Chapter 6: The Enterprise Architect
"The Enterprise Architect is the conductor of the technology orchestra, ensuring all sections play in harmony." â Roger Sessions
Executive Summary
The Enterprise Architect operates at the intersection of business strategy and technology implementation, ensuring organization-wide IT alignment and coherence. This chapter explores how Enterprise Architects create technology roadmaps, implement governance frameworks, and drive digital transformation initiatives. You'll learn about established frameworks like TOGAF and Zachman, practical approaches to portfolio management, and strategies for leading enterprise-wide change.
6.1 Opening Perspective
As companies grow, so does the complexity of their technology landscape. Different departments may use different systems, teams may choose their own tech stacks, and new acquisitions can introduce duplicate or conflicting platforms. Without coordination, this leads to fragmentation, high costs, and slow innovation.
The Enterprise Architect (EA) exists to solve this problem. Unlike Solution or Software Architects, who focus on individual products, the Enterprise Architect is responsible for organization-wide IT alignment, ensuring that every system, process, and investment supports the company's strategic goals.
đ¯ Key Learning Objectives
By the end of this chapter, you will understand:
- How to align IT strategy with business objectives across the enterprise
- Enterprise architecture frameworks (TOGAF, Zachman) and their practical application
- Governance structures and technology roadmap development
- Digital transformation leadership and change management
- Skills and tools essential for enterprise-scale architecture
- Real-world scenarios of enterprise architecture implementation
6.2 Organization-Wide IT Alignment
The primary mission of an Enterprise Architect is to create a cohesive, future-proof technology ecosystem. They look across business units, regions, and product lines to ensure that technology decisions support organizational success.
Strategic Alignment Framework
Core Alignment Objectives
| Objective | Description | Success Metrics | Stakeholders |
|---|
| Strategic Support | Technology enables business goals and competitive advantage | ROI improvement, time-to-market reduction | C-suite, business unit leaders |
| Cost Optimization | Eliminate redundancy and achieve economies of scale | IT spend reduction, operational efficiency | CFO, procurement, IT management |
| Risk Mitigation | Reduce technical, security, and compliance risks | Incident reduction, audit success | Risk management, compliance, security |
| Innovation Enablement | Platform supports rapid innovation and experimentation | Development velocity, feature delivery | Product teams, engineering leadership |
Enterprise Architecture Domains
Business Architecture
| Component | Focus Area | Deliverables | Tools |
|---|
| Business Capability Model | What the business does | Capability maps, heat maps | BiZZdesign, Software AG |
| Value Streams | How value is delivered to customers | Value stream maps, metrics | Lean methodologies, process mining |
| Organization Structure | How people and teams are organized | Org charts, responsibility matrices | Traditional modeling tools |
| Business Processes | How work gets done | Process models, workflow diagrams | BPMN tools, process repositories |
Application Architecture
Data Architecture
| Aspect | Description | Standards | Governance |
|---|
| Data Models | Canonical data structures | Common data models, schemas | Data modeling standards |
| Data Flow | How data moves between systems | Integration patterns, APIs | Data lineage tracking |
| Data Storage | Where and how data is stored | Storage standards, retention policies | Data lifecycle management |
| Data Quality | Accuracy, completeness, consistency | Quality metrics, cleansing rules | Data quality monitoring |
Technology Architecture
| Layer | Components | Standards | Rationale |
|---|
| Infrastructure | Servers, networks, cloud platforms | Hardware standards, cloud providers | Cost efficiency, reliability |
| Middleware | Application servers, integration platforms | Platform standards, versions | Consistency, supportability |
| Security | Identity management, encryption, monitoring | Security frameworks, policies | Risk mitigation, compliance |
| Development | Languages, frameworks, tools | Development standards, processes | Productivity, quality |
6.3 Enterprise Architecture Frameworks: TOGAF and Zachman
Enterprise Architecture is more than intuition; it is a discipline supported by established frameworks that provide methodologies, terminology, and documentation standards.
The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)
TOGAF provides a structured approach to designing, planning, implementing, and governing enterprise architecture.
TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM)
TOGAF ADM Phases Detail
| Phase | Purpose | Key Activities | Deliverables |
|---|
| Preliminary | Framework establishment | Methodology customization, governance setup | Architecture framework, principles |
| A: Vision | High-level aspiration | Stakeholder analysis, vision creation | Architecture vision, stakeholder map |
| B: Business | Business architecture | Capability modeling, process analysis | Business architecture models |
| C: Information Systems | Data and application architecture | Application portfolio, data models | Application and data architectures |
| D: Technology | Technology platform architecture | Infrastructure planning, standards | Technology architecture, standards |
| E: Opportunities | Implementation planning | Gap analysis, roadmap creation | Implementation roadmap, projects |
| F: Migration | Detailed planning | Project prioritization, migration planning | Migration plan, implementation plan |
| G: Implementation | Governance during implementation | Architecture compliance, oversight | Governance reports, recommendations |
| H: Change Management | Post-implementation evolution | Change assessment, architecture updates | Change requests, updated architecture |
TOGAF Architecture Content Framework
| Architecture | Focus | Key Artifacts | Stakeholders |
|---|
| Business | Business strategy, governance, organization | Business model, capability model | Business executives, process owners |
| Data | Data assets, management, governance | Data model, data dictionary | Data owners, analysts, compliance |
| Application | Application portfolio, integration | Application portfolio, interface specs | IT management, developers |
| Technology | Infrastructure, platforms, standards | Infrastructure model, standards | IT operations, infrastructure teams |
Zachman Framework
The Zachman Framework provides a taxonomy for describing enterprise architecture through a two-dimensional matrix.
Zachman Framework Structure
| Perspective | Data (What) | Function (How) | Network (Where) | People (Who) | Time (When) | Motivation (Why) |
|---|
| Planner | List of business data | List of business processes | List of business locations | List of organizations | List of business events | List of business goals |
| Owner | Conceptual data model | Business process model | Business logistics system | Work flow model | Master schedule | Business plan |
| Designer | Logical data model | System architecture | Distributed system architecture | Human interface architecture | Processing structure | Business rule model |
| Builder | Physical data model | Computer system design | Technology architecture | Presentation architecture | Control structure | Rule specification |
| Implementer | Data definition | Program structure | Network architecture | Security architecture | Timing definition | Rule definition |
| Worker | Actual data | Function execution | Network operation | Organization operation | Schedule execution | Strategy execution |
Framework Application Strategy
Framework Selection and Customization
| Consideration | TOGAF | Zachman | Hybrid Approach |
|---|
| Organization Size | Large enterprises | Any size | Tailored to organization |
| Implementation Style | Process-oriented | Artifact-oriented | Balanced approach |
| Industry Type | Generic application | Generic application | Industry-specific adaptation |
| Maturity Level | Medium to high | Any level | Gradual introduction |
| Resource Requirements | High (training, tools) | Medium | Variable |
6.4 Governance and Technology Roadmaps
A major responsibility of Enterprise Architects is to create governance structures and technology roadmaps that guide IT investments and ensure alignment with strategic objectives.
Enterprise Governance Framework
Architecture Review Board (ARB)
| Role | Responsibilities | Decision Authority | Meeting Frequency |
|---|
| Enterprise Architect | Framework adherence, strategic alignment | Architecture standards, exceptions | Weekly |
| Security Architect | Security compliance, risk assessment | Security approvals, requirements | As needed |
| Solution Architect | Project-specific design validation | Technical approach approval | Per project |
| Business Representative | Business requirement validation | Priority setting, resource allocation | Monthly |
| Technology Lead | Technical feasibility, platform standards | Platform decisions, tool selection | Bi-weekly |
Governance Processes
| Process | Purpose | Trigger | Outcome |
|---|
| Architecture Compliance | Ensure adherence to standards | Project milestone, design review | Approval, exceptions, recommendations |
| Technology Evaluation | Assess new technologies | Technology requests, market changes | Approved technologies, standards updates |
| Exception Management | Handle deviations from standards | Non-compliance identification | Exception approval, remediation plans |
