‘Greening IT‘ is an interntionally collaborative, non-profit, creative commons licensed book dedicated to the preservation of the most important resource – planet earth itself. As the book details, our approach to preservation is not accomplished via pure environmentally focused policies, but instead by leveraging the most important and potent enabler of the Low-Carbon society – Information and Communication Technology (ICT).

Abstract
Even though the amounts of information in enterprises are rapidly increasing, it does not directly provide the organizations with competitive advantages. A paradox of the Information Age is that while information have never been available in such vast amounts as now, the vast volume has caused the organizations to lose sight of the overall picture; what is required is a way to enhance and manage the information to provide a coherent vision. This can be described as Coherency Management.
This thesis examines how the novel concept of Coherency Management (CM) can be enhanced based on pragmatic problems identified in a complex enterprise. Carlsberg, which is currently undergoing a major standardization transformation, provides a unique opportunity to assess the standardization process and the effect on the enterprise. The empirical data obtained is analyzed to enhance the Coherency Management concept described in (Doucet et al, 2009), advancing it to cope with those problems found to be inside CM’s scope.
On the basis of the identified problems and findings in the thesis, a CM framework has been developed. This framework represents a more pragmatic view on CM, and can be implemented in an enterprise to introduce CM there. In addition, the framework can be utilized as a foundation for the further development of the concept.
The thesis asserts that: Coherency Management should only to a lesser extend possess domain specific knowledge; it should not be included in the Enterprise Architecture discipline; and it should only concern the improvement of cooperation between the departments and programs in the enterprise – by using the three modes for architecture.
The thesis also discusses how the scope of Coherency Management is best determined and the differences between CM and Enterprise Architecture. The paper concludes by elaborating on the findings of the thesis and discuss if the problem statement has been sufficiently answered.

I have been ‘playing around’ with the dataset FORM makes up. In the blog menu, you will find links to pages about Project NemFORM.

To demonstrate how the reference model can be used, I have created this simple application (autosuggesting services; reference), which can also be used on a mobile device (tested on Android only, so far).

If you are interested in the geeky details, read about my experience with FORM XML, and JQuery-empowered FORM usage. You can also read about my implementation of the new FORM widget from Digitaliser.dk.

My project is mentioned in a news story on Modernisering.dk, the Ministry of Finance’s website for digitization of government (and owners of FORM). ‘Innovative use’, they call my project. How nice of them

Full disclosure: The Ministry of Finance is a client of EA Fellows. NemFORM is however a private project of mine.

But wait, there’s more: On 18 November, the free, online version will be available from 21gov.net.

Read the press release.

Follow the book @gov20book on Twitter. The book’s twitter hashtag is #gov20book. Also, follow the list of contributors.

We will accept legitimate and relevant remixes and reuses of stuff that deserves to be in a book. But we have pretty high standards, so do not be offended if we reject your proposal. In general, we want thoughtful, wellwritten contributions, shorter or longer, that discuss new business models for government and democracy. Contributions about technical matters are not likely to make it into the book, unless they are really wellwritten and ‘important’. I realise I personally will even have to struggle to build bridges over to, say, Coherency Management, but you just wait and see

As co-editor, I have teamed up with Christian Bering Pedersen, a young professional and digital native, who I supervised in his Master thesis project a few years ago. Christian has a sharp eye and tongue, and will be great to work with.

Confirmed contributors to the book are:

• Don Tapscott, Canada
• Mark Drapeau, USA
• Alexandra Samuel, USA
• Olov Östberg, Sweden
• Tommy Dejbjerg Pedersen, Denmark
• Tim O’Reilly, USA
• David Weinberger, USA
• Chris Potts, UK
• and several others, whose names will be published in the near future.

The book will not be a heavyweight like the coherency managment book (540 pages). It will probably have nearly as many collaborators and contributors though, but typically with shorter chapters (essays).

Follow the book project via its infopage/website.

• Toronto from July 17th to 25th.
• Washington, DC from July 26th to 31st.
• Ottawa from July 31st to August 6th.
• Boston from August 7th to 14th.
  oh, and then a stopover in Iceland:
• Reykjavík from August 14th to 18th.

Along the way I will attend The Open Group’s 23rd Enterprise Architecture Practitioners Conference in Toronto, where I have three contributions: Particapant in Panel Discussion and podcast on Architecture’s Scope Extends Beyond the Enterprise, my lecture Coherency Management and the Future of Enterprise Architecture, and participant in Panel Discussion: Enterprise-Centric Architecture and the Role of “Business”.

