Kelly Services Enterprise Architecture

Document Sample
Kelly Services Enterprise Architecture Powered By Docstoc
					Portfolio
                   IT EMEA Regional Enterprise Architecture




EA Program
                   Kelly’s NEW word of information
                   Kelly’s NEW word of communication
                   Kelly’s NEW word of talents


EA Project
                   Proof of Concept
                   KM based EA 4 Kelly Services, a source 2 change



3rd Field Paper:




Debriefing Corporate Enterprise Architecture, Kelly Services Troy
      D
March 31, 2009 version 0.2 Gerhard Hacker
3rd Field Paper:     Kelly Services - Living Reinvented Architecture




Version 0.1, initiated for debriefing of Corporate EA, Troy/Michigan
March 06, 2009


Version 0.2, extended after MBA project review
March 31, 2009



Version 0.2 March 31, 2009
IPR by Gerhard Hacker
at.EXCELLENCE Vienna-Salzburg-Chaumont



                         Page 2
        Kelly’s NEW world
        of information
        of communication
        of talents


        debriefing of Corporate Enterprise Architecture

        Living Reinvented Architecture
        Kelly Services, Troy/Michigan




Portfolio
        IT EMEA
        Regional Enterprise Architecture

EA Program
        Kelly’s NEW word of information
        Kelly’s NEW word of communication
        Kelly’s NEW word of talents

EA Project
        Proof of Concept
        KM based EA for Kelly Services, a source 2 change

Status March 31, 2009 version 0.2 Gerhard Hacker

                                        Page 3
The core




Principles



Foregive to growg
                                     HH the 14th Dalai Lama




Rules




De Heroo takes the wapons
                                                     SunZi




Guidelines



The ervolutionair
                                        Ernest Che Guevara




                            Page 4
The metaphors




The Answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything
                                                                     42




Happiness is Real, only When Shared
                                                   Alexander Supertramp
                                                         Cris McCandless




                           Page 5
A story



Leading through crises



Das Gewitter




                                  Answers




1. Contaimnent




                         Page 6
Contents
Metaphor ......................................................................................... 4

Preamble ........................................................................................ 6

           o The big picture of Architecture
           o Executive summary

CHAPTER 1
  > Basics
       o Involved dimensions .........................................................            19
       o Global objectives ...............................................................        20
       o Details and goals ...............................................................        22
       o Target audience and created values .....................................                 22
       o Results ............................................................................     22
       o Methodology, Concepts, Paradigms ......................................                  22
       o Entanglement Methods : Targets .........................................                 22
       o Entanglement Tasks : Methods ............................................                22
       o Results ............................................................................     22

CHAPTER 2
  > Proof of Concept (PoC) at Kelly Services EMEA
       o PoC phases .......................................................................       30
       o PoC activities ....................................................................      31
       o PoC roadmap ....................................................................         30
       o PoC milestones ..................................................................        31
       o PoC roles ..........................................................................     30
       o Structure of the final documentation ....................................                31

CHAPTER 3
  > Library of used Models
       o Model of the 3 Building Blocks (BB) ..................................... 40
       o BB 0 to BB 2 Models at decomposition level 0 to 2 .................. 66
       o Results, Summary and Action Plan ....................................... 80

Appendix
  > References, Abbreviations ............................................................ 88
  > 3rd Generation KM in Action: Practices in Swiss Companies ............... 90
  > GARTNER ITxpo 11/2008 Cannes, focus on EA ................................ 22




                                    Page 7
Preamble
Common Requirement Definition (CRD) ? A ENTERPRISE IS A LINK LIKE A BRIDGE




State of the Art Architecture: Santiago Calatrava - Bridge of Europe, Orleance France 1996 - 2000



CRD ? Values ? A ENTERPRISE IS A SYSTEM LIKE A BRIDGE




High Standard Architecture: Sir Norman Foster - Millau Viaduct, Millau France 1993 - 2004



CRD ? Values ? Measurement ? A ENTERPRISE IS A SYSTEM LIKE A DYNAMIC BRIDGE




Zen = philosophy emphasizes simplicity, clarity, honesty

Architecture = is the art and science of designing and erecting

                                         Page 8
Executive Summary

Kelly’s vision, vision and values* are

    >   We do the right thing.
    >        Core Competencies—Honesty and Integrity; Inspires Trust; Inclusion and Diversity




    >   We make a difference.
    >        Core Competencies—Customer Commitment; Community Support; Solution-Focused




    > We deliver excellence.
    >        Core Competencies—Strategic Thinking; Quality of Service; Continuous Learning;
    >                          Bottom- Line Focused




    > We are one Kelly.
    >        Core Competencies—Team Orientation; Global Perspective; Working Relationships




    > We know our business.
    >        Core Competencies—Functional/Technical Expertise; High-Impact Communication;
    >                          Execution Excellence; Organizational Awareness



The target
  > Start working and finalize working with continuous value creation
  > Don’t destroy knowledge at any time



This 3rd field paper
  > is prepared to align information between Kelly’s Corporate and EMEA
     Enterprise Architecture Leads of today and tomorrow



*source: http://www.kellyservices.com/web/global/services/en/pages/vision_mission_values.html


                                       Page 9
The architectural background
  > Common Requirement Definition ?
       o A ENTERPRISE IS A LINK LIKE A BRIDGE
       o
  > Common Requirement Definition ? Values ?
       o A ENTERPRISE IS A SYSTEM LIKE A BRIDGE
       o Change the system in real-time using less power
       o
  > Common Requirement Definition ? Values ? Measurement ?
       o A ENTERPRISE IS A SYSTEM LIKE A DYNAMIC BRIDGE
       o Measure values, lost values and time


Example Helsinki 2050: using a Web 2.0 approach

Towards WikiCity is an interesting and in a positive sense idealistic entry whose
goal is to activate residents to create information, innovations, services, and
entrepreneurship on their own initiative. Social innovations are presented to be
the area's central developmental force.

    > Public Leadership: Governing with Rules, Platforms and Tools
          o Public leadership cannot deliver a new city to its people. A city has to
             be created by the people living there
          o But public leadership can create the platforms and infrastructure, the
             tools and rules that make that process of mass innovation easier
          o
    > Organisations and cities that want to innovate, have to take risks and learn
       from failure.
          o People have to try, fail a bit, learn, adapt, and try again

    > Bottom Up, Top Down and Side by Side
          o Strategy into the local level
          o Our problems are man-made, therefore they can be solved by man.
            And man can be as big as he wants
          o We are entering - I believe - a new era of politics, and potentially
            hopeful politics. I'm going to call it open leadership




Source: architect Tuomas Toivonen, Hans Park, researchers Roope Mokka, Aleksi Neuvonen, Finland


http://www.greaterhelsinkivision.fi/

                                       Page 10
The architectural answer to the enterprise
  > must fulfill: make it not simpler, make it simple (Einstein) !


The standard model to make it simpler:




   > The business and its dynamic drives the entities
          o with different speeds in different areas
          o limited via strategies, architecture and other forces
          o
   > A answer to make it simpler is to align components with a IT middleware
      infrastructure
          o using a Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
          o and Business Process Management (BPM), Corporate Performance
            Management (CPM), Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM) aso.



A model to make it simple: use only 1 and 2




   > Empowerment of the distributed resources, focusing on people
       o Living Reinvented Management from a holistic system viewpoint
       o Stressing the enterprise with conflict to learn
                           Page 11
Love Conflicts and Solve Conflicts
KM based Enterprise Architecture 4 Kelly Services, a source 2 change




                                Page 12
Kelly’s NEW world
of information
of communication
of talents


debriefing of Corporate Enterprise Architecture, Troy

Living Reinvented Architecture
BASICS




                   Page 13
Involved dimensions within Kelly Services



          ORGANIZATION:


          Kelly Services, Corporate @Troy/Michigan USA and EMEA @Neuchatel/Switzerland


          Organizational learning as the foundation for high performing teams, countries,
          regions and the corporate enterprise itself



          TECHNOLOGY:


          Using Enterprise Architecture (EA) approaches based on Knowledge Management (KM)
              to find the right strategy for the portfolio of solutions and intervention


          -      Chief Architect Solutions are guidelines to manage conflicts, evolution, change and
                 knowledge


          -      Business Architect Solutions are process guidelines for LoB entities


          -      Enterprise Architect Solutions are technology guidelines for project-, information-
                 brigs- (components, applications), infrastructure- and service-management as
                 well as for IT operation



          HUMENS:


          EA is a strategic planning process and therefore core of change management
          In every change process conflicts occur and they have to be seen (sense) and solved
          (respond)


          KM is the link between sense and respond at dynamic systems
          KM is the link for Living Reinvented Management & Architecture
          KM is the link for Kelly’s future Talent Management – Kelly’s NEW World of Talents




                                   Page 14
Global objectives


          Kelly Services is a people company, staffing the world. They founded the temporary
          staffing industry in 1946. The headquarter is situated in Troy, Michigan. With 2008
          revenues of $ 5.7 billion, Kelly Services is number 428 of the fortune 500:2008
          enterprises. Within the EMEA region, today there are 23 countries with 23 different
          approaches for one people business.


          Now the target is not to make it simpler, it is to make it simple (Einstein).



          That means, not to harmonize the landscapes (organization + processes +
          technology) and the development of future states, to create more value, using
          Enterprise Architecture (EA) as a strategic planning process.



