Navigate Business Architecture—Mapping the Landscape

Bedrock Contours

I started my analogy with the major glacial valleys. The bedrock that creates the easy paths. I think about the bedrock contours of an organization to see the natural flow. The easy paths that simply develop until no one thinks about whether there ever was a choice.

Look at the landscape. What path would the water take? Simply following the contours. Racing down the steep parts. Pooling in the low bits. Meandering down the valley bottoms.

Now look at your organization's ecosystem. We model ecosystems to understand what is mostly outside any stakeholder's choice. Like the bedrock, a lot of the ecosystem just is. Like the possibilities created by the landscape, ecosystem opportunities, challenges, and threats are structural.

Formally, our ecosystem model kind identifies the entities and their interactions that shape the contours of our organization. We use a simple layer frame to capture the complexity and diversity of external relationships:

• Regulatory Layer: Regulators, compliance bodies, standards organizations, and their rules, controls, and reporting interactions
• Market Layer: Competitors, customers, market influencers, and demand-side dynamics
• Upstream Business Partner Layer: Suppliers, logistics providers, and upstream collaborators critical to inputs and production
• Downstream Business Partner Layer: Distributors, resellers, service partners, and other channels delivering products/services to end customers
• Internal Layer: Organizational, functional, and legal structures within the enterprise boundary that interface with external layers

Most of these layers, just are. Most organizations work inside their ecosystems. Few organizations have the heft to create a market, or even alter their industry's supply chain. Ecosystem is the 7th lever in the "Seven Levers of Digital Transformation" because altering your ecosystem requires major heroic interventions. Frankly, most architecture projects will even treat the Ecosystem Model's Internal Layer as bedrock superior architecture.

Legacy Decisions

I'm often asked why superior architecture includes such a broad range of prior decisions. The dead-hand of past decisions creates quiet constant constraints limiting every architecture alternative you will look at today.

Exshaw, Canmore, and Banff are separated by a few kilometres. Choices the CPR made in the 1800s have created very different trajectories for these towns. Even today, 140 years later in the Bow Valley if you are in the tourist services business, you look to Banff. Canmore's entry into the tourist scene had to wait until the population of Calgary pushed demand for mountain condos and get-aways. Exshaw is still an industrial materials supply point.

We use the business model kind, product and service model kind, and organigraphic model kind to capture legacy decisions. Usually, the business model helps us capture the legacy decisions that create contours.

Again, we use a simple layer frame:

• Financial Logic Layer: How are economic returns captured through revenue generation, pricing models, profit mechanisms, and contractual terms.
• Market Scope & Delivery Channel Layer: Who the enterprise serves (customer segments, markets) and how (physical goods, digital goods, services, and partner channels) relevant to value capture.
• Operational Logic Layer: What capabilities, business functions, and processes create and deliver value
• Enablers & Execution Layer: How is value sustained and accelerated through elements like organization, IP, skills, infrastructure, and brand.

This model is designed to show us how we are structured. The legacy decisions that separate a software company like Computer Associates from a software company like VMware. Computer Associates leveraged an install base, support contracts, and mature software to earn its keep.

Every organization has a natural direction, a path that is less energy. A path better aligned with its legacy decisions. Nothing would stop CA from writing a new application. But, the natural direction was to go shopping for mature products in mature segments. Then acquire them, and integrate them into the contract portfolio.

Without an event, like NA Construction's Digital Transformation, few will even consider that deep structure could be changed. The deep structure is just nature. We see this in my simple example used in the myth of the constant—Product Family A's need to change enough to grow share with existing products is not treating the business model as a variable.

Current Authority Topology

Who is involved in a decision is very significant. The current authority structure will completely change possible decisions. With that change, entire new contours can be created.

Canmore and Banff sit in the Bow Valley a hundred kilometres of highway from Calgary. They are separated by the Banff National Park Boundary, demarking an administrative domain. That boundary places one town inside a world famous wildlife preserve overseen by Canada's Federal Government. Its senior leaders reporting to a bureaucracy headquartered 3,500 km away. The other town is under local control.

Years ago, I worked on a public safety communications project in Banff Park. I needed to get communications to a remote ranger's office. In a wilderness area I didn't have any public utilities. There was even a darned mountain in the way of satellite communications. In a weak moment I suggested we just blow the top few hundred feet off the mountain. My sponsor looked over and said, 'I think removing half-a-million tons of limestone would be easier than getting permission to do it'.

We use a governance model kind based on a SABSA risk model concept to map out complex authority structures. We start with topical decision authority based on the key organizational structure.

We'll shamelessly draw from:

• Ecosystem Model Internal Layer: Organizational, functional, and legal structures within the enterprise boundary that interface with external layers
• Business Model Operational Layer: Business functions that create and deliver value
• Value Chain Model: On the primary side looking for products, services, manufacturing, support, and sales. On the supporting side, key supporting organizations.
• Major Initiatives, significant Portfolios, Product Families and core Products
• Geographic boundaries that impact organization and products

Carver Decision Space.png

In my governance message following authority tracks, I talked about using Carver's decision model. This is a larger version of the concept. While you can build a formal model I use it to find the current authority topology. I want to know if we face:

• a swamp, where the change needs a committee to form the committee
• a clear vista, where I have clear sight lines
• the mountains, where the path is clear, but filled with very sharp boundaries
• hidden hazards, like ripple rock, that can rip the bottom out of a decision

We all wish for clear vistas. Sadly, they are rare. Swamps are where change initiatives go to die.

Most of the time we have mountains and hidden hazards. A significant digital transformation will have clear authority. Often with weird contours, and sudden changes to a different decision domain. A sudden cliff-like shift in performance expectations, constraints, and risk appetite. Think about the line between Canmore and Banff. 26km separated by a National Park Boundary.

Concluding Mapping the Landscape

Most of our business architecture contours are solid. They frame our business' possibilities, opportunities, and challenges. Contours are a key source of unexpected threats and opportunities.

When I think of the contours I test two things. First, I test the downhill flow. I look for what is the easy, natural downhill path. If you don't apply any energy this is where the organization will flow. Second, I test engineering a change. What would it take to alter the topology?

Wherever possible I take the downhill flow. I let the natural contours carry my changes with the natural flow. Then, there are the times when I have to battle nature. When I have to overcome the downhill flow. Then I need to expend serious energy.

Without a need to change the contours I live with my organization's deep superior architecture. The deep superior architecture formed by our ecosystem. Our legacy decisions that created shallower superior architecture. Last, the current authority topology that sits on top of the foundation.

This week I want you to think about the contours of your superior architecture. Test the downhill flow. If you didn't start with the contours in mind, are you following the downhill path?

As a stretch task, test whether you inadvertently need a topographical change. I'm all for topographical change. In fact, most digital transformations require topographical change. However, needing an inadvertent topographical change means you need an unbudgeted engineering marvel.

Next week we'll move to looking at how value is created. Bluntly, the target business architecture must be directly aligned with value creation.

Have a great week!

As always, I welcome your feedback and questions.

Regards,

Dave

Dave Hornford
Conexiam