Imagine you are walking on a cold autumn day, the ponds are freezing to ice for the first time and the sun is setting. Suddenly an absolutely magnificent building appears in your view! Beautiful shapes, extraordinary play with light and shadow being amplified by the sunset. Wonderful materials with amazing patterns and texture. Nothing seems random, it’s a thought behind everything.
As you come closer, you hear the noise from the freight train passing by. Behind the building, you see ugly trash containers. When you enter the building, you see some broken floor tiles and the doors are squeaking. You hear someone talking about the interior light control system that does not work. Others are talking about that the cantina being dreadfully cold today, because the architect insisted it should be open all the way up to the top floor, and the heating struggles with keeping stable temperature. Your impression isn’t so good anymore…
The architecture you perceive is so much more than drawings, models and pictures are able to communicate. The perceived architecture is dependent on both external factors, that are not under the control of the architect or building project, and internal factors, that the architect or building project can change and control themselves. The main job of the architect is to tweak all the internal factors, like walls, windows, materials, air etc to optimize the building for its users. The architect has to consider the external factors too, like neighbors, background noise and sunlight, but only by adding internal factors to manage the impact they will add to the perception. But in any case, both the internal and the external factors, impact the perception you and I get.
OK, let’s turn to the discipline of enterprise architecture. Here we are typically talking about strategy alignment, business, data/application and technology architecture. With TOGAF, we analyze the strategy, describe capabilities with actors, roles, tools and processes. Zachman has a slightly different approach, but is still similar. But from my point of view, something vital is missing!
We are only considering a small part of the actual enterprise architecture, the one you can perceive while working and interacting with the company. Organizational structure, team collaboration, culture, mindset, office layout, distance to the coffee machine. All factors that impact the outcome, the performance of the company.
All companies have these, and most companies do change them from time to time. But I rarely talk to anyone considering these — holistically — together with the crucial components of the discipline enterprise architecture. How can we tweak these — along with our processes and technology — to optimize the value our company delivers to the customer?
And do we really work like the described processes say we should? Do the communication really follow the chain of command, like it is supposed to?
Because, after all, it’s the entire perceived enterprise architecture that contributes to outcome — not our diagrams, drawings and models.
What we really need is a understanding of what is a part of this perceived enterprise architecture. There are other frameworks to address these aspects, and they might be good help to understand what we need to take into concern. However, those are not really important either —because no framework can replace people in our company.
People will always be the most important part of a company, no matter how high tech we becomes. The employees need to thrive, be valued, have a purpose. The customers want an excellent customer experience. The leaders and owners want great results. As Simon Sinek says it:
“100% of employees are people. 100% of customers are people. 100% of investors are people. If you don’t understand people, you don’t understand business.
The perceived enterprise architecture is about people, not frameworks. The company itself is about people. And I truly believe people oriented values in the company will lead to better results for everyone — including those most interested in the numbers. If you always look for ways to improve the perceived enterprise architecture for people, you will also get better economic results.
In the last century, companies have been seen as mechanical machines that should be optimized to be as efficient as possible. It might have given better economic results, compared with what they had, but the underlying values were not very kind. People were resources, that should be exploited maximally. Work done, efficiency and utilization were the important metrics.
For some time, another type of companies have emerged. Companies that are designed and operate more like an organism. Nobody can force an organism, whether it’s a plant or an animal, to grow. To harvest fruit from an apple tree, you must put it in a good environment, with good soil, enough water, enough light. The tree needs periodically cropping and thinning, but most of all — it must be allowed to grow by itself.
Agile organizations are based on these people oriented values. Where leaders act as gardeners, not chess masters. Where the customer is the most important stakeholder. Where it is safe to experiment — and fail. Where learning and employee satisfaction are critical success factors. Where human skills are even more important than technical skills.
Because we are all humans.
PS: If you want your company to become more agile, this article about why start the agile journey might be a good place to start.
Published first time on Feb 18 2022 on Medium.com.