Letter: For enterprise architecture, keep it simple

Regarding "DOD's Wisnosky: EA needs notation" : I like Wisnosky's idea on a common symbology for enterprise architecture. But if techies and network experts develop this new language, it will likely be too complex and burdensome to effectively communicate to a broad audience. If it can't communicate to a broad audience, it will doom EA rather than advance it. EA serves to make transparent and communicate and make plain, not take concepts that are Greek to most and make them Chinese.  The reason EA has not advanced is because it has been largely the realm of techies. To advance EA, we need to involve people who understand mission, process, and data more than anyone else. What holds EA back is the fact that it is viewed as the domain of hardware and software experts, when it is not.

Anonymous

What do you think? Paste a comment in the box below (registration required), or send your comment to [email protected] (subject line: Blog comment) and we'll post it.

Featured

  • Elections
    voting security

    'Unprecedented' challenges to safe, secure 2020 vote

    Our election infrastructure is bending under the stress of multiple crises. Administrators say they are doing all they can to ensure it doesn't break.

  • FCW Perspectives
    zero trust network

    Can government get to zero trust?

    Today's hybrid infrastructures and highly mobile workforces need the protection zero trust security can provide. Too bad there are obstacles at almost every turn.

Stay Connected

FCW INSIDER

Sign up for our newsletter.

I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.