          The target is to use EA based on Knowledge Management (KM) like coaching of the
          environment, supervising them with principles, rules, guidelines and blueprints to
          enable them to build a SENSEable, ‘employee-built-architecture’ of tomorrow. All
          solutions have to be designed for a real-time enterprise within the people business,
          operating on the edge of now, where the future emerges. This paradigm shift, I call



          Living Reinvented Management & Architecture



          The measurement of success should be done on solution values, distinguishing
          between the possible values (ideal world scenario) and the values regarding to the
          management decisions (real world implementation)




                               Page 15
Details and goals


          Mergers and acquisitions of the past created a sophisticated landscape of processes
          and applications within the EMEA region, which is supporting 23 countries from
          Portugal via France, Switzerland, Germany to Russia and down to the UAE with
          different cultures and languages.


          In 2007 the Kelly Services board of directors decided to establish three regions (AMER,
          EMEA and APAC), each with their own management and HQ. This should be the
          answer to a faster changing world, to be more flexible and better linked to the regional
          and local needs in the future.


          Today the employee turnover is very high. Knowledge management methods are not
          in place. Even EMEA countries like Finland, Czech, Poland, Germany, France, Spain,
          Portugal, UAE are not connected to the corporate network. For example, they are
          missing a simple access to the information of the Intranet. Therefore a lot of values
          are lost day by day.


          With the additional shift to continuous value creations – that means, moving from a
          people administrator to the role of a trusted advisor of people’s life - the key issues for
          Kelly Services are


             •   operational spending:
                    see the low hanging fruits, distribute information efficiently


             •   discretionary spending:
                    grow the business, managing knowledge via enhancing communication
                     effectively


             •   transformational spending:
                    preparing the field, enabling the change from administrators of temporary
                     workers to the trusted adviser between people and companies




                                   Page 16
Target audience and created values for Kelly Services


          Kelly Services: Corporate


             •   value creation 4 the top management (C*O)
             •   showing the current situation within EMEA and the link to the corporate
                 enterprise architecture


          Kelly Services: EMEA


             •   value creation 4 the management and all lines of business (LoB)
             •   showing the gaps between ideal world scenarios and real world
                 implementations


          Kelly Services: IT EMEA


             •   value creation 4 the Applications-, Infrastructure-, Program- and Services-
                 Management showing the needs between EA and project delivery
             •   supporting principles and blueprints to the EMEA region


          Kelly Services: IT @Countries


             •   value creation 4 the management 2 succeed within the future change (via
                 portfolio, programs and projects)
             •   supporting rules and guidelines to the countries


          Gerhard Hacker:


             •   value creation 4 the validation of the approach, using Enterprise Architecture
                 (EA) based on Knowledge Management (KM) methods via a PoC
             •   answering the research topics and hypothesis (verified, falsified or unclear)




                                 Page 17
Results


          METHODOLOGY:


          Research topics:


          Change
             -   Does a KM driven EA assist to an organizational and technical change process ?


          Learning
             -   Are the decision makers able to learn from EA issues ?


          Sustainability
             -   Is Knowledge Management a proper approach to drive EA ?


          Hypothesis:
             -   EA based on KM methods is practicable and creates value !


                 These values has to support the strategy as well as people, processes and
                 technology
                 This value creation must be measurable.



          PRACTICAL:


          As a result of the interventions to the systems, development is possible


             -   Kelly’s world of talents, as of today
             -   could change to Kelly’s NEW world of information, communication & talents


             -   Gerhard Hacker’s world of conflicts, as of today
             -   could change to Gerhard Hacker’s NEW world of conflicts




                               Page 18
Methodology, concepts, paradigms




         People Business


               The Future of Talent Management (Taleo)



         Architecture


               The next hop after 2.0 is not 3.0, it is Living, Reinvented: The Technology of
               Abundance and Constraints (O’Reilly)
               Towards WikiCity’s with the goal to activate residents to create information,
               innovations, services, and entrepreneurship on their own initiative (Tuomas
               Toivonen, Hans Park, Roope Mokka, Aleksi Neuvonen)


         Enterprise Architecture


               EA is a strategic planning process (Gartner)
               The approach: Living Reinvented Management & Architecture



         1st Generation of Knowledge Management


               System thinking (Senge)
               Organizational Learning (Argyris)



         2nd Generation of Knowledge Management


               Establishing surroundings (Firestone, McElroy)
               Deploy networks (Allee)



         3rd Generation of Knowledge Management


               Leading from the future, when it emerges (Scharmer)
               Shift from complex to knowable trespassing to the chaotic (Snowden)



                              Page 19
Entanglement methods : targets


         Planning
                  Start a PoC within my probation period with the usage of my former Enterprise
                  2. 0 implementation experience


                  Use the first 100 days to validate the systems against change and conflict
                  handling


         Execution


                  Open mind


                  Usage of a dynamic PM methodology (Scharmer, Theory U)
                  instead of a static PM approach (one static dimension only, reduced change
                  requests)
                         Observe, observe, observe
                         Retreat and reflect
                         Act in a instance
                  to minimize influences on the systems outputs


                  Open heart


                  Use ba (place) as the source and revolution as strategy (Scharmer, Theory U)
                  to allow the knowledge flow from chaotic to complex to known to chaotic
                  (Snowden, Cynefin)


                  Open will


                  Love conflicts and solve conflicts


                  use conflicts as enablers for organizational learning


         Review
                  Distribute learning’s within the PoC project to get feedback


                  measure value creation




                                Page 20
Entanglement tasks : methods


           Overall PoC project: methodology


             using 3rd generation KM method from Scharmer and Snowden
             and conflict escalation management


           Operational spending: see the low hanging fruits, distribute information
             using mostly 1st generation KM methods
             Senge, 5th discipline
             Technology to share data and information


           will reduce operational spending dramatically


    architecting a real-time Enterprise - Kelly Services, NEW world of information


           Discretionary spending: grow the business, managing knowledge, enhancing
           communication
             using mostly 2nd generation KM methods
             Supply side KM and demand side KM integration
             Mentoring, CoP’s, World Café, Value Networks


           will enhance the communication significantly


    architecting a real-time Enterprise - Kelly Services, NEW world of communication


           Transformational spending: preparing the field, enabling the change from Temp to
           Trust Biz
             using mostly 3rd generation KM methods
             Scharmer, Theory U describing self-transcending knowledge and
                Snowden’s knowledge ecology approach Cynefin


           enabling Kelly Services for a real-time enterprise capturing all the values of knowledge
           at the emerging future.
           Scharmer’s Theory U is recently a learning method at the moment to enable this.
           Extended with knowledge ecology, chaos, complexity and paradox Kelly Services will
           sense upcoming opportunities


    architecting a real-time Enterprise - Kelly Services, NEW world of talents

                                Page 21
Love Conflicts and Solve Conflicts
KM based Enterprise Architecture 4 Kelly Services, a source 2 change




                                Page 22
Kelly’s NEW world
of information
of communication
of talents


debriefing of Corporate Enterprise Architecture, Troy

Living Reinvented Architecture
PROOF OF CONCEPT (PoC)




                   Page 23
PoC Phases




              Scope = Kelly Services, a source 2 change



              •   Planning PoC project


              •   Realization PoC project with 3 streams

                     o   operational spending
                     o   discretionary spending
                     o   transformational spending


              •   Review PoC project




                               Page 24
PoC Activities


             Scope = Kelly Services, a source 2 change


                 •   Planning
                        o   Involved Systems
                        o   Scope and Tasks of EA driven by KM
                        o   KM Methods


                 •   Realization
                        o   Getting started
                                   Ba (the place)
                                   Blog (the feelings)


                        o   Observe, Observe, Observe
                                   3 streams of EA
                                        •     operational spending
                                        •     discretionary spending
                                        •     transformational spending
                                   response to strategy
                                        •     revolution


                        o   Retreat & reflect
                                   Sensing
                                   Presensing


                        o   Act in a instance
                                   Crystallizing
                                   Prototyping
                                   Performing


                        o   Close PoC project
                                   Check deliverables


                 •   Review
                        o   Handover results
                                   Reflections
                                   Learning’s
                                   Measurement of values

                                    Page 25
PoC Roadmap




        Planning of the PoC project
          before starting at Kelly Services EMEA, Neuchatel/Switzerland


        Realization of the PoC project
          within 100 days, staying 54 days at Kelly Services EMEA, Neuchatel/Switzerland


        Review of the PoC project
          within 8 days, focus on measurement of values




                             Page 26
PoC Milestones




         5.1.2009     0 day             start at Kelly Services EMEA, Neuchatel/Switzerland


                                        co-initiating


         14.1.2009     10 days          getting started


                                        co-sensing


          27.1.2009    20 days          observe, focus on team
           6.2.2009    30 days          observe, focus on local organization
          16.2.2009    40 days          observe, focus on regional organization


                                        presensing


           1.3.2009    50 days          retreat and reflect


                                        co-creating


         20.3.2009     65 days          review crystallizing
         10.4.2009     80 days          review prototyping
           4.5.2009   100 days          close PoC project


                                        co-evolving


         13.5.2009    108 days          close PoC project review




                              Page 27
PoC Roles cross Kelly Services


          Kelly Services - Corporate, Troy/Michigan


          Enterprise Architect            Paul Blowers      4 alignment 2 validate
          CIO                             Joseph Drouin     4 information
          COO                             George Corona     4 information
          CEO                             Carl Camden       4 information