| Standard Lifecycle | Manage standard evolution | Technology changes, business needs | Updated standards, migration plans |
Technology Roadmap Development
Roadmap Components
Roadmap Planning Process
| Phase | Duration | Activities | Stakeholders | Deliverables |
|---|
| Current State Analysis | 4-6 weeks | Asset inventory, capability assessment | IT teams, business units | Current state documentation |
| Future State Design | 6-8 weeks | Vision development, target architecture | Leadership, architects | Future state architecture |
| Gap Analysis | 2-3 weeks | Current vs. future comparison | Analysis teams | Gap analysis report |
| Initiative Planning | 4-6 weeks | Project definition, sequencing | Project managers, architects | Initiative portfolio |
| Roadmap Creation | 2-3 weeks | Timeline development, resource planning | Program managers | Technology roadmap |
Investment Prioritization Matrix
| Criteria | Weight | Evaluation Method | Scoring Range |
|---|
| Business Value | 35% | ROI calculation, strategic alignment | 1-10 scale |
| Technical Risk | 25% | Complexity assessment, dependency analysis | 1-10 scale (inverted) |
| Resource Requirements | 20% | Cost estimation, skill availability | Budget-based scoring |
| Regulatory Impact | 15% | Compliance requirements, deadline analysis | Binary/weighted |
| Innovation Potential | 5% | Technology advancement, competitive advantage | Qualitative assessment |
Application Portfolio Management
Portfolio Categorization
| Category | Characteristics | Investment Strategy | Timeline |
|---|
| Strategic | Business differentiators, high growth potential | Significant investment, enhancement | Ongoing |
| Key Operational | Critical business functions, stable requirements | Maintenance, selective improvements | 3-5 years |
| Supporting | Utility functions, commodity features | Standardization, cost optimization | 2-3 years |
| Legacy | Outdated, high maintenance, limited value | Retirement, replacement planning | 1-2 years |
Application Rationalization Process
| Step | Purpose | Method | Duration |
|---|
| Inventory | Catalog all applications | Automated discovery, surveys | 4-6 weeks |
| Assessment | Evaluate business value and technical quality | Scoring models, stakeholder interviews | 6-8 weeks |
| Categorization | Group applications by strategic value | Portfolio analysis, business alignment | 2-3 weeks |
| Strategy Definition | Define treatment strategies | Cost-benefit analysis, roadmap alignment | 3-4 weeks |
| Execution Planning | Create implementation plans | Project planning, resource allocation | 4-6 weeks |
6.5 Driving Digital Transformation
In today's competitive environment, Enterprise Architects are key players in digital transformation initiatives, serving as both technical leaders and change agents.
Digital Transformation Framework
Transformation Dimensions
Technology Modernization
| Area | Current State | Target State | Key Initiatives |
|---|
| Infrastructure | On-premises, siloed | Cloud-native, hybrid | Cloud migration, containerization |
| Applications | Monolithic, coupled | Microservices, composable | API development, service decomposition |
| Data | Fragmented, batch | Unified, real-time | Data lake implementation, streaming analytics |
| Integration | Point-to-point, rigid | API-driven, flexible | API gateway, event-driven architecture |
Business Process Innovation
| Process Area | Traditional Approach | Digital Approach | Technology Enablers |
|---|
| Customer Engagement | Channel-specific, manual | Omnichannel, automated | CRM, marketing automation, AI |
| Product Development | Waterfall, slow | Agile, rapid iteration | DevOps, cloud platforms, analytics |
| Operations | Manual, reactive | Automated, predictive | IoT, ML, process automation |
| Decision Making | Intuition-based, delayed | Data-driven, real-time | BI platforms, dashboards, alerts |
Change Management Strategy
Stakeholder Engagement Model
| Stakeholder Group | Engagement Approach | Communication Method | Success Metrics |
|---|
| Executive Leadership | Strategic alignment sessions | Executive briefings, scorecards | ROI achievement, strategic milestone completion |
| Business Unit Leaders | Collaborative planning | Regular status meetings, workshops | Process improvement, capability enhancement |
| IT Teams | Technical enablement | Training, hands-on sessions | Skill development, tool adoption |
| End Users | User-centric design | User testing, feedback sessions | User satisfaction, adoption rates |
Transformation Roadmap
Transformation Success Patterns
Proven Strategies
| Strategy | Description | Success Factors | Common Pitfalls |
|---|
| Start Small, Scale Fast | Begin with pilot projects, expand successful patterns | Clear success criteria, rapid feedback | Lack of scaling strategy |
| Business-Driven Priorities | Focus on business value, not technology novelty | Strong business sponsorship | Technology for technology's sake |
| Incremental Delivery | Deliver value continuously, not big-bang changes | Agile methodology, regular releases | Perfectionism, delayed delivery |
