Month: March 2008

This is an Awesome EA Case-Study : Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson on Monday proposed a set of sweeping changes to the nation’s financial system

 
 
 
 
The proposed changes :

 

Advertisements

Six Sigma aids only Linear Transformation not Non-linear / Radical Transformation

By Srinidhi Boray

It is interesting to understand that Six Sigma works on the perfect hind sight and it’s future sight is dependent on the extrapolation of the past statistical information. Meaning it is a derivative of the past. In a way, future is spinning around its past (on its tail) in the Six Sigma realm. What can be inferred from this is that it is useful for applying to those systems that are linearly expanding. When a system is subjected to non-linearity, then Six sigma methodology breaks-down. Methods available within  Enterprise Architecture and Six Sigma both have vied for spots within large enterprise as a discipline for gaining significant business process improvements. When businesses are confronted by evolutive transformations, then newer approaches need to be sought. For, basis on which the Six Sigma is founded will be no more relevant. However, if six sigma is combined with EA, then mathematically it turns into integro-differential equation,

  • Where the EA is about integrating the different parts into a whole
  • and

  • Six Sigma is about dealing with deviations from the qualitative norm, so it is a partial differential equation
  • Combining both we have integro-differential equation 
  • What is ‘Change’

    By Srinidhi Boray

    Change affects everybody. And it will happen again and again, when the entropic equilibrium is disturbed. It is a systemic property. It is not driven by a person nor a simple one factor. It is not a property of personality. It is the intrinsic systemic property. Change happens so political reforms happen. It is not the other-way around.

    Many factor comes into play for a change to occur. It is very difficult to visualize changes and the transformations. The only thing that can be understood is the process that facilitaes the change not the final form the change will lead into, until it comes to a rest. As John Zachman points, change is a ‘step function’. It is not  a liner extrapolation of the past. It is a dynamic evolution of a completely new system, which is very difficult to be envisaged.

    From the Theory of Constraints, it is known that the degree of Complexity reduces the degree of Freedom within a certain system boundary. After a certain complexity threshold is reached, the system has to completely metamorphise to overcome the systemic constraint, and to do so, has to evolve into a completely new system. It will not any longer be mere re-form, rather it will be ‘generative’.  Certainty can only be held that long. After a certain threshold it will be the fiefdom of the Uncertainty until the next stable state is reached. While discussing harmony, chaos is presumed. The ceaseless juggle between the two is responsible for producing a newer system.

    CIAO – Interesting pursuit after EA Ontology

    Interesting work in EA Ontology space. Especially the ‘separation of concerns’ is well applied to the notion of ‘ontology’ and its separation from the principles of construction.

    Transcript below is complied from the following link

    Cooperation & Interoperability – Architecture & Ontology

      

    CIAO! is an initiative whose mission is to stimulate the development of the emerging discipline of enterprise engineering, as well as its practical application in improving the societal performance of enterprises. By an enterprise is understood any kind of enterprise, like commercial, not-for-profit, governmental, etc., as well as any kind of alliance between enterprises: enterprise networks, supply chains, etc. The name CIAO! is an acronym for Cooperation, Interoperability, Architecture, and Ontology. The first two constitute the key themes of CIAO!: the cooperation within and between enterprises and the interoperability of their information systems. The second two constitute the key concepts in addressing these themes. The concepts of architecture and ontology have a specific meaning in CIAO!. Architecture is defined as the normative restriction of design freedom. It is made operational by means of principles that guide the design of systems (enterprises, information systems, etc.). Ontology is defined as the implementation independent understanding of the construction and operation of systems (enterprises, information systems, etc.).

     

    The traditional organizational sciences take a function-oriented point of view towards enterprises. They are analytic by nature, and the dominant type of model of an enterprise, therefore, is the black-box model. The black-box based knowledge provided is sufficient and adequate for managing the behavior of an enterprise within settled ranges of control; it is inadequate for changing an enterprise. Change, however, is the imperative adagium of current (and certainly future) enterprises. They need to be agile and flexible since they (will) operate in an increasingly dynamic and global environment. Moreover, enterprises need to be transparant; they will be held publicly accountable for every effect they produce. To meet these requirements, an engineering, construction-oriented, point of view has to be taken. Synthetic knowledge is needed, in addition to the analytic knowledge, that effectively supports the changing of an enterprise. Developing and incorporating this kind of knowledge in the organizational sciences, means no less than a paradigm shift. The emerging discipline that takes the needed construction-oriented point of view, and that will provide the synthetic knowledge for letting enterprises continuously adapt to threats and challenges, is called enterprise engineering.

     

    The current situation resembles very much the one that existed around 1970 in the computing sciences. At that time a revolution took place in the way people conceived information technology and its applications. Since that time, people are aware of the distinction between the form and the content of information. This revolution marks the transition from data system engineering to information system engineering. The comparison with computing sciences is not an arbitrary one: the key enabling technology for shaping future enterprises is the modern information and communication technology (ICT). A growing insight in the computing sciences is that the intention in communicative action is the central notion for understanding profoundly the relationship between organization and ICT. So, like the content of communication was put on top of its form in the 1970’s, the intention is put on top of the content now. The current revolution marks the transition from information system engineering to enterprise engineering.

     

     

     

     Reference:http://rolandettema.wordpress.com/about/