          Kelly Services - EMEA, Neuchatel/Switzerland


          GM EMEA                         Life Agnéus       4 super vision
          Senior Director IT EMEA         Jaume Galiffa     4 super vision
          Marketing EMEA                  Tamara Achba      4 support of PoC
          IT EMEA Controlling             Roch Schenk       4 support of POC



          Kelly Services Employees – EMEA, Switzerland, Neuchatel


          All                             all               4 observation



          Kelly Services IT Employees – 23 EMEA countries


          IT Manager                      all               4 super vision




                                Page 28
Structure of final documentation, delivered after 108 days to Kelly Services
used also for MBA Master Theses at University for Economics, Linz/Austria




           Abstract


           Preamble
           Dedication
           Table of Content


           Theory at a Glance
               -   Terms and definitions
           About this Thesis
               -   Problem
               -   Objectives
               -   Structure


           Building Block 0
               -   Relevance
               -   Approach


           Building Block 1
               -   Ideal World Scenarios


           Building Block 2
               -   Real World Implementation
               -   Results
               -   Summary and Action Plan


           List of Abbreviations
           List of Figures
           References


           Annex
               -   Kelly Services
               -   Global resources




                                    Page 29
Love Conflicts and Solve Conflicts
KM based Enterprise Architecture 4 Kelly Services, a source 2 change




                                Page 30
Kelly’s NEW world
of information
of communication
of talents


debriefing of Corporate Enterprise Architecture, Troy

Living Reinvented Architecture
LIBRARY OF USED MODELS




                   Page 31
Model of the 3 Building Blocks (BB)




          BB 0  Common EA Vision (Living Reinvented Architecture)


          BB 1  Common Architecture Blueprints (Ideal World Scenarios)


          BB 2  regarding to the resign of the Job – Regional Enterprise
                 Architecture Lead IT EMEA – no blueprints representing Kelly
                 specific solutions will be available (Real World Implementation)

                 The results will be limited to conflict and change management

                 Stressed by measuring the created values

                 Closed by a summary and action plan, seen from the outside world




                               Page 32
BB 0 Model: Approach = the key accountabilities of the regional EA lead




          Role 1: Regional Enterprise Architecture Lead, EMEA (12|16)

             •    after structuring all accountabilities we detect, 9 from 16 deliverables
                 are related to the business needs of the demand chain, including
                     o 3 deliverables for the people business
                     o 3 deliverables for the IT business
                     o 3 deliverables for the Corporate Enterprise Architecture

             •   3 deliverables from 16 are related to the IT EMEA supply chain needs
                    o mostly to audit and review the PMO output

          Role 2: Infrastructure Team Lead, IT EMEA (4|16)

             •    Responsibilities: 4 from 16 deliverables are related to manage the IT
                 Infrastructure team, the
                     o Technical Solution Architects
                     o Infrastructure Engineers




                               Page 33
BB 0 Model: Approach = the current Kelly Services organization (March 2009)




          Corporate = AMER: today there is no difference between the Corporate
          organization and the AMER organization

             •   The CIO is managing a group of 400+ IT people spitted in
                   o IT delivery
                   o IT operations

             •   The Senior Director (SD) IT EMEA is managing a group of 13 headcounts
                   o Applications Architecture including Business Analysts (BA) and
                       Application Architects (AA)
                   o Technical Architecture & Infrastructure including Solution
                       Architects and Technical Engineers
                   o Project Management Office (PMO) with Program Managers (PM)
                       and PMO Controlling (PC)
                   o Service Management (SM)

          EMEA: The General Manager (GM) is managing all Lines of Business (LoB)

             •   There are 23 countries with Cluster Managers and Country Managers (CM)
                   o within lager countries there are also IT managers to take care of the local IT
                       needs of all employees

                              Page 34
BB 0 Model: Approach = standard conceptual model for EA Governance




            These standard model depicts the major elements in an corporate enterprise
            architecture governance program, as well as the significant relationships among the
            elements. The model can be used to help to identify potential gaps within the
            organization's, enterprise architecture governance organization, processes and tools

            Red: Living Reinvented Architecture changes to strategy as a output of KM


    Source: McClure


                                 Page 35
BB 0 Model: Approach = extended EA Governance model with KM




         Visions
             o generative system
             o learning organization


         New Model
            o KM influences systems
            o Output of KM is strategy
            o Strategy influences the business environment
            o Feedback loop to the system




                             Page 36
BB 0 Model: Approach = Standard EA Process Landscape




         ICT Planning Framework




                            Page 37
Value Management




                   Page 38
EA Strategy & Master Planning




                    Page 39
Business Demand Management




                 Page 40
Application Architecture Management




                   Page 41
Portfolio Program Management




                   Page 42
EA Management




                Page 43
Release Management




                 Page 44
        Logical ICT Inventory




Source: planningIT http://www.alfabet.com/
                                 Page 45
BB 0 Model: Approach = the development to a generative system*




    Unseen: autistic system (Polite routines, empty phrases – not saying what I think)

    Blue: adaptive system (Divergent views: I am my point of view – say what I think)

    Light: self-reflecting system (From defending to inquiry into viewpoints – reflect on my part)
        • MBWA, Management by Walking Around

    Green: generative system (Stillness, collective creativity, flow – identity shift, authentic self)
        • ELIAS, Emerging Leaders Innovate Across Sectors

               •   address the shared challenges of creating value for the triple bottom line— the
                   economy, society, and the environment
               •   network of leaders in the public, private, and civic sectors
               •   growing capacity among organizations to develop sustainable solutions across
                   the three sectors.
               •   enhanced capacity among leaders to respond to the challenges of globalization
                   and sustainable development by pioneering practical innovations

        •   Ba (Japanese place), is a shared context in motion, in which knowledge is created and
            utilized. Ba is a phenomenological time and space where knowledge as a stream of
            meaning emerges.
         • Revolution: Can it change the system? Do you address the systemic root issues?

    Source: www.TheoryU.com, Scharmer MIT
                                  Page 46
BB 0 Model: Approach = system thinking




    Archetypes

        •   B – Balancing loop, is one in which action attempts to bring two things to agreement.
            Any situation where one attempts to solve a problem or achieve a goal or objective is
            representative of a balancing loop
        •   R – Reinforcing loop, is one in which the interactions are such that each action adds to
            the other. Any situation where action produces a result which promotes more of the
            same action is representative of a reinforcing loop

    The Lows of the 5th discipline

        •   Today's problems come from yesterday's "solutions."
        •   The harder you push, the harder the system pushes back.
        •   Behavior will grow worse before it grows better.
        •   The easy way out usually leads back in.
        •   The cure can be worse than the disease.
        •   Faster is slower.
        •   Cause and effect are not closely related in time and space.
        •   Small changes can produce big results...but the areas of highest leverage are often
            the least obvious.
        •   You can have your cake and eat it too ---but not all at once.
        •   Dividing an elephant in half does not produce two small elephants.
        •   There is no blame.


    source: Senge

                                 Page 47
BB 0 Model: Approach = my holistic view & values




    Gerhard Hacker
       • * 23.4.1958 Pennewang, Austria




                             Page 48
BB 0 Model: Approach = The generic value model




       Power Value (PoV)
       do I have enough power to move, to change
       0 ... no change possible, 8 ... change in right-time possible, 9 ... change in real-time
             possible
       Prediction Value (PrV)
       do I have the right methods in place for all predictive scenarios
       0 ... no methods, 8 ... methods enables a answer in right-time, 9 ... methods enables a
             answer in real-time
       Decision Value (DeV)
       do I have the right rules in place to enable a decision
       0 ... no rules, 8 ... rules enables a change in right-time, 9 ... Rules enables a change in real-
             time
       Adaption Value (AdV)
       do I have the right systems to implement decision
       0 ... no adaption possible, 8 ... adaption possible in right-time, 9 ... adaption possible in
             real-time
       Lost Value (LoV)
       Lost tangible and intangible values
       999.99 ... €$
       Action Distance (AcD)
       0.00.0       ... Years, Month, Days, Minutes depending on services/solutions




                               Page 49
BB 0 Model: Approach = The conflict model




        •   No conflicts
               o 0 … balance

        •   Conflicts   with win-win*
               o 1      … hardening
               o 2      … polarization & debate
               o 3      … actions instead of words

        •   Conflicts   with win – lose*
               o 4      … concern for image and coalition
               o 5      … loss of face
               o 6      … strategy of threatening

        •   Conflicts   with lose – lose*
               o 7      … limited destruction proposals
               o 8      … fragmentation
               o 9      … together in the abyss

        •   Destroy – destroy all
               o 10 … environment
               o 10+ … settlement
               o 10++ … love


    * source: Glasl

                                   Page 50
BB 0 Model: Approach = the learning model




          The reality within this PoC without comments




                              Page 51
From
       Enterprise Architecture 2.0

To
       Living Reinvented Architecture


       Page 52
BB 0 Model: Approach = The Balance Wheel @Decomposition Level 0




    Tri sector invention




    The three pillars of the outside world
       •            Clients
       •            Credits
       •            Change




                                  Page 53
BB 0 Model: Approach = The Balance Wheel @Decomposition Level 1




    Te three pillars in the inside world
        •            Marketing
        •            Finance
        •            Architecture




