enterprise architecture case study examples

• Please enable javascript in your browser settings and refresh the page to continue.
• Technology Research /
• Enterprise Architecture

Enterprise Architecture - Case Studies

• Infrastructure & Operations 6
• Enterprise Architecture 10
• Data & Business Intelligence 2
• Strategy & Operating Model 8
• Applications 10
• Project & Portfolio Management 8
• Data & Business Intelligence 3
• Vendor Management 8

Types of Content

• Job Descriptions 20
• Templates & Policies 175
• Case Studies 10
• Blueprints 35
• Storyboards 88

Olmsted Medical Center provides healthcare to communities in southern Minnesota via a centralized hospital and 13 clinical locations. Olmsted has recently implemented an...
The IT department of a mid-sized municipality wanted to build its strategic competency, but the team was of the habit of thinking and operating in tactical mode the...
A community-based, non-profit healthcare organization has seen a rapid increase in the complexity, scope, and volume of IT services delivered over the past two years. A...
The IT department of a multi-location community college located in the US mid-west had become siloed, operating independently from the needs of the organization it...
A large hospital with a rich and time-honored history was well-known for its innovation and academic research activities. IT needed to ensure that its data architecture...
An Asian-headquartered chemical manufacturing organization with an 80-year history and facilities in over 20 countries wants to assess IT risks for its operations in the...
A 20-person IT department in a mid-sized regional grocery retailer received a mandate from its Board of Directors to reapproach and increase its risk management...
A small university in the American mid-west needed to introduce its IT stakeholders to key risk concepts as part of a new, broader IT governance mission. By gaining a...
Increasing business complexity has been driven by both organic growth and acquisitions. IT had to align its people, projects, and resources with the Company's innovative...
Performance and ability to support future growth were being challenged by an increasingly complex healthcare market and ever-tightening budgets. IT needed to chart a new...

Please confirm the appointment time and click Schedule.

Your call is being booked. A representative will be available to assist you if needed.

Enterprise Architecture Case Studies

Architecture Case Studies – Discover Why Leading Architects Choose ABACUS

CLP Power: Utility of the Future

Award winning enterprise architecture.

Objective: The CLP enterprise architecture team needed to update their architecture to set their organization up for growth. They moved from a project-siloed, application-centric architecture to a future fit architecture built around re-usable business capabilities. At the same time they built an architecture roadmap for a successful smart meter rollout.

About CLP Power Hong Kong: CLP Power provides electricity to more than 80% of Hong Kong’s population and is transitioning rapidly to renewables. Its business strategy is centered around Decarbonization, Decentralization, and Digitalization.

University of Edinburgh

Preparing to succeed.

Use Case: To bring together all metadata across the university into a single-source truth. Helping to enhance scenario analysis and build reliable roadmaps, keeping stakeholders informed of time critical decisions.

About University of Edinburgh: Considered one of the leading universities worldwide, The University of Edinburgh has a rich history and noted alumni including Olympic champions, novelists, and prime ministers. Founded in 1582, The University of Edinburgh is the sixth oldest university in the United Kingdom.

Webinar: Modern Woodman

Enterprise strategy & project execution with balanced scorecard.

One of the nation’s largest fraternal financial services organizations, Modern Woodmen of America serves nearly 730,000 members throughout the United States and manages over $17 billion in assets. Modern Woodmen relies on its EA team to help outline business strategies and determine clear routes to outcomes. The team uses Balanced Scorecard and the Business Motivation Model to capture decision-making and roadmap changes. They also use ABACUS to provide senior management with overviews of strategies and projects.

Webinar: Enstar

Mastering data: creating an effective ea repository.

By transforming your repository into a single source of truth, you help avoid data silos and allow business leaders to make informed data-driven decisions. During this webinar, the enterprise architecture team at leading global insurance company Enstar explores the key steps used to harvest their data into an effective EA repository helping to create value and master their data.

Webinar: Man Group

Understanding your application landscape and what’s important to your organisation.

Use Case: To meet the ever-changing requirements of the business, and to fully understand the application landscape and where the associated risks lie

Solution: Man Group walk through their application modeling journey incl. their challenges, solutions, and future use-cases they aim to support. Focusing on 3 key areas: Defining what is important and to whom, Identifying and modeling criticality, and Using algorithms to remove timely data inputs and provide quick insight into high-risk activities.

To read the full article, please click here.

Financial Services (Insurance and Employee Benefits)

Use Case: US insurance and financial services giant Ameritas wanted to eliminate spreadsheet sprawl and establish an authoritative source that could be referred to company-wide to guide cybersecurity, regulatory compliance, technical debt reduction and strategy.

Solution: The team is using ABACUS to integrate data from operational systems, to run impact analysis and to provide self-service access to compliance information. They have built an  up-to-date inventory of data, applications, servers and operating systems. They generate architectural artifacts including infrastructure diagrams, application integration diagrams, application catalogues and roadmaps. Employees from the CIO to datacentre operators, are kept informed using enterprise architecture data.

Webinar: Amsterdam City Council

Use Case: To support the ongoing digitalization of local government in an effective and timely manner, architects benefit from a shared knowledge base.

This presentation provides insight into the ongoing journey of the architecture team of the City of Amsterdam towards this goal including the use of ArchiMate, Integrations and the move from primarily projects to also landscape contribution.

Webinar: NXP

Modeling and self-service dashboards to support business and it stakeholders.

NXP is a world leader in semiconductor, automotive, industrial IoT and communications technologies. See how their EA team use a combination of ABACUS Enterprise together with ABACUS Studio to support a wide group of users and stakeholders by creating tailored dashboards for specific stakeholders and business area and using process maps, treemaps, graph views and catalogues to communicate information and provide valuable insights

Tackling Cybersecurity Risk with Enterprise Architecture

Use Case: Sophos needed to ensure cybersecurity best-practice and secure clients’ trust by identifying potential risks within the business.

Solution: Using ABACUS, Sophos identified six steps to efficiently identify and reduce cybersecurity risks: security catalog setup, risk/security scoring, roadmapping, risk mitigation, visualization application landscapes and business capability maps, continuous risk reduction.

Jackson Life Insurance

Financial services (insurance).

Use Case: Tackle technical debt across 200+ systems. Calculate costs and risks associated with complex application code, outages, security breaches and unsupported software.

Solution: Over a period of only 6 months the team centralized technology and application data in ABACUS and ran cost and risk algorithms on their enterprise architecture models. By managing the risks associated with technical debt and legacy systems strategically, they quickly identified hard dollar savings and ways to improve IT capacity and efficiency.

Reliance Industries

Conglomerate.

Use Case:  Manage and transform a massive IT landscape comprising 3000+ processes and 1500+ applications spread over 10,000+ servers.

Solution:  Reliance Industries is India’s largest private sector business enterprise and amongst the Fortune 500 companies. It’s businesses span 4G Digital Services, organised retail, and energy and petrochemical products. RIL has adopted a tailored TOGAF metamodel, and is using ABACUS to co-ordinate its architecture and IT management.

Coventry Building Society

Light touch for heavy lifting.

Objective: To enhance their IT strategy and migrate successfully from Sparx and PowerPoint into a single source of truth. Ensuring the team are well positioned to deal with the demands of 2020: the move to remote working, increasing service expectations, technology transformation and changing demand of customers.

About Coventry Building Society: The Coventry Building Society is the second largest building society in the United Kingdom with total assets of more than £49 billion. The society provides a range of Mortgage and Savings products and solutions to over 1.5m members, keeping their members at the heart and focus of their company.

Technology EA Successes eBook

Achievements & successes from technology enterprise architects.

Explore how a leading UK security software firm  compared risk scorings using ABACUS algorithms  and discover how tailor made meta-models allowed world leading semiconductor and technology company, to  encompass both project and program management, and architecture to add value.

Ready to Upgrade Your Roadmaps, Modeling & Analytics?

Contact us today.

• Demo Videos
• Interactive Product Tours
• Request Demo

Step-by-Step Enterprise Architecture Tutorial with TOGAF

TOGAF is an architecture framework – The Open Group Architecture Framework. TOGAF provides the methods and tools for assisting in the acceptance, production, use, and maintenance of an enterprise architecture. It is based on an iterative process model supported by best practices and a re-usable set of existing architecture assets.

TOGAF ADM for EA Development

The ADM is central to TOGAF which describes a method for developing and managing the lifecycle of enterprise architecture and forms the core of TOGAF. It integrates elements of TOGAF described in this document as well as other available architectural assets, to meet the business and IT needs of an organization.

The TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) provides a tested and repeatable process for developing architectures. Each phase of ADM below contains iterative (Continuous) sequence of steps to develop an enterprise-wide Architecture and the possible iterations:

Getting the organization committed and involved

• Preliminary Phase
• Phase A: Architecture Vision

Getting the Architecture right

• Phase B: Business Architecture
• Phase C: Information Systems Architectures
• Phase D: Technology Architecture

Making the Architecture work

• Phase E: Opportunities & Solutions
• Phase F: Migration Planning
• Phase G: Implementation Governance

Keeping the Process running

• Phase H: Architecture Change Management
• Requirement Phase: Requirements Management

Development Phases of Architecture Development Method

The TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) provides a tested and repeatable process for developing architectures. The ADM includes establishing an architecture framework, developing architecture content, transitioning, and governing the realization of architecture.

All of these activities are carried out within an iterative cycle of continuous architecture definition and realization that allows organizations to transform their enterprises in a controlled manner in response to business goals and opportunities.

Phases within the ADM are as follows:

• The Preliminary Phase describes the preparation and initiation activities required to prepare to meet the business directive for new enterprise architecture, including the definition of an Organization-Specific Architecture framework and the definition of principles.
• Phase A : Architecture Vision describes the initial phase of an architecture development cycle. It includes information about defining the scope, identifying the stakeholders, creating the Architecture Vision, and obtaining approvals.
• Phase B : Business Architecture describes the development of a Business Architecture to support an agreed Architecture Vision.
• Phase C : Information Systems Architectures describes the development of Information Systems Architectures for an architecture project, including the development of Data and Application Architectures.
• Phase D : Technology Architecture describes the development of the Technology Architecture for an architecture project.
• Phase E : Opportunities & Solutions conducts initial implementation planning and the identification of delivery vehicles for the architecture defined in the previous phases.
• Phase F : Migration Planning addresses the formulation of a set of detailed sequences of transition architectures with a supporting Implementation and Migration Plan.
• Phase G : Implementation Governance provides architectural oversight of the implementation.
• Phase H : Architecture Change Management establishes procedures for managing change to the new architecture.
• Requirements Management examines the process of managing architecture requirements throughout the ADM.

Zoom into a TOGAF ADM Development Phase B

To understand how we can adapt ADM for EA development, let’s pick ADM Phase B as an example. We can all the steps (9 steps) involve for conducting the work in this phase as shown in the Figure below:

How to Conduct Development Phase of EA for TOGAF ADM?

• To start Phase B of Business Architecture, we first look at the objectives of this development phase.
• By following each of the nine steps (as shown in the Cheatsheet below), we need to references the input documentation or work which have been done in the previous development phases (the Preliminary and Phase A).
• Create a new deliverable, or sometimes you need to refine the previous documentation iteratively based on the steps which will fulfill the objectives of the phase.

Jump-Start TOGAF ADM Projects with Visual Paradigm

Enterprise Architecture is essential to every business, yet it’s not easy to master. Have you ever thought that you would be able to learn Enterprise Architecture solely by yourself? Visual Paradigm is here to help. Equipped with an intuitive TOGAF ADM process navigator, to develop Enterprise Architecture with Visual Paradigm is just like having a tutor sitting next to you, guiding you through the instructions, taking you through the ADM examples. All you need to do is to follow the on-screen instructions, fill-in some forms, draw some ArchiMate diagrams (3.0), and that’s it, the deliverables will be there for retrieval.

Visual Paradigm makes you an enterprise architect in no time at all – and with no training, as the actionable guide through process comes along with instructions, tips, samples and case study. Read through this tutorial, relax and see how the best TOGAF software can help you perform TOGAF activities and produce TOGAF deliverables with ease.

What does Visual Paradigm Offer?

