Enterprise Architecture (EA) denotes management best practices for lining up business and technology resources to realize strategic results, expand upon Organizational Performance, achieve Cost Optimization, and steer departments to achieve their core missions through Operational Excellence.
Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) was first introduced in September 1999 by the Federal CIO Council for evolving an EA within any U.S. federal agency. FEAF assists through documentation and information that conveys a summarized outlook of an enterprise at various tiers of scope and detail.
FEAF offers a shared approach for the consolidation of strategic, business, and technology management as a component of Organization Design and Performance Management. FEAF introduced a methodology for an Enterprise Architecture that transcended several interagency boundaries.
The Collaborative Planning Methodology suggested along with FEAF is envisioned as a complete planning and implementation lifecycle, for employment down all tiers of scope defined in the Common Approach to Federal Enterprise Architecture—i.e., International, National, Federal, Sector, Agency, Segment, System, and Application.
May 2012 saw a full new guide, called the “Common Approach to Federal Enterprise Architecture.” The guide offers an overall approach to establishing and employing Enterprise Architecture in the Federal Government for expanding joint approaches to IT service delivery. The Common Approach homogenizes the expansion and employment of architectures within and between Federal Agencies.
A 2nd version of FEAF was published in January 2013, meeting the criteria set forth by the Common Approach. It underscores the importance of Strategic Planning and Strategic Goals as the source for driving business services, which consequentially provides the requirements for enabling technologies. At the heart of it is the Consolidated Reference Model (CRM), which links 6 reference models and equips all departments with a shared language and framework to explain and evaluate investments.
The FEAF comprises of 6 interconnected Reference Models, linked through Consolidated Reference Model (CRM), each relating to a sub-architectural domain of the framework.
These Reference Models convey word-based abstractions of original architectural data and deliver a structure for relating significant elements of the FEA in a collective and uniform manner:
- Strategy Domain -> Performance Reference Model (PRM)
- Business Domain -> Business Reference Model (BRM)
- Data Domain -> Data Reference Model (DRM)
- Applications Domain -> Application Reference Model (ARM)
- Infrastructure Domain -> Infrastructure Reference Model (IRM)
- Security Domain -> Security Reference Model (SRM)
CRM is intended to permit inter-agency evaluation and detection of overlapping investments, disparities and prospects for cooperation within and across agencies.
By means of the collection of reference models a common nomenclature and system is cultivated for describing IT resources. Making use of this standard framework and terminology, IT portfolios can be managed more suitably and taken advantage of throughout the Federal Government.
A brief description of the reference models is as follows:
Performance Reference Model (PRM)
PRM relates agency strategy, internal business factors, and investments, presenting a way to measure the influence of those investments on strategic outcomes.
Business Reference Model (BRM)
BRM depicts an organization through arrangement of common mission and support service segments rather than through vertical lines of control, thus encouraging cooperation within and across agencies.
Data Reference Model (DRM)
DRM assists in detection of existing data assets located in solitary storages and aids in comprehending the meaning of that data, ways of accessing it, and means for leveraging it for supporting performance outcomes.
Application Reference Model (ARM)
ARM classifies the standards and technologies involving systems and applications that support the delivery of service capabilities, allowing agencies to share and reuse common solutions and benefit from economies of scale.
The Infrastructure Reference Model (IRM)
IRM sorts the standards and technologies relating to network/cloud to aid and facilitate the provision of voice, data, video, and mobile service components and facilities.
The Security Reference Model (SRM)
SRM offers a mutual language and approach for deliberating on security and privacy in connection with Federal agencies’ business and performance goals.
Interested in learning more about Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) and its reference models?” “You can download an editable PowerPoint on Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) Primer here and FEAF associated PowerPoint series presentations on the Flevy documents marketplace.
Do You Find Value in This Framework?