                                   Page 54
BB 0 Model: Approach = The Balance Wheel @Decomposition Level 2




    The linkage of the three pillars of the inside world to the
       •            Board
       •            Bridge




                                   Page 55
BB 0 Model: Approach = Change @Level 0, Chief Architecture




    Principles


    Real-time needs to slow down




                               Page 56
BB 0 Model: Approach = Change @Level 1, Business & Enterprise Architecture




    Rules and guidelines




                            Page 57
BB 0 Model: Approach = Change @Level 2, Domain Architecture




    Blueprints




                           Page 58
BB 0 Model: Approach = Change @Level 0 Domain Architecture Blueprints from IA-A




    Example: Operational Spending = Change Network Infrastructure

    Power Value
                  •   9 real-time, rules for all events implemented
                  •   8 right-time, rules for major events implemented
                  •   …
                  •   0 no change possible

    Prediction Value
                  • 9 real-time, whole service portfolio
                  • 8 right-time, major service portfolio

    Adaption Valued
                 • 9 real-time, fully automated for all tasks
                 • 8 right-time, fully automated for major tasks

    Lost Value
                  •   as of today 124.095 ... 168.566 US$ /month within EMEA
                  •   depending on future design 2 (MPLS + IPv4sec) … design 6 (IPv4sec only)

    Action Distance
                  •   depending on services from 1 min to 3 years
                  •   3 years contract for the core backbone, linking data centres
                  •   1 minute for a new software based VPN deployment



                                Page 59
BB 1 Model: Ideal World Scenario = Operational Spending @Level 0 Blueprint




    Example: Infrastructure Device-AAA-Cloud-Service-Brig-Data




                              Page 60
BB 1 Model: Ideal World Scenario = Discretionary Spending @Level 0 Blueprint




    Example: Communication e.g. disable eMail, enable Work Flows to grow




                              Page 61
BB 1 Model: Ideal World Scenario = Transformational Spending @Level 0 Blueprint




    Example: from Admin (Temp Biz) to Trusted Advisor (myWorld, myLife, mySuccess)




                             Page 62
BB 2 Model: Real World Implementation = usage of the Theory U model and process
(MIT Scharmer), documented via a web based blog @gerhard.hacker.at



    Planning




            -8.    Mo    15.12.2008   presentation of Architecture Roadmap, Paul Blowers
            -7.    Tu   16.12.2008    preparing strategy for EA 2.0 based on KM
            -6.    We   17.12.2008    preparing strategy for EA 2.0 based on KM
            -5.    Th   18.12.2008    preparing strategy for EA 2.0 based on KM
            -4.    Fr   19.12.2008    acceptance from Kelly Services, IT EMEA for the job
            -3.    Mo   22.12.2008    preparing strategy archiving the key accountabilities
            -2.    Tu   23.12.2008    preparing strategy archiving the key accountabilities
            -1.    We   24.12.2008    preparing strategy archiving the key accountabilities

               0   Fr     2.1.2009    close consulting company at.EXCELLENCE

    Realization




           1.      Mo     5.1.2009 from Salzburg/Austria to Neuchatel/Switzerland
                                   first day at Kelly EMEA, Neuchatel – living in the hotel
           2.      Tu     6.1.2009 getting notebook and other tools
           3.      We     7.1.2009 prepare visit
           4.      Th     8.1.2009 visiting Kelly’s branch office in Zürich
           5.      Fr     9.1.2009 review leanings from visit

                         10.1.2009    found the place to live, cinema Che - le Argentine

           6.      Mo    12.1.2009    Bas is visiting Neuchatel




           7.      Tu    13.1.2009    Bas is visiting Neuchatel
           8.      We    14.1.2009    Bas is visiting Neuchatel
           9.      Th    15.1.2009    Bas is visiting Neuchatel


                                Page 63
10.   Mo   19.1.2009    Owen is visiting Neuchatel
11.   Tu   20.1.2009    Owen, Jan is visiting Neuchatel
12.   We   21.1.2009    Owen, Jan is visiting Neuchatel
13.   Th   22.1.2009    Owen, Jan is visiting Neuchatel
14.   Fr   23.1.2009    Owen, Jan is visiting Neuchatel
15.   Sa   24.1.2009    check operational spending
16.   So   25.1.2009    check operational spending
17.   Mo    26.1.2009   check operational spending
18.   Tu   27.1.2009    check operational spending
19.   We   28.1.2009    London with team

20.   So   29.1.2009    Milestone: observe, focus on team

                     London WS with TNC
21.   Fr   30.1.2009 London with team
22.   Sa   31.1.2009 review learning at London
23.   So    1.2.2009 last day in hotel – the future is Chaumont without furniture
24.   Mo    2.2.2009  preparing WS at Lisboa
25.   Tu    3.2.2009  preparing WS at Lisboa
26.   We   4.2..2009 celebration of the first month at a local Thai restaurant
27.   Th    5.2.2009 getting knowledge of the communication problems within .ch
                      using the wall at cafeteria to stress the situation
28.   Fr    6.2.2009 starting the wall project at cafeteria




29.   Sa    7.2.2009    extending the wall with the KyVi and Buddhist prayer flags
                        - the Key Visual (KyVi) symbolizes Knowledge Mgmt. (KM)
                        - the tower from the last team building event (=1st gen KM)
                        - the prayer flags symbolizing the values (=2nd gen KM)
                        - the U of the prayer flag symbolizing 3rd gen. KM
                        using religion as the highest end of org. development

30.   So    8.2.2009    Milestone: observe, focus on local organization

                        Extend the wall with new content
31.   Mo    9.2.2009    preparing WS at Lisboa
32.   Tu   10.2.2009    EMEA kick-off 2009 Lisboa
33.   We   11.2.2009    EMEA kick-off 2009 Lisboa
34.   Th   12.2.2009    IT EMEA WS at Lisboa
35.   Fr   13.2.2009     EMEA kick-off 2009 Lisboa
36.   Sa   14.2.2009    review learnings from Lisboa
37.   So   15.2.2009    Extending the wall project with big pictures at IT EMEA floor
                         cinema, Che – la Revolution
38.   Mo   16.2.2009    IT EMEA moves to a separated wing within the HQ building
39.   Tu   17.2.2009    check discretionary spending

40.   We    18.2.2009    Milestone: observe, focus on regional organization


                  Page 64
                       non communication at .ch escalates
41.   Th   19.2.2009   check non communication at .ch with HR, GM and IT EMEA
42.   So   22.2.2009   review EA approach
43.   Mo   23.2.2009   review EA approach
44.   Tu   24.2.2009   EA presentation at Uni Lausanne
45.   We   25.2.2009   check EA approach with Senior Director IT EMEA




46.   Th   26.2.2009   marketing.ch is removing the info wall @the cafeteria
47.   Fr   27.2.2009   PMO lead is removing the KyVi and the info wall @IT EMEA
                       analyzing situation – flowers to everyone
48.   Sa   28.2.2009   finalize EA work at NGN
49.   So    1.3.2009   deliver 50 day review to EMEA management and Paul
                        on the edge of chaos - no answers

50.   Mo    2.3.2009       Milestone: retreat & reflect

                        replacement of the KyVi
                       one day in exile (cafeteria Neuchatel, le petit prince)
51.   Tu    3.3.2009   the EMEA management is not able to start a dialogue
                        no answer is also a answer, decision is clear
52.   We    4.3.2009   notice of cancelation at Kelly Services IT EMEA
                       getting also the signed contract in parallel 
53.   Th    5.3.2009   check source of job accountabilities with OCG PM




54.   Fr    6.3.2009   debriefing with Senior Director IT EMEA

      So    8.3.2009   from Neuchatel/Switzerland to Vienna/Austria
                       conflict escalation level 10++, destroying love (Ursi)

55.   Mo    9.3.2009   activate Think Tank IP-team.com (Psycho, Phil, Theo)
56.   Tu   10.3.2009   check IPv6 deliverables with IP network specialist from HP
57.   We   11.3.2009   definition of core: Living Reinvented Architecture (LRA)
58.   Th   12.3.2009   development of LRA core
59.   Fr   13.3.2009   development of LRA core
60.   Sa   14.3.2009   development of LRA level 0
61.   Mo   16.3.2009   LRA extensions with LQ perspectives
62.   Tu   17.3.2009   development of LRA level 0
63.   We   18.3.2009   development of LRA level 1
64.   Th   19.3.2009   development of LRA level 2

65.   Fr   20.3.2009   Milestone: review crystallizing


                 Page 65
66.   Sa   21.3.2009   development of LRA level 1
67.   Mo   23.3.2009    project review with Uni Linz
68.   Tu   24.3.2009   development of LRA level 1
69.   We   25.3.2009   development of LRA level 1
70.   Th   26.3.2009   development of LRA level 1
71.   Fr   27.3.2009   development of LRA level 2
72.   Sa   28.3.2009   development of LRA level 2
73.   Mo   30.3.2009   sharp methods for measurement of progress with Uni Linz
74.   Th   31.3.2009   handover EA debriefing paper to Paul Blowers




