When transformation efforts fail even though we have followed the latest theories and best practices, part of the explanation often is that 'there is a difference between theory and practice'. In this presentation Mikkel Brahm explains that difference between orthodox theory and practice, which we must be aware of to avoid certain pitfalls, and draws on less orthodox theory to help cope with these challenges.

1. A Complexity inspired approach to
Leading Technology Enabled
Business Transformation
Doctor of Management (Ph.D) Mikkel H Brahm
Head of Architecture, Nordea | Digital Banking

2. Mikkel H. Brahm
Head of Architecture
Nordea | Digital Banking
25+ years of experience in the fields of
Software Engineering and
Enterprise Architecture
Slides available at SlideShare
https://www.slideshare.net/mikkelbrahm
Doctoral (PhD) Thesis available at UH
Seeking to Control Enterprise with Architecture
the limits and value of an engineering approach
from the perspective of an Enterprise Architect
http://uhra.herts.ac.uk/handle/2299/17596
ENTERPRISE
Intentional process of doing and organizing business
emerging from enabling/constraining figurations of relationships always in flux
ARCHITECTURE
Guiding organisation of structuring structures
including human conventions and mechanisms

3. Problem Statement
Why do most transformations fail to deliver expected results?

4. Enterprise Architecture
Some definitions to ensure that we understand each other
Architects design Architecture
Architecture is Structuring Structures1
We impose Structure to achieve Qualities
• e.g. Firmitas, Utilitas, Venustas
• ~ Durability, Usefulness, Beauty
Everything that is Formed has Architecture
• whether or not an architect designed it
• whether or not emergent = intentional
A Company may engage in one or more Businesses
A Business is a Purposeful Exchange of Valuables
(tangible or intangible; for profit or non-profit)
The Business takes place in an Ecosystem of
Players who play some role in the Context of the
Business e.g. customer and supplier, but also
market regulators, competitors, partners, media, ..
Enterprise can mean the Ecosystem, the Business, the Company, or the IT of either of these
Enterprise Architecture can mean the design of the (intentional) structure of the Enterprise,
or/and the (intentional and emergent) structuring of the Enterprise
1) Pierre Bourdieu, (1972) 2013, Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge University Press 4

5. MechanismsPeople
Action
Structure
$
Enterprise Architecture
What we seek is particular outcomes = action performed by people and mechanisms in structures
Harold Leavitt, 1965, Applied Organizational Change in Industry, in Handbook of Organizations, James March (Ed.), Routledge
Based on Leavitt’s diamond

6. 3. AS-IS MODEL 2. TO-BE MODEL
0. AS-IS REALITY 1. TO-BE REALITY
4. GAPS
• A
• B
• C
5. ROAD MAP
Best Practice (waterfall) Change Management
Rarely delivers the desired outcomes – but it is something you can do without having to think too much
6[E.g. TOGAF-ADM] Open Group, The (2013) TOGAF® Version 9.1. Zaltbommel: Van Haren Publishing.

7. Our limited ability to effect change
Iterative and learning based approaches allow you to navigate along the way
7Steve Jobs: The doers are the major thinkers. The people that really create … are both the thinker and doer in one person.

8. Changes that you did not intend to occur
Iterative and learning based approaches allow you to navigate along the way
Influence
Action
Response
e.g. Power and Influence – Public Transcript
e.g. Arts of Resistance – Hidden Transcript
James C Scott, 1992, Domination and the Arts of Resistance, Yale University Press 8

9. Gaps that are not / cannot be modelled
Iterative and learning based approaches allow you to navigate along the way
Einstein: It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer
?
!
Problem Solution
Solution
Problem
(Objective)
9

