Managing the Transition from Current to Target Architectures

TOGAF uses the technique of Gap Analysis to understand differences between the current and target architectures. The technique is used in all four domains – business, data, application and technology (Phases B, C and D) – to identify the components that need to remain, those that need to be replaced or updated, and those that need to be retired. And gap analysis is then used to help develop architecture roadmaps for each of these domains, and to produce a consolidated roadmap across all four domains (in Phase E of the ADM).

Gap Analysis is clearly a key technique for EA, and this case study shows how a European retail organization (also ranked one of the largest retailers in the world) applied the TOGAF technique to three types of gap, to make the transition from current to target architectures more effective.

Here are the three types of gap that they used:

1. Firstly they recognised that there is often a gap between TOGAF certification and using EA technique effectively. Here they used a mentoring program to help their architects bridge the gap between “knowing” TOGAF and the practicalities of actually “architecting” change.

2. The second type of gap was the gap between the views of a particular change to the architectures and the overall direction of the enterprise architecture as a single unit. This is the difference between an iteration of the TOGAF ADM that is focused on a particular request for architectural change, and the iteration of the ADM that is focused on a holistic, enterprise-wide overview of all architectural changes.

3. Finally they focused a lot of effort on producing a more thorough consolidated view of the gaps between the various architecture domains. This was similar to the consolidated view produced by TOGAF in Phase E, but with greater attention to the dependencies and relationships between all architectural components.