Phase H of the TOGAF Architecture Development Method (ADM) is about ensuring that the implemented architecture delivers the expected value and benefits, and identifying any changes or improvements that may be needed. In this article, you will learn how to evaluate and update the architecture in phase H, using the TOGAF framework and best practices.
The first step in phase H is to define the criteria and methods for evaluating the performance and outcomes of the architecture. These criteria should be aligned with the business goals, objectives, and drivers that were established in phase A, as well as the stakeholder expectations, requirements, and feedback collected throughout the ADM cycle. Examples of evaluation criteria include business value (how well does the architecture support the business strategy, vision, and value proposition?), architecture quality (how well does it meet defined quality attributes, standards, and principles?), architecture compliance (how well does it adhere to governance framework, policies, and processes?), architecture maturity (how well does it enable the organization to mature its capabilities?), and architecture change (how well does it respond to changes in the business environment?).
Phase H is way to late to be identifying performance evaluation methods. Performance criteria has to be identified in A and B phases. The implementation success ( was it implemented as architected) will be managed through good Portfolio/Program/Project management practices. This all falls apart in phase E.
In phase H, the next step is to collect and analyze data to measure the architecture performance and outcomes against the evaluation criteria. The data sources and methods vary depending on the type and scope of the architecture, but may include surveys and interviews to gather qualitative data from stakeholders, users, and customers; metrics and indicators to gather quantitative data from systems, processes, and services; and audits and reviews to gather objective data from external or internal auditors. Appropriate tools and techniques should be used to analyze the data, such as statistical methods, benchmarking, gap analysis, root cause analysis, or SWOT analysis. Additionally, it is important to document and communicate the results of the analysis through reports, dashboards, scorecards, or presentations.
I think this is way outdated with the advent of AI. I find this rhetoric of documenting “through dashboards, reports, scorecards) outdated to. How many out there really use dashboards, scorecards and such to make the decisions that impact the Customer experience? Most of these are there to rationalize an architecture “Function” in their organization.
The third step in phase H is to identify and prioritize the issues that arise from the data analysis. These issues may be related to gaps, risks, problems, or opportunities that affect architecture performance and outcomes. To do so, you should use a structured approach that includes clearly defining the issue, categorizing it according to type, severity, urgency, and complexity, proposing possible solutions or actions to address it, and ranking the issues according to importance, dependency, and alignment with evaluation criteria and business goals.
The final step in phase H is to update the architecture based on the prioritized issues and their resolution. You should follow the change management process that was defined in phase F, and ensure that the changes are approved, communicated, implemented, tested, and verified. You should also update the relevant architecture artifacts, such as the architecture models, views, descriptions, documents, and repositories. You should also update the architecture roadmap, which is the output of phase G, to reflect the changes and their impact on the architecture vision, objectives, and deliverables.
I”d like to know how many of us out there actually got to phase “H” and if you did, what was you success story? Was the Organizational structure an impediment? Did the implementation of the framework in your organization have an impact on success? Was this implemented as waterfall method or integrated into the existing corporate processe?