10. Best Practice (waterfall) Change Management
Partial answer to why this approach rarely seem to deliver the desired outcomes
Pattern1: Context (= set of Forces) + Problem + Solution
Our models are (over) simplifications of the real world
=> they do not describe all the relevant forces and aspects of problem and solution
1. Gaps between as-is and to-be models are only a subset of gaps between realities
◦ dependencies exist between gaps, both gaps that show up in models and gaps that do not
2. Changes in our roadmap are only a subset of all the changes that occur e.g. do not cover
◦ changes emerging without intentional actions
◦ changes that result from the intentional moves of other players in the ecosystem
3. Some changes that are included in our roadmap, we are not always able to effect
◦ the people available to us may not have the required know how or technologies
◦ “wielding power” to influence, sell, motivate, etc. is difficult and complex
◦ the objective we are pursuing may not be realistic
1) Christopher Alexander, 1979, The Timeless Way of Building & 1977, A Pattern Language, Oxford University Press 10
Iterative approaches may better support learning and navigating along the way

11. Intro
Organization
as a Game

15. Complexity I
What characterizes this thought style?

16. Society is a figuration, and status etc. is not evenly distributed
=> Everyone cannot win at the same time
A subset of society has similar properties e.g. a market
=> There is no formula that will allow everyone to win
Norbert Elias

17. Gossiping has the social function to re-iterate norms and values
in light of particular (or imaginary) situations

18. Norms what it is normal to do aka customs
+ Values how we make value judgements
culture eats strategy for breakfast
Peter Drucker
Culture the way of life / living / organizing

19. If our individual behavior is not socially acceptable
we risk exclusion i.e. others cease to have function for us
In an organizational setting exclusion can mean being fired, but
can also just mean that you do not participate in the fun stuff

20. Enforcement – example
Boss instructs EA to focus on modelling and documentation
Social convention – example
EA is overly critical towards senior managers’ ideas and desires

21. In every society it may be observed that, if it is not to constitute
an insult, the counter-gift must be deferred and different,
because the immediate return of an exactly identical object
clearly amounts to a refusal (i.e. the return of the same object).
The ‘giving of a gift’ is a social construction / social convention
There is an ‘art’ to doing it properly Pierre Bourdieu

22. One of the most crucial questions for a player is
when to play – and when to pass
Chris Potts

23. Baboons do not use Baboon-made technology
Social order is re-enacted and re-negotiated every day
Bruno Latour

24. Prescription = what the script presupposes
from its transcribed actors and authors
Transcription = action hitherto played out by human or
nonhuman actors is translated to a more durable repertoire
Bruno Latour

25. We use physical constructs to symbolize social convention

26. Scripted-action lends durability to social conventions
since scripted enactment is not as such a renegotiation
Materiality can have function for people in the sense that the
scripted action and prescription can enable and constrain

27. An early well-known ”Industrial transformation”
into the Hunter-Gatherer Society
Technologies that enable hunter-gatherer-society:
• Hunting tools e.g. spear, spear thrower
• Enables efficient procurement of meat, skins etc.
• Gathering tools e.g. wicker basket
• Enables efficient gathering of roots, herbs etc.
• Fire
• Enables cooking of food
• Restricts movement
• Leads to tribal gathering point
• Leads to communal meal
• Language / speech
• Enables expression of needs and fears etc.
• Enables co-cordination and colaboration
• Division of Labour – hunter, gatherer, tool-maker
• Adam Smith (1776) ”An Inquiry into the Nature
and Causes of the Wealth of Nations”
• Xenophon (4th century BC) ”Cyropaedia”

28. Dichotomy & idealization tends to constrain available options
• Good
• Agreement
• Control
• Transparent
• Bad
• Disagreement
• Freedom, Autonomy or
Empowerment
• Opaque
• Useful for some, less for others
• Negotiation,
Collaboration & Competition
• Enabling & Constraining,
Self-disciplining
• Public & Hidden Transcripts +
Ruptures

29. We must cease once and for all
to describe the effects of power in negative terms:
it ‘excludes’, it ‘represses’, it ‘censors’,
it ‘abstracts’, it ‘masks’, it ‘conceals’.
In fact power produces; it produces reality;
it produces domains of objects and rituals of truth.
Michel Foucault

30. It entails a refusal to use intellectual resources
outside a narrow and ‘safe’ terrain
Functional stupidity is organizationally-supported lack of
reflexivity, substantive reasoning, and justification
Source: Alvesson & Spicer, A stupidity-based theory of organizations