TOGAF ADM is the process of developing an enterprise architecture, while Visual Paradigm features a process navigator that guides you through the execution and completion of TOGAF ADM. Broadly speaking, Visual Paradigm features/facilitates the following:

• An ADM process navigator that guides you through the development of enterprise architecture with TOGAF ADM, activity by activity, step by step
• Guide you through the creation of deliverables and artifacts, with clear instructions
• Generate deliverables upon the completion of an ADM phase
• Automatic archiving of deliverables in an Architecture Repository
• Helps you understand TOGAF by providing you with samples
• Provides the tools and diagrams you need in analysis and documentation, which includes  ArchiMate 3 diagram tool and viewpoints (The Open Group certified), Implementation Plan Diagram, Migration Roadmap, Maturity Analysis, PERT Chart, RACI Chart, Implementation Factor Assessment & Deduction Matrix, Consolidated Gaps, Solutions, & Dependencies Matrix, etc.

Preparation

You need a project to work on. To avoid messing up your production data, create a new project in Visual Paradigm first. You can create a new project by selecting  Project > New  from the application toolbar.

Opening the TOGAF ADM process navigator

You can access the ADM process navigator anytime throughout the ADM cycle by selecting  ITSM > TOGAF ADM  from the application toolbar.

You should see the screen below. You can double click on a phase to view its activities.

Working on TOGAF ADM Preliminary Phase

Let’s start working on the first TOGAF ADM phase, the preliminary phase.

Part	Description
Overview	The steps required to complete this activity. The step in bold indicates the current step that you need to perform at this moment. Once you’ve completed a step, click on   at the bottom right to proceed to the next step.
Instruction	Click to expand the   pane, which shows the information you need to know about the step, what you need to do, what is the purpose, and what will achieve.
View Sample	Click to expand the   pane, which displays sample(s) associated with this step. Let’s say if the step requires you to draw a specific type of diagram that you are not familiar with, you can view the sample to gain ideas about how the diagram should look like.
Perform Action	The action you need to take to complete this step. There may be one action or more. And if you want to insert your text or diagrams in addition to what we recommend, you can click the   button to add it manually. In this case, you are asked to write a project background and draw a diagram to depict the project background. These are the actions to take in step 1. In step 2 there will be another set of actions required.
Activity Steps	Indicates the progress and completeness of this activity.

Organization Unit	Level of Impact	Description of Impact
Customer	Impacted communities	To inquire about the three services, customers can contact the front office as the contact point.
Issuer	Extended impacted units	While the three back end officers will unify into one contract point the informational exchange between the issuer and the offices will be done through existing channels.
Bank		The change in investment management function may affect communication with the bank.
Home & Away		N/A
Home & Away Front Office	Core impacted units	Enterprise-wide CRM automation in the front office, which may affect the user experience of the front office staff.
Home & Away Back Office	Soft impacted units	Introduction of integrated back-office suite that may affect the user experience of back-office staff.
Auto		N/A
Auto Front Office	Core impacted units	ArchiSurance is going to provide a one-stop-shop solution for its customers by unifying the three front offices into one single point of contact for all three major types of products and services.
Auto Back Office	Soft impacted units	Introduction of integrated back-office suite that may affect the user experience of back-office staff.
Legal Expense		N/A
Legal Expense Front Office	Core impacted units	Enterprise-wide CRM automation in the front office, which may affect the user experience of the front office staff.
Legal Expense Back Office	Soft impacted units	Introduction of integrated back-office suite that may affect the user experience of back-office staff.
Acquire Team 1	Soft impacted units	N/A
Acquire Team 2	Soft impacted units	N/A
Acquire Team 3	Soft impacted units	N/A
Area 1		N/A
Area 2		N/A

• Go back to the activity page through the breadcrumb.

• Click  Complete Step  at the bottom right.
• Steps two requires reviewing maturity gaps. Click on the action  Maturity Gaps and Resolutions , take a look and go back to the activity page.
• Click  Complete Step  at the bottom right. So you should now have a basic idea about how to use Visual Paradigm to develop enterprise architecture. We will just stop here.

Generating an ADM Deliverable

Once you’ve completed all the activities in a (deliverable) lane, you can generate the deliverable. To generate a TOGAF ADM deliverable is simple, you just need to double click on the document shape on the right-hand side of the lane.

Then, provide a file name and confirm. A document is generated with the information entered presented. The figures below show how a generated deliverable looks like. It consists of the diagrams and forms you developed and filled, and the content pre-filled. The first figure shows the ArchiMate Diagram you drew:

And here is the architecture maturity model developed using radar chart:

Using the Architecture Repository

The Architecture Repository is a holding area for all architectural assets within an enterprise. Whenever you generate a deliverable, a copy will be archived automatically in the Architecture Repository. To open the Architecture Repository, select  ITSM > Architecture Repository  from the application toolbar.

The figure below shows how the Architecture Repository looks like. When all the activities associated with a TOGAF ADM deliverable are done, a deliverable (document) will be automatically generated and archived in the drawer named  Organization-Specific Architectures . You may double click on  Organization-Specific Architectures  to open the drawer and retrieve the deliverable.

The Architecture Repository also allows you to store and manage your files. To do this, simply drag the files need to store into Architecture Repository and drop under the target drawer.

Turn every software project into a successful one.

We use cookies to offer you a better experience. By visiting our website, you agree to the use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy .

© 2024 by Visual Paradigm. All rights reserved.

• Privacy statement

Disruptive architecture

Enterprise architecture case study.

We have been using Business Model Canvas and IAF as tools when building up a film production company for the last years. 

I have now decided to share public examples of architecture artifacts and architecture views as a case study of doing Enterprise Architecture. Update: The case study will be in at least eight additional parts, from a Business Model Canvas to the different areas and layers in IAF.

We have not been using a formal EA process as TOGAF ADM or similar. Instead, we have being using the EA mindset and frameworks to improve different areas in the business, step by step.

The focus areas for the architecture work started with the film production process and supporting tools as filming is a collaborative effort.  How should we work and with what equipment, from a high-level down to details by re-using industry practice as much as possible.

IAF by Capgemini

Next step 1.5 years ago was to take care of GDPR and privacy issues to be “compliant” and this policy was published on our website before GDPR went into effect.

Business Model Canvas

Third, we worked with Business Model Canvas for our strategy in order to focus the business to be profitable in the long run.

In parallell, we worked with different types of contracts, rights and roles for employees and contractors.

The fifth focus area have been on the sales process and tools to support and follow up sales & orders with clients, e.g how to support the right side of the business model canvas.

This is a lot to cover from an architecture perspective, but the main task for all involved people is to produce films, not to do EA. Thus, very much as working with clients in EA assignments.

Free White Paper

7 use cases solved with enterprise architecture

Can EA drive competitive advantage? Yes! Here’s how!

Companies today face increasing pressure to transform and adapt to changing markets and advancing technology.

But transformation requires deep insight into the IT landscape. It also requires cross-team collaboration, dynamic road mapping, and future-state modeling.  

Enterprise architecture (EA) and a data-driven EA solution are necessary to create the foundation for business transformation and IT optimization.

This whitepaper explores seven of the most common use cases where EA can be a real game-changer:

Get your free copy

Virtusa | Fast-track and future-proof core banking transformation leveraging BIAN

Zafin integral to the success of bian’s second coreless banking proof of concept, redhat | build a modern core banking platform, tcs | bian: powering purpose-driven, future-ready banks.

In the race to stay ahead, provide best-in-class customer service, and meet ever increasing market demands, banks have bolted on digital capabilities in an ad hoc manner introducing considerable complexity into the underlying IT architecture. Today, most traditional banks operate with a complex, unmanageable IT architecture with duplicate systems and data impeding speed-to-market for new products and services. Increasingly inflexible legacy systems have resulted in business silos and monolithic applications that hinder agility and adversely impact the pace of key transformation initiatives.

To stay relevant, incumbent banks must foray into areas beyond traditional banking spaces by stepping into their customers’ lives at the right time with the right product. This will require banks to embrace purpose-driven business models through new partnerships with larger ecosystem partners, which in turn will require architectural readiness and plug-and-play integrations to enable ecosystem play. While banking channels are increasingly adopting digitalization to deliver beyond banking services, pain points around legacy architecture remain. In our view, to address these pain points, transition to purpose-driven ecosystem models and become future-ready, banks must adopt the Banking Industry Architecture Network (BIAN) standard. This article focuses on BIAN adoption trends and journeys.

Video: TCS | BIAN Business IT Alignment Adoption TCS | BIAN APIs and Microservices Adoption

Cognizant | Core Banking Transformation at a top North American bank leveraging BIAN

Bian member case studies.

Download an overall summary of Adoption examples

Case Studies

ArchiMate’ Modeling Notation for the Financial Industry Reference Model: Banking Industry Architecture Network (BIAN)

This document provides guidance on how the ArchiMate Specification, a standard of The Open Group, can be used to exploit the value of the Banking Industry Architecture Network (BIAN) Financial Industry Reference Model.

It is designed to provide a guide to anyone involved or interested in how to manage the transition to a digital financial institution. It guides an Enterprise Architecture organization to develop an agile, lean, and stable banking architecture using the ArchiMate language and BIAN.

Patrick Derde, EnVizion, BIAN & Martine Alaerts, EnVizion

Archi Banking Group: Combining the BIAN Reference Model, ArchiMate’ Modeling Notation, and the TOGAF’ Framework

This Case Study is a fictitious example developed to illustrate the combined use of the Banking Industry Architecture Network (BIAN) Reference Model with the ArchiMate’ modeling notation and the TOGAF’ framework (both standards of The Open Group). The ArchiMate and TOGAF concepts used in this Case Study can be applied to different situations. The use of the BIAN Reference Model supports addressing typical financial industry concerns.

PNC Financial Services Group

The BIAN model fits perfectly in line with how we view enterprise architecture (EA) at PNC. One of the first steps we took as an organisation was to bring a business perspective to enterprise architecture. To us, technology is not just a collection of servers and software, but rather a set of technical solutions that are aligned to specific business capabilities and functions. Steven Van Wyk, Executive Vice President, Head of Technology and Operations, PNC Financial Services Group Read case study

Cognizant Technology Solutions, led by Sanghosh Bhalla, Niloy Sengupta and Akshaya Bhargava from the firm’s Banking and Financial Services Consulting practice, recently helped a top three North American bank, adopt BIAN and optimize their enterprise portfolio of applications that support business functions across all of its business units. Sanghosh Bhalla, Niloy Sengupta and Akshaya Bhargava, Cognizant Read Case Study

As a vendor that grew through acquisitions, we inherited a rich collection of applications that have their application specific interfaces. Applications that had similar scope ended up having their specific interfaces for essentially the same responsibilities. One of our strategic goals was to cut integration time and cost and over time achieve plug-and-play interoperability between different applications in our portfolio. Aleksandar Milosevic, Chief Software Architect at banking software provider Asseco SEE Read case study

• All Resources
• Learning Hub

Top Use Cases for Enterprise Architecture: Architect Everything

Oct 17, 2019 by Bunny Tharpe

Architect Everything: New use cases for enterprise architecture are increasing enterprise architect’s stock in data-driven business

As enterprise architecture has evolved, so to have the use cases for enterprise architecture.

Analyst firm Ovum recently released a new report titled Ovum Market Radar: Enterprise Architecture. In it, they make the case that enterprise architecture (EA) is becoming AE – or “architect everything”.

The transition highlights enterprise architecture’s evolution from being solely an IT function to being more closely aligned with the business. As such, the function has changed from EA to AE.

At erwin, we’re definitely witnessing this EA evolution as more and more as organizations undertake digital transformation initiatives, including rearchitecting their business models and value streams, as well as responding to increasing regulatory pressures .

This is because EA provides the right information to the right people at the right time for smarter decision-making.

Following are some of the top use cases for enterprise architecture that demonstrate how EA is moving beyond IT and into the business.

Top 7 Use Cases for Enterprise Architecture

Compliance. Enterprise architecture is critical for regulatory compliance. It helps model, manage and transform mission-critical value streams across industries, as well as identify sensitive information. When thousands of employees need to know what compliance processes to follow, such as those associated with regulations (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA, SOX, CCPA, etc.) it ensures not only access to proper documentation but also current, updated information.

