To have a long-term plan, a blueprint, and a roadmap for a
country is as important as we need one for an enterprise. A country is like an
enterprise entity in a bigger scale, which also needs a common vision, cohesive
top-down guidance, and effective governance structure and process to make sure
the vision, goals, and objectives can be achieved and the execution is heading
to the right direction. Therefore, a country also needs an “EA”. This could be
an ingredient of socialism, if yes be it. As I discussed in a previous blog
article “The Road of Moderation”, the correct choice is usually in the middle
between extremes. For a social system, it should be between extreme capitalism
and extreme socialism. The most effective and efficient way is likely the
convergence from the two. This is about the balance of the top-down guidance,
planning, governance, and coordination with the freedom of organic growth from
bottom-up. We can see that USA and China
are converging from different directions to an optimized model that suites each.
I’m looking forward to the development, and maintain optimistic for the motion.
US government has promoted enterprise architecture for over
a decade, but mainly in IT domain leading by CIOs. One reason for that it is
not as successful as expected is due to lacking of participation from business
side. If we can involve the participation from business side for the entire US
government, what we get is exactly the Enterprise Architecture for the United
State of America!
In EA, we prefer a federated model for big enterprise, which
is applicable to a country as well. As a matter of fact, USA has already
adopted the federated government model by design. Mr. President is the CEO of
the country; we also need a Chief Enterprise Architect and an enterprise architecture
team for the country to serve the intent!
Relevent Links:The Road of Moderation
Enterprise Architecture .vs. Collection of Architectures inEnterprise
No comments:
Post a Comment