31. Not only Architects feel competent (and want) to direct change,
so be prepared for a political struggle if you seek influence

32. What is science?

33. Orthodox EA has its roots in natural sciences
General Systems Theory

34. - 4 =

35. - 4 = It depends…
… on which assumptions we make

36. - 4 =
- 1 4*
i 2*
2i
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_number
All science is based on assumptions
Different theories are based on different assumptions

37. Orthodox EA
What characterizes this thought style?

38. 1 Orthodox EA presumes autonomy (and rationality)
Individual is primary and apart from other individuals

39. 2 Orthodox EA presumes determinacy
Spontaneity and improvisation is absent or insignificant

40. 3 Orthodox EA presumes openness
Everything can (and should) be shared and modelled

41. 4 Orthodox EA presumes enterprise intentionality
Enterprise treated as Entity with own strategy and goals

42. 5 Orthodox EA presumes agreement
Not aligned individual goals are illegitimate / selfish

43. Assumptions that characterise orthodox EA
(and Systems Theory)
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
• The individual is primary, makes meaning of experiences,
and makes rational decisions about which course of action to take
• Knowable set of stimuli-response; If we know what factors into a situation,
then we can predict what will happen in that situation
• Information is assumed to be shared openly and hence freely available,
so that everything can (and should) be modelled and documented
• The Enterprise is treated as an entity with intentionality,
and conflicting individual intentionality is made illegitimate
• People are assumed to agree on goals and means,
or at least architecture cannot begin until agreement is reached

44. Complexity II
What characterizes this thought style?

46. people have function for each other
we are born into relationships to people upon whom we depend
Elias, Norbert (1991).
The Society of Individuals.
Basil Blackwell.

47. 1 Interdependence enable and constrain our actions
Socially unacceptable behavior can damage relationships

48. 2 We often act habitually / acceptably to garner support.
Provocative actions can lead to renegotiation of norms.

49. Phronesis: Wisdom / Practical Judgment – experience based
Knowing what it is right to do = being a virtuous person
Episteme: Theory and Basic assumptions – pure knowledge
Techne: Craftmanship / Method – can be taught

50. 3 Power dynamics enable and constrain what it is prudent
to say both for subordinates and for the power holders
5 times “Why?” => Socially acceptable rationalization
Scott, John C (1990).
Domination and the Arts of
Resistance - Hidden transcripts.
Yale University Press.

51. 4 Power is never equally distributed. Any leverage can be
used to further one’s interests in any other area.
Jackall, Robert (2010).
Moral Mazes –
The World of Corporate Managers.
Oxford University Press.

52. Linear causality
Culture forms Behaviour OR Behaviour forms Culture
Circular or Transformative causality
Culture forms Behaviour AND Behaviour forms Culture

53. 5 Collaborative innovation hinges on mutual trust
that others can contribute what we ourselves cannot

54. Assumptions underpinning my approach
(contrasted with assumptions underpinning Systems Theory)
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
1. Mutual interdependence
2. Self-disciplining and Spontaneity
3. Hidden Transcript and Public Transcript
4. Figuration of relationships with power-differentials
5. Web of Intentionality - Collaboration and Competition

55. Individual
Group
Relationship
Figuration
= Patterns of Relationships in Flux

56. Mechanism
Scripted
ActionTranscription
(or Inscription
or Encoding)
Author (Developer) Actor (User)
Prescription
Actor-Network Theory “primer”
(https://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/papers/Latour_Mixing.pdf)
Actor
Techne can be taught, Phronesis cannot – perhaps we can only transcribe Techne?