75.   We    1.4.2009
76.   Th    2.4.2009
77.   Fr    3.4.2009
78.   Sa    4.4.2009
79.   Mo    6.4.2009

80.   Tu   7.4.2009 Milestone: review prototyping

81.   We     8.4.2009
82.   Th     9.4.2009 project review with Gartner executives
83.   Tu   14.4.2009
84.   We   15.4.2009
85.   Th    16.4.2009
86.   Fr   17.4.2009
87.   Sa   18.4.2009
88.   Mo   20.4.2009
89.   Tu   21.4.2009
90.   We   22.4.2009
91.   Th   23.4.2009
92.   Fr   24.4.2009
93.   Sa   25.4.2009




94.   Mo   27.4.2009
95.   Tu   28.4.2009
96.   We   29.4.2009
97.   Th   30.4.2009
98.   Sa    2.5.2009
99.   So    3.5.2009

100. Mo    4.5.2009    close PoC project


                 Page 66
Review

         101.   Tu    5.5.2009
         102.   We    6.5.2009
         103.   Th    7.5.2009
         104.   Fr    8.5.2009
         105.   Sa    9.5.2009
         106.   Mo   11.5.2009
         107.   Tu   12.5.2009

         108. We     13.5.2009 close PoC project review




                          Page 67
BB 2 Model: Real World Implementation = measured against real-time, event-driven
Architecture Principles, Rules & Guidelines




                            Page 68
BB 2 Results




    Goal: Continuous Value Creation




                              Page 69
BB 2 Summary and Action Plan




   Goals
      o Prepare yourself to see the horizon
           o reduce
           o reuse
           o recycle

      o   in parallel, enable the future
              o getting started
              o observe, observe, observe
              o retreat & reflect
              o act in an instance




                             Page 70
Love Conflicts and Solve Conflicts
KM based Enterprise Architecture 4 Kelly Services, a source 2 change




                                Page 71
Kelly’s NEW world
of information
of communication
of talents


debriefing of Corporate Enterprise Architecture, Troy

Living Reinvented Architecture
APPENDIX




                   Page 72
References


   People business




   Architecture




   1st generation KM


           Agyris 1990, Overcoming Organizational Defenses: Facilitating Organizational Learning
           Senge 1990, 5th discipline
           Senge Kleiner Smith Roberts Ross 1996, 5th discipline, feel book


   2nd gengeneration KM


           McElroy 2007, the New Knowledge Management
           Firestone McElroy 2007, Key Issues in the New Knowledge Management
           Allee 2007, The Future of Knowledge
           Back Kroch Seufert Enkel 2007, Putting Knowledge Networks into Action


   3rd generation KM


           Snowden 2001, Cynefin
           Scharmer 2008, Theory U
           Meissner/Wolf, 3rd Generation KM in Action: Relational Practices in Swiss Companies

   other

           HH the 14th Dalai Lama 2001, the rules of happiness
           HH the 14th Dalai Lama 2004, the wisdom of forgive

           Sunzi 600 bC, the art of war
           Chan 1998, Sunzi on the Art of War and Its General Application to Business

           Che Guevara 1949, the Secret Purpose of a Revolution
           Che Guevara 2009, the Economics of Revolution

           Hacker 2007, why to build a Enterprise 2.0
           Hacker 2007, how to build a Enterprise 2.0, cook book
                                Page 73
Kelly Services IT EMEA, internal


       1st field paper 2009, Kelly Services - Enterprise 2.0, what is IT 2.0 ?
       2nd field paper 2009, Kelly Services - road book to EA 2.0


Kelly Services Corporate EA lead

       Roles and responsibilities, Kelly Services IT EMEA
         Key accountabilities, Regional Enterprise Architecture Lead




                             Page 74
Abbreviations


          2       to
          4       for
          AMER    Americas
          APAC    Asia Pacific
          BB      Building Block
          Biz     Business
          C*O     all C level Managers
          CEO     Chief Executive Officer
          CIO     Chief Information Officer
          COO     Chief Operations Officer
          EMEA    Europe Middle East Africa
          GM      General Manager
          HQ      Headquarter
          IPR     Intellectual Property Rights
          IT      Information Technology
          KM      Knowledge Management
          LoB     Line of Business
          Swiss   Switzerland
          Org     Organization
          Tech    Technology
          Temp    Temporary employee
          UAE     United Arabic Emirates
          USA     United States of America




                         Page 75
Definition of Terms

          Application architecture:

          Establishes patterns, guidelines and templates for building and integrating
          applications according to the major delivery channels and quality of service
          characteristics that constitute a given enterprise’s range of application profiles
          (Heffner, 2002)


          Architecture:

          Just as the term architecture does not have a clear meaning in building architecture
          (Jonkers, 2004), the same is true in information technology (IT).
          Since the advent of electronic computing, the term architecture has had various
          meanings depending on its context of use. For example, in the case of computing
          hardware, architecture describes the construction blueprint of a device or
          component. When used in the context of information systems, however, architecture
          is used as an abstraction to deal with complexity (Iyer & Gottlieb, 2006)


          Architecture maturity:

          As defined by Ross, Weill and Robertson (Ross, 2006), the four stages of
          architecture maturity are:

              1. Business Silos architecture: where companies look to maximize individual
                 business unit needs or function needs.
              2. Standardized Technology architecture: providing IT efficiencies through
                 technology standardization and, in most cases, increased centralization of
                 technology management.
              3. Optimized Core architecture: which provides companywide data and process
                 standardization as appropriate for the operating model.
              4. Business Modularity architecture: where companies manage and reuse
                 loosely coupled IT-enabled business process components to preserve global
                 standards while enabling local differences.


          Architecture principle, rules, guidelines:

          As defined by The Open Group (TOG, 2006), Principles are general rules and
          guidelines, intended to be enduring and seldom amended, that inform and support
          the way in which an organization sets about fulfilling its mission. In their turn,
          principles may be just one element in a structured set of ideas that collectively
          define and guide the organization, from values through to actions and results.
          Depending on the organization, principles may be established at any or all of three
          levels:

          o   Enterprise principles provide a basis for decision-making throughout an
              enterprise, and inform how the organization sets about fulfilling its mission. Such
              enterprise-level principles are commonly found in governmental and not-for-
              profit organizations, but are encountered in commercial organizations also, as a
                                Page 76
    means of harmonizing decision making across a distributed organization. In
    particular, they are a key element in a successful architecture governance
    strategy (see Architecture Governance).
o   Information Technology (IT) principles provide guidance on the use and
    deployment of all IT resources and assets across the enterprise. They are
    developed in order to make the information environment as productive and cost-
    effective as possible.
o   Architecture principles are a subset of IT principles that relate to architecture
    work. They reflect a level of consensus across the enterprise, and embody the
    spirit and thinking of the enterprise architecture. Architecture principles can be
    further divided into:

        •   Principles that govern the architecture process, affecting the
            development, maintenance, and use of the enterprise architecture
        •   Principles that govern the implementation of the architecture, establishing
            the first tenets and related guidance for designing and developing
            information systems

Architecture review:

The purpose of an architecture review, as defined in the Rational Unified Process
(IBM, 2006), is to address the following:

    •   To uncover any unknown or perceived risks in the schedule or budget.
    •   To detect any architectural design flaws. Architectural flaws are known to be
        the hardest to fix, the most damaging in the long run.
    •   To detect a potential mismatch between the requirements and the
        architecture: over design, unrealistic requirements, or missing requirements.
        In particular the assessment may examine some aspects often neglected in
        the areas of operation, administration and maintenance. How is the system
        installed? How do we transition the current databases?
    •   To evaluate one or more specific architectural qualities: performance,
        reliability, modifiability, security, safety
    •   To identify reuse opportunities

The Open Group (TOG, 2006) states that an Architecture Compliance review is a
scrutiny of the compliance of a specific project against established architectural
criteria, spirit, and business objectives. A formal process for such reviews normally
forms the core of an enterprise Architecture Compliance strategy. The Open Group
describes the generic goals of an Architecture Compliance review to include some or
all of the following:

    •   First and foremost, catch errors in the project architecture early, and thereby
        reduce the cost and risk of changes required later in the lifecycle. This in turn
        means that the overall project time is shortened, and that the business gets
        the bottom-line benefit of the architecture development faster.
    •   Ensure the application of best practices to architecture work.
    •   Provide an overview of the compliance of an architecture to mandated
        enterprise standards.
    •   Identify where the standards themselves may require modification.
    •   Identify services that are currently application-specific but might be provided
        as part of the enterprise infrastructure.
                      Page 77
   •   Document strategies for collaboration, resource sharing, and other synergies
       across multiple architecture teams.
   •   Take advantage of advances in technology.
   •   Communicate to management the status of technical readiness of the project.
   •   Identify key criteria for procurement activities (e.g., for inclusion in
       Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) product RFI/RFP documents).
   •   Identify and communicate significant architectural gaps to product and
       service providers.

