Enterprise Intelligence

I’m called a Business Architect. But if my work is scoped by IT, funded by IT, consumed by IT, and mainly used to support IT execution, then my work still sits inside IT. Unless I define D1–D15 × P1–P6 anatomy, I am not architecting the business. I am translating it for IT.

I’m called a Business Architect. But if I only create business views, I am not defining business anatomy. If my work does not make D1–D15 × P1–P6 explicit, I am not architecting the business. I am representing it. And representation is not architecture.

It may be business analysis. It may be solution design. It may be technical design. It may be tool configuration. It may be governance. It may be implementation planning. But it is not architecture.

I create value streams. That is real work. That is useful work.That is important work. But if the value stream does not link to P1 above and P3–P4 below, I am not defining architecture. I am drawing how value appears to move.

I configure AWS. That is real work. That is useful work. That is important work. But if P1–P4 are not explicit, I am not the architect of the project.

I configure ServiceNow. That is real work. That is useful work. That is important work. But if P1–P4 are not explicit, I am not the architect of the project.

I configure Microsoft Azure. That is real work. That is useful work. That is important work. But if P1–P4 are not explicit, I am not the architect of the project. I am the Azure cloud configurator.

I configure Oracle. That is real work. That is useful work. That is important work. But if P1–P4 are not explicit, I am not the architect of the project. I am the Oracle configurator.

I configure Salesforce. That is real work.That is useful work. That is important work. But if P1–P4 are not explicit, I am not the architect of the project. I am the Salesforce configurator.