The Regulatory Rationale for Integrating Data Management & Data Governance

Data security/risk management. EA should be commonplace in data security planning . Any flaw in the way data is stored or monitored is a potential ‘in’ for a breach, and so businesses have to ensure security surrounding sensitive information is thorough and covers the whole business. Security should be proactive, not reactive, which is why EA should be a huge part of security planning.

Data governance. Today’s enterprise embraces data governance to drive data opportunities , including growing revenue, and limit data risks, including regulatory and compliance gaffes.

EA solutions that provide much-needed insight into the relationship between data assets and applications make it possible to appropriately direct data usage and flows, as well as focus greater attention, if warranted, on applications where data use delivers optimal business value.

Digital transformation. For an organization to successfully embrace change, innovation, EA and project delivery need to be intertwined and traceable . Enterprise architects are crucial to delivering innovation. Taking an idea from concept to delivery requires strategic planning and the ability to execute. An enterprise architecture roadmap can help focus such plans and many organizations are now utilizing them to prepare their enterprise architectures for 5G.

Mergers & acquisitions. Enterprise architecture is essential to successful mergers and acquisitions . It helps alignment by providing a business- outcome perspective for IT and guiding transformation. It also helps define strategy and models, improving interdepartmental cohesion and communication.

In an M&A scenario, businesses need to ensure their systems are fully documented and rationalized. This way they can comb through their inventories to make more informed decisions about which systems to cut or phase out to operate more efficiently.

Innovation management. EA is crucial to innovation and project delivery. Using open standards to link to other products within the overall project lifecycle, integrating agile enterprise architecture with agile development and connecting project delivery with effective governance.

It takes a rigorous approach to ensure that current and future states are published for a wider audience for consumption and collaboration – from modeling to generating road maps with meaningful insights provided to both technical and business stakeholders during every step.

Knowledge retention. Unlocking knowledge and then putting systems in place to retain that knowledge is a key benefit of EA. Many organizations lack a structured approach for gathering and investigating employee ideas. Ideas can fall into a black hole where they don’t get feedback and employees become less engaged.

When your enterprise architecture is aligned with your business outcomes, it provides a way to help your business ideate and investigate the viability of ideas on both the technical and business level.

Free, full-featured, cloud-based trial

erwin EA/BP powered by Casewise

> > Case Studies

Case Studies

The role of case studies.

One of the goals of The Open Group Architecture Forum is to provide a forum within which both customer and vendor organizations can exchange feedback and experience in the use of TOGAF.

All of this feedback is considered in the ongoing evolution of TOGAF within the Architecture Forum, and indeed much of it has already been incorporated in this current version of TOGAF.

It is important to emphasize that no case study can provide a complete blueprint for how another organization should go about using TOGAF. All organizations are different, and each organization should understand what TOGAF has to offer, and adopt and adapt the parts that are useful for its needs.

Nevertheless, over the years of its existence as an architecture framework, TOGAF has been used by a variety organizations around the world in major architecture developments, both in its entirety, and in an adapted form.

It is hoped that the case studies presented here will provide useful guidance to organizations intending to use TOGAF or considering using it to develop an enterprise IT architecture.

The formats of the case studies vary, between normal descriptive text, through presentations, and in some cases video.

The following case studies show TOGAF in use in a variety of situations.

Dairy Farm Group (Hong Kong)

The Dairy Farm Group Case Study 1 illustrates extensive use of TOGAF as the basis of an enterprise-wide IT architecture to integrate many disparate business units.

The Dairy Farm Group (DFG) is a holding company in the Retail sector. It has a very strong presence in the Asia/Pacific region, and is the 71st largest retailing company worldwide.

DFG has a corporate goal to be the largest, most successful retailer in Asia/Pacific in its chosen markets. To support this goal, DFG has restructured from a federation to a unified group of companies, with a single corporate purpose business focus, and a single IT infrastructure.

The DFG Technical Program Architecture Group (TAPG) was chartered to develop a Technical Architecture for DFG, and chose TOGAF and its supporting methodology as the basis. Using TOGAF, the TAPG was able, in a very short period of time (from July through October 1998) to develop a world-class technical architecture.

It was particularly helpful to be able to point key suppliers to a published version of TOGAF, so that they could see an explanation of the methodology and refer to the TOGAF Standards Information Base (SIB).

This Case Study has its own web site at: www.opengroup.org/public/member/q498/DFG/dfg_frame.htm .

Department of Social Security (UK)

The DSS Case Study illustrates the use of TOGAF, both as the basis of a new architecture framework, and as a key tool in managing the outsourcing of service delivery, in that vendors and integrators were required to use TOGAF as the basis for their tenders, and to use it subsequently in the ongoing management of the IT architecture.

Organizational Context

The UK Department of Social Security (DSS) is responsible for the development, maintenance, and delivery of the UK's social security program and of the UK Government's policy for child support. The DSS currently employs around 90,000 staff and utilizes the largest civilian computer operation in Europe to provide services to its executive agencies, other government bodies, and various Independent Statutory Bodies. One of those executive agencies, the Information Technology Services Agency (ITSA), is responsible for providing the necessary IT systems and services, either internally or through contracts with the private sector.

Social Security spending is approaching £100 billion a year (1999), making it the biggest single spending department in government. At any given time, 70% of the population are in contact with the DSS. In 1998 the Department:

• Dealt with 15 million benefit claims, and 33 million changes of circumstances
• Made nearly a billion payments (a great deal of which were handled electronically)
• Handled upwards of 160 million telephone enquires

Existing IT

Departmental IT systems have tended to be product-based rather than customer-centered. There are separate systems for each DSS agency. In the case of the Benefits Agency, there are separate systems for each benefit. Each benefit system has evolved as a series of processes, supported by its own IS/IT. These "Benefit Chimneys" support their own individual processes, and hold their own information. The consequence is unnecessary duplication and inefficiency, between processes and functions that are, or could be, common. This is especially the case in the way that the Department uses the information it holds. This belies the fact that these systems have data and functions in common.

Strategic Objectives

Recognizing the problems inherent in a product-based approach, a Corporate IS/IT (CISIT) Strategy was developed to support government objectives for a modern, more responsive social security service. IS and IT are crucial, not just to change the Welfare State, but to fundamentally change, for the better, the way that the DSS delivers services. Within the IS/IT arena the changes have shifted the focus to the definition, and purchase, of services rather than products, and promotes a new sourcing strategy. Private sector service providers are expected to a play a greater role in the development of the Department's new IS/IT systems to capitalize on their experience, expertise, and self-financing abilities.

The welfare system must be an active system. It must be simpler, more efficient, transparent, and easier to use. It must be better geared towards the needs of the people who actually use it, be they the general public or the Department's staff. IS and IT will have a key part in enabling these changes, in that any services must be:

• More accessible and easier to use than they are now
• More efficient and effective
• More accurate and less vulnerable to fraud
• Simpler and more flexible than they are now

Central to the Corporate IS/IT Strategy is the provision of a single logical data repository capable of supporting all of the Department's core business activities. This will reduce duplication of stored data and, thus costs to the taxpayer and the potential for fraudulent claims. It will also ensure that information common to different benefits only needs to be captured once, so providing an improved service to the public.

The data will be complemented by a set of shared systems which will carry out common functions which need to be consistent, such as capturing information, calculating entitlements, and making payments. Ultimately such functions are also expected to be shared, with the intention that they maximize flexibility for, and responsiveness to, policy changes.

Greater freedom is permitted in local business practices, but local systems are required to work with the common services to provide cohesive end-to-end support of social security administration.

The UK Government as a whole is looking to new technology to improve the way government services are delivered: the Prime Minister has pledged to increase the number of opportunities for customers to access DSS services electronically. Using its Corporate IS/IT Strategy, the DSS intends to position itself to optimize its use of new technologies in order to provide better, simpler services for DSS customers and staff alike.

It is also the intention of the DSS to modernize the links that exist with other government departments and other relevant organizations, such as Local Authorities. What is needed to be achieved in social security - flexible, easy-to-use and efficient services, based on common information - needs to be achieved across government. This is known as "joined up" government and is focussed around delivering the goals of government as a whole in a seamless, integrated way. This will enable staff to concentrate on delivering a better service to clients, whilst improving efficiency and effectiveness through IT support.

The Accord Project

Realizing the Department's IS/IT Strategy will be a large and complex task that will be delivered in stages, over a number of years. These strategic aims are being taken forward by a major procurement project - the ACcess to CORporate Data (ACCORD) project. Three private sector consortia (composed of major international companies) satisfied the criteria for participation in this procurement and all have been awarded IS/IT Services Agreements under which a range of IS/IT services may be purchased. These IS/IT services may be allocated for different time periods, at the end of which time the services must be capable of being recompeted and provided by a different service provider. The DSS, therefore, is required to manage multiple service providers. It must also ensure that their services, which may run in heterogeneous environments, are capable of interacting.

Given the scale of DSS operations, the transition to CISIT-compliant systems will take place on an incremental basis over a number of years. Thus, legacy and the new IS/IT systems will be required to run in parallel and interoperate.

The Need for a New Architecture Framework

Despite the importance of ACCORD IT developments, other initiatives, both sourced from within ITSA and via external procurement routes, will inevitably occur. This dictates the need for Departmental control and the setting of a context for any development. The Department will retain strategic and management control of its architecture via the use of an architecture framework. It is intended that this framework will:

• Provide a classification and structuring scheme within which IT applications can be placed
• Identify those architectural components which can be used, as required, in various combinations to construct operational (sub)systems
• Provide the reference documentation for the architecture(s) of CISIT systems
• Provide the vehicle whereby the principles and standards of the architecture(s) are described along with their dependencies/interdependencies
• Provide a process for developing the architecture/solutions throughout the lifetime of CISIT systems
• Document the different perspectives of the CISIT systems
• Support the specification of requirements and evaluation of supplier bids
• Support the development and monitoring of contractual milestones
• Better integration and interoperation of systems
• Subsequent developments
• Support re-competition (over time)
• Change/contract management

The Department's legacy systems had been developed according to an in-house architecture framework. Rather than extend that framework, it was decided that a new architecture framework was required that more closely met the needs of the CISIT Strategy. The Department's Corporate IS/IT Architecture Framework (CISITAF) has been based on that produced by The Open Group, The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) because:

• It provides a common set of vendor-independent terminologies for documenting the Department's technical requirements.
• It has been widely accepted within the IT industry. Due to the nature of the Departmental context, this was seen as a key advantage of using TOGAF. All SPs would have their own preference for an architecture framework; e.g., ICL would utilize Open/Framework whilst IBM would prefer Open/Blueprint. However, TOGAF is vendor-neutral having been developed with input from many leading IT companies and cognizant of the other major frameworks.
• It complements the architecture framework upon which the Department's legacy systems are based.

CISITAF Documentation Set

It would not be practical to document the whole CISIT architecture framework within a single document. The documents that will eventually comprise the CISITAF (they will be developed along different time lines) are shown in the following diagram.

Although the CISITAF tends to place a different emphasis on the elements, it includes all of those in the TOGAF base set, namely:

• A Technical Reference Model (TRM)
• A Standards Information Base (SIB)
• An Architecture Development Process

supported by descriptions of the architecture from different views.

These have been supplemented by a new framework component: the Model Technical Architecture.

Technical Reference Model

Development of the CISITAF commenced with the definition of a Technical Reference Model (TRM). Use of the TRM aimed to ensure completeness of the architectural definition, by providing a taxonomy of common terms and definitions.

It identifies the IT infrastructure services that may be required on one or a number of application platforms within the CISIT architecture.

The set of services shown is based upon the TOGAF TRM with additions to reflect DSS-specific requirements. The additional services are telephony services and workflow services.

Conformance to this model does not mean that an application will implement all or only these named services without any additional facilities. The set of services used in any situation will be tailored to meet specific business needs.

Standards Information Base

The Standards Information Base (SIB) within TOGAF comprises a comprehensive list of the standards adopted by The Open Group.

The CISITAF SIB has the same aims of promoting interoperability and software portability. However, it will focus upon Departmental technical policies and standards, together with relationships between them, which may be used to assist in the selection of standards and products.

This document will be populated incrementally as appropriate standards are identified and agreed.

Architecture Development Process

The Architecture Development Process (ADP) will describe how the CISITAF will be developed and maintained. It will also outline the stages to be followed, roles and responsibilities of relevant parties, and the products to be produced throughout the process.

