Telecom Director EA FAQs - Why do 220 IT projects ≠ Telecom Enterprise Architecture?
- Sunil Dutt Jha
- 7 days ago
- 6 min read
Updated: 5 days ago
Most telecom operators still treat Enterprise Architecture as an IT exercise, which is why EA efforts don’t change service reliability, provisioning accuracy, billing correctness, revenue leakage, partner settlements, or customer experience.
Telecom EA ≠ Telecom IT.
This Director EA FAQ explains where traditional EA breaks down and how a true enterprise anatomy reveals the structure that IT alone cannot see, align, or repair.
It explains the logic of shadow anatomies, 12 telecom use cases, and the One Telecom One Anatomy™ advantage.
Q1: Why do 220 IT projects ≠ Telecom Enterprise Architecture?
Myth:
Telecom EA = Telecom IT (Network Modernization + OSS/BSS Transformation + Digital Channels + Cloud Migration).
Reality:
Telecom operates through 15 departments (D1–D15) such as Network Planning, Network Operations, Product Management, Sales, Order Management, Provisioning, Billing, Revenue Assurance, Partner Management, Regulatory Compliance — each with its own P1–P6 rule cycles.
Telecom IT is only one department. That is EA(IT), not the enterprise’s full anatomy.
EA(IT) ≠ Enterprise Anatomy.
Q2. Why do so many IT projects fail to represent the enterprise in this industry?
Because telecom IT automates only a small fraction of P5 tasks, while a telecom operator’s actual operating architecture lives entirely in P1–P4.
Every telecom function — Network, Product, OSS, BSS, Billing, Assurance, Partner Operations, Customer Operations — runs on a full P1–P6 structure:
P1 (Strategy) defines coverage strategy, monetization models, service portfolio, and regulatory intent.
P2 (Processes) defines product launch, order capture, provisioning, activation, billing, assurance, and support.
P3 (System logic) defines service definitions, rating rules, charging logic, discount priority, usage aggregation, partner settlement rules, and exception handling.
P4 (Component Spec) defines components such as service catalogs, tariff tables, rating engines, mediation logic, provisioning workflows, and billing configurations.
This is the architecture (P1-P4) of the telecom enterprise.
IT projects, however, touch P5 only — the manual task layer — and typically automate just thin slices of it:
capturing orders
triggering provisioning workflows
activating services
generating invoices
logging complaints
producing reports
The underlying structure (P1–P4) remains inconsistent and largely undocumented.
This creates the core mismatch: The IT system automates “tasks” i.e. a subset of P5. The telecom enterprise runs on Architecture (P1–P4).
Those service definitions, charging rules, and decisions were never architected.
Because P1–P4 is missing:
service definitions behave differently across OSS and BSS
charging logic diverges by product and system
discount and bundle rules vary across channels
usage aggregation differs across mediation paths
billing outcomes vary for the same service
partner settlements follow different logic by agreement and platform
Telecom IT does not fail due to lack of capability. It fails because it is built on an incomplete representation of the telecom enterprise’s architecture.
Until P1–P4 is modelled, IT will continue to automate isolated P5 tasks, not the telecom enterprise logic.
Q3. What drives the high project count in this industry?
Because every change touches multiple rule layers at once.
Telecom bottlenecks:
New products require changes across catalogs, provisioning, charging, billing, and care
Pricing updates ripple through rating engines, discounts, invoices, and settlements
Network changes affect service availability, provisioning constraints, and SLA rules
Regulatory mandates trigger reporting, billing, data-retention, and interception changes
Partner onboarding introduces new revenue-share and reconciliation logic
High project count is the symptom of deep rule complexity, not poor execution
Q4. What is unique about Telecom industry’s D1–D15 functions?
Each telecom operator has a distinctive 15-department anatomy (D1–D15 × P1–P6).
Telecom highlights:
Network Operations – governs availability, fault resolution, and service quality rules
Product Management – owns service definitions, bundles, eligibility, and pricing logic
Billing & Charging – runs complex rating, aggregation, and discount cycles
Revenue Assurance – detects leakage across usage, billing, and settlement flows
These functions generate the strongest P1–P6 drift, making alignment critical.
Q5. What does P1–P6 look like in the telecom industry?
This explains how strategy (P1) → operations (P6) breaks down.
