586
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 30:
Line 30: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
GC Enterprise Architecture/Enterprise Solutions (view source)
Revision as of 14:05, 24 September 2020
, 14:05, 24 September 2020→Reusability Classification Framework
== Reusability Classification Framework ==
== Reusability Classification Framework ==
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Option
!Description
!Illustration
|-
|Centralization
|Reusable assets are standardized to the entire GC in a consolidated manner, governed by a centralized authority and can also be provisioned by a single service provider , and is fully integrated across all instances. It maximizes utility of major investments which address common business needs, have Enterprise-wide scope, long durations, and require participation from all departments and agencies
Example: SSC Secure Cloud Enablement and Defense (SCED), desktop standards, data standards
Pros: Enables cohesive, horizontal integration across Enterprise to enables consistent frictionless utilization by stakeholders and administration. Maximizes consistency of technology.
Cons: Increases risk of vendor lock in. Does not allow for department specific customizations to address non-standardized business processes.
|
|-
|Distributed
|Reusable assets are identified by departments with common needs, governed by those departments and provisioned distribution and shared instances of the assets. This model leverages enterprise standards, product owners, departmental clusters, governance and oversight. This model may also leverage distributed technical infrastructure to support solution clusters.
Examples: FMT accelerators / Product Owner guardrails / Open Source toolkits, distributions, and templates, M365 (MS Teams) – Federated via DCAM tenants.
Pros: Recognizes layered approach of Enterprise Architecture Framework and enables governance of one or many aspects of Business, Information/Data, Application, Technology, Security, and Privacy for reuse by departments with similar business processes or non-functional requirements.
Cons: Although the risk of vendor lock in is mitigated comparted to the Enterprise Service Model, it may be challenging to replace technology components that span multiple departments.
|
|-
|Interoperability
|Reusable assets are developed by departments using standards and published for provisioning by others. This stand alone, or decentralized option allows departments to implement their own unique assets but publish and consume APIs and Open Source software centrally led guidance and standards.
Examples: IBM Curam (BDM – Public Cloud-hosted Containterized microservices exposed as APIs)
Pros: Enables reactive solutions to address business processes not shared across departments. Limited risk of vendor lock in.
Cons: Limits reuse across departments. Talent supporting technology components in the federated model have fewer opportunities to build skill sets useful across the Enterprise.
|
|-
|Departmental
|Reusable assets are developed for provisioning within a department or are not resuable at all as there is are no common business capabilities and user journeys.
This option allows departments to implement one-off, niche services, with reuse within their department or none at all.
Examples: Agriculture Canada SeqDB – Botany, Mycology, and Entomology Collection Management
Pros: Enables maximum flexibility for departments
Cons: Does not easily allow for reuse. Encourages niche skills not portable across the GC
|
|}
== Decision Making Framework for Enterprise Solutions ==
== Decision Making Framework for Enterprise Solutions ==
