http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik/archive/2007/08/24/is-it-time-to-bring-the-fea-concepts-to-the-commercial-space.aspxFor years, we've been living with Zachmann and now TOGAF as commercially available EA frameworks, but honestly, they don't address the problems faced by large organziations with respect to complexity. The Federal Enterprise Architecture does. That's becauseen-USCommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik/archive/2007/08/24/is-it-time-to-bring-the-fea-concepts-to-the-commercial-space.aspx#4570160Sun, 26 Aug 2007 08:49:11 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:4570160Hong S Kim<p>FEA has a good reason to follow for both of the public and private sector. But the problem is that it is very difficult to guide the every enterprise to catch up the Federal Reference Model because lack of easy and practical solutions for this earea. Therefore, it wolud be going to take some time for the FRM to be prsctical enough. I think we may find out the very practical &quot;how to get to the FEA&quot; with reasonable efforts. Thanks! &nbsp; </p>http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik/archive/2007/08/24/is-it-time-to-bring-the-fea-concepts-to-the-commercial-space.aspx#4571137Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:01:08 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:4571137NickMalik<p>The reality is that the content of the FEA is less important for the commercial sector than the mechanism and overall metamodel. &nbsp;The fact that the layers are organized in the manner that they are, and the types of information in those layers: that is readily attainable and in fact, would greatly accelerate the creating of commercial enterprise architecture.</p> <p>The FEA is a great EA reference model... better than Zachmann, IMHO.</p> http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik/archive/2007/08/24/is-it-time-to-bring-the-fea-concepts-to-the-commercial-space.aspx#5021343Fri, 21 Sep 2007 02:38:45 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:5021343Paul Wallis<p>Hi Nick,</p> <p>I think you hit the nail on the head when you say that a commercial organisation never thinks over a long enough period of time to produce something akin to FEA. &nbsp;</p> <p>The current economic pressures on even the largest of companies mean that taking a long term approach to EA can never be a reality without a huge leap of faith. &nbsp;Trying to get corporate buy-in for EA is difficult. &nbsp; Trying to get business to pay for a long term project with no measurable benefits is next to impossible, and rightly so. &nbsp;</p> <p>When I worked in the cash rich Oil &amp; Gas industry I always had to show why I should get IT project budget over and above new pumps, compressors or plant modifications which would reduce bottlenecks, smooth production and make money. &nbsp;Everything had to be related to maximising profitability over as short a period of time as possible.</p> <p>Governments have different priorities and responsibilities to those of a business, as expressed so clearly by the development of FEA and DoDAF.</p> <p>I’ve recently posted an article “Understanding Enterprise Architecture complexity” comparing Zachman, TOGAF and DoDAF to OBASHI, an approach which we developed from techniques used by Oil and Gas engineers which does provide quick paybacks early in its implementation. &nbsp;</p> <p>See <a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.keystonesandrivets.com/kar/2007/09/the-models-and-.html">http://www.keystonesandrivets.com/kar/2007/09/the-models-and-.html</a> , your thoughts about this approach are very welcome. </p>