Why TOGAF Isn’t Enough: A Case Study In Real Enterprise Architecture
This exploratory Enterprise Architecture (EA) case study examines how a large organisation used the TOGAF framework as a starting point but ultimately developed a customised enterprise architecture model. It discusses which parts of the framework were retained, what was discarded, and how the organisation constructed an EA practice that delivered substantial value, offering actionable lessons.
Key Points
- Details a large organisation’s attempt to implement TOGAF as its enterprise architecture framework.
- Compares TOGAF’s prescribed methodology with the actual practices adopted by the organisation.
- Breaks down the organisation’s homegrown EA processes, roles, and documentation tailored to real-world constraints.
- Analyses why core components of TOGAF, including ADM and ACF, were deemed impractical or ineffective in context.
- Reflects on broader implications for EA theory, practice, and the adaptability of frameworks across various environments.
Content Summary
Enterprise architecture has been positioned as a strategic enabler, providing clarity, alignment between business and IT, and a coherent roadmap for digital transformation. TOGAF, the most adopted EA framework, claims to facilitate these outcomes. However, this case study reveals discrepancies between the theoretical framework and practical application within a large, tech-driven organisation.
The organisation initially adopted TOGAF and trained its architecture staff accordingly, yet faced challenges when implementing its methods. The Architecture Development Method (ADM) and the framework’s content were largely ignored, leading to a custom approach that emphasised responsiveness and collaboration over rigid adherence. Architects felt that TOGAF’s complexity hindered progress, leading to over-engineered documents and disengaged stakeholders.
Instead of abandoning EA, the organisation reimagined it, creating flexible documentation that served real planning functions. This evolution resulted in a stakeholder-centric architecture that prioritised value over compliance with TOGAF. The case illustrates that formal frameworks often fail under operational complexity, and that an adaptive, context-sensitive approach is often necessary for success.
Why should I read this?
This article offers critical insights for CIOs and IT leaders facing the tension between strategic IT alignment and operational realities. It provides a practical perspective on how one organisation navigated the challenges of applying TOGAF, demonstrating that effective enterprise architecture is not about rigid frameworks but about flexibility and real-world applicability. It encourages leaders to focus on actionable practices rather than merely adhering to formal methodologies.
“`