I will probably sneak in a bunch of meetings around the Coherency Management book, which is now with the printer, and with a bit of luck, will be able to announce a few events around the book as I travel on. And then I’m planning some meetings around a new book project I plan to announce shortly. Which reminds me: allow me to introduce two new tags: Government 2.0 and Open Government.

If you are located – or happen to be – in one of the locations I visit, and are interested in any of the tags to this post, and want to meet, get in touch.

Peter Bernus chairs IFIP WG5.12 Architectures for Enterprise Integration, and arranges the ICEIMT Workshop Next Generation Enterprise Architecture on 23-24 June in Leiden, which I have just registred for (unfortunately only last day). Themes on the agenda:

• Next Generation Enterprise Architecture (NextGenEA): what is it, what does it need to succeed and what does it include: Interoperability, ‘Cloud Computing’, new ways of Visualization, Enterprise Integration, Enterprise Resource Management, Enterprise Data Consolidation
• Role of the senior Decision Maker: What is the role of the senior decision maker? What types of information and tools do they require to be effective? Can NextGen EA make a difference or indeed add any value to the day to day activities and key decisions made by senior business managers within a modern Organization?
• Decision Support Tools: What are the current EA tools on the market? What are the current management decision support tools available to senior decision makers? Is there a gap or a cross over point between the two or is the current marketplace effectively being served by existing product offerings?
• Enterprise Architecture Frameworks (practice and theory): What do existing EA frameworks say about the role of senior decision makers in the architectural process and what is the role of architecture in the making of critical business decisions within the modern Organization?
• Interoperability: ­ present and future trends & standardization across Organizations? How do these trends support or refute the case for NextGen EA as a tool for senior decision makers within the modern Organization?
• NextGen EA: New theories and techniques, interdisciplinary approaches for combining Management Theory and traditional EA topics, such as Enterprise Modelling / Enterprise Engineering / Enterprise Integration
• Which Research Frameworks are appropriate for the investigation of the above questions?  Human understanding and communication as a condition of interoperability. Suitable social and organisational structures that create the motivation and the opportunity to achieve common understanding and consensus and the potential need for new organisational forms and cultural change

Being a ICEIMT workshop means it is part of the International Conference on Enterprise Integration and Modelling Technology, a series of landmark conferences held since 1992. ICEIMT originally started as a strategic initiative of NIST and the European Union to review the state of the art in Enterprise Integration (EI) and to make recommendations to industry and research, creating roadmaps for EI research and product development. I’m proud to say that I have just joined the ICEIMT’2010 Steering Committee.

Before the actual ICEIMT’2010, which is not yet scheduled/placed, the will be another workshop, on 14-16 December in Bled in Slovenia. The main objective of this workshop is to bring together management scientists, engineers and enterprise architects to hold an open discussion on the future synergies of these disciplines.

• business design and business management — the use of enterprise architecture practice in various transformations
• coherency of decision making — from senior management to low level control
• whole of life and complete life cycle approaches to enterprise engineering — the systems science of EA and management
• decision support tools — enterprise modelling, business process management & analysis, and business intelligence
• the fusion of the management and engineering disciplines
• the enterprise architect as a profession: skills, education, training and accreditation
• unifying theories and enterprise ontologies
• architecture frameworks and their use in managing projects, programmes, enterprises and networks of enterprises
• case studies
• open research questions
• etc.

The Leiden-workshop is part of ICE2009 conference on “Collaborative Innovation: Emerging Technologies, Environments and Communities”. ICE stands for International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising. The term Concurrent Enterprising is

an amalgam which brings together the paradigms of Concurrent Engineering and Extended/Virtual Enterprising: The Concurrent Enterprise is a distributed, temporary alliance of independent, co-operating manufacturers, customers and suppliers using systematic approaches, methods and advanced technologies for increasing efficiency in the design and manufacturing of products and services by means of concurrency, parallelism, integration, standardisation, team work and more for achieving common goals on global markets.

Sounds interesting, but I only have time to attend the NextGenEA workshop. Actually, only half of it.

The book introduces the idea of Coherency Management, and asserts that this is the primary outcome goal of an enterprise’s architecture.

Editors of the book are Gary Doucet, John Gøtze, Pallab Saha, and Scott Bernard. With submissions from over 30 authors and co-authors, the book reinforces the idea that EA is being practiced in an ever-increasing variety of circumstances – from the tactical to the strategic, from the technical to the political, and with governance that ranges from sell to tell. The characteristics, usages, value statements, frameworks, rules, tools and countless other attributes of EA seem to be anything but orderly, definable, classifiable, and understandable as might be hoped given heritage of EA and the famous framework and seminal article on the subject by John Zachman over two decades ago. Notably, EA is viewed as an Enterprise Design and Management approach, adopted to build better enterprises, rather than a IT Design and Management approach limited to build better systems.

