In my previous post, The Quest for All-Embracing Succinct Definition, I expressed the intention to build a defining story for enterprise architecture. The post received several encouraging comments that were most positive, constructive and challenging. Thank you! One (I am not referring to one of the comments @ drisec.com) was skeptical, straight cynical even, but with a hint why, which helps too.
I am not going to react to any of those comments now however. It is too easy to lose myself in doing so. Instead I opt to start a structured build-up over a number of posts and all comments received will be food for thought, to continue, or to go back and reconsider. So don’t stop commenting!
In creating the structured build-up I will take following approach:
- Initially I will draw from existing definition assertions made by others and will consider them being rightful only based on my own intuition although some might not be widely accepted yet. Later on, I may come back to those so to secure the foundations or to reconsider.
- In the build-up I will leave lots of loose ends, by intention or just by initial oversight, that I will pick up again in later posts. Any reader looking for “enterprise architecture” clarity in one post is headed to disappointment. Please consider this when commenting.
- I will create models to support the reasoning, with the quote that “all models are wrong but some are useful” (George E. P.Box) in mind.
For the curious ones, on the reasons why I am doing all of this… I am proceeding with this, firstly out of intellectual curiosity whether it can be done, secondly to find better means to clarify the value of enterprise architecture to the unaware, but primarily in support of writing the master dissertation that I need to deliver and for which I have already done quite some research. Is the defining story of enterprise architecture the subject of my dissertation? Partly, it will form the underpinnings of something larger…
The path from thought to the 'dry', 'sec' essence 