Architecture Funding
Develop approaches to funding enterprise architecture management and architecture improvement initiatives.
Improvement Planning
Practices-Outcomes-Metrics (POM)
Representative POMs are described for Architecture Funding at each level of maturity.
- 2Basic
- Practice
- Begin cross-project funding for a limited number of architecture capabilities.
- Outcome
- Some cross-project investments are made, typically in infrastructure — e.g. shared storage, virtualization.
- Metrics
- Survey results that identify where organization support and resistance to architecture projects lie.
- Satisfaction ratings for the architecture function.
- Basic counters and trends for architecture artefacts creation and usage.
- Budgets, costs, and resource usage.
- Aggregated project portfolio, programme, and project metrics for dash boards, and project phase and task metrics for diagnosis.
- 3Intermediate
- Practice
- Put funding mechanisms in place for a central enterprise architecture function and architecture management practices.
- Outcome
- Enterprise architecture planning begins to take a longer term view and leverages synergies across projects.
- Metrics
- Counts, averages, variances, and associated trends of errors and rework.
- Variance from targets and mean.
- Issue counts and trends (by severity and urgency).
- Open to close metrics (e.g. time, total cost of fix).
- Metadata enabled aggregate metrics by department, function, business unit, geospatial region, product, service, and so forth.
- Surveys on awareness of, usability, and use of architecture artefacts and guidance.
- Project portfolio, programme, and project life-cycle metrics.
- Practice
- Provide separate funding for architecturally significant projects.
- Outcome
- Architecture maintenance costs for such projects are adequately funded.
- Metrics
- Counts, averages, variances, and associated trends of errors and rework.
- Variance from targets and mean.
- Issue counts and trends (by severity and urgency).
- Open to close metrics (e.g. time, total cost of fix).
- Metadata enabled aggregate metrics by department, function, business unit, geospatial region, product, service, and so forth.
- Surveys on awareness of, usability, and use of architecture artefacts and guidance.
- Project portfolio, programme, and project life-cycle metrics.
- Practice
- Put funding in place for a target architecture landscape (in principle for a 3-year vision, with confirmation for the current funding cycle).
- Outcome
- An architecture vision and a roadmap are funded and enabled.
- Metrics
- Counts, averages, variances, and associated trends of errors and rework.
- Variance from targets and mean.
- Issue counts and trends (by severity and urgency).
- Open to close metrics (e.g. time, total cost of fix).
- Metadata enabled aggregate metrics by department, function, business unit, geospatial region, product, service, and so forth.
- Surveys on awareness of, usability, and use of architecture artefacts and guidance.
- Project portfolio, programme, and project life-cycle metrics.
- Practice
- Implement architecture components in the project portfolio for appropriate prioritization and funding.
- Outcome
- Enterprise architecture activity is subjected to and passes project selection/authorization criteria.
- Metrics
- Counts, averages, variances, and associated trends of errors and rework.
- Variance from targets and mean.
- Issue counts and trends (by severity and urgency).
- Open to close metrics (e.g. time, total cost of fix).
- Metadata enabled aggregate metrics by department, function, business unit, geospatial region, product, service, and so forth.
- Surveys on awareness of, usability, and use of architecture artefacts and guidance.
- Project portfolio, programme, and project life-cycle metrics.
- 4Advanced
- Practice
- Expand funding mechanisms to support a larger suite of architecture capabilities, enabling innovation and value across the whole organization.
- Outcome
- Leveraging the enterprise architecture knowledge base enhances the return on investment.
- Metrics
- Counts and trends of governance compliance and governance exceptions.
- Elapsed time and trends for governance steps such as approvals cycles.
- Counts and trends for first time fixed and count issues re-opened.
- Pareto of missing information types that cause delays in decision-making.
- Frequency and time in use of tool features.
- Cost, cycle-time, and resource utilization impact of automation and architecture driven process changes.
- Baseline measurements of business (unit) operations before an architecturally significant change implementation so that its impact can subsequently be determined more accurately.
- Comprehensive project portfolio, programme, and project metrics.
- Stakeholder surveys on communications, architecture engagement, and architecture artefact utility.
- 5Optimized
- Practice
- Implement a lifetime TCO model to fund services beyond the lifetime of individual platforms.
- Outcome
- Technological debt from unfunded end-of-life events is avoided.
- Metrics
- Pareto of architecture guidance principles explicitly used in decision-making.
- Count of decisions adjusted by enterprise architecture governance committee.
- % of decisions getting enterprise architecture approval without modification.
- Cost to projects of technology debt.
- Complexity metrics (e.g. # of decisions in process, divergent process path counts, count of tasks requiring experts/consultant level staff).
- Satisfaction rating surveys that are value focused (i.e. how valuable is the enterprise architecture function to the stakeholders).
- Benefits realization metrics from project portfolios, programmes, and the benefits realization function.
- Practice
- Start collaborative investments with customers, partners, and/or suppliers to build architectural capabilities in support of the business ecosystem (e.g. common data model, electronic marketplace).
- Outcome
- Shared capabilities are developed which are visible to customers, partners, or suppliers (e.g. establishment of open industry standard data models for data exchange).
- Metrics
- Pareto of architecture guidance principles explicitly used in decision-making.
- Count of decisions adjusted by enterprise architecture governance committee.
- % of decisions getting enterprise architecture approval without modification.
- Cost to projects of technology debt.
- Complexity metrics (e.g. # of decisions in process, divergent process path counts, count of tasks requiring experts/consultant level staff).
- Satisfaction rating surveys that are value focused (i.e. how valuable is the enterprise architecture function to the stakeholders).
- Benefits realization metrics from project portfolios, programmes, and the benefits realization function.