Module 3 Reflection: Business Architecture

I think the most obvious system in place within my school district that helps define our Business Architecture is the rigorous testing of business scenarios. Before any technology or curriculum adoption, focus groups meet on a recurring basis to test out products and discuss strengths and limitations. Such was the case with our newest mathematics textbook adoptions, which took months to agree upon. I don’t see the overseeing of such rigorous scenario testing as a limitation at all, but rather a safeguard. Our district is so large (the third largest in California) that it is imperative money is well spent; when a district-wide program is adopted and implemented, it’s often accompanied with a six- to seven-figure price tag.

According to the BIZBOK Guide (2013), the BA must be centered around four key domains: capabilities (what?), information (what?), value streams (how?), and organization (who and where?). Those four areas are then surrounded by other elements, including the vision, partners, products/services, policies, projects and decision-making processes (p. 2). It’s clear to me that our district has considered these zoomed-out perspectives in detail, as every decision and professional development seminar is part of a shared vision. An example is how these designs have trickled down to the Technology Architecture within the district.
 
In 2014, I began to question some of the products and decision-making processes of my district’s Technology Architecture, which is directly correlated to the infrastructure of our Business Architecture: Why do we only have Hewlett-Packard products as our PCs on campus? Why is our firewall, or network regulation, so strong? Why do some schools have 45 MB/s network download speeds, and we only have 10 (metrics/measures)? And why do “HelpDesk” tickets (services) have to be so structured and detailed? It’s interesting that after learning about Business Architecture in our assigned readings, some lightbulbs turned on in my mind that point to the core elements of BA: every decision made is intended to “improve business capabilities.”

In September, 2015, as I began to pursue the adoption of a Chromebook pilot program in my own classroom, the answers to my questions began to flood my mind through inferential reasoning. Our district really does abide by its vision and mission statements. And the LCAP goals are so well-outlined that the budget is strategically arranged to maximize the accomplishment of our district’s goals. Furthermore, every person I spoke to along the chain-of-command seemed to share that vision and played a particular role in answering my questions. Our district had a design in place for updating and improving certain technologies every school, and the key players had a schedule to uphold.

I spoke with an IT technician on Friday, as 26 of our teachers were scheduled for a new computer replacement (after 5 years). He said the average technician in the district oversees about 4000 devices! In most organizations, that’s unheard of; with such a structured architecture, however, it’s possible.

My new HP “desktop.” The entire hard drive, motherboard, and processor is in that small box attached to my monitor!

In developing my own Business Architecture, it’s important for me to learn from the successes and failures of other organizations. Every scenario must be considered and that’s labor intensive. But as a mentor of mine used to say, think about the five Ps: Prior Preparation Prevents Poor Performance. If at all possible, I’d like to prepare for my surprises in advance!

A Guide to the Business Architecture Body of Knowledge [PDF]. (2013). Business Architecture Guide. Retrieved February 7, 2016 from http://www2.mitre.org/public/eabok/pdf/BIZBOK-V3.5-Part1-Introduction.pdf  ​