| Skills Investment | Develop internal capabilities alongside technology | Training programs, external partnerships | Neglecting people aspects |
Transformation Metrics
| Category | Metrics | Target | Measurement Method |
|---|
| Business Value | Revenue growth, cost reduction, time-to-market | 10-30% improvement | Financial reporting, process measurement |
| Technical Quality | System reliability, performance, security | 99.9% uptime, <2s response | Monitoring tools, automated testing |
| Organizational | Employee satisfaction, skill development | 85% satisfaction, 90% skill targets | Surveys, competency assessments |
| Customer Experience | Satisfaction scores, engagement metrics | Net Promoter Score >50 | Customer feedback, analytics |
6.6 Real-World Case Study: Enterprise Digital Transformation
Background: Traditional Manufacturing Company
Company Profile:
- 150-year-old manufacturing company with $5B revenue
- 50+ manufacturing facilities across 20 countries
- Legacy systems including mainframe ERP from 1990s
- Fragmented IT landscape with 200+ applications
- Declining market share due to digital-native competitors
Business Challenges:
- Slow product development cycles (18-24 months)
- Limited customer data visibility
- High IT maintenance costs (75% of IT budget)
- Inconsistent processes across facilities
- Regulatory compliance difficulties
Transformation Strategy
Phase 1: Assessment and Vision (Months 1-6)
Current State Analysis:
| Domain | Assessment Results | Key Issues | Priority |
|---|
| Business Architecture | 50+ disconnected business processes | Process inconsistency, manual handoffs | High |
| Application Architecture | 200+ applications, 80% legacy | Technical debt, integration complexity | High |
| Data Architecture | Data scattered across 30+ systems | Data quality issues, limited analytics | Medium |
| Technology Architecture | 60% on-premises, outdated infrastructure | High maintenance costs, scalability limits | Medium |
Future State Vision:
Phase 2: Foundation Building (Months 7-18)
Governance Implementation:
| Component | Implementation | Timeline | Success Criteria |
|---|
| Enterprise Architecture Function | 15-person EA team, TOGAF methodology | 6 months | EA framework operational |
| Architecture Review Board | Cross-functional board, weekly meetings | 3 months | 100% project review coverage |
| Standards & Policies | Technology standards, security policies | 9 months | 90% compliance rate |
| Portfolio Management | Application inventory, rationalization | 12 months | 200+ applications categorized |
Technology Foundation:
| Initiative | Scope | Investment | Timeline |
|---|
| Cloud Migration | Infrastructure modernization | $15M | 18 months |
| API Platform | Integration backbone | $8M | 12 months |
| Data Platform | Analytics foundation | $12M | 15 months |
| Security Enhancement | Zero-trust architecture | $6M | 18 months |
Phase 3: Business Transformation (Months 19-36)
Application Modernization Strategy:
| Application Category | Count | Strategy | Timeline | Investment |
|---|
| ERP System | 1 (core) | Replace with cloud ERP | 24 months | $25M |
| Manufacturing Systems | 15 | Modernize, cloud-enable | 18 months | $18M |
| Customer-Facing | 8 | Rebuild on modern platform | 15 months | $12M |
| Supporting Systems | 30 | Rationalize, consolidate | 12 months | $8M |
| Legacy Systems | 146 | Retire, replace, or integrate | 24 months | $20M |
Business Process Re-engineering:
Transformation Results
Business Impact Metrics (Year 3)
| Metric | Baseline | Target | Achieved | Improvement |
|---|
| Product Development Cycle | 18-24 months | 6-9 months | 8 months | 60% reduction |
| Manufacturing Efficiency | 65% OEE | 85% OEE | 82% OEE | 26% improvement |
| Customer Satisfaction | NPS 25 | NPS 50 | NPS 48 | 92% improvement |
| IT Cost as % Revenue | 3.2% | 2.0% | 2.1% | 34% reduction |
| Data-Driven Decisions | <10% | >80% | 75% | 7.5x improvement |
Technical Achievements
| Area | Improvement | Measurement |
|---|
| System Integration | 200+ point-to-point connections reduced to API-based integration | Integration complexity metrics |
| Data Quality | Data accuracy improved from 60% to 95% | Data quality scorecards |
| System Reliability | Uptime improved from 95% to 99.5% | Monitoring and incident tracking |
| Security Posture | Zero critical security incidents in Year 3 | Security audit results |
Lessons Learned
Success Factors
| Factor | Description | Implementation | Impact |
|---|
| Executive Commitment | CEO and board championed transformation | Regular steering committee meetings | High organizational buy-in |
| Business-Led Approach | Business units drove requirements | Business architects embedded in teams | Strong solution relevance |
| Incremental Delivery | Value delivered every 3-6 months | Agile methodology, MVP approach | Sustained momentum |
