradictory to the idea that all concepts can be both logical and physical Mapping Physical Data Component to Artifact is no problem either; but contradictory to the idea that all concepts can be both logical and physical 22
Show Logical and Physical in ArchiMate Create separate Logical and Physical views Use a naming convention per symbol to indicate the difference All behavior concept are considered Logical, all structural concepts are considered Physical Use specializations: Physical is a specialization of Logical. The complete and correct metamodel for this option is: 23 But last option this requires flexibility of the tool used!
TOGAF Adds Additional Viewpoints 24
ArchiMate & TOGAF Matching Viewpoint 25
Comparing the Viewpoints TOGAF has more viewpoints TOGAF has more detailed viewpoints So TOGAF adds value to ArchiMate The match between TOGAF and ArchiMate viewpoints is reasonable The NAF ArchiMate development working group works on a white paper covering this subject 26
... and a few nice! problems to solve ArchiMate and TOGAF used in combination Is the best of two worlds: An approach for large strategic initiatives A defined process for these initiatives A defined architecture governance A unique graphical representation Guidelines and templates Viewpoints that cover multiple phases 27