In the IEEE Computer Society report (2005) titled Architecture Reviews: Practice
and Experience, architecture reviews are cited as valuable for the following reasons
(Maranzano):

   •   Find design problems early in development when they are less expensive to
       fix
   •   Leverage experienced people by using their expertise and experience to help
       other projects in the company
   •   Let the companies better manage software components suppliers
   •   Provide management with better visibility into technical and project
       management issues
   •   Generate good problem descriptions by having the review team critique them
       for consistency and completeness
   •   Rapidly identify knowledge gaps and establish training in areas where errors
       frequently occur (for example, creating a companywide performance course
       when many reviews indicated performance issues)
   •   Promote cross-product knowledge and learning
   •   Keep experts engaged
   •   Spread knowledge of proven practices in the company by using the review
       teams to capture these practices across projects


Architecture review board (architecture board)

A key element in a successful architecture governance strategy (see Architecture
Governance) is a cross-organization Architecture Board to oversee the
implementation of the strategy. This body should be representative of all the key
stakeholders in the architecture, and will typically comprise a group of executives
responsible for the review and maintenance of the overall architecture" (TOG, 2006)


Business architecture:

We use the concept of ‘Business Architecture’ to structure the responsibility over
business activities prior to any further effort to structure individual aspects
(processes, data, functions, organization, etc.). The business architecture arranges
the responsibilities around the most important business activities (for instance
production, distribution, marketing, et cetera) and/or economic activities (for
instance manufacturing, assembly, transport, wholesale, et cetera) into domains”
(Versteeg & Bouwman, 2006)



                     Page 78
Business strategy:

A strategy defines a framework for guiding the choice of actions. It is a broad
articulation of the kinds of products the organization will product, the basis on which
its products will compete with those of its competitors, and the types of resources
and capability the firm must have or develop to implement the strategy successfully”
(Saloner, Shepard, & Podolny, 2001)


Causal Loop Diagram (CLD):

Causal loop diagrams (CLDs) are a kind of systems thinking tool. These diagrams
consist of arrows connecting variables (things that change over time) in a way that
shows how one variable affects another (Pegasus Communications, 2006)

CLDs contain several components (Anderson & Johnson, 1997):

   •   One of more feedback loops that are either reinforcing or balancing processes
   •   Cause-and-effect relationships among the variables
   •   Delays


Chief (enterprise) architect:

The chief enterprise architect (also known as the chief architect) is responsible for
leading the program to develop, maintain, govern and evolve the enterprise
architecture across the enterprise. The chief enterprise architect is also responsible
for defining the enterprise architecture process and the architecture review
process, as well as for leading the effective integration of these processes with
other, related business and IT processes. The responsibilities for this role vary by
organization, but generally include the following: (Handler & Weiss, 2006)

   •   Leading the creation or evolution of the enterprise architecture function /
       program, including the coordination of an appropriately balanced pursuit of
       enterprise business, information, technical and solution architectures
   •   Understanding, advocating and supporting the enterprise's information
       technology (IT) strategies
   •   Leading the identification and analysis of enterprise business drivers to derive
       enterprise business, information, technical and solution architecture
       requirements
   •   Analyzing the current IT environment to detect critical deficiencies and
       recommend solutions for improvement
   •   Analyzing technology industry and market trends as well as determining their
       potential impact on the enterprise
   •   Promoting the enterprise architecture process, outcomes and results to the
       organization, including the enterprise's IT and business leaders
   •   Leading and facilitating the creation of governing principles to guide
       information, technology and solution decision making for the enterprise
   •   Leading the development of an implementation plan for the enterprise
       architecture based on business requirements and IT strategies
   •   Ensuring that the optimal governance structure and compliance activities
       (such as handling waivers) are associated with enterprise architecture
                     Page 79
       compliance
   •   Overseeing enterprise architecture implementation and ongoing refinement
       activities
   •   Overseeing the evaluation and selection of hardware and software product
       standards, as well as the design of standard configurations
   •   Consulting with application development project teams to fit systems to
       architecture, as well as to identify when it is necessary to modify the
       technical architecture to accommodate project needs
   •   Consulting with infrastructure development projects to fit infrastructure to
       architecture, as well as to identify when it is necessary to modify the
       technical architecture to accommodate infrastructure needs
   •   Identifying organizational requirements for the resources, structures and
       cultural changes necessary to support the enterprise architecture
   •   Overseeing the documentation of all architecture design and analysis work
   •   Leading the development and execution of a communication and education
       plan for the enterprise architecture
   •   Assessing (through appropriate metrics) and communicating the achievement
       and impact of the enterprise architecture


Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS):

The term COTS (Commercial-Off-The-Shelf) products can, in principle, apply to any
component that is offered by a third-party vendor. However, it is more normally
used to refer to system software products (Sommerville, 2001)


Complex Event Processing (CEP):

CEP deals with evaluating a confluence of events and then taking action. The events
(notable or ordinary) may cross event types and occur over a long period of time.
The event correlation may be casual, temporal, or spatial. CEP requires the em-
ployment of sophisticated event interpreters, event- pattern definition and matching,
and correlation techniques. CEP is commonly used to detect and respond to business
anomalies, threats, and opportunities. (Seybold, 2006)


Conceptual model:

Using visual methods to communicate ideas entails creating a sub-structure of non-
verbal communication. Too often do designers make hasty, unrefined drawings that
must be laboriously over-explained to colleagues and clients. The very premise of
visualization is that a conceptual model is created to convey thinking, or “tell a
story” to someone else (Baskinger & Nam, 2006)


Data architecture:

Ranges from strategic views of data used for executive reporting and business
planning, through data warehousing, business intelligence and operational data for
transactional applications. Its scope includes both data design and the principles and
policies that govern its ownership, use, and management across the enterprise
                     Page 80
(Heffner, 2002)


Enterprise application blueprinting:

To achieve their objective of aligning IT and business strategies, EA groups focus
scarce central group resources on three highly-leveraged activities—creating the IT
strategic plan and overseeing the investment prioritization process, blueprinting
the enterprise application environment, and prioritizing retirement candidates
(Enterprise Architecture Executive Council, 2005).


Enterprise architecture:

Enterprise architecture is the process of translating business vision and strategy into
effective enterprise change by creating, communicating and improving the key
principles and models that describe the enterprise's future state and enable its
evolution (Lapkin, 2006).


The term enterprise in this case means a collection of organizations that share a
common set of goals and objectives. Enterprise architecture is also seen to
encompass ‘domain architectures’ such as business process architecture, data
architecture, applications architecture and technology architecture (Ross, 2006)


Enterprise architecture concept:

When the architecture for a new building is captured in blueprints, enterprise
architecture is often represented in principles, policies, and technology choices.
Thus, the concept can be difficult for managers to get their arms around. We have
found that a simple picture, which we refer to as the “core diagram,” helps
managers debate and eventually come to understand their company’s enterprise
architecture. This simple one-page picture is a high-level view of the processes,
data, and technologies constituting the desired foundation for execution” (Ross,
2006)


Enterprise architecture framework:

As defined by The Open Group, An architecture framework is a tool which can be
used for developing a broad range of different architectures. It should describe a
method for designing an information system in terms of a set of building blocks, and
for showing how the building blocks fit together. It should contain a set of tools and
provide a common vocabulary. It should also include a list of recommended
standards and compliant products that can be used to implement the building blocks
(TOG, 2006)

Martin and Robertson (2003) state that an enterprise architecture framework is used
as a means to organize and present architecture models, and that two distinct model
management approaches include:

                     Page 81
   •    managing models according to the perspectives of model users, and
   •    using a life-cycle approach as an organizing theme.


Enterprise architecture development method:

As a representative example, the Architecture Development Method (ADM) from The
Open Group is a method for developing an enterprise architecture (2006).

The ADM provides (Blevins, Spencer, & Waskiewicz):

   •    A reliable, proven way of developing the architecture
   •    Architecture views which enable the architect to ensure that a complex set of
        requirements are adequately addressed
   •    Linkages to practical case studies
   •    Guidelines on tools for architecture development



Enterprise architecture model:

An architecture model is used as a means to capture the complex, multi-layered and
cross-domain details associated with enterprise architecture. Modeling provides
architects and others with the ability to visualize entire systems, assess different
options and communicate designs more clearly before taking on the risks—technical,
financial, or otherwise—of actual construction (Cernosek & Naiburg, 2004)


Enterprise architecture pattern:

From an enterprise architecture standpoint, we can describe a pattern as being a
practical and logical construct that shows the interaction of key logical elements of
functionality and the relationships of these components to carry out core elements of
system design. Patterns fit into an architecture framework as an intermediate stage
of the architecture process, taking an understanding of business architecture and
business process, and showing logical arrangements of technology in support of the
business architecture” (Schulman, 2004)


Enterprise architecture process:

Enterprise architecture processes span many activities. In a study of 24 large
corporations, the Enterprise Architecture Executive Council (2005) identified
the following top five activities performed by enterprise architecture groups:

   1.   IT strategic planning and investment prioritization
   2.   Enterprise application blueprinting
   3.   Application portfolio management
   4.   Development language, platform, and tool selection
   5.   Enterprise data modeling and reference data management



                      Page 82
Enterprise architecture standard:

Enterprise architecture standards cover a wide range of subject and technology
domain areas; e.g., architecture representation, business rules and process
management, modeling and metadata specifications (TOG, 2006), enterprise
engineering and integration (CIMOSA Association, 2006), and so forth.


Enterprise architecture tool:

Enterprise architecture tools typically offer the following key functionalities
(Corporate Executive Board, 2006):

       •   Business process definition
       •   Business architecture design
       •   IT architecture design
       •   Systems mapping
       •   Workflow design
       •   Process analysis
       •   Data modeling
       •   Simulation
       •   Reporting and publishing
       •   Framework templates
       •   Standards templates
       •   Compliance templates


Event:

An event is a notable thing that happens inside or outside your business. An
event (business or system) may signify a problem or impending problem, an
opportunity, a threshold, or a deviation.