57. Technology and Mechanisms
1. Autonomy
2. Determinacy
3. Openness
4. Intentionality
5. Agreement
1. Interdependence
2. Self-disciplining
3. Hidden Transcript
4. Power Figuration
5. Collaborate/compete
1. Transcription
2. Turing machines
3. Knowable but complicated
4. Scripted Action & Prescription
5. No responsiveness
(Bruno Latour)

58. No Universal Theory
Systems Theory explains
systems e.g. mechanical
Process Theory explains
humans organizing

59. Intermezzo
Organization
as a Multi-tier Game

60. Elias, Norbert (1978).
What is Sociology?
Columbia University Press.
Multi-tiered game
representatives • delegates
leaders • government
court • elite
We tend to personify the source
of the constraints which we feel
compelled to obey

61. Architecture
What difference does it make how I think?

62. James Lapalme, l’École de Technologie Supérieure
Enterprise Architecture is many things to many people…

63. • Customer’s devices
• Customer’s systems e.g. ERP
• Search Engines
• Public Infrastructure
• Market places
• Laws and norms
• Standards of doing business
• Labour unions
• Taboos
Architecture, both as-is and to-be, is also outside the company
This can be a source of both some stability and some change

64. Our product sells  how can we produce it cheaper or faster  Inside-in
Our product does not sell, but should  how can we market it better  Inside-out
Our product does not seem to work  what is it that customers do need  Outside-in
Our product would work in a different market  who can augment our product  Outside-out
Figuration has no in-/outside, but we can take the perspective of
the other e.g. the customer, the regulator, the partner etc.

65. Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Outcome
Mean /
Objective
Mean /
Objective
Mean Mean MeanMean
Linear
Causality
=>
Predictable

66. Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Mean Mean
Mean
Mean
Outcome
Organisation / needs in t0 = organisation / needs in t1
i.e. we control when the organization does and does not change
t0 t1

67. Practical examples of Orthodoxy
Elias: Idealization of stable states
Process-reduced language
Analyze Design Execute
Unfreeze Change Refreeze
(Kurt Lewin)

68. The v-model assumes that you can hand over
the entire outcome of your work
Practical examples of Orthodoxy

69. Practical examples of Orthodoxy
AS-IS LOGICAL
AS-IS PHYSICAL
TO-BE LOGICAL
TO-BE PHYSICAL

70. STRATEGY
SOURCE:
McKinsey Organization Design Service Line,
McKinsey 9 Golden Rules report
2013
SOURCE:
Leavitt, Harold J.
“Applied Organizational Change in Industry”
in Handbook of Organizations pp 1144-70
1965
5 decades of improvements …
… without progress

71. Taking the attitude of the other is what allows us
to understand their perception of us – and allows us to “fit in”
Rather than pursuing an unattainable level of predictability,
why not improve instead our ability to observe and understand?

72. George Herbert Mead describes “the attitude of the engineer”
as an enlarged sense of social self and attitudes of others

73. To engineer something helpful, we must understand both
the person we are trying to help and their journey (fulfil need)

75. Practice
Being in charge without being in control

76. 76
[Why are banks so similar?] DiMaggio, P. J. and Powel, W. W. (1983) The iron cage revisited:
Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organisational fields. American Sociological Review. 48(2), pp.147-160.

77. Source: Nordea, Annual Report 2017, nordea.com Investor Relations
Nordea simultaneously responds to change and innovate
Together, we lead the way, enabling dreams and everyday aspirations for a greater good
77

78. 2018 © Nordea Digital Company confidential
Customer Statement
“I will trust a bank that guides me when I
feel lost, comforts me when I feel
frustrated, and encourages me when I need
motivation.” Take my hand
and I will trust
you
Customer Statement

79. Source: Nordea, Annual Report 2018, nordea.com Investor Relations 79
€m

80. Nordea’s adoption of Scaled-Agile Framework
This is a work in progress – roughly 50 % of development is done in a SAFe (“inspired”) structure
• Nordea has split our total investment in change into 7 portfolios
• Initiatives in a portfolio are sized according to investment level (essential, large, full)
• Cadence is common 4*12 weeks PI’s (+3+1 weeks of vacation) = matches fiscal year & quarters
80Source: https://scaledagileframework.com/