Documentation of the ADP is pending the resolution of various organizational and technical issues. It is intended that it will be progressed through an Architecture Control Service.

Architecture Views

The Architecture Views describe an IT system/subsystem from different perspectives to satisfy the requirements of diverse interest groups. The CISITAF makes use of the following Views:

• Functional View
• Management and Operational View

Security View

• Builder's View
• Data Management View
• Commercial and Contractual View
• Computing View
• Communications View

Essentially, these views are the same as those recommended by TOGAF, with two principal differences:

• A consideration of operational aspects has been added to the Management View
• A Commercial and Contractual View has been defined.

The Commercial and Contractual View is a necessary addition given that the DSS intends to implement the CISIT Strategy using a number of services/systems, potentially supplied by different service providers. It provides the perspective which concentrates on those metrics and processes that are required to support a (sub)system's commercial and contractual aspects and interface it successfully with (sub)systems provided by other service providers.

Model Technical Architecture

The CISITAF Model Technical Architecture (MTA) constitutes an addition to the standard TOGAF approach. It is complementary to the TRM in that it focuses on providing a number of models for features which may be implemented on one, or a number of application platforms. In addition, the models may be implemented by one or more IT infrastructure services on each application platform, which would reflect the TRM taxonomy.

The MTA describes the goal technical architecture for systems, which will be developed within the CISIT Strategy. Each architectural aspect is defined within a separate chapter, supported by what have been termed the "four Ps":

• Policies are statements that (once agreed) must be adhered to in any specification, construction, and operation of a system within the CISITAF. Any proposal or bid will be assessed as to its ability to meet all of the policies.
• Principles are the engineering principles that should be adhered to. Like all principles there are implementation options, but the underlying spirit of the principles must be adhered to.
• Preferences are areas where the Department would prefer a particular mechanism, style, methodology, product, etc. The adoption of alternatives by service providers is possible, but convincing reasons for the adoption of any alternatives will need to be provided.
• Propositions collect the hypotheses and ideas raised in the various areas of the model architecture. Service providers are required to consider the propositions and adopt them or articulate alternatives together with convincing reasons for the alternative.

Where more detail is required, there may be an architectural model, held as a separate document, giving more information regarding the architectural aspect, including the description, objectives, and rationale for that particular architecture. Aspects meriting such treatment include:

• Component architecture
• Transaction management
• Data management
• Interoperation with legacy systems
• Management Information Systems (MIS)
• Directory services
• Workflow management
• Output services
• Event management
• Data networks

In addition, the MTA specifies a number of general engineering principles, or qualities, that must be exhibited by all CISIT deliverables:

• Scalability
• Serviceability
• Availability
• Manageability
• Auditability

Interoperability

• Flexibility
• Suitability

Using the CISITAF

The ACCORD procurement has proceeded in a number of stages and the CISITAF has been used, to varying degrees, in all of them.

The specification of the technical requirements has been informed by the policies and principles detailed in the MTA. In their responses, service providers have been required to commit to adhering to all the policies and principles in the CISITAF. They have had to describe how their proposed solutions satisfy the general engineering principles.

In ascertaining the capabilities of different service providers, during the initial bidding stages of the procurement, to deliver ACCORD services, Architecture Views have provided the Department with a means of eliciting full and comparable descriptions of proposed solutions. These views also provided a concise description of the technical proposals that were invaluable in allowing staff not directly involved in the procurement to quickly gain of overview of the solutions. To assist the Department in carrying out technical compliance and technical assurance, a matrix had to be provided for each product used, which detailed how that product supports the CISITAF engineering principles.

From those consortia awarded an ACCORD IS/IT Services Agreement, one, Affinity, was selected to take the lead role in delivering the initial implementations of IS/IT services. At this stage, the service provider was required to be more explicit about their proposed solutions. The CISITAF is coming to the fore in finalizing the detailed technical requirements. The MTA and its subordinate models have been used as the basis for informed, detailed consultation with the service provider. These discussions have resulted in the production of the Technical Solution Statement within which the Architecture Views are being used to document the agreed system architecture.

Continuing use of the CISITAF has been assured for the duration of the ACCORD IS/IT Services Agreements. All Service Providers, who have signed such agreements, have committed themselves to using and assisting in the development of the CISITAF so that it encompasses changes in business and IS/IT strategy.

The Department has determined that the principal way in which this will be achieved is through an Architecture Control Service (ACS), operated jointly by the Department and lead service provider, with other service providers in supporting roles. In addition to the ACCORD initiative, there are also a number of other IS/IT developments planned or currently underway. The ACS will be the authority responsible for ensuring that all providers of CISIT services, including ITSA, comply with the CISITAF standards. This is intended to facilitate the integration and interoperation of systems from different sources and maintain flexibility in the choice of supply channels.

The Department has instituted an organizational structure in order to obtain senior commitment to the ACS. An Architecture Board has been established made up of senior officers representing both the Department's IS and IT and the Department's private sector partners. The IS/IT Architecture Board will drive the strategic IS/IT Architecture activities of the Department, maintaining very close links with the business vision via the involvement of the Modern Services Team. The DSS Architecture Board is supported by an Architecture Control Team that will carry out the day-to-day activities of the ACS, including:

• Maintenance of the Architecture Vision
• Communication of the vision
• Co-ordination of the architecture definition
• Input into the process of control; e.g., liaison between the architecture board and architecture working groups
• Supporting services; e.g., secretariat and architects-R-US (selling architects into projects)

The aim of this team is not to try and create a single architecture team, but to control the architecture via the co-ordination of the other Departmental groups. This will be achieved by the establishment of architecture working groups that will carry out the detailed technical work with the support of the architecture control team and with the authority of the Architecture Board.

Amongst the initial activities of the ACS will be the agreement and documentation of the CISITAF architectural development process and the identification of IS/IT systems to support the ACS. It is envisaged that the CISITAF standards information base will emerge from the latter piece of work.

Litton PRC (US)

Litton PRC chose the TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) as a basis for its revamped internal Architecture Design Process. The Litton PRC Case Study 2 reviews the use of TOGAF within Litton PRC, and explains why TOGAF was chosen.

The Joint Engineering Data Management Information and Control System (JEDMICS) Case Study illustrates the early stages of the ADM in use on a specific project.

The JEDMICS, formerly known as EDMICS before the "joint" services status was added, is designed to provide a modern means of storing and retrieving engineering drawings and data in electronic repositories through the use of various optical, digital and magnetic mass storage devices, digitizing scanners, graphics hard copy devices, graphics display workstations, and communications devices. JEDMICS addresses the needs of the primary and secondary engineering repositories for the US Armed Services and the Defense Logistics Agency, including activities such as Navy Shipyards, Naval Aviation Depots, and Army and Air Force maintenance depots.

A key element of JEDMICS is the conversion of repositories for engineering data - which include both drawings and documents - into digital format and storing the data on optical disk to support changes in depot maintenance processes. These repositories will store 190 million engineering drawings and 500,000 technical publications. Such an extensive amount of data in JEDMICS repositories represents an enormous investment in labor and in the establishment of workflow processes to utilize that data. It is, therefore, critically important that the JEDMICS investment be kept technologically fresh. This puts tremendous emphasis on platform and software interchange and interoperability.

Definition of Existing Environment in Existing Terms

JEDMICS can be viewed as several subsystems: Input, Data Integrity, Index, Optical Storage, Graphics Display Workstation, and Output. The functional view of the JEDMICS architecture is shown in Functional View of Existing JEDMICS Environment .

The Input Subsystem is the primary entry point for scanning drawings, aperture cards, and documents into JEDMICS. The major hardware components include large-format scanners, dual-sided page scanners, and high-speed aperture card scanners.

The Data Integrity Subsystem provides for the processing of scanned images that temporarily reside on magnetic storage while awaiting quality assurance on Data Integrity Control workstations.

The Index Subsystem provides for the inquiry and access of image-related index information upon being scanned into the JEDMICS system.

The Optical Storage Subsystem provides for the storage of image data on both multiple disk autochangers, "jukeboxes", and standalone single-disk devices. The stand-alone units provide backup for the jukebox and, in addition, are a means for exchanging data between sites.

The Remote Output (Workstation) Subsystem provides the capability to access image and index data that resides in the Data Integrity Control and Optical Storage Subsystems. The Multifunction Graphics Display Workstation provides the ability to view an image and direct output to a hardcopy output device. The multifunction capability of this workstation allows the site to access different systems from the same hardware platform. The Engineering Graphics Display Workstation provides a true raster editing capability.

The Output Subsystem provides for a variety of output devices and media types for JEDMICS engineering data. Output capabilities include aperture card production, high-resolution hardcopy plotting, large-format printing, and high-speed printing.

The topology of the existing JEDMICS is shown in Existing Hardware Topology .

Restatement of Existing Environment in TOGAF Terms

The existing JEDMICS environment follows a distributed computing architectural model. A client JEDMICS application on a workstation communicates with server applications on the Index Server and Optical Data Management Server to retrieve engineering data and display it at the workstation. The Input Subsystem works as a client communicating with the Data Integrity Subsystem server to enter engineering data into JEDMICS. The data, once subjected to quality control checks, is then transferred from the Data Integrity (Pending) Server to the Index and Optical Data Management Servers to be entered into JEDMICS permanent storage.

The Output Subsystem also acts as a client to the Index and Optical Data Management Servers to output JEDMICS data. Requests for output are initiated by the Workstation client and communicated to the Output Subsystem. The Output client application requests the data from the Index and Optical Data Management Servers and outputs it to aperture cards, tapes, printers, plotters, CD-ROMs, or any other output device available to JEDMICS.

The general diagram for the JEDMICS distributed computing model is shown in JEDMICS Distributed Computing Architecture .

The existing environment can be restated in TOGAF terms using Mapping of Services to Existing Architecture that maps the existing JEDMICS components into the standard application platform services.

Data Interchange	*	*			*
Data Management		*	*	*
Graphics & Imaging	*				**
Network	*	*	*	*	*	*
Object			*	*
Operating System	*	*	*	*	*	*
Software Engineering
Transaction Processing			*
User Interface	*					*

The standard application platform services provided in JEDMICS perform the following specific functions:

• Data Interchange: In JEDMICS, drawings are input to the system and output from the system in C4 format, which is a tiled, CCITT Group IV bitmap encoding format service. The Data Interchange services convert the bitmap from various scanned formats into C4 format and convert from C4 format to bitmap data that can be sent to common data output devices like printers and CRT screens.
• Data Management: These services are satisfied by an Oracle Relational Database Management System (RDBMS) for the index data and Kodak KOSI optical disk management software.
• Graphics and Imaging: Scanners and compression software services are used in the Input Subsystem and decompression software and imaging and drawing services are used by the Workstation and Output Subsystems.
• Network: In JEDMICS all of the components use the functions provided by the TCP/IP protocol stack working over either an Ethernet or Token Ring network (depending on the user installation).
• Object: The Index and Optical Storage Subsystems manage the drawing objects in JEDMICS and make use of Object Services.
• Operating System: The Operating System Services are found on all of the JEDMICS subsystems.
• Software Engineering: Although programming language compilers and GUI builders are used to develop JEDMICS, no Software Engineering Services map into existing subsystems.
• Transaction Processing: The ORACLE RDBMS used by the Index subsystem provides these services.
• User Interface: These functions are provided at the Input Subsystem and at the Workstation subsystem.

Views, Constraints, and External Environments

Operations view.

In the Operations view, the key operational aspect of the system is the storage of engineering data and the retrieval by users of that data. JEDMICS is designed to be the authoritative repository for all DoD engineering data. The majority of the engineering data to be stored is in the form of drawings. Drawings consist of sheets and frames of data and can have accompanying documents associated with them. Drawings and drawing sheets can be revised and the coherent basis for each set of revisions among the drawings and drawing sheets must be made. Additionally, sets of drawings or individual sheets may be associated with each other to create sets that can be used for procurement, manufacturing, and maintenance of objects described by the drawings.

Because the JEDMICS is to serve as the authoritative repository of engineering data, strict quality controls are placed on all data entering the system. This quality control function is exercised by staging input to interim magnetic storage first, and then migrating the data to optical disk for permanent storage once it has been checked. Data placed in permanent storage may be accessed by local and remote users and viewed or printed as needed. Each piece of data in the system must be able to be accessed by drawing number, manufacturer, description, and weapon system.