| Skills Investment | $5M invested in employee training | Internal academies, external partnerships | Successful technology adoption |
Challenges and Mitigations
| Challenge | Impact | Root Cause | Mitigation Strategy |
|---|
| Resistance to Change | Delayed adoption in 3 facilities | Fear of job displacement | Change management program, reskilling |
| Data Migration Complexity | 6-month delay in ERP replacement | Underestimated data quality issues | Enhanced data cleansing, validation |
| Integration Challenges | 20% budget overrun | Legacy system complexities | Dedicated integration team, additional tooling |
| Skill Gaps | Slower than expected cloud adoption | Limited cloud expertise | External consulting, accelerated training |
6.7 Skills and Career Development
Core Competency Framework
Skill Development Matrix
| Skill Category | Entry Level | Mid Level | Senior Level | Principal Level |
|---|
| Business Acumen | Basic business understanding | Functional expertise | Cross-functional leadership | Strategic business partnership |
| Technology Knowledge | Technical background | Platform expertise | Technology strategy | Innovation leadership |
| Architecture Practice | Framework awareness | Framework application | Framework customization | Framework development |
| Leadership & Communication | Individual contributor | Team influence | Organizational influence | Enterprise influence |
Career Progression Pathways
Traditional Enterprise Path
| Role | Experience | Responsibilities | Key Skills |
|---|
| Junior EA | 5-8 years | Domain architecture, documentation | Technical skills, framework knowledge |
| Enterprise Architect | 8-12 years | Cross-domain architecture, governance | Business acumen, leadership |
| Senior EA | 12-18 years | Enterprise strategy, transformation | Strategic thinking, change management |
| Chief Architect | 15+ years | Technology vision, organizational leadership | Executive communication, innovation |
Alternative Career Paths
Essential Skills Development
Business and Strategic Skills
| Skill | Development Method | Timeline | Validation |
|---|
| Strategic Planning | MBA education, strategy consulting experience | 2-3 years | Strategic plan development |
| Financial Analysis | Finance courses, CFO partnerships | 1-2 years | ROI calculations, budget management |
| Change Management | Change management certification, transformation projects | 1-2 years | Successful change initiatives |
| Industry Expertise | Industry conferences, analyst relationships | Ongoing | Thought leadership, speaking |
Technical and Architecture Skills
| Area | Core Knowledge | Advanced Knowledge | Mastery Indicators |
|---|
| Frameworks | TOGAF, Zachman basics | Framework customization | Framework development |
| Cloud Platforms | AWS, Azure, GCP services | Multi-cloud strategy | Cloud architecture certification |
| Integration | API, ESB, messaging | Event-driven architecture | Integration pattern innovation |
| Emerging Tech | AI/ML, IoT, blockchain awareness | Strategic application | Technology evaluation leadership |
Professional Development Resources
Certifications and Training
| Provider | Certification | Focus Area | Value Proposition |
|---|
| The Open Group | TOGAF 9.2 Certified | Enterprise architecture methodology | Industry standard, widely recognized |
| Zachman Institute | Zachman Certified Enterprise Architect | Architecture framework application | Structured thinking, comprehensive view |
| Cloud Providers | AWS/Azure/GCP Architect certifications | Cloud architecture expertise | Technical credibility, platform knowledge |
| Business Schools | Executive MBA, Strategy programs | Business leadership skills | Strategic thinking, executive presence |
Professional Communities
| Organization | Focus | Membership Benefits | Engagement Opportunities |
|---|
| The Open Group | Enterprise architecture standards | Standards development, networking | Working groups, conferences |
| Enterprise Architecture Professional Organization (EAPO) | EA profession advancement | Best practices, certification | Local chapters, mentoring |
| Gartner Executive Programs | Technology leadership | Research, peer networking | Advisory services, summits |
| Industry-Specific Associations | Sector-specific challenges | Industry insights, regulations | Committees, thought leadership |
6.8 Tools and Methodologies
Enterprise Architecture Tools Landscape
Repository and Modeling Tools
| Tool Category | Leading Tools | Strengths | Use Cases |
|---|
| EA Repositories | BiZZdesign Enterprise Studio, Software AG Alfabet | Comprehensive modeling, governance | Large enterprises, complex landscapes |
| Diagramming Tools | Lucidchart, Draw.io, Visio | Ease of use, collaboration | Documentation, communication |
| Specialized Modeling | ArchiMate tools, MEGA HOPEX | Standard compliance, detailed modeling | Framework adherence, detailed analysis |
| Cloud-Native Tools | AWS Well-Architected Tool, Azure Architecture Center | Cloud integration, best practices | Cloud-first organizations |