Event Specification and Occurrence: The term event is often used interchangeably to
refer to both the specification (definition) of the event, and each individual
occurrence (instance) of the event.

Define in Business Terms: For an event to be meaningful to downstream subscribers
(human and automated) it is imperative that the event (name and body) is specified
in business terms, not data or application terms.

WHAT IS IN AN EVENT? Each event occurrence has an event header and event body.
The event header contains elements describing the event occurrence, such as the
event specification ID, event type, event name, event timestamp, event occurrence
number, and event creator. These elements are consistent, across event
specifications. (Seybold, 2006)


Event Body:

The event body describes what happened. For example, if a retailer specified a low
inventory threshold event, the event body would contain the information to
                      Page 83
communicate which product fell below the allowable threshold. The event body must
be fully described so any interested party can use the information without hav-
ing to go back to the source system. For the low inventory threshold event, the
event body would contain not only the product identifier, but also the product
description, and the point in time inventory and threshold levels. To ensure events
are understood by all consumers, a clear business lexicon or ontology should be
used. (Seybold, 2006)


Event channel:

The event channel, typically a messaging backbone, transports standard formatted
events between event generators, event processing engines, and downstream
subscribers. (Seybold, 2006)


Event driven activity:

A single event, or event correlation, may initiate numerous downstream activities.
The invocation of the activity might be a push by the event processing en-
gine (service invocation, business process initiation, notification) or a pull by
subscribers of event publications. Subscribers might be humans, applications, active
business processes, data warehouses, performance dashboards, and/or automated
agents. Events should be published in the standard event format. Transformation to
subscriber-specific formats is typically done by an enterprise integration backbone.
(Seybold, 2006)


Event-Driven Architecture (EDA):

Event Driven Architecture is a style of software architecture based on real time flows
of events. EDA is a buzzword was being pushed by Gartner as far back as 2003. At
the time, Roy Schulte of Gartner went so far as to say that in SOA, connecting
services occurs in a linear, predictable sequence, whereas an event-driven
architecture allows for multiple, less predictable, asynchronous events to happen in
parallel and trigger a single action. (Matsumura, 2006)

Event-Driven Architecture (EDA) is a style of application architecture centered on an
asynchronous “push”- based communication model. EDA is the software architecture
of choice for implementing “straight through” multistage business processes that
deliver goods, services and information with minimum delay. Applications designed
using EDA are also easier to modify than traditional applications as business
requirements change (Schulte/Gartner, 2009)

In an event-driven architecture, a notable thing happlain key event concepts, walk
through event processing flows, and identify the major implementation components
of an event-driven architecture. Extreme Loose Coupling: By its nature, an event-
driven architecture is extremely loosely coupled, and highly distributed. The creator
(source) of the event only knows the event transpired. The creator has no
knowledge of the event’s subsequent processing, or the interested parties. The
traceability of an event through a dynamic multipath event network can be difficult.
Thus, event-driven architectures are best used for asynchronous flows of work and
                     Page 84
information. (Seybold, 2006)


Event generator:

Every event is generated from a source. The source might be an application, data
store, service, business process, transmitter, sensor, or collaboration tool (IM,
email). An ordinary event may be evaluated for notability by an event preprocessor
(router, filter), resulting in the generation of a new notable event. Because of the
variety of event generators, not all events will be generated in the required format
for event processing. In those cases, the events need to be transformed to the
required (enterprise standard) format prior to being deposited in the event channel.
(Seybold, 2006)


Event metadata:

A good event-driven architecture has a strong metadata architecture. Event
metadata includes event specifications and event processing rules. Event
specifications must be made available to event generators, event format
transformers, event processing engines, and subscribers. While no standards
currently exist for event definition and processing notation, it is only a matter of
time. (Seybold, 2006)


Event processing:

In the event processing layer, upon receipt, events are evaluated against event
processing rules, and actions are initiated. The event processing rules and actions
are defined in accordance to the needs of the interested parties, not of the event
generators. The actions include invoking a service, initiating a business process,
publishing the event out to a subscription hub, directly notifying humans or systems,
generating a new event, and/or capturing the event for historical purposes. Events
are processed by engines. A simple engine processes each event occurrence
independently. A complex engine processes new event occurrences in context of
prior and future events.

The cores of event processing are the engine and the event occurrence data. Simple
event engines are often homegrown. Complex event engines should be acquired
from a CEP engine provider. Event occurrence data is typically persisted and
retained for audit and trend analysis. (Seybold, 2006)


Event Stream Processing (ESP):

In event stream processing, both ordinary and notable events happen. Ordinary
events (orders, RFID transmissions) are both screened for notability and streamed
to information subscribers. Stream event processing is commonly used to drive the
real-time flow of information in and around the enterprise––enabling in-time
decision making. (Seybold, 2006)



                      Page 85
    Event tooling:

    Event development tools are required to define event specifications and processing
    rules, and to manage subscriptions. Event management tools provide administration
    and monitoring of the event processing infrastructure, monitoring of event flows,
    and visibility into event generation and processing statistics (Seybold, 2006)

.



    Governance:

    As used in this study, governance “is essentially about ensuring that business is
    conducted properly. It is less about overt control and strict adherence to rules, and
    more about guidance and effective and equitable usage of resources to ensure
    sustainability of an organization's strategic objectives” (The Open Group, 2005).
    Within the context of information technology (IT) and as used in this study,
    governance is the assignment of decision-making rights and accountabilities
    regarding behavior in the desirable use of IT (Dreyfuss, 2003).

    In the hierarchy of governance structures, IT governance encompasses architecture
    governance, which is the practice and orientation by which enterprise architectures
    and other architectures are managed and controlled at an enterprise-wide level”
    (TOG, 2005).


    Interdependency between EA and SOA Governance:

    Any implementation of governance should be centered on the four pillars of an
    enterprise architecture: people, processes, technology, and services. One
    mechanism to implement an enterprise IT and SOA governance is by establishing a
    center of excellence (CoE) for IT and SOA governance that would enable a shared
    resource and capability center to function as a resource pool as new business
    application needs arise (Mitra, 2005).

    There is a common misconception that SOA governance is governance of an SOA, as
    though SOA were one more IT asset in need of governance in the organization. That
    belief, however, indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of SOA.
    Fundamentally, SOA is enterprise architecture—when an enterprise adopts SOA, it
    should approach the organization of all of its IT assets from an SO perspective. As
    such, Service orientation provides a broad organizing principle for all aspects of IT in
    the company—including IT governance. That's why we say SOA governance is IT
    governance in the context of SOA, rather than governance of SOA (Bloomberg,
    2004).


    SOA governance is a social change. The enterprise architect plays the role of the
    teacher or educator, not the policeman. The policing can be performed by the review
    board. Your role as the mentor to the application teams is to show them the value of
    governance; how they can benefit from the governance processes, policies, and
    tools in place; and how the additional work involved in following these policies can
                         Page 86
help them be more productive and deliver more business value (Mittal, 2006).


International Organization for Standardization (ISO):

ISO is a network of the national standards institutes of 157 countries, on the basis
of one member per country, with a Central Secretariat in Geneva, Switzerland, that
coordinates the system” (ISO, 2006).


Model-Driven Architecture (MDA):

The Object Management Group’s “Model-Driven Architecture starts with the well-
known and long established idea of separating the specification of the operation of a
system from the details of the way that system uses the capabilities of its platform.
MDA provides an approach for, and enables tools to be provided for:

       o   specifying a system independently of the platform that supports it,
       o   specifying platforms,
       o   choosing a particular platform for the system, and
       o   transforming the system specification into one for a particular platform.

The three primary goals of MDA are portability, interoperability and reusability
through architectural separation of concerns” (Miller & Mukerji).


Object Management Group (OMG):

The OMG is an international, open membership, not-for profit computer industry
consortium that was formed in 1989. OMG’s modeling standards, including the
Unified Modeling Language™ (UML®) and Model Driven Architecture®

(MDA®), enable powerful visual design, execution and maintenance of software and
other processes, including IT Systems Modeling and Business Process Management.
OMG’s middleware standards and profiles are based on the Common Object Request
Broker Architecture (CORBA®) and support a wide variety of industries" (OMG,
2006).


Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards
(OASIS):

OASIS is a not-for-profit, international consortium that drives the development,
convergence, and adoption of e-business standards. The consortium produces more
Web services standards than any other organization along with standards for
security, e-business, and standardization efforts in the public sector and for
application-specific markets. Founded in 1993, OASIS has more than 5,000
participants representing over 600 organizations and individual members in 100
countries” (OASIS, 2006).


Platform as a Service (PaaS):
                     Page 87
PaaS is the delivery of a computing platform and solution stack as a service. It
facilitates deployment of applications without the cost and complexity of buying and
managing the underlying hardware and software layers, providing all of the facilities
required to support the complete life cycle of building and delivering web
applications and services entirely available from the Internet—with no software
downloads or installation for developers, IT managers or end-users.

PaaS offerings include workflow facilities for application design, application
development, testing, deployment and hosting as well as application services such
as team collaboration, web service integration and marshalling, database
integration, security, scalability, storage, persistence, state management,
application versioning, application instrumentation and developer community
facilitation. These services are provisioned as an integrated solution over the web.
(Wikipedia, 2009)


Program and portfolio management (PPM):

PPM is a set of activities that govern how organizations select and manage a group
of specific investment initiatives to achieve defined business results or affect
change” (Apfel, 2006).