Management View

The management view of the system is that the user has a role in the system according to the function that they are performing. This view partitions the users of the system into the following categories:

• System Supervisors: Control the operation of the system and assign privileges to other users.
• Scanner Operators: Input data to the system.
• Quality Assurance Operators: Check the quality of input data and edit as necessary.
• Engineers: Edit the data and create new data.
• Users: View and print the data but do not modify the data. Users can create their own associations of existing data for maintenance and procurement activities.

The security view has two types of security mechanisms. Each user has a unique user ID and password that allows him or her access to certain categories of data. In addition, each hardware device capable of inputting or outputting data has restrictions on the category of data on which it can operate. Data can be input, viewed, printed, and output only if both the user and the input/output device have the prerequisite access authority to the required categories.

Constraints

JEDMICS provides the means for the acquisition, storage, management, and distribution of engineering technical data as well as the wide variety of other published material related to the operation and maintenance of ships, airplanes, and weapons systems in the Services. With JEDMICS, this information is received, stored, accessed, and transferred digitally on optical disk.

The optical disk technology in JEDMICS is the cornerstone of the weapons system acquisition process improvements anticipated through CALS. The repositories of drawings maintained in JEDMICS are the source for the efficient distribution and sharing of the large volume of complex engineering drawings and technical data.

JEDMICS has replaced the current manual and semi-automated aperture card-based repository functions with a fully automated optical disk-based system that will enhance access, timeliness, and product quality for the primary government users of engineering drawings.

The current JEDMICS was constructed using an open systems approach to software development, the integration of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware/software, training, maintenance, site surveys, and system design plans. The JEDMICS contract included a technology refreshment clause that allowed for the incorporation of new technology as it became available. The system was initially deployed with VAX computers as the Index Server, Sun Sparc 1+ computer workstations for Editing Workstations, and Zenith 286 computers for the User Workstations. Because open system principles were adhered to during the JEDMICS design, the system has evolved to SGI Challenge POSIX index servers, Sun Sparc 5 Editing Workstations, and Pentium User Workstations. The latest software version fielded for the 36 systems in use supports both of these configurations (original VAX and current SGI), plus intermediate technical refresh configurations. Only minor software differences exist, and only because of the operating system differences between the VAX (non-POSIX compliant VMS operating system) and the SGI (POSIX-compliant IRIX operating system). A uniform software baseline is supported across all installations.

The major constraint is that the Target Architecture should be compatible with the existing hardware suite already fielded to users. COTS software already purchased and fielded with the earlier version of the JEDMICS software should also be retained in the Target Architecture. Specifically, the ORACLE RDBMS represents a significant investment and must be retained. COTS drawing viewers and editors as well as special-purpose hardware devices are not subject to redesign. The workstations and server computers have been refreshed periodically with new technology, but the current assets represent too large an investment to replace. Similarly, all of the data entered into existing JEDMICS sites must be transformed, with no loss of information, to a new Target Architecture.

The other constraints associated with the existing base of hardware and software are:

• Existing large-format scanners which can scan paper, vellum, and mylar drawings
• Existing dual-sided page scanners which can scan 8.5 x 11" documents at an effective rate of 1,200 pages per hour
• High-speed aperture card scanners which scan at an effective rate of 350 cards per hour
• All input scan devices capable of surpassing the contract-specified minimum resolution of 200 dots per inch, and support 512 x 512 tiling and software image compression based on CCITT Group IV algorithms
• A magnetic disk storage system that temporarily holds scanned images while awaiting quality assurance on Data Integrity Control workstations - the primary processing steps include quality assurance verification of image and hollerith index data, and the migration of images to permanent optical storage
• A COTS relational database and forms processing software used for the Index Subsystem
• Optical Storage Subsystems used to hold image data on both multiple disk autochangers, jukeboxes (14-inch platters), and standalone single-disk devices (14" and 5.25"). The jukebox is capable of handling the storage for up to 6 million JEDMICS images. The stand-alone units provide backup for the jukebox and, in addition, are a means for exchanging data between sites.
• Existing Workstation Subsystems that are used to edit and quality control scanned images - the multifunction capability of this workstation allows the site to access different systems from the same hardware platform; existing Engineering Graphics Display Workstations provide a true raster editing capability
• Output devices that include aperture card production, high-resolution hardcopy plotting, large-format printing, and high-speed printing - the Aperture Card Plotters collectively have the capability to produce 200 aperture cards per hour from images stored on JEDMICS; the main feature of the high-Resolution plotter is the capability to output drawing sizes A through K

A final business process constraint is that the old and new software systems must coexist during the transition period of all 36 sites.

Besides the constraints that the existing COTS hardware and software impose, certain business goals and objectives also affect the Target Architecture. As part of the most recent change in system specifications, the JEDMICS customer has specified that the software be redesigned using object-oriented programming models and the DOD-STD-2167A lifecycle methodology. (The DOD-STD-2167A lifecycle is a formal "waterfall" software development model designed to produce maintainable, complete, and correct software systems). The motivation for using object-oriented programming models was the desire to increase the maintainability of the software in the future and to provide sufficient isolation layers to allow the system to evolve as a repository. Because of the aging base of fielded weapon systems, engineering data contained in JEDMICS repositories will still be providing long-term support to users well into the next century.

External Environments

The network used at each JEDMICS site is part of the local environment and, as such, the existing JEDMICS coexists with other networked systems and equipment. The new Target Architecture will also be required to fit into existing external environments without disruption of the site's other missions. JEDMICS, within certain limits, also must be portable to user provided workstations and other equipment such as printers and plotters. The data created using the existing JEDMICS software must be transferable to the new JEDMICS Target Architecture without any data loss and with a minimum of disruption.

Target Architecture

The Target Architecture for the new JEDMICS software followed a number of goals:

• Make maximum use of existing equipment
• Follow open system precepts for portability, interoperability, and vendor-independence
• Use object-oriented database techniques to isolate specific technology choices
• Use COTS software to lower conversion costs

Based on the analysis of the user functional requirements, the new JEDMICS subsystems were partitioned along object-oriented boundaries. The subsystems in the Target Architecture are:

• Session Management subsystem - handles all user-level interaction in a consistent manner.
• Distributed Object Management subsystem - manages all of the engineering data contained in JEDMICS regardless of specific location.
• Drawing Management subsystem - maintains all of the special relationships associated with drawings, drawing sheets, drawing revision, and accompanying documents.
• Input and Output subsystem - handles all input and output of data to JEDMICS in a uniform and consistent manner.

The target JEDMICS environment still follows a distributed computing architectural model. A client JEDMICS Session Management application on a workstation communicates with the Distributed Object Management server application to enter and retrieve engineering data on the Index Server and Optical Data Management Server. This engineering data is displayed at the workstation. The Session Management application can also communicate with the Drawing Management application to request or set the various drawing management relationships. The Input and Output application works as a client communicating with the Distributed Object Management server application to enter engineering data into JEDMICS. The Distributed Object Management server application makes use of an RDBMS (Oracle - existing) and a network data object manager (SQL*NET - new) to store data in JEDMICS.

The Input and Output Subsystem also acts as a client to the Distributed Object Management server application to output JEDMICS data. Requests for output are initiated by the Session Management application client and communicated to the Input and Output Subsystem. The Input and Output client application requests the data from the Distributed Object Management server application and outputs it to aperture cards, tapes, printers, plotters, CD-ROMs, or any other output device available to JEDMICS.

The general diagram for the new JEDMICS distributed computing model is shown in The New Distributed Computing Architecture .

The functional components of the new JEDMICS system architecture are shown in The New JEDMICS Functional Architecture .

Using object-oriented methodology, the functional architecture becomes simpler and more direct. The Target Architecture will use these standards for each of the Application Platform Services:

Data Interchange	MIL-STD-1840B, MIL-STD-28002	CALS data interchange
Data Management	ISO/IEC 9075	SQL data definition
Graphics & Imaging	MIL-STD-28002	CALS raster image format
Network		TCP/IP, TFTP
Object	X/Open G302	Object definition and registration
Operating System	IEEE Std 1003.1-1990	POSIX
Software Engineering	ISO/IEC 9899	Programming languages - C
Transaction Processing
User Interface	X/Open C150, C160, C320	X Windows and Motif API

The migration phase will require moving the 36 sites from their old system to their new Target Architecture. One of the elements that will simplify the transition is the decision to maintain all of the drawing images saved on optical media in their current raster format. While images remain the same, the index structure in the Oracle database will be radically changed. This will necessitate the transfer and conversion of all currently entered drawing index data into the new object-oriented database structure. A separate conversion effort will address these activities. The implementation of the conversion will require that both the old and new software architectures will be briefly run in the same user environment.

New software COTS products will be installed at the sites during migration, and translation software will be in operation to allow interoperability between sites running the old and new architectures.

Ministry of Defence (UK)

The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) Case Study shows how the ADM can be used to develop an organization-specific architecture framework, allowing independent operating divisions to develop their own architectures while ensuring that they share a common core operating environment.

Executive Summary

The UK MoD recognizes the value of a standards-based approach to achieving interoperability between defense communications and information systems (CIS). It has established a CIS standards organization comprising the Defence CIS Standards Executive Group (DCISSEG), the Defence CIS Standards Committee (DCISSC), and the Defence CIS Systems Board (DCISB). The DCISSEG includes members from all the MoD sectors and formulates standards recommendations and guidelines based on achieving business goals of interoperability and reducing costs.

The DCISSEG has defined a Defence CIS Technical Reference Model (TRM) which is based on the NATO Open Systems Environment Technical Reference Model (NATO OSE TRM). The DCIS TRM meets the MoD's CIS requirements, and at the same time is open, aligned with the marketplace, and in a position to incorporate future developments in technology. Population of the DCIS TRM with appropriate open system standards has generated the Defence CIS Framework for Standards, Profiles, and Products (DCISF) which provides the basis for the design of all future MoD CISs.

The DCISF has been applied in the procurement of an operational system for the RAF. A standards-based architecture was derived from the DCISF and written into the project procurement specification. This proved to be effective in ensuring that the future system would be compliant with the DCISF. The approach was rather ad hoc , however, and highlighted the need to define architectures that could be used for communities of CISs. Such architectures are called Common Operating Environments (COEs) and the MoD is in the process of defining an initial COE that will be applicable to all operational CISs.

Laying the Foundations

The first step along the road to achieving communication and information system (CIS) interoperability in the MoD involved two key activities:

• Providing motivation for the work: The MoD recognized the need for a common reference model and standards framework for guiding CIS projects, with the aim of improving interoperability, portability, scalability, and cost-effectiveness of procurements. In order to exploit its emerging common user infrastructure, the MoD had to make use of COTS products based on open system standards.
• Creating a CIS architecture and standards organization within MoD: The Defence CIS Standards Executive Group (DCISSEG) and its parent bodies, the Defence CIS Standards Committee (DCISSC) and the Defence CIS Systems Board (DCISB), were charged with delivering the required reference model and standards framework. The core personnel were drawn from all MoD sectors, including the Procurement Executive, Navy, Army, and Air Force sectors. They provided the necessary seniority, experience, technical authority, and ability to communicate with a wide range of interested parties including potential users, project managers, policy-makers, and technical experts outside the group.

Constructing the Model

The next step was to define a DCIS TRM. A TRM is a model representing an abstraction of an IT system. It assists in understanding and identifying the basic building blocks of an IT system but is not populated with standards and does not contain guidance on application. The benefits arising from the use of a TRM include the following:

• It enables the technical strategy for future purchases and migration to be set out.
• It simplifies system procurement since it provides a ready-made structure for specifying CIS requirements.
• It exposes the interfaces between the building blocks of a system, leading to improved interoperability, application portability and software development, re-use, and maintenance.
• It provides a coherent view of the whole system, leading to a better understanding of issues such as security and management which are pervasive throughout the system.
• It permits existing systems to be described clearly and in a standard way.

There were several existing TRMs on which the DCIS TRM could have been based. The choice of TRM was guided by the following considerations:

• The TRM should be open, widely supported, and aligned with the marketplace.
• It should be capable of meeting the majority of military requirements.
• There should be a commitment by the "owners" of the TRM to maintain it and allow future developments in technology to be incorporated.

