Evaluation of Enterprise Architecture Frameworks for NCI - CBIIT

1. Evaluation of Enterprise Architecture Frameworksfor NCI - CBIIT Dec 19, 2011

2. Agenda • What is an Enterprise Architecture Framework(EAF)? • Comparison Criteria for EAFs (CBIIT’s perspective) • Comparison of EAFs • Q&A 2

3. What is an EAF? • Enterprise Architecture (EA) comprises of Business, Information, Data, System and Technology Architecture • Each of these architectures is realized as a “view” pertaining to various stakeholders • A view is a projection of the enterprise architecture model that is meaningful to one or more system stakeholders • Enterprise Architecture Framework (EAF) should define how to organize the structure and views associated with an enterprise architecture; this is accomplished through a set of processes and templates

4. CBIIT Specific Comparison Criteria for EAF • Alignment with Federal Governance Process / Architecture Framework • CBIIT is a part of a Federal Agency • Needs to adhere to and follow various federal processes such as CPIC and OMB’s success evaluation • EAF to include processes which help in integrating with the above federal processes • Adhere to federal mandates such as use of FEAF as suggested by OMB and office of Federal CIO • Free to use and distribute • Should be free to use to be in line with CBIIT’s Open Source and Free Software objective • Should be freely distributable or implementable by other organizations/institutes that participate with CBIIT

5. CBIIT Specific Comparison Criteria for EAF • Support for Open Source Development • Under OSDI, some of the development will be performed by participating institute/organization • Should either prescribe how to facilitate and govern such an environment or be flexible to support it • Ease of Implementation (Light-weight) • Should not be process, artifact or governance heavy • Should be flexible and scalable based on the need of the enterprise or particular process • Availability of free-to-use tools • Tools, artifacts, methodology freely available which support/follow the EAF • Can be either from the EAF provider or other parties

6. CBIIT Specific Comparison Criteria for EAF • Industry Adoption • Should be widely adopted across industry and must be mature (wide support in terms of tools & training)

7. Comparison of EAFs • Four EAFs were evaluated • Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) • The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) • The Zachman’s Framework for Enterprise Architecture • Reference Model of Open Distributed Processing (RM-ODP) • First three were selected based on their market share and maturity • RM-ODP is also well-recognized and was recommended from within CBIIT • Each of the frameworks was evaluated against CBIIT specific criteria

8. Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework • Developed by Federal CIO’s Council and OMB to comply with Clinger–Cohen Act • Exists since 1999 and widely adopted within Federal Agencies • Free to use • Provides guidance on how to implement • Incorporates or supports various federal process such as CPIC, OMB’s evaluation process • Allows for segment architecture allowing each business unit (primarily agency) to define their own architecture • Supported by wide number of companies and has supporting tooling

9. The Zachman’s Framework • Provides well defined taxonomy for each of the cells in the enterprise framework • Clearly identifies artifacts that need to be produced for each cell in the framework • No well-defined or adopted guidelines on how to implement the framework (the latest version does have some guidance) • Leveraged by various federal agencies (VA) • Can be quite cumbersome as the number of artifacts required by the framework is large • It is not free to use and requires licensing

10. The Open Group’s Architecture Framework • Provides well-defined or adopted guidelines on how to implement the framework • Matured and widely adopted by various organizations • Provides ADM, Artifact Templates, Artifacts Repository etc. • Tooling support from various third party vendors (e.g. EA) • Can be quite cumbersome as the number of artifacts required by the framework is large • Not free to use and requires licensing

11. Reference Model of Open Distributed Processing • Currently being adopted by HL7 - Australia • Primary focus is Distributed Processing at Object Level • Provides a taxonomy and semantics for each of the five viewpoints which define system architecture • No well-defined process on how to implement the framework • Focuses on distribution, interworking, platform and technology independence, and portability at individual system level • Has to be used in conjunction with an Architecture Framework for overall EA

12. Comparison for EAFs ** Use with OSDI – This can be better evaluated after OSDI approach is further elaborated. ? - Denotes that more information is needed to fully evaluate

13. References • FEAF - http://www.cio.gov/documents/fedarch1.pdf • TOGAF - http://www.opengroup.org/togaf/ • Zachman - http://www.zachman.com/ • RM-ODP - http://www.rm-odp.net/ • OMB Evaluation Criteria – • http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/e-gov/eaaf

14. Questions ? • Thank You