Architecture
Maturity Model
In the past years, the Capability Maturity
Models have been extensively used by many organizations, for assessing their
status and guiding the improvement of their IT related processes, mainly in the
software and systems engineering areas.
« Such models provide the following
benefits :
- They describe the practices that any organization must perform in order to improve its processes
- They provide a yardstick against which to periodically measure improvement
- They constitute a proven framework within which to manage the improvement efforts
The various practices are typically organized
into five levels, each level representing an increased ability to control and
manage the development environment. »
TOGAF 9 does not provide an
« official » Maturity Model for Enterprise Architecture. It does
provide, however, a quite detailed example, taken from the US Department of
Commerce.
US DoC Architecture
Maturity Model
The DoC ACMM consists of six maturity levels
and nine architecture elements.
The six levels are :
0 – none
1 – initial
2 – under development
3 – defined
4 – managed
5 – measured
The nine enterprise architecture elements are
- architecture process
- architecture development
- business linkage
- senior management involvement
- operating unit participation
- architecture communication
- IT security
- architecture governance
- IT investment and acquisition strategy
The table below describes in a brief way the
maturity levels 1 to 5. Level 0 means « no enterprise architecture
program ; no enterprise architecture to talk about. »
| Enterprise Architecture Aspect |
Level 1: INITIAL |
Level 2: UNDER DEVELOPMENT | Level 3: DEFINED |
Level 4: MANAGED |
Level 5: MEASURED |
architecture process |
Ad hoc; dependence on individual efforts ("heroes"). |
Clear roles and responsibilities are defined |
EA process is largely followed | EA process is part of the culture. Quality metrics are captured. |
EA process is under constant improvement effort |
| architecture development | Ad hoc, localized | Vision; principles; baseline and target architecture; TRM; standards framework |
Gap analysis and migration plan are completed. Standards profile is fully developed |
EA documentation is regularly updated. All architectures comply to standards. | Standards and waivers process encompasses all IT decisions |
| business linkage | Minimal | Explicit linkage to business strategies | EA integrated with CAPEX and investment control | CAPEX and investment control take EA as key input. Periodic re-examination of business drivers. |
Business is involved in the continuous EA process improvement |
| senior management involvement | Minimal | Senior management is aware of EA effort | Senior management actively supports EA process and standards |
Senior management directly involved in EA review process. | Senior management is involved in the continuous EA process improvement |
| operating unit participation | Minimal | Clear roles and responsibilities are defined | Most elements support and actively participate in EA process |
The entire unit supports and actively participates in EA process |
Feedback from unit drives EA process improvement |
| architecture communication | Documentation
is on the web |
Related web pages are kept up to date with EA deliverables |
EA own web pages; they are kept up to date with EA deliverables |
EA documentation is regularly updated | Architecture documentation is used by every decision maker in IT |
| IT security | Ad hoc, localized | Clear roles and responsibilities are defined | IT security architecture standards profile fully developed |
Performance metrics are captured | Feedback from IT secutiry drives EA process improvement |
| architecture governance | No governance | Some adherence to existing standards profile |
Explicit governance of majority of IT investments |
Explicit governance of all IT investments | Standards and waivers process encompasses all IT decisions |
| IT investment and acquisition strategy | Minimal participation of EA | Some adherence to existing standards profile | IT acquisition strategy complies with EA; cost benefit analysis of projects |
All planned IT acquisitions are governed by EA | No unplanned IT investment or acquisition activity |