The above considerations led to the adoption of the NATO Open Systems Environment (OSE) TRM as the basis for the DCIS TRM. The NATO OSE TRM aligns well with The Open Group TRM, thus ensuring that the first of the above criteria is met. At the same time, the NATO OSE TRM has been developed within an international military context. Finally, NATO is committed to maintaining the TRM and keeping it in step with changing technology.

The following amendments were made to the NATO OSE TRM in order to meet with the UK MoD's requirements:

• A Physical Environment component was added, mainly to meet the needs of the Army sector.
• Elements within the Application Software Entity were re-grouped, in order to reflect MoD's view of support applications.

The DCIS TRM is represented in DCIS TRM .

Further information about the definition of the DCIS TRM can be found in Volume 2 of the DCIS Standards Guides.

Building the Framework

This step involved the population of the DCIS TRM with relevant open system standards wherever possible. The resulting framework is the Defence CIS Framework for Standards, Profiles, and Products (DCISF) as detailed in Volume 3 of the DCIS Standards Guides.

Population of the DCIS TRM required suitable standards to be identified and placed within each of the IT Service components of the TRM. The standards selected were intended to be neither exhaustive nor unique. A relevant standard would be included in the DCISF if it was judged to meet the following selection criteria (as applicable):

• Promotes interoperability
• Enables people portability
• Enables application portability
• Has market support
• Is technically consistent with the DCIS TRM and other DCIS standards
• Is consistent with other relevant MoD initiatives

The standards were categorized according to their status. For example, "Recommended" standards were assessed to meet the relevant selection criteria in full; "Emerging" standards met most of the selection criteria, but represent a higher risk, owing to their lack of maturity and stability.

The population of the TRM with open system standards was based on a consensus within the MoD CIS community. This consensus was achieved through a series of technical workshops held by DCISSEG, attended by representatives from each of the MoD sectors.

Defining an Architecture

This step involved the application of the DCISF to an MoD project. The purpose of this was two-fold:

• To offer the relevant project the benefits of using the DCIS TRM and DCISF
• To validate the DCISF through its application to a real project

The general benefits that are brought to a CIS procurement from the use of the DCIS TRM and DCISF include the following:

• Greater clarity and quality of the architecture and standards sections of the Invitation to Tender and the tenders
• Ease of tender assessment since a standard structure is adopted
• Improved technical communication with industry since a standard vocabulary is adopted

The project concerns an operational CIS being procured for the RAF. The project team sought advice from the RAF Sector Interoperability Authority (SIA) on the specification of technical standards for the system. The RAF SIA is the focus for IT architectures, standards, and interoperability within the RAF Sector and provides RAF representation within the DCISSEG. The RAF SIA were ideally placed, therefore, to apply the RAF Sector Technical Architecture Framework (RAF STAF), which is based closely on the emerging DCISF, to the project.

Key features of the system technical architecture are its graphical and geographical services, its interfaces with external systems, and its security requirements. The system standards specification was prepared by the RAF SIA in close consultation with the project team. The structure of the standards specification is aligned with the structure of the DCIS TRM, and the technical standards constitute a profile of standards from the DCISF, tailored to meet the system's requirements. The standards define an implementable and system-specific architecture, derived from the overarching DCIS standards framework. Thus, the system will be able to interoperate with future systems that are also compliant with the DCISF.

In conclusion, the application of the DCISF in defining a system-specific architecture for a real CIS project proved to be effective. The approach used was rather ad hoc , however, and this points to a requirement for a more systematic way of defining standards-based architectures for CIS. The answer is to define Common Operating Environments (COEs). A COE is an agreed specification derived from a framework of open standards which is applicable to CIS within a particular community. A COE is defined once, and applied many times, as CISs within a particular community are procured. The MoD is in the process of defining COEs, starting with an operational COE.

The Way Forward

The following future MoD CIS interoperability activities are identified:

• Maintain the DCIS TRM.
• Maintain the DCISF in line with MoD business requirements and market developments in CIS standards and products.
• Continue to apply the DCISF to CIS projects in the near-term, using the initial application to an operational CIS as a model.
• Complete the definition of the operational COE and begin to define other COEs as required. In particular, there is a requirement for an overall Defence COE, the Defence Interoperability Environment (DIE), which will provide Intranet-type services such as wide area networking and messaging to the vast majority of MoD CISs.
• Apply the MoD COEs to future projects.

NATO (Belgium)

NATO's example illustrates the development of Target and Transitional Architectures in the context of overall enterprise architecture.

Within NATO the two Strategic Commands (ACE and ACLANT) are equipped with different C2-systems: basically Allied Command Europe - Automated Command and Control System (ACE-ACCIS) for ACE and Maritime Command and Control System (MCCIS) for ACLANT.

In reaction to the NATO Washington Summit (April 1999) a double convergence between ACE and ACLANT on the one hand and between the Command and Control Systems and the Management Information Systems (MIS) on the other hand has been initiated in order to improve the interoperability and the cost-efficiency of these systems. As the combination of the C2-services and MIS-services is called Automated Information System (AIS), the common system target between the two Strategic Commands is therefore called Bi-SC AIS.

In practice the convergence is envisaged incrementally, whereas the first implementation target revolves around a common "core capability". Such a concept is close to The Open Group's Boundaryless Information Flow initiative and consists of harmonizing/standardizing the foundation IT services throughout the two command structures and also implementing common applications where possible.

The applications are categorized into:

• Core applications, which are general-purpose applications that are built on the basis of "off-the-shelf" packages (typical examples are Military Message Handling, Document Management, or Enterprise Management)
• Functional applications, which are business-specific applications in support of the military functions (typical examples are OPS-, INTEL-, or LOG- applications in support of operation control, intelligence, or logistics)

The breakdown of the overall AIS target into "implementation segments", the articulation of these segments, and the planning and management of their implementation, are of course many issues which cannot be successfully addressed without a sound and comprehensive architecture of the system targeted.

In order to avoid a "big-bang" development of such a Target Architecture, which would be almost mission impossible at this scale, the architectural process has been divided into two parallel development activities with different objectives and scopes, namely:

• A high-level Target Architecture, describing the key objectives of the system for the next six years. Its development is mainly top-down out of the strategic objectives of the commands or the operational and policy requirements.
• A Transitional Architecture, describing the services targeted for the near term and the transitions from the existing system baseline. Such a Transitional Architecture is developed as an extension to the previous architecture but also accommodates a bottom-up approach, in order to capture the migration constraints and the lessons learned from the fielded baseline.

The respective customers of these two kinds of architectures are the "stakeholders" on the one hand and the end users and implementors on the other hand.

As explained in Time Horizon : "In such an approach, the Target Architecture is evolutionary in nature, and requires periodic review and update according to evolving business requirements and developments in technology, whereas the Transitional Architectures are (by design) incremental in nature, and in principle should not evolve during the implementation phase of the increment, in order to avoid the "moving target" syndrome. This of course is only possible if the implementation schedule is under tight control and relatively short (typically less than two years)."

An Implementation Plan, which both considers the operational priorities and the architectural constraints, and consequently defines the optimal implementation sequence, is required to transition from an agreed high-level Target Architecture to a Transitional Architecture dedicated to the first implementation target.

The following figure illustrates the above considerations and stresses the role of the Architects, who mediate between the stakeholders and implementors and are supposed to maintain the consistency of the whole edifice. They typically aim to reduce the latent gap or lack of understanding between stakeholders and implementors that is caused by the increasing complexity of their respective activities.

The high-level Target Architecture of the Bi-SC AIS has been developed and endorsed in the years 2001 and 2002, and has entered a maintenance process, whereas the Transitional Architecture for the first Bi-SC AIS implementation target has been initiated.

The architectural consistency of these two architectures is largely based on the following factors:

• They both use the same "NATO Architecture Framework" which is in fact a customization of the US-C4ISR (also described in C4ISR Architecture Framework ) to the NATO context. The breakdown of the architectural descriptions into "operational", "system", and "technical" views, combined with the development of standard "architectural templates", establishes a common language between the architects and a sound means of communication with the stakeholders.
• They also make use of the same "NATO C3 Technical Architecture". This is an architectural design and implementation guidance for the development of System and Technical Views of C3 (Command, Control, and Communications) systems. It includes a detailed TRM, an inventory of standards, and guidelines/directives to develop "interoperability profiles", implement system building blocks, and eventually select software products. The NC3TA is based on the US DoD TRM and DII COE, but has evolved to incorporate the needs of NATO nations as well as Australia and New Zealand.
• Last but not least, there is a tight collaboration between the architects involved.

The adoption/customization of a comprehensive architectural methodology, which would formally relate all the architectural tasks and make the linkage with the implementation projects, is still an issue. There is still some risk for a Target Architecture to be misinterpreted by implementors, whereas its traceability with the strategic objectives and mapping with the operational requirements remain both critical.

The TOGAF ADM is considered as a valuable starting point for the methodology, due to its adaptability and comprehensiveness. The concept of system "building blocks" is perceived as crucial to manage the interdependency between the aforementioned Target Architectures and to communicate with the users and implementors. Moreover, the latest release of the ADM (Version 8) explicitly supports an incremental approach and makes use of the IEEE Std 1471 concepts (stakeholders, views and viewpoints, etc.) which are fully applicable to a large organization like NATO.

The current architectural development is based on the following paradigms.

The architectural description is broken down into three views:

• Operation view (equivalent to the Business Architecture, in TOGAF terms)
• System view (the combination of the Applications and Data Architecture)
• Technical view (equivalent to the Technology Architecture)

The three architecture views are described in three distinct levels of abstraction (conceptual, logical, and physical) which enables a progressive development and facilitates the validation/exploitation of the architectural description. It is indeed no use developing a logical description of a view if the underlying concepts are not clear or agreed. The same way, a detailed physical description of a view, which deals with the site characteristics, is only possible when a common logical description is agreed.

The following figures describe the expected properties of the architectural rows and columns.

Such a model, based on a 3-by-3 matrix, is also likely to facilitate the maintenance of the architectural descriptions and the consistency of the whole architectural process. A detailed mapping of this model with the aforementioned (NATO or US-C4ISR) "architectural templates" is available but exceeds the scope of this Case Study and is replaced by the following figure, which gives an overview of the internal structuring of the architectural description.

The linkage of architecture with its environment is perceived as follows.

Some underlying "principles and objectives", derived from the stakeholders' views, pertain to the whole architectural model, whereas the operational context, the feedback from the fielded baseline, the "state-of-the art", or the user or system requirements apply to the model as follows:

Police IT Organization (UK)

The UK Police IT Organization (PITO) used TOGAF as the basis for the Technical Architecture for its National Strategy for Police Information Systems (NSPIS).

The NSPIS Case Study includes a comprehensive approach to architecture views, and a methodology for ensuring interoperability between the building blocks of the final architecture.

The UK has some 43 police forces. Each one has a different way of doing basically the same job and the authority to purchase what it likes, when it likes, and from who it likes. It is not surprising therefore that there is a whole variety of IT solutions to meet the business need. In addition there are national systems and networks that connect to the local force systems. The most notable is the Police National Computer connected over a facilities managed Police National Network.

Objectives of NSPIS

• Rationalize Data Structures
• Effective Pricing
• Future Proofing

The police business has identified 38 varied application areas. The NSPIS applications include personnel, accounting, invoicing, case preparation, command & control, crime & incident reporting, custody, etc. The applications can be grouped into business domains. These domains or business groups are likely to contain some commonality of architecture and application functionality which distinguishes them from other domains. It is acknowledged that over time each domain will change due to new additions and re-arrangements of the current set.

In bringing solutions to market, we need to be aware of the high degree of interoperability demanded by the business, both between forces and between applications, both intra and inter-force in order to reduce cross-boundary effects. In order to move forward, the Home Office is not in a position to dictate how things should be. In essence there must be a local and central partnership, together with a commitment at all levels to support the formal strategy agreement. In order to achieve this, we must promote all aspects of the strategy not only to the local forces as the prime users, but to the suppliers who will need to be taken on board during application procurement.

