Enterprise Architecture (EA) is often misunderstood as just a collection of frameworks and methodologies. However, the reality is that EA exists in every organisation — whether formally structured or shaped through ad-hoc decisions. The distinction between Enterprise Architecture and Enterprise Architecting is crucial to understanding how organisations can move from fragmented, unstructured systems to a coherent, strategic architecture that aligns with business objectives.
In this article, we’ll explore:
- The difference between Enterprise Architecture (the concept) and Enterprise Architecting (the practice).
- The risks of blindly adopting EA frameworks.
- How to build a practical and adaptable EA practice that truly supports business goals.
Enterprise Architecture: The Concept That Always Exists
Regardless of whether an organisation actively invests in EA, it already has an enterprise architecture — even if it’s informal or undocumented. This architecture is reflected in how the organisation structures and manages its processes, technologies, and people.
Organisations typically fall into two categories:
- Formal Enterprise Architecture — Purposefully designed and documented following established guidelines.
- Ad-hoc Enterprise Architecture — Emerging from organic decisions without an overarching strategy.
Thus, EA is not something that an organisation either has or does not have; rather, it is always present — either as an intentional system or as a result of evolving decisions.
Enterprise Architecting: The Practice That Shapes Architecture
If Enterprise Architecture is the outcome, then Enterprise Architecting is the process that creates, modifies, and sustains it. This practice can take two forms:
- Deliberate (Formal) Architecting — Using recognised EA frameworks, methodologies, and principles to shape a structured and well-documented enterprise architecture.
- Consequential (Ad-hoc) Architecting — Where architecture emerges from situational decisions without an overarching strategy.
The challenge for many organisations is transitioning from an ad-hoc architecture to a formalised one. However, this shift must be intentional and aligned with business objectives — simply adopting a framework does not guarantee success.
The Pitfall of Framework-Driven Architecting
Many organisations, in their quest to formalise EA, make the mistake of blindly adopting popular frameworks without considering whether they align with their actual needs. This often results in:
- Impractical Architecture — A rigid system that fails to serve the business effectively.
- Checklist-Driven EA — Following frameworks just to comply with governance requirements, rather than focusing on meaningful improvements.
- Disconnection from Business Goals — An architecture that exists on paper but does not translate into business value.
A formal EA approach should not be about ticking boxes; it should be about achieving a real, adaptable structure that enables business growth.
Moving Towards a Practical and Sustainable EA Practice
For organisations looking to mature their enterprise architecting practice, the key is to focus on outcomes rather than rigid processes. Consider these best practices:
- Define the Purpose of EA — Establish clear objectives: business alignment, agility, efficiency, and innovation.
- Start with Business Needs — Ensure that architecture decisions are business-driven, not just IT-centric.
- Adopt Frameworks Wisely — Use them as tools to guide strategy, not as rigid rulebooks.
- Ensure Continuous Evolution — EA should not be a one-time project but an ongoing, adaptive practice.
Conclusion
Enterprise Architecture is always present in an organisation — whether as an ad-hoc construct or a formalised framework. The role of Enterprise Architecting is to actively shape and refine this architecture to ensure it supports business goals effectively. However, organisations must resist the temptation to implement EA frameworks for compliance’s sake; instead, they should focus on building a practical, flexible, and value-driven architecture that truly supports their strategic direction.
In the next article, I will explore how organisations can transition from an ad-hoc enterprise architecture to a structured yet adaptable EA practice — without falling into the framework trap. Stay tuned!