Portfolio and Governance Tools
Methodology Selection Framework
Framework Comparison
| Aspect | TOGAF | Zachman | Custom Framework |
|---|
| Complexity | High | Medium | Variable |
| Implementation Time | 12-18 months | 6-12 months | 3-12 months |
| Industry Adoption | Very high | Medium | Variable |
| Customization Required | Medium | High | Low |
| Tool Support | Extensive | Limited | Variable |
Methodology Adaptation Guidelines
| Organization Size | Recommended Approach | Framework Elements | Implementation Strategy |
|---|
| Small (<500 employees) | Lightweight, pragmatic | Basic documentation, simple governance | Start with principles, grow organically |
| Medium (500-5000) | Structured but flexible | Core framework elements, formal processes | Phased implementation, focus on value |
| Large (5000+) | Comprehensive, formal | Full framework, extensive governance | Program-based approach, change management |
| Enterprise (10000+) | Multi-domain, federated | Distributed architecture, complex governance | Transformation program, dedicated team |
6.9 Key Takeaways
đĄ Essential Principles for Enterprise Architects
Strategic Alignment
| Principle | Description | Application |
|---|
| Business Value First | Technology decisions must drive business outcomes | Every architecture decision mapped to business value |
| Portfolio Thinking | Optimize across the entire technology portfolio | Avoid local optimization, consider enterprise impact |
| Future-Ready Design | Build adaptable architectures for changing needs | Design for evolution, not just current requirements |
| Risk-Balanced Approach | Balance innovation with risk management | Calculated risks, mitigation strategies |
Governance Excellence
| Practice | Benefit | Implementation |
|---|
| Lightweight Governance | Enables agility while maintaining control | Risk-based reviews, automated compliance |
| Standards with Flexibility | Consistency with innovation enablement | Principles-based standards, exception processes |
| Continuous Improvement | Evolving architecture practice | Regular retrospectives, feedback incorporation |
| Stakeholder Engagement | Buy-in and adoption success | Regular communication, collaborative planning |
Transformation Leadership
| Capability | Description | Development Method |
|---|
| Change Vision | Articulate compelling technology future | Strategic planning, stakeholder engagement |
| Execution Excellence | Deliver complex transformation programs | Program management, delivery experience |
| Cultural Adaptation | Foster architecture-aware culture | Training, mentoring, success stories |
| Innovation Balance | Balance innovation with stability | Technology evaluation, risk assessment |
Success Metrics for Enterprise Architects
| Category | Key Metrics | Measurement Method |
|---|
| Business Impact | ROI, cost reduction, time-to-market improvement | Financial analysis, process measurement |
| Architecture Quality | Standards compliance, architecture debt reduction | Automated assessment, code analysis |
| Governance Effectiveness | Review coverage, exception rates, compliance scores | Governance tooling, audit results |
| Transformation Progress | Milestone achievement, capability maturity | Program tracking, maturity assessments |
6.10 Reflection Questions
-
Strategic Alignment: How would you ensure technology investments align with rapidly changing business strategies in a dynamic market environment?
-
Governance Balance: How do you balance the need for architectural governance with the agility requirements of modern development teams?
-
Transformation Leadership: What strategies would you use to gain buy-in for a major digital transformation initiative from skeptical business stakeholders?
-
Framework Selection: Under what circumstances would you recommend developing a custom enterprise architecture framework rather than adopting TOGAF or Zachman?
-
Career Development: What combination of business and technical experiences would best prepare someone for an enterprise architect role?
6.11 Further Reading
Essential Books
- "Enterprise Architecture at Work" by Lankhorst et al.
- "The Enterprise Architecture Advantage" by Ross, Weill, and Robertson
- "IT Architecture Toolkit" by Hanschke
- "The Practice of Enterprise Architecture" by Svyatoslav Kotusev
Frameworks and Standards
- TOGAF 9.2 Standard: opengroup.org/togaf
- ArchiMate 3.1 Specification: opengroup.org/archimate
- Zachman Framework: zachman.com
- COBIT Framework: isaca.org/cobit
Professional Resources
- Enterprise Architecture Professional Organization: eapo.org
- The Open Group: opengroup.org
- Gartner Research: gartner.com/en/information-technology
- Forrester Research: forrester.com
Thought Leadership
- Martin Fowler's Enterprise Architecture: martinfowler.com
- Gregor Hohpe's Enterprise Integration Patterns: enterpriseintegrationpatterns.com
- Ruth Malan's Architecture and Design: ruthmalan.com
Next: Chapter 7: The Infrastructure & Cloud Architect â