We will use the coherencymanagement.org website not just to promote the book, but also to be a platform for continued dialogues about coherency management and for publishing further studies. We’re especially interested in relevant case studies, and have published one such: Neil Kemp’s interesting case study about Winnipeg Fleet Management.

In Advances in Government Enterprise Architecture, my good friend Pallab Saha over in Singapore has made a seminal compilation of 18 chapters on government enterprise architecture written by practitioners and practicing academics from Australia, Germany, Greece, Ireland, The Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, United Kingdom, and United States of America. Several of the contributing authors also have chapters in the Coherency Management book that Pallab and I, together with Gary Doucet and Scott Bernard, are releasing very soon.

If I should emphasise one chapter from the book, it has to be Pallab Saha’s own chapter about Singapore’s e-government initiative and the Methodology for AGency ENTerprise Architecture (MAGENTA), “a rigorous, disciplined and structured methodology for development of agency enterprise architectures that enables agencies to align to and fully support the government’s transformation objectives and outcomes”. Very interesting read.

With its 502 pages, Advances provides a very solid view on governmental EA. It is a perfect book for students and researchers of e-government and governmental EA, alas its cost ($195 at Amazon) means that the students have to wait for their libraries to get the book. This is without doubt the reference book for government EA.

In Enterprise Governance and Enterprise Engineering, Dr. Ir. Jan A.P. Hoogervorst from Sogeti in the Netherlands presents a competence-based perspective on governance, where “employees are viewed as the crucial core for effectively addressing the complex, dynamic and uncertain enterprise reality, as well as for successfully defining and operationalizing strategic choices”. Hoogervorst sees enterprise engineering as “the formal conceptual framework and methodology for arranging a unified and integrated enterprise design, which is a necessary condition for enterprise success”.

Hoogervorst defines Enterprise architecture as “a coherent and consistent set of principles and standards that guides enterprise design,” and he argues that EA is a communicative bridge between the functional and constructional perspectives, that is between a functional, requirements-oriented, black-box system perspective and a constructional, realization-oriented, white-box perspective. I like Hoogervorst’s approach to EA. It’s neither IT-centric nor business-centric; if anything, it’s enterprise-centric.

The last chapter is about a fictitios case, an energy company. While this certainly helps in understanding enterprise governance and enterprise design in practice, it is in my opinion still leaving the reader with unanswered questions about enterprise engineering. As if Hoogervorst or Springer ‘forgot’ some additional chapters of the book. Or maybe it’s just a ‘cliffhanger’ to forthcoming books? Hoogervorst’s book is the second to be published in Springer’s Enterprise Engineering Series (I reviewed the first book in the series back in December). This series is aimed at academic students and advanced professionals. I’ll certainly recommend Hoogervorst’s book to my students.

The third book I’ll talk about here has been on my book shelf for a while, as it was published in November 2007, and I bought it right away, but must admit that it didn’t really catch me on the first reading back then. Recently, I was prompted to pick it up again, and am actually happy I did.

In Lost in Translation (book’s site), Nigel Green and Carl Bate from CapGemini describe a simplified ‘language’ for preventing loss in translation from business needs to IT solutions. This language is called ‘VPEC-T after the five dimensions it focuses on: Values, Policies, Events, Content and Trust. VPEC-T is presented as a common language that is natural for both business and IT, and is “straightforward enough to use, yet sophisticated enough to work in today’s connected world.”

Subtitled “A handbook for information systems in the 21st century”, the authors do not hide their interests: They provide a tool (‘language’) for how IT-people can become better at capturing what the business wants from IT. In this sense, it’s classic Information Systems thinking (chapter 2), and VPEC-T does indeed come across as, yes, yet another IS-approach. But also, as one that may well take some IS-territory, perhaps especially from IS-practitioners. I will certainly follow VPEC-T. I follow @taoofit on Twitter. I’ve also joined the VPEC-T Google Group. Also, google the acronym and you’ll find a few good things by adopters of it, for example the VPEC-T mindmap which seems quite useful.

Abstract: Enterprises have been exploiting the agility improving abilities of information technology heavily in the last decade. The problem of lacking agility is especially important in today’s environment which has an overwhelming characteristic of ‘change’ defining it. As such, a number of enterprise aligning uses of information technology have been proposed by both academia and practitioners. One such use is the implementation of service-orientation that promotes loose coupling and reusability among other highly desirable agility drivers. This Master ’s thesis proposes an extension to the service-orientation design paradigm to include cloud based utility computing. This new design paradigm stands to promote enterprises level of agility higher than was possible before with ‘traditional’ service-oriented architectures alone. Download (PDF).

Highly recommended!