[Updated October 5, 2016]
Inspired by Gerben Wierda’s thoughtful discussion about how the full framework is depicted in the new ArchiMate* 3.0 specification (An AchiMate 3 Map (Layers? What Layers! — 1)), I’m going to suggest there’s another level of improvement that can be made to the specification’s “peanut butter and jelly sandwich” diagram. [Please excuse the visual metaphor but that’s what it looks like – with PB&J leaking out on all sides.]
Figure 1. ArchiMate 3 Layers and Aspects
In his posting, Gerben suggests a succession of improvements (depicted below).
Figure 2. Gerben Wierda’s Suggested Improvements
But they still left my question unanswered: Why were Strategy, Motivation, Implementation & Migration left as disconnected layers on opposite sides of the enterprise architecture map? [I don’t accept Motivation being classed as an Aspect but that’s a topic for another article.]
What happened to the architectural principles of simplicity and elegance?
Aren’t the following series of enterprise architecture maps more informative and more understandable? …more pragmatically useful? I refer to the version below as the Progressive Enterprise Architecture Map.
Figure 3. Progressive Enterprise Architecture Model: Progressive Enterprise Architecture Map
Check them out for yourself and please add your feedback in the Comments section below. Click on any diagram to see a larger version.
Michael Herman (Toronto)
p.s. If the arrows make the enterprise architecture map too prescriptive from a pure ArchiMate specification perspective, what do you think of this version?
p.p.s. In October 2016, in the article Crossing the Enterprise Architecture Chasm, I extended PEAMs to include:
- Continuous Transformations
- Strategy Chasm
- Enterprise Architecture Chasm
Here’s an example (click to enlarge):
*ArchiMate is a registered trademark of The Open Group.