Project governance:

Five primary goals that are common motivations for creating project governance
structures and processes include the following: (Leganza, 2003)

       1.   controlling cost
       2.   ensuring business value
       3.   maximizing resources
       4.   providing a balanced investment portfolio
       5.   ensuring the uniform application of best practices


Reference Model:

A reference model is an abstract framework for understanding significant
relationships among the entities of some environment that enables the development
of specific architectures using consistent standards or specifications supporting that
environment. A reference model consists of a minimal set of unifying concepts,
axioms and relationships within a particular problem domain, and is independent of
specific standards, technologies, implementations, or other concrete details” (OASIS,
2006b).


Sense & Respond:

The ability to respond rapidly and effectively to changing conditions is a powerful
competitive advantage. Companies can use Complex-event Processing (CEP)
techniques, a sophisticated form of EDA, to extract the information value from
                      Page 88
multiple events. CEP systems find patterns in event data to detect opportunities and
threats. Timely alerts are then pushed to the appropriate recipients, often using
Business Activity Monitoring (BAM) dashboards or similar end-user information
delivery channels. The result is faster and better operational decisions and more
timely responses to important situations (Schulte/Gartner, 2009)


Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA):

Service Oriented Architecture is a paradigm for organizing and utilizing distributed
capabilities that may be under the control of different ownership domains. It
provides a uniform means to offer, discover, interact with and use capabilities to
produce desired effects consistent with measurable preconditions and expectations
(OASIS, 2006).


Simple Event Processing (SEP)

In simple event processing, a notable event happens, initiating downstream
action(s). Simple event processing is commonly used to drive the real-time flow of
work—taking lag time and cost out of a business. (Seybold, 2006)


Software as a Service (SaaS):

Software owned, delivered and managed remotely by one or more providers. If the
vendor requires user organizations to install software on-premise using their
infrastructures, then it isn't SaaS. SaaS delivery requires a vendor to provide
remote, outsourced access to the application, as well as maintenance and upgrade
services for it. The infrastructure and IT operations supporting the applications must
also be outsourced to the vendor or another provider” (Clark, Desisto, Holincheck,
White, & Kyte, 2006)


System development methodology:

Sommerville (2001) defines the following four general process models as
abstractions to explain different approaches to software development:

       1.   Waterfall model
       2.   Evolutionary development
       3.   Formal systems development
       4.   Reuse-based development

SCRUM is an iterative incremental process of software development commonly used
with agil softwre development. Despite the fact that "Scrum" is not an acronym,
some companies implementing the process have been known to adhere to an all
capital letter expression of the word, i.e. SCRUM. This may be due to one of Ken
Schwaber's early papers capitalizing SCRUM in the title. Although Scrum was
intended for management of software development projects, it can be used to run
software maintenance teams, or as a program management approach.

                     Page 89
SCRUM is a process skeleton that includes a set of practices and predefined roles.
The main roles in Scrum are the "ScrumMaster" who maintains the processes and
works similarly to a project manager, the "Product Owner" who represents the
stakeholders, and the "Team" which includes the developers. During each sprint,
typically a 2–4 week period (length decided by the team), the team creates an
increment of usable software. (Wikipedia, 2009)



Systems thinking:

Systems thinking offers you a powerful new perspective, a specializedlanguage, and
a set of tools that you can use to address the most stubborn problems in your
everyday life and work. Systems thinking is a way of understanding reality that
emphasizes the relationships among a system's parts, rather than the parts
themselves. Based on a field of study known as system dynamics, systems thinking
has a practical value that rests on a solid theoretical Foundation (Pegasus
Communications, 2006)

In general, systems thinking is characterized by these principles (Anderson &
Johnson, 1997)

   o   thinking of the “big picture”
   o   balancing short-term and long-term perspectives
   o   recognizing the dynamic, complex, and interdependent nature of systems
   o   taking into account both measurable and non-measurable factors
   o   remembering that we are all part of the systems in which we function, and
       that we each influence those systems even as we are being influenced by
       them.


Technical Architecture:

Captures decisions on technology required to support general infrastructure
requirements (e.g., e-mail, file sharing, desktop computing) as well as hardware
and software infrastructure for enterprise data and applications (e.g., DBMS,
servers, networks, application server software, data warehousing, etc.) (Heffner,
2002)


The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF):

The original development of TOGAF Version 1 in 1995 was based on the Technical
Architecture Framework for Information Management (TAFIM), developed by the US
Department of Defense (DoD). The DoD gave The Open Group explicit permission
and encouragement to create TOGAF by building on the TAFIM, which itself was the
result of many years of development effort and many millions of dollars of US
Government investment” (TOG, 2006)

TOGAF in its Enterprise Edition remains what it has always been, namely an
architecture framework - a set of methods and tools for developing a broad range of
different IT architectures. It enables IT users to design, evaluate, and build the right
                     Page 90
architecture for their organization, and reduces the costs of planning, designing, and
implementing architectures based on open systems solutions” (TOG, 2006)



Web Oriented Architecture (WOA)
is a style of software architecture that extends SOA to web based applications, and
is sometimes considered to be a light-weight version of SOA. WOA is also aimed at
maximizing the browser and server interactions by use of technologies such as REST
and POX. (Wikipeda)

World Wide Web Consortium (W3C):

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international consortium where
Member organizations, a full-time staff, and the public work together to develop
Web standards. W3C's mission is: To lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by
developing protocols and guidelines that ensure long-term growth for the Web”
(W3C, 2006)


Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture:

The Framework as it applies to Enterprises is simply a logical structure for classifying
and organizing the descriptive representations of an Enterprise that are significant to
the management of the Enterprise as well as to the development of the Enterprise’s
systems. It was derived from analogous structures that are found in the older
disciplines of Architecture/Construction and Engineering/Manufacturing that classify
and organize the design artifacts created over the process of designing and
producing complex physical products (e.g., buildings or airplanes)” (Zachman, 1996)




                     Page 91
Annex 1




          Job description
          Regional Enterprise Architecture Lead
          Kelly Services, IT EMEA




   2 pages

                              Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Annex 2 (download online from w w w.real-time.at user=ba, password=revolution)




    People Business
          The Future of Talent Management: Four Stages of Evolution
          TALEO Research white paper 2007


    Architecture
           WikiCity, Social Silicon Valley Manifesto
           Tuomas Toivonen, Hans Park, Roope Mokka, Aleksi Neuvonen 2007


    Enterprise Architecture
          Framing a Collaborative EA Governance Program within the Context of Service-
          Oriented Software Systems Development
          Mark McClure, Enterprise Technology Architect, 2007


    Knowledge Management
           3rd Generation KM in Action: Relational Practices in Swiss Companies 2008
           Jens O. Meissner, Lucerne School of Business, Patricia Wolf, ETH Zürich, Switzerland


    GARTNER Analysts Symposium ITxpo 11/2008 Cannes

           Achieving EA Excellence: The Now and Future of Enterprise Architecture
           Philip Allega

           Myth-Busting: What Enterprise Architecture Is Not
           Betsy Burton

           The Best Enterprise Architects Don’t Work Too Hard
           Brian Burke

           Workshop & Open Forum: Top 10 Ways EA Will Lower Your Costs
           Brian Burke

           Demonstrate EA and Strategic Planning Impact with Performance Management
           Philip Allega

           Gartner Magic Quadrant: Enterprise Architecture Tools
           Philip Allega

           Managing the 21st Century: The New Frontier
           Diane Morello




                                Page 95
Portfolio
                  IT EMEA Regional Enterprise Architecture




EA Program
                  Kelly’s NEW word of information
                  Kelly’s NEW word of communication
                  Kelly’s NEW word of talents


EA Project
                 Proof of Concept
                 KM based EA 4 Kelly Services, a source 2 change




                               Page 96
Field Paper Part 3:   Debriefing Corporate Enterprise Architecture, Kelly Services Troy
                      March 31, 2009 version 0.2 Gerhard Hacker
Page 97
Love Conflicts and Solve Conflicts
KM based Enterprise Architecture 4 Kelly Services, a source 2 change




                                Page 98
To the whole Kelly Services team and especially to
Paul Blowers




Thanks for everything !




Gerhard Hacker




at.EXCELLENCE
A-1212 Vienna, Lazarsfeldgasse 1-5-15 / Austria
A-5020 Salzburg, Maxglaner Hauptstrasse 63-4 / Austria
CH-2067 Chaumont de Pury, Chemin du Grand Hotel 3 / Switzerland


+43. 664. 234 99 65
ger_hacker@yahoo.de
gerhard.,hacker.at




                                      Page 99
www.real-time.at




Book 1: Hacker 2007 - why to architect a Enterprise 2.0 ?

Book 2: Hacker 2007 – how to architect a Enterprise 2.0 ?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

       Field Paper Part 1:     Kelly Services - Enterprise 2.0, what is IT 2.0 ?

       Field Paper Part 2:     Kelly Services - road book to EA 2.0

       Field Paper Part 3:     Kelly Services - Living Reinvented Architecture

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Book 3: IP-team.com 2009 – build a Living Reinvented Enterprise now !




                                   Page 100