Marc Gewertz made the following post on LinkedIn recently:
"Agile EA? Give me a break! Please stop dreaming up buzzwords. If your EA is not agile, then your EA is not an EA, it is just another slow, stubborn, organic mess of an enterprise!"
"Agile means quickly adaptable. The purpose of using the practice of EA is to design, develop, build and change your enterprise in a logical, systematic, and integrated way, which is quickly adaptable to any changes needed, for any reasons given."
"If the architecture of your enterprise is not logical, systematic, and integrated, then it is not agile, no matter what buzzwords are used to describe it."
My reply posted on Linked:
One could make the same argument for maligning the use of the phrase agile software development - when software development itself intrinsically should mean quickly adaptable. But that would be refusing to acknowledge that there are indeed "agile" - and "not-agile" - ways of doing things.
But, of course, not all software development organizations and processes are organized and implemented in a way that is quickly adaptable. The same is true of the many varied implementations of enterprise architecture in organizations - and their processes.
If the preponderance of evidence shows that there is more rot and waste in what most folks have chosen to call enterprise architecture - then I have no problem with some folks prepending Agile to EA - in their attempt to introduce more agile ways for an EA to operate - and to call out that the Emperor has no clothes.
2023-03-01 Postscript
A friend recently shared with me this link to a article by Sam Holcman
What does “agile” Enterprise Architecture mean?
https://www.architecturescoe.org/resourcesall/agile-enterprise-architecture
"We do not believe that 'agile' Enterprise Architecture can even be a real thing!"
"It does seem that adding the adjective 'agile' to Enterprise Architecture makes it now different than previous methods, teachings, courses, or 'certifications.'"
"This would imply, using the antonym of 'agile' that, what they were doing before was dull and slow, and what they are doing now, 'agile' Enterprise Architecture, is quick and nimble."
I don't think Sam gets the picture ("We do not believe that "agile" Enterprise Architecture can even be a real thing! It is the output of TRUE Enterprise Architecture that would enable enterprise 'agility'"). He has a vested interest in the methodology that he promotes (Enterprise Architecture Center of Excellence (EACOE)) - and so could naturally be expected to be resistant to change.
His arguments have the smell of No True Scotsman.
If you apply his same arguments against agile Enterprise Architecture - to the revolutionary/evolutionary changes in SDLC practices - of agile and DevOps. He would likely argue that those are not real terms either.
His argument (and the About page for the EACOE) appear to be reminiscent of the heavyweight implementation of Enterprise Architecture - which is the antithesis of agility: Ivory Tower and Heavy-Handed Centralized Governance. And that is very different from what the term Agile Enterprise Architecture really encompasses.
2023-03-06 Postscript
Gerben Wierda's latest article:
Beyond Chess and the Art of Enterprise Architecture (Part Two)
https://www.architectureandgovernance.com/applications-technology/beyond-chess-and-the-art-of-enterprise-architecture-part-two/
I noted he includes this...
An Agile EA Manifesto
If there was to be an ‘agile EA’ manifesto — it could be summed up as:
- Strategic agility and uncertainty analysis over fore- and backcasting
- Requirements over principles
- Collaboration over division of labour
- Design skills over design principles
- Create your abstractions ‘risk based’
- Govern your architecture through ‘checks & balances’
- And last but not least:
- IT skills over powerpoint skills
No comments:
Post a Comment