The purpose of the technical architecture is to:

• Provide the format and documentation standards for the technical constraints applied to the NSPIS application procurements
• Assist the application procurement process by describing an advocated set of technical development and software procurement options in a standard fashion
• Describe the products and standards used by each NSPIS application

The NSPIS technical architecture is also intended as an aid to discussions with suppliers when it is important to ensure that:

• Parties are clear on what constitutes conformance to the NSPIS technical architecture.
• Queries on NSPIS technical issues and other requests are handled uniformly.
• An appropriate level of liaison and negotiating presence is provided.
• Change control records are kept and maintained.

The NSPIS technical architecture advocates services (i.e., components and products) that support the policy laid down by the technical design authority. Currently the architecture must conform to the following properties:

• Multi-tiered client/server
• Distributed
• Modular/re-usable components-based
• Based on common APIs
• Able to interwork with other NSPIS systems/components
• Multi-vendor; i.e., open and heterogeneous

The NSPIS technical architecture is based on The Open Group Architecture Framework Reference Model with additions made to reflect the set of services required by the NSPIS recommended applications.

The NSPIS technical architecture is, in principle, the optimum way to achieve the objectives of interoperable, portable, scalable systems by means of an advocated set of services using open architecture standards. However, practical consideration should also be given to each architecture components:

• Degree of completeness - how tried and tested is the service?
• Degree of certainty - how mature is the service?
• Likely longevity - what is the predicted future market position of the service?
• Cost - what is the life-time cost across the range of applications?

To provide a complete, cost-effective architecture, it may be necessary to pursue a "shades of openness" policy that includes the pragmatic use of proprietary products with an awareness of "lock-in" issues. Wherever possible, the NSPIS technical architecture will recommend a single choice of component with the lowest predicted obsolescence factor. Where a single recommendation is not possible, a range of advocated options that conform to the technical architecture may be given instead. Procured applications are required to adhere to the NSPIS technical architecture recommendations and standards profile outlined within this document. Furthermore, the framework will be used to assist in the development and evolution of all future NSPIS applications services requirements.

NSPIS Technical Architecture Manual

The NSPIS technical architecture is described in three volumes:

• Volume 1: Overview has the rules and guidelines and defines the platform services. It covers the principles which form the basis of the NSPIS technical architecture and the way in which it is intended to be used and maintained. The appendix has a profile of available services and standards and contains general NSPIS requirements and a methodology for selection and conformance.
• Volume 2: Generic Architecture contains the mandated platform services and the range of allowable standards. Also, the architectural requirements to satisfy the user requirements and the conformance criteria. This document is the technical architecture requirements and constraints for NSPIS application procurement.
• Volume 3: Application-Specific Architecture is the supplier's response to the user and technical requirement and contains a complete list of platform services and the relationship between the components chosen, together with a description of the hardware and communication environment required to deliver the performance and scalability. The application-specific architecture describes the complete architecture for each application and forms the basis of the subsequent configuration management. There will be an application-specific architecture associated with each NSPIS application and it will contain all the elements recommended to implement the service provided under the NSPIS framework agreement. The supplier's application-specific architecture forms the basis of the technical evaluation and the conformance test quote. It informs the evaluation of future generic components and helps define acceptance and conformance tests.

The technical architecture documents are intended for use by members of the NSPIS community in NSPIS projects, and in any subsequent implementations including the maintenance and operations of NSPIS products. The NSPIS community includes:

• IT Managers
• Project Managers
• NSPIS Program/Project Teams
• Procurement and Contract Managers
• Technical User Group
• In-house Development Teams
• Configuration Managers

Additionally, this framework may also be referenced by individual purchasers at force level. Teams using the NSPIS framework should remember that these guidelines are a coherent and integrated framework that should be used in their entirety. To use the criteria in an ad hoc fashion like a "pick-list" will represent non-compliance and compromise interoperability.

Applying the Framework

The NSPIS technical architecture is a set of components and a specification of how these components are connected to meet the overall requirements of NSPIS. The following are a set of principles for the application of a component-based approach:

• The architecture need only contain components to implement those framework services that it requires.
• Components may implement one, more than one, or only part of a service identified in the framework.
• Components should conform to standards relevant to the services they implement.

At least four complementary and simultaneous mechanisms are seen as contributing to the definition of the components making up the overall NSPIS Architecture Framework, and each application-specific architecture.

These mechanisms are:

• By theoretical debate, evaluation, and choice
• Competitive procurement through infrastructure projects
• Evaluation and selection of options provided by the application procurement process
• Selection of components and APIs during application system build.

Under this arrangement, potential components and APIs of the technical infrastructure could be in one of the following states of procurement:

NSPIS Generic Architecture Components	Undefined	Optional	Mandated
NSPIS Application-Specific Components	Undefined	Optional	Mandated

At the award of contract we would expect to see the application-specific component being mandated but not necessarily immutable; i.e.:

NSPIS Generic Architecture Components	Mandated	Mandated	Mandated
NSPIS Application-Specific Components	Mandated	Mandated	Mandated

At system build, final decisions would be taken with reference to those components initially allowed freedom of choice (i.e., not defined or optional) and decisions made whether to embrace any of them in the NSPIS Generic Application Platform. At conformance testing, performance testing, and live running, a formal evaluation of the future status of all components would be made to update in particular the generic application component services by addition, subtraction, or substitution. Each procurement process will generate new releases of the technical architecture and each application system build and test will influence future changes. An overview of the role of the technical architecture in the procurement process is shown in the figure below.

All suppliers who respond to procurements are given the opportunity, indeed are required, to submit their application-specific architectures. This allows the opportunity to refine, further develop, and recommend alternatives or substitutes to the Generic Architecture.

There are four basic migration models that can be defined:

A Force has two environments, a Force-specific environment and its NSPIS environment, and it gateways between these two environments.

This model is applicable when the Force's current environment has no reasonable evolution to the NSPIS world, and the investment in current systems mean that a radical change to build a complete Force environment conforming to the NSPIS technical architecture is untenable.

A Force has an environment based on NSPIS-compatible operating systems and networks - e.g., UNIX and TCP/IP - but has NSPIS and legacy applications working on a variety of platforms at the middleware level within this environment.

A Force has not only an NSPIS-compatible environment, but conforms at the application platform level, with services and components compatible and based on the NSPIS technical architecture at the middleware level.

Force either modifies existing legacy applications or acquires non-NSPIS applications which use or replace interfaces defined within implemented NSPIS applications.

NSPIS Technical Reference Model

This section contains descriptions of the Application Platform component complete with approved or contender standard, service, and product names.

This section describes the Technical Reference Model (TRM), a more detailed view of the Logical Framework. The purpose of the TRM is to allow components of an existing or planned information system and the relationships between components to be recorded in a consistent manner.

The following diagram shows the TRM complete with the classes or types of services within the recommended categories on the Application Platform.

The set of services shown here is based upon TOGAF TRM with additions to reflect NSPIS-specific requirements. The additional NSPIS-specific services are Intranet Services, Telephony, MIS Services, Workflow Services, GIS, and Mobile Radio Services. These are services which would normally exist in more than one service category and/or in the Application Software tier. At this level of detail the framework depicts entities, interfaces, and service areas only and does not imply inter-relationships between the service areas.

Conforming to the model does not mean that each application will implement all or only these named services without any additional facilities. The intention of the NSPIS TRM is that applications will use a set of services tailored to their specific business area needs.

Each service within the application platform is described under four headings:

• Mandated Components
• Approved Components
• Interoperable Components
• Illustrative Components

The component definitions and standards profile are maintained as a reference as standard definitions for NSPIS suppliers and Police IT community. Inclusion does not imply selection. Conforming to the model does not mean that each application will implement all or only these named services without any additional facilities. The intention of the NSPIS TRM is that applications will use a set of services tailored to their specific business area needs.

It is important that the components on the application platform are able to interoperate and do not mutually interfere one with the other. To this end, suppliers fill in an interoperability matrix which contains rows of all the application-specific components and columns of all the application-specific components, other generic components, and any other components used by other NSPIS applications which are not already included. (See table below.)

		Application-Specific	Other Generic	Other NSPIS
		Components	Components	Components
Ref1	App Spec Compt 1
Ref2	App Spec Compt 2
Ref3	App Spec Compt 3
Ref4	App Spec Compt 4
etc.

Suppliers indicate by a tick whether they interoperate with the other components. If they do not interoperate directly but through another (intermediate) component listed, then the reference number of that intermediate component is inserted in the box. Where they do not interoperate, a cross is inserted.

Design templates for the Interoperability Processes in each application will be developed in conjunction with the application project teams before full proposals. Suppliers indicate the components involved in providing interoperability with other NSPIS applications, that is:

• Desktop-to-application interoperability
• Application-to-application interoperability
• Application-to-database interoperability
• Database-to-database interoperability

Technical Requirements and Views

Suppliers will be asked to respond to technical requirements under business, information, application, and engineering headings for each of the number of views.

The Requirement Views are a definition of the architecture in terms of the requirements that they set out to satisfy. Each requirement is broken down and considered under four headings: Business requirement, Information requirement, Application requirement, and an Engineering requirement. Within each of these requirements it will specify if it is:

There are 10 views, each with the four requirements. They are: User, Organization, Management, Operations, Processing Platform, Integration, Data Management, Security, Contract, and Service Delivery. This produces an 4 X 10 matrix. (See below.)

User
Organization
Management
Operations
Processing Platform
Integration
Data Management
Security
Contract
Service Delivery

As well as taking account of all the requirement views when selecting, implementing, and using the components of the application platform, the selection must take account of how well the components work together and what effect the choice one might have on the freedom of choice of another service. To assist in this choice, the application platform before and after each choice is compared using the metrics generated from each analysis. The analyses include gap analysis, value analysis, and risk analysis.

Whilst suppliers and integrators have necessarily to be constrained in their choice of application platform to ensure interoperability and portability, it is important to its relevance over time that suppliers are given every opportunity to comment on and submit alternative preferred or more appropriate components. This is particularly important where standards are immature, difficulties of component interoperability are being experienced, or mandated and preferred components are nearing obsolescence or irrelevance. Similarly suppliers, IT departments, and users must be able to exploit new methods and technology paradigms and incorporate them into the architecture without compromising the current applications or architectures.

The Architecture in Action

Suppliers respond to the technical architecture at specific stages within the NSPIS application procurement and implementation cycle. Each differs in detail depending on the procurement route adopted for each application and the type of product sought.

All NSPIS suppliers need details of each other's application-specific architectures to enable interoperability and consistency of change control. Mechanisms to achieve the desired level of co-operation and visibility of design are required from the NSPIS supplier community, PITO, and NSPIS application projects. These mechanisms are set up and further developed in conjunction with existing NSPIS suppliers and those suppliers short-listed and subsequently awarded NSPIS contracts. The selection and subsequent implementation of each NSPIS application platform informs subsequent selections and direction. NSPIS suppliers and the conformance testing agency are contributors to the debate with PITO and the Technical User Group.

QA Consulting

QA Consulting are a UK consultancy and training company whose mission is to improves IT effectiveness within large organizations. The company's focus is on enhancing the skills of people - optimizing human capital investment, and providing IT expertise that complements in-house skills. The company is the UK's No.1 IT Trainer, with 400+ Courses, both Instructor-lead and Internet-based, covering both technical and business skills.

The QA Case Study 3 explains the company's approach to using TOGAF, and gives an example of a recent client engagement in the Travel industry using TOGAF.

Statskonsult (Norway)

Statskonsult is the Department of IT Planning & Co-ordination, in the Directorate for Public Management, within the Norwegian Government. It used parts of the TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) to develop an architecture for an IT infrastructure for the public sector in Norway.

The Case Study explains the general background to the project. The use of the TOGAF ADM is explained in a separate presentation. 4

Norway Streamlines Government Processes by Going Online

In Norway, over 35% of the population are experienced in navigating the Internet. The Norwegian government intends to leverage this knowledge by using the Internet to deliver more effective and cost-efficient public administration services. Termed the Public Sector Network, this initiative is a joint venture between Norway's Ministry of National Planning and Co-ordination and the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities. The objective is to create a national Internet-based infrastructure that will enable the public administration (both local and central government) to transform from a traditional paper-based, bureaucratic organization into an easily-approached, responsive online body. Initially, over 100 paper-based reporting mechanisms between public bodies are being targeted for conversion to online systems. The aim is to convert every applicable service by 2001.