81. Group Business Support
Nordea Organisation, simplified
No split between IT and Business, nor Silos; just Run the Business and Change the Business
Group
Functions
Personal Wholesale
RUN THE BANK
CHANGETHEBANK
Group Functions Portfolio
Personal Portfolio
Commercial Portfolio
Commercial &
Business
Wealth
Wealth Portfolio
Wholesale Portfolio
Change Execution Initiatives funded by Portfolios
Product (not Project) funding i.e. ≈ Stable Burn Rate
Architectural Governance is a mix of Investment Gates and
Solution Architects assigned into Hubs
Group Data Portfolio
Group Tech Portfolio
Group
Architecture
CEO
81

82. Shared via
Architecture Repository
EA provide initiatives with Target and Transition architecture
We do not just seek autonomy per se, but a mix with just-in-time centralized decisions
82
Enterprise Level
Portfolio Level
Solution Level
Information Guidance
Approved by
Architecture
Board
Approved by
Maker + Checker
Solution Architects must link their architecture
to Enterprise and Portfolio level architecture
Architecture that guides build teams
must be approved by the Architecture Board
We are centralizing prioritization and control
over the transformation of Nordea
and invalidate previous ‘silo-decisions’
Published by
Head
Architect
Approved by
Maker + Checker
scaledagileframework.com: Centralize infrequent long-lasting decisions that provide significant economies of scale

83. Budgets&Guidelines
Controlling&Reporting
Henry Mintzberg, 1983, Structure in Fives, Designing effective organizations, Prentice-Hall 83

84. Sunshine
84James C Scott, 1992, Domination and the Arts of Resistance, Yale University Press

85. Architecture Board
Includes COO’s and CIO
Head Architect
Dual competent
Solution Architect
Dual competent
Developer
Cross-functional teams
trust
trust
trust
85Steve Jobs: The people that really create the things … are both the thinker and doer in one person.

86. Nordea & Personal Banking Priorities 2019
Each Business Area defines sub-goals to the Group level priorities
Increase Business Momentum
• Mmmmmmm mmm mmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmm
• Mmm mmmmmmmmm mmm mmmmmmmmmmm
• Mmmm mmmmmmmmmm mmm
• Mmmmmm mm mmm m mmmmmmmm
• Mm mmmmmmmm mmm mmmmmmmmm
Drive Structural Cost Efficiency
• Mmmmmmmmm m mmmmmmm mm mmmmmm
• Mmmmm mmmmmmmmm mmmmmmm mmmmm
• Mm mmmmmmm mmmmmmm mmmmmmm
Key Priorities
Key Enablers
Leverage ONE Nordea
Embrace Data, Technology & Digitalisation
Embed the Nordea Culture
• Mm mmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmm mmmmm
Mm mmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmm mmmmm
• Mm mmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmm mmmmm
86
What to architect?
Completeness of
Vision?

87. Investment in Change in Personal Banking 2019
Illustrative example (names/numbers are modified)
87
INITIATIVE
ARCH.
ALIGN
BUDGET
FY TARGET
ARCH.
PRIORITY
ARCHITECTURE
ALIGN & PRIORITY RATIONALE
BusinessMomentum
StructuralCostEfficiency
LeverageONENordea
Data,Tech&Digi
Lack of clarity of scope boundaries with <other
investment> and risk of duplication
€ 1,2m
Increase momentum within some product
offering
Product and Service 1
Have not yet adopted strategic enabler zzz€ 2,1m
Increase momentum within some servicing
offeringProduct and Service 2
Building yyy, which could be acquired to speed up
innovation
€ 12,1mWin the XYZ market by ZYXMarket 3
High Biggest and most important enabler in the bankMostly€ 121mNnn mmmmmmmm nnn mmmmmmRe-platform 2
Key enabler for re-platform 2€ 12,1mNnn mmmmmmmm nnn mmmmmmNew capability 1
High Key enabler for re-platform 2Fully€ 21,2mNnn mmmmmmmm nnn mmmmmmRe-platform 1
Mmm m mmm mmmmmmmmm mmm€ 2,1mNnn mmmmmmmm nnn mmmmmmNew capability 2
Mmm m mmm mmmmmmmmm mmmNeutral€ 1,2mNnn mmmmmmmm nnn mmmmmmInnovative capability 3
Mmm m mmm mmmmmmmmm mmm€ 2,1mNnn mmmmmmmm nnn mmmmmmCulture transformation 1
Embedthe
NordeaCulture
Nordea and PeB
2019 PRIORITY
High
Mostly None
Mostly
None
Mostly None
Mostly None
None
NoneFully
Mostly
Business
Momentum
Leverage
ONE
Nordea
Data
Tech
Digi
Cul-
ture
Cost
out
Next step (I hope): Pivot to focused Goals-driven
Inspiration: Chris Potts, FruITion Series, Creating the Ultimate Corporate Strategy for Information Technology
Investment culture?
Ability to execute?