You can download in-depth presentations on this and hundreds of similar business frameworks from the FlevyPro Library. FlevyPro is trusted and utilized by 1000s of management consultants and corporate executives. Here’s what some have to say:
“My FlevyPro subscription provides me with the most popular frameworks and decks in demand in today’s market. They not only augment my existing consulting and coaching offerings and delivery, but also keep me abreast of the latest trends, inspire new products and service offerings for my practice, and educate me in a fraction of the time and money of other solutions. I strongly recommend FlevyPro to any consultant serious about success.”
– Bill Branson, Founder at Strategic Business Architects
“As a niche strategic consulting firm, Flevy and FlevyPro frameworks and documents are an on-going reference to help us structure our findings and recommendations to our clients as well as improve their clarity, strength, and visual power. For us, it is an invaluable resource to increase our impact and value.”
– David Coloma, Consulting Area Manager at Cynertia Consulting
“FlevyPro has been a brilliant resource for me, as an independent growth consultant, to access a vast knowledge bank of presentations to support my work with clients. In terms of RoI, the value I received from the very first presentation I downloaded paid for my subscription many times over! The quality of the decks available allows me to punch way above my weight – it’s like having the resources of a Big 4 consultancy at your fingertips at a microscopic fraction of the overhead.”
– Roderick Cameron, Founding Partner at SGFE Ltd
Inculcating productive workforce behaviors is of utmost significance in Business Transformation, successful Strategy Execution, and Performance Improvement. However, making people embrace productive behaviors involves a concerted effort across the organization.
The realization of Transformation, Strategy, and Performance improvement goals can become a reality by developing a thorough understanding of the 4 components of Organizational Behavior. These components act as powerful levers in shaping the desired behaviors in the workforce:
- Organizational Structure
- Roles and Responsibilities
- Individual Talent
- Organizational Enablers
These Organizational Design levers work effectively when combined and aligned. Let’s discuss the first 2 levers in detail now.
Organizational Structure represents the management reporting lines that create the organization’s spans of control, layers, and number of resources. Organizational Structure is a foundational driver to Organizational Design, which also has a strong positive bearing on promoting the behaviors critical to improve the overall performance of the enterprise. This is owing to the power that a position exerts on the subordinates based on factors that are important for individuals—e.g., work, compensation, and career ladder.
The Organizational Structure indicates an enterprise’s priorities. An organization is typically structured in accordance with its top most priority. For instance, functional organizational structure is adopted by enterprises having functional excellence as a priority. In present-day’s competitive markets, most organizations have to deal with several priorities at a given time, which could be conflicting. However, this does not mean adding new structures on top of existing ones, thereby increasing unnecessary complexity. Creating overly complex structures to manage multiple priorities results in red tape and delayed decisions. All roles are interdependent, necessitating cooperation. This means taking care of the needs of others—instead of just watching over personal priorities—and encouraging individual behaviors that boost the efficiency of groups to achieve collective objectives.
Roles & Responsibilities
Roles and responsibilities deal with tasks allocated to each position and individual. Organizational Design depends heavily on redefining clearer and compelling roles and responsibilities—to avoid any duplication of efforts or creating adversaries among team members. In a collaborative culture where cooperation is the mainstay of an organization, individuals should not only be aware of what is required of them, but also appreciate the responsibilities of their team members, the authorities their roles exercise, the skills required, and the metrics to measure success.
A methodical way to outline roles and responsibilities effectively—while minimizing complexity—that encourages cooperation and empowerment is through the “Role Chartering” technique. The technique requires distinctly identifying all roles on the basis of 6 key factors:
- Describing shared and individual accountabilities
- Outlining indicators to track success
- Specifying who has the right to decide what
- Indicating the capabilities critical for roles
- Assigning the leadership traits valuable for the roles
- Charting the abilities required for accomplishing personal and team goals.
Interested in learning more about these components to Organizational Behavior? You can download an editable PowerPoint on Organizational Behaviors here on the Flevy documents marketplace.