Through the Public Sector Network, the Norwegian people will be able to manage their relationship with the public administration in the fields of taxation, welfare, and other public administration functions. As a result, the Norwegian government will deliver improved service levels and significantly reduce its costs on currently labor-intensive, paper-based tasks. Consequent savings can then be allocated to furthering the public good in areas such as health care and education.

Working with The Open Group to Plan the Future

In helping to establish the Public Sector Network, an ongoing relationship has been established between the Norwegian Ministry of National Planning and Co-ordination and The Open Group.

The Open Group will serve as a central resource that tests, brands, and guarantees compatibility with IT DialTone specifications, products, and technologies. In this capacity, The Open Group will contribute substantially to the Norwegian Public Sector Network and similar projects around the globe.

An Internet DialTone Framework as Easy-to-Use as the Telephone

Creating a national infrastructure such as the Public Sector Network poses a number of challenges. There are currently many point-solutions, technologies, and products from a growing number of suppliers. But how do companies wishing to utilize the Internet understand the benefits and risks associated with each one? Which ones work with each other, conform to agreed standards, or will remain relevant in five years' time? How do companies avoid making proprietary decisions that could erode the required benefits of the Internet?

"The more common approach to this project would have been to build one big government network that is planned, constructed, and managed centrally. However, this approach is not very flexible and would almost certainly have required the costly duplication or replacement of existing infrastructure - in fact it would probably have failed. It's really a challenge to match the formal, juridical framework with the needs of the marketplace, especially under the European Union rules for public procurement," says Gard Titlestad, Head of the Secretariat for IT Standardisation.

"The alternative is to adopt a more "open" approach that protects the vast investment of public money in existing infrastructure and enables the ongoing integration of new technology from a broad range of suppliers. To do this we identified the need for a common framework - an industry-agreed reference point by which to identify standards, products, and technologies that provide consistent features and attributes, such as security and reliability - now and in the future. A solution is to work closely with The Open Group to assist in the delivery of its IT DialTone architecture."

To ensure that the Public Sector Network remains flexible and maximizes the use of the latest market developments in technology and service, the project is based on a framework agreement. The IT DialTone set of technologies provides the framework with a reference point and an agreed approach to the development and implementation of Internet standard specifications, technologies, and products. In turn, this framework guides the procurement policies of each municipality and government department, guaranteeing a consistent approach to the network implementation. Yearly re-negotiation of the framework will consistently reflect market development dynamics.

Joseph De Feo, Former President & CEO of The Open Group said: "The Norwegian Government is leading Europe in the charge to realize the true social potential of the Internet. As part of this process they have identified the benefits of basing their future infrastructure development on robust, industry-agreed standards not on proprietary solutions, which they realize could eventually erode the country's ability to communicate freely with the world if alternative, non-compatible decisions are made by other governments, companies, or organizations."

With the Public Sector Network, Norway leads the world in creating a national, Internet-based infrastructure to administer public services and improve government operational efficiency. The country's proactive steps guarantee the construction of an effective, supplier-independent, and flexible national online resource.

Westpac (Australia)

Westpac is a major Australian bank who have used TOGAF in collaboration with IBM, in much the same way as the UK Department of Social Security; i.e., as the basis of managing the technology components of a major outsourcing relationship.

The Westpac Case Study 5 gives an overview of the approach used and reactions.

return to top of page

The TOGAF document set is designed for use with frames. To navigate around the document:

• In the main Contents frame at the top of the page, click the relevant hyperlink (Part I, Part II, etc.) to load the Contents List for that Part of the TOGAF document into the Secondary Index frame in the left margin.
• Then click in that Contents List to load a page into this main frame.

Downloads of the TOGAF documentation, are available under license from the TOGAF information web site . The license is free to any organization wishing to use TOGAF entirely for internal purposes (for example, to develop an information system architecture for use within that organization). A hardcopy book is also available from The Open Group Bookstore as document G063 .

Case Study of the Enterprise Business Architecture

For those interested in reviewing a Case Study of the Enterprise Business Architecture, an example is presented using the Business Process Modeling and Notation (BPMN).

The case study example represents a modest build-to-order manufacturing enterprise. This same case study is used as a teaching aid in all Enterprise Business Architecture presentations, classes and articles. It contains 16 composite Value Stream models that are fully integrated with one another. They are aggregated up and represented as a single enterprise model, and the Order-to-Cash Value Stream is decomposed down to the first level of workflows to show the relationships between Value Stream models and the transformation within the workflow models.

One may choose to navigate through the BPMN models from top-to-bottom or from selecting a value stream from the EBA Hierarchy Model. To get started reviewing the BPMN example for the Enterprise Business Architecture, CLICK HERE . 

Copyright © 2022 Enterprise Business Architecture - All Rights Reserved.

• Regulation & Information
• Intellectual Property
• Legislative

 Success Stories 

• Tell us your story!  Use this template for sharing your success.

These success stories below highlight where agencies have applied enterprise architecture methodologies to solve specific business problems which has resulted in programmatic success. Each quarter, the FEAPMO will feature new succcess stories as identified by the agencies.  

• DOD Success Story The DoD’s High Performance Computing Modernization Program (HPCMP) is responsible for providing some of the world’s most advanced computing capability in support of the DoD mission. The nation-wide Defense Research and Engineering Network (DREN) provides the HPCMP user community with protocol-rich, high-availability, high-capacity, low-latency, secure connectivity. In June, 2003, the DREN was designated as the first DoD IPv6 pilot network. This DOD success highlights six keys to success and eight challenges that were overcome without additional personnel and with less than $100,000 in additional funding. DOD Success Story (PDF, 234kb)

Each year Industry reports toxics releases to EPA which is shared with State agencies. The 2007 TRI-MEweb significantly reduces the reporting burden of facilities filing via web, abates EPA and state programs data collection transaction costs, and delivers impressive program performance efficiencies. The 2007 TRI-MEweb is a leap forward towards a one-stop-shop paperless TRI reporting system. EPA Success Story ( PDF , 62kb)

In late 2007, former Associate Deputy Director, Joseph L. Ford, determined that centrally managing license agreements for Information Technology (IT) was a critical need and would provide an opportunity for huge cost savings and improved efficiencies. During just four quarters of its existence, the program has proved its worth by recording a total FY 2008 cost savings/avoidance of $14,869,700, while also recording an additional $49,394,266 in out-year cost savings for FY 2009 through FY 2012. FBI Success Story ( PDF , 56kb)

Case Studies

These case studies are for information purposes only and can be used by the architectural community to highlight specific examples from Federal Agencies throughout their agency or organization.

The following case study demonstrates how the Food and Drug Administration used Enterprise Architecture to standardize business processes and achieve considerable cost savings for their IT Consolidation initiative. Final Case Study ( PDF , 137kb) Executive Summary ( PDF , 103kb)

The listed case study demonstrates how the U.S. Customs and Boarder Protection (CBP) uses EA to improve system support at lower cost to more than 20 agencies with missions tied to Internal Trade and Transportation. CBP Case Study ( PDF , 125kb)

The following case study demonstrates how the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) used Enterprise Architecture to implement a streamlined electronic grants application process that provides better service to customers and business partners. HUD Case Study ( PDF , 33kb)

The following case study demonstrates how several banking oversight agencies used Enterprise Architecture to implement a streamlined data collection process that reduced costs, increased productivity, and improved oversight of financial institutions. FFIEC Case Study ( PDF , 25kb)

This case study demonstrates how the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) used enterprise architecture to create a blueprint for Government-wide human resources (HR) management, including the creation of HR shared service centers. HR LOB Case Study ( PDF , 39kb)

Case Study: Effective Enterprise Architecture Management

• February 15, 2024

3 Case studies demonstrate the power of modern enterprise content management

Customers in insurance, banking, and healthcare find benefits in replacing aging content management tools with modern systems..

From insurance to banking to healthcare, organizations of all stripes are upgrading their aging content management systems with modern, advanced systems that introduce new capabilities, flexibility, and cloud-based scalability. In this post, we’ll touch on three such case studies.

Global insurance company

A large insurance company adopted a cloud-based document management system to enable paperless operations around the world and simplify regulatory compliance. The organization had some tactical document management systems, but they were siloed and based on slow, outdated technology. Plus, all files were stored in U.S. data centers, creating obstacles for a globally dispersed user base.

After adopting Alfresco Content Services and Alfresco Governance Services running on Amazon Web Services (AWS), the insurer fully digitized its operations. The IT team worked closely with business users to build a solution “in which paper wasn’t part of the process,” the company’s SVP and CIO said.

The solution provides electronic file and records management capabilities that integrate seamlessly with the company’s core insurance applications, automating everything from document retrieval to records management . The solution is saving the company $21 million over five years thanks to massive reductions in paper, printing, and storage costs.

Large community bank

When a 28-branch community bank decided to sunset its document storage system, it needed a solution that would work with its cloud-based core banking system.

After identifying dozens of company requirements, the organization selected  OnBase  running on the Hyland Cloud. With support from Hyland Professional Services, the bank migrated 2.5 million documents, representing the past 15 years of business documents, to OnBase. Soon after, the bank added WorkView , Hyland’s low-code application builder, to create solutions and address new challenges with speed and agility.

“With WorkView, you can build workable solutions with almost no code at all. It’s enabled us like a force multiplier. We can accomplish so much with a small team,” said the bank’s enterprise process manager.

Among the benefits, the solution helped the bank’s lending department retire its manual, paper-based workflow in favor of more automated processing using OnBase workflows. The results have been significant: a mortgage loan process now takes less than 20 minutes to complete each day, down from two hours.

What’s more, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the bank was able to bring on remote, temporary workers to handle an onslaught of Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) applications.

“All the documents needed were visible in OnBase without relying on paper to complete the work,” said the bank’s senior vice president and director of operations and process improvements. “We couldn’t have managed the loan volume without OnBase in the cloud.”

Large pharmacy and healthcare firm

A large American retail pharmacy and healthcare company was looking to upgrade its aging knowledge management systems. Its executive leadership team directed the business to select a knowledge management platform with a modern, open-source approach that would reduce the company’s dependence on IBM, Oracle, and other proprietary solutions.

The company opted for Hyland’s  Nuxeo Platform , an open-source and highly scalable platform that enables the provider’s customer care representatives to quickly access their customers’ current coverage details. It also gives the company the flexibility to introduce new solutions in the future without worrying about being constrained by proprietary technology.

Ultimately, the healthcare firm used Nuxeo to replace two aging platforms:

• A mission-critical solution, previously based on IBM File Net, that’s used by more than 20,000 customer care agents to serve clients daily.
• A content management solution based on Oracle Stellent for managing policies, procedures, and other business content.

Now, the company is confident its agents will be up to date on the latest information they need to do their jobs effectively, from patient details to urgent notices about drug recalls.

“We’re confident the Nuxeo Platform will enable us to inform our reps ASAP,” said a healthcare company rep. “This is critical not only for our business, but also for the well-being of the millions of people who use [our] services.”

To learn more, visit Hyland .

Related content

The evolving state of enterprise content management: how ai changes the game, the secret to effective enterprise content management: building from a sound base, how intelligent document processing automates content-intensive processes, 5 benefits intelligent document processing brings to content management, from our editors straight to your inbox, show me more, chinese firms bypass us export restrictions on ai chips using aws cloud.

Bayer Crop Science blends gen AI and data science for innovative edge

What is outsourcing? Definitions, benefits, challenges, advice

Mike Aiello, CTO at Secureworks, joins CIO Leadership Live from Foundry's CIO100 event NEW

CIO Leadership Live Australia with Andrew Dome, Chief Digital Information Officer at Uniting

CIO Leadership Live Australia with Alan Sharvin, Chief Information Officer, Tabcorp

Mike Aiello, CTO at Secureworks, joins CIO Leadership Live from Foundry's CIO100 event

Metalenz optimizes optical sensor for smartphones, enabling next-gen biometrics

How are AI talent searches changing?

Sponsored Links

• The cloud shouldn’t be complicated. Unlock its potential with SAS.
• Everyone’s moving to the cloud. Are they realizing expected value?
• The future of identity is here. Unlock brand growth with Merkury
• Everybody's ready for AI except your data. Unlock the power of AI with Informatica

• Skip to main content
• Skip to search
• Skip to footer

Products and Services

Partner Incentives

Maximize your profitability with one-time enrollment in Cisco incentives.

Are you a Cisco partner?