88. Nordea’s transformation is a series of transformational changes
Currently the ecosystem probably requires us to change more than we can cope with in one go
Simplify
Operating
Core
Digitalize
Sales and
Servicing
Open
Supply and
Distribution
88

89. 89
Target
[Reference]
(Target State)
As-is
(Current State)
Transition
(State +1)
Transition
(State +2)
Strategy level
Conceptual level
(Initial State)
Vision
(Target
State)
Roadmap
(Change)
Gaps
Group and Portfolio Architecture Steer Transformation
Our means are orthodox architecture deliverables mandated by senior decision makers

90. 90
PeB Execution
Core Hubs
Responsible for
a core Application Platform
i.e. reusable systems that can
support (multiple) value streams
Journey Hubs
End-to-end responsible for
an Operational Value Stream
aka User Journey
including the Users eXperience
from need arises to need fulfilled
PeB has two kinds of Hubs / Development streams
In SAFe, an Operational Value Stream is supported by People and Systems
Inspiration: www.scaledagileframework.com + Milan Gunther + Eric Ries + Complex-responsive perspective

91. Processes for ensuring that we do what we agree
Portfolio Architectural Alignment
◦ Demonstrate that initiatives are architecturally aligned, critical
dependencies identified. and meaningful prioritization exists.
◦ Conducted by Enterprise Architects in the Portfolio
Architecture team on a quarterly basis with special emphasis in
Q3 when input for the yearly Development Prioritization
Process (DPP) must be submitted
Strategic Initiative Architectural Alignment
◦ Demonstrate that the highest cost and/or impact initiatives
have optimal architectural/strategy alignment and executive
support.
◦ Conducted by Enterprise Architects in the Portfolio
Architecture team upon material scope or epic change.
Delivery Architectural Alignment
◦ Demonstrate that initiatives (whether project or agile-based)
have their scope/epics aligned with approved artefacts, and
are consuming IT standards.
◦ Conducted as maker/checker peer review upon reaching D2
(before Run phase) when HLD is ready for review.
Processes for agreeing what we want
Technology Adoption and Use
◦ Demonstrate that a minimal set of operationally supportable
technology standards exist to meet business objectives.
◦ Demonstrate that obsolescence and security risks are
mitigated through robust lifecycle management,
◦ Demonstrate that cost, complexity and risk is reduced
through service-based delivery of technology,
◦ The requestor of a Standard proposal must assign the proposal
to a Head Architect (leader of a sub-unit in the Group
Architecture unit).
Artefacts Adoption and Use
◦ Demonstrate that artefacts have been approved by
accountable persons from architecture, business, functions,
technology, data, security and risk/compliance areas/domains,
in an inclusive manner.
◦ Artefacts are submitted to Architecture Board for approval by a
Head Architect (leader of a sub-unit in the Group Architecture
unit).
91
Agree what we want, and Do what we agree
Governance is how we follow up on gaps between emergence and intention

92. 92
Ambition Level
Scope
Calendar Time / Deadline
Prioritization
Epics / Features
Architecture – Business Needs
Capacity
Budget / # of Teams
Consultants / Sourcing
Do you want to
invest more money in
change execution to
become more aligned?
Should we do more
enablers and fewer
business features
to become more
aligned?
Should we lower the
ambition level
to become more
aligned?
(or just wait)
Escalate to create transparency into the actual state of affairs
PortfolioGovernance ensures that the Balancing Act is done by Senior Decision Makers