Telecom P1–P6 drift:
• P1 Strategy: network expansion, monetization models, service portfolio, compliance goals • P2 Process: product launch, order capture, provisioning, billing, assurance, support • P3 Logic: service definitions, rating rules, charging logic, discount priority • P4 Components: OSS, BSS, mediation platforms, billing engines, service catalogs • P5 Implementation: vendor-specific configurations, custom workflows, manual overrides • P6 Operations: NOCs, billing ops, care teams applying rules differently
Misalignment across these perspectives causes unpredictable service and revenue outcomes.
Q6. We already have extensive architecture documentation. Why redo this?
Myth:
More documentation means we understand the enterprise.
Reality:
Documentation shows parts of the telecom operator. Enterprise Anatomy shows the telecom operator as one integrated model.
Think of the human body. It has 11 organ systems — circulatory, respiratory, nervous, endocrine, immune, digestive, etc. Each system has its own function, but they are not optional, not interchangeable, and not isolated. They work as one integrated model, with thousands of interdependencies.
No amount of medical paperwork can replace understanding how the body actually works as a single system.
A telecom operator is the same.
A telecom anatomy = 15 Functions (D1–D15) × 6 Perspectives (P1–P6).
This creates hundreds of functional flows and thousands of decision, data, and rule connections across:
• Strategy (P1)• Process (P2)• Rule / logic cycles (P3)• Component definitions (P4)• Implementation tasks (P5)• Daily operations (P6)
Traditional documentation tries to describe these parts separately — system by system, department by department.
But none of those documents show:
• How service definitions propagate to billing
• Where charging diverges from product intent
• Where provisioning contradicts catalog rules
• Why the same service produces different invoices
• Where drift starts and how it spreads
You get a library — not a model.
Enterprise Anatomy collapses complexity into ONE integrated model.
Instead of documentation sprawl, you get One Telecom One Anatomy™ — readable by leadership and executable by teams.
Q7. How do we evolve from EA (IT) → EA (Departments) → One Telecom One Anatomy™?
Most organisations stop at EA = IT architecture.
The next evolution is:
Step 1: Elevate EA (IT) Create P1–P4 model of Telecom IT itself. i.e model of IT strategy, IT processes, IT logic, IT components of Telecom IT (Network Modernization + OSS/BSS Transformation + Digital Channels + Cloud Migration)
Step 2: Create EA (Departments) • 15 telecom functions mapped end-to-end (P1–P6) • Clear view of strategy, processes, system logic, component specs, implementation tasks, and operations
Step 3: Create One Telecom One Anatomy™ • A single P1–P6 model across the full enterprise • Shared understanding of service, charging, billing, and settlement flows • Alignment of network, product, IT, operations, and partners
This is where structural drift stops — and execution stabilizes.
Q8. What can One Telecom One Anatomy™ do that traditional EA cannot?
Traditional EA focuses on systems and documentation. It cannot see that every telecom department runs its own shadow anatomy — its own version of service logic, charging rules, data checks, and operations.
A mid-size telecom operator typically carries 100–300 shadow anatomies, for example:
• Product logic differs across catalogs and channels • Charging rules diverge across rating engines • Billing interpretations vary across platforms • Partner settlement logic is fragmented • Network and IT apply different service meanings
Traditional EA documents this drift. One Telecom One Anatomy™ eliminates it.
It collapses hundreds of shadow anatomies into one coherent enterprise anatomy across P1–P6.
How it impacts the 12 Core Telecom Use Cases
Using One Telecom One Anatomy™, the operator can finally address enterprise-wide failures across use cases such as:
Service Definition Consistency One service meaning across catalog, provisioning, and billing.
Pricing & Charging Accuracy One rating logic instead of fragmented engines.
Order-to-Activation Flow One P1–P6 model for provisioning and activation.
Billing Accuracy Consistent rating, invoicing, and adjustments.
Revenue Assurance Unified leakage detection across usage and billing.
Partner Settlements One settlement logic per agreement.
Customer Onboarding One rule flow across channels.
Product Launch
Single place to define service, price, eligibility.
Regulatory Reporting One meaning per data element.
Usage Mediation Unified aggregation logic.
Network-to-Billing Alignment Service quality reflected correctly in billing.
Customer Experience Alignment Same decision logic across care, web, mobile.
With One Telecom One Anatomy™, these use cases become predictable, coherent, and improvable — because they run on one enterprise logic stack.
If EA remains limited to IT, the telecom enterprise continues to drift — system by system, rule by rule, service by service.
A telecom operator regains coherence only when its entire P1–P6 structure is mapped as one integrated anatomy.
Write to us if you’d like a diagnostic walk-through of how this works in your environment.
