USA50: Why a State Benefits System Claimed Agile Backlogs as Evidence of Enterprise Architecture

Overview:

This case is part of a 100-diagnostic series exposing how public sector IT teams have mislabeled delivery methods as “Enterprise Architecture progress.”

A recurring pattern is equating active agile backlogs with architecture reform. User stories moved, sprints closed, features deployed — yet the enterprise structure linking benefits policy, eligibility, payment, and compliance was never modeled.

P1–P6 Insight Preview:  Agile delivery improved implementation speed (P5) and localized processes (P2), but lacked policy-to-operations alignment (P1) and system behavior coherence (P3).

Components (P4) evolved in isolation; business ops (P6) and tech ops (P6) remained reactive to policy changes.

Role Disconnects:

1. CEO/Agency Head: “We’re delivering faster than ever” — but still not delivering holistically.

2. CIO: “We’ve embraced agile” — yet nothing connects the dots enterprise-wide.

3. Sales Head (Programs): “Stakeholder requests are addressed quickly” — but systemic problems remain.

4. Chief EA: “We have agile projects, not an agile enterprise.”

Want to read more?

Subscribe to architecturerating.com to keep reading this exclusive post.

Subscribe Now