93. Enterprise Architect toolbox
A multi-disciplinary approach will enable more informed decision making
93
Enterprise Architecture
(and Technology)
Tools, Methods, and
Understanding
Business and
Change Management
Tools, Methods, and
Understanding
Leadership and
Psychology
Tools, Methods, and
Understanding

94. How you become competent hinders development of expertise
To evolve you must first follow prescriptive methods and models, and then transcend them
94
Schooling
Mentoring
Reflexivity
Transcend
MethodsandModels
Follow
MethodsandModels
Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus, 1986, Mind over Machine, Macmillan Inc.

95. Summary
Different ways of thinking about change

96. We need a multi-disciplinary approach
Complex Responsive
Processes of Relating
Systems Theory
People
(Human actors)
Technology
(Mechanical construction)
Action
(Continuous flow)
Structure
(Social construction)
?
ANT is first of all a negative argument

97. ENTERPRISE
Intentional process of doing and organizing business
emerging from enabling/constraining figurations of relationships always in flux
ARCHITECTURE
Organisation of structuring structures
including human conventions and mechanisms

98. So far, we are mainly modelling “as sketch”.
We maintain very few coherent enterprise models.
UmlAsBlueprint is a UmlMode that focuses on completene
The essence of (UmlAsSketch) sketching is selectivity
The promise of (UmlAsProgrammingLanguage
as) a higher level language (is that it is) … more
productive than current programming languages.Martin Fowler

99. Take different perspectives
i-i, i-o, o-i, o-o
Team, Company, Market, Society are all just subsets of
organizing = patterning of relationships always in flux
Consider carefully when you
need more or less stability
Conversations – and action in general – can take
more fluid or more formalized forms
Choose carefully when to
play or pass
Trust (social capital) can be built up (not given) over time,
but it can be lost very quickly and dramatically
Small incremental changes
are less difficult to validate
Changing structuring structures can have unpredictable
effects, and can be dificult to recover from
Choose carefully whom to
oppose and whom to back
Many people want to influence the organization
in similar ways to Enterprise Architects
Some observations and ideas

100. • Find out what you are architecting
• Find out who is building / making decisions on what you are architecting
• Find out which questions the builders / decision-makers have
• E.g. how to build in a desirable, viable, feasible (, …) way
• Find out who also wants to supply such answers
• Find out which of these could be allies and which are opponents
• Do whatever it takes to provide the needed answers / guidance
Universal Architecture Method

101. Stacey, Ralph D. and Mowles, Chris (2016).
Strategic management and Organisational Dynamics: The
Challenge of Complexity to Ways of Thinking About
Organisations. 7th ed. United Kingdom: Pearson Education.
Stacey, Ralph D (2012).
Tools & Techniques
of Leadership and Management.
Routledge.
Jackall, Robert (2010).
Moral Mazes –
The World of Corporate Managers.
Oxford University Press.
Scott, John C (1990).
Domination and the Arts of Resistance -
Hidden transcripts.
Yale University Press.
Elias, Norbert (1978).
What is Sociology?
Columbia University Press.
Elias, Norbert (1991).
The Society of Individuals.
Basil Blackwell.
Latour, Bruno (2005).
Reassembling the Social – An introduction
to Actor-Network-Theory.
Oxford University Press.
Mead, George Herbert (1934).
Mind, Self, & Society.
The University of Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1977)
Outline of a Theory of Practice.
Cambridge University Press
Scott, John C (1998).
Seeing like a State – How Certain Schemes to Improve
the Human Condition Have Failed.
Yale University Press.
Guenther, Milan (2013).
Intersection – How Enterprise Design bridges the gap
between Business, technology and People.
Elsevier.
Ries, Eric (2013).
The Lean Startup – How today’s Entrepreneurs use Continuous
Innovation to create radically successful Businesses.
Crown Business.