ArchiMate and TOGAF v3.pdf

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

Dont 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 KPIs for the result of its own efforts TOGAF monitors the results of its own efforts in terms

of a business outcome or realized KPIs

3

Creating and governing

the architecture

process

Creating architectures

Creating and governing project

portfolios

The TOGAF Architecture Development Method

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 TO

GAF D

etailled Content Metam

odel

20

ArchiMate & TOGAF ACF Archimate Buss. Appl. Technology layer

TOGAF ACF

Business object

Representation

Application component

Application service

Data Object

Node

Device

System Softw

are

Netw

ork

Comm

unication Path

Infrastructure Service

Artifact

Data archit.

Data entity X X

Logical data component X

Physical data component X X

Applic. arch.

Information system service X

Logical application component X

Physical application component X

Technol. arch.

Platform Service X

Logical technology component X X

Physical technology component X X X

21

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 meta- model for this option is:

But last option this requires flexibility of the tool used!

23

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

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

... and a few nice! problems to solve

27

ArchiMate and TOGAFWhy use TOGAF next to ArchiMate?Why use TOGAF?The TOGAF Architecture Development MethodWhat is typical in the TOGAF approach?What does this process add?Where is the Fit with ArchiMateWhere does ArchiMate fit in TOGAF?ArchiMate 1.0 MetamodelArchiMate 2.0 ExtensionsTOGAF Content Metamodel OverviewTOGAF Detailled Content MetamodelArchiMate & TOGAF ACFArchiMate & TOGAF ACFShow Logical and Physical in ArchiMateTOGAF Adds Additional ViewpointsArchiMate & TOGAF Matching ViewpointComparing the ViewpointsArchiMate and TOGAF used in combination