Architect's Corner!

It's few months since Zachman Framework version 3, was announced. Interestingly, this is the most EA-inclusive representation of the Zachman Framework over the last 40 years. The new version is the culmination of 4 decades of experience and it took nearly 12 months for Zachman International to prepare the " The Zachman Ontology for Enterprise Architecture".
There are several noteworthy changes in the new version which raises the understanding level and discards some of the existing myths and misconceptions. Moreover, this time the framework is aimed at the enterprise community in general and hopefully clears the cloud over the prevailing confusion about Enterprise Architecture vs. Enterprise IT Architecture.
While there are visible changes, it’s important to note that both “theory” and the “logic” of the framework remains unchanged. It continues to be a two-dimensional classification system - a "schema" consisting of communication interrogatives (What, How, Where, Who, When and Why) and reification transformations (Identification, Definition, Representation, Specification, Configuration, Instantiation).
Here, is a list of 16 key visible changes in Zachman Framework graphics v3.0 compared to v2.0 (2004).

#	Key changes	Description
1	New graphic is subtitled, as “The Enterprise Ontology.”	Framework is ontology- or the complete set of all the “elements” that exist in the Enterprise. It describes nothing about how Enterprise Architecture is done, it only defines the “science of what Enterprise Architecture is”... or the ontology.
2	Horizontal integration lines ( across the cells)	Most obvious change is the addition of the “Integration lines” linking elements between the columns. This clearly establishes that that INTEGRATION exists between the Columns. This is also a serious problem, because many Enterprise Architects are building composite models and hard-binding multiple concepts together in their Architecture, rather than separating independent variables and then integrating the variables across each Row as and when needed.
3	Transformation across the vertical cells Vertical Integration Lines (Crooked transformation symbol), across the cells.	The vertical integration lines convey the idea of transformation when moving from the top to the bottom of each column. Now, it is clearer that the models of each row transform - they do not get more detailed. Please note that level of detail is represented in the height of each cell, i.e.: a high level of detail at the top each cell and an excruciating level of detail at the bottom of each cell. I will detail this idea in another blog post, hopefully by next month.
4	Reification process down each column	The models in each cell are re-designed and transformed to the next Row below, and a complete Row 6 wraps up the 6th phase of reification. The six phases of reification are Identification-Row 1, Definition-Row 2, Representation- Row 3, Specification-Row 4, Configuration-Row 5 and Instantiation-Row 6),
5	Audience perspective (label)	Audience perspectives have been labelled to attract the attention of General Management. The labels are Executive Perspective, Business Management Perspective, Architect Perspective, Engineer Perspective, Technician Perspective, Enterprise Perspective
6	Model Names (label)	The six models names (labels include) Scope Contexts, Business Concepts, System Logic Technology Physics, Tool Components, Operation Instances
7	Classification Names ( label)	The 6 Communication Interrogatives remains the same ;-)(What, How, Where, Who, When and Why)
8	Enterprise Names (label)	The 6 Communication Interrogatives in enterprise context include Inventory sets (Classification name is “What”) Process Flows (Classification name is “How”) Distribution Networks (Classification name is “Where”) Responsibility Assignments ((Classification name is “Who”) Timing Cycles ((Classification name is “When”) Motivation Intentions (Classification name is “Why”)
9	Process Transformations (2004 version) changed to Process Flows	Based on the inputs from the business process experts, Column 2 name was changed from “Process Transformations” to “Process Flows”
10	Network Nodes (2004 version) changed to Distribution Networks	The fundamental concept of this Column deals with distribution of resources as opposed to node addresses on a network. Column 3 was grossly misunderstood because of this terminology “Network Nodes”. Enterprise Architects often thought of this as point-to-point nodes and were not building their models correctly.
11	Organization Groups (2004 version) changed to Responsibility Assignments	The 2004 version confused quite a number of people with its title“Organization Groups”. As soon as Enterprise Architects saw this label, they incorrectly assumed: Organizational Chart – It is not so. This Column is all about responsibility; John aptly changed the meta-model to form the title “Responsibility Assignments” for Column 4. Some people often complained that the Framework doesn’t include ‘Customers’. With this new title, it encompasses all the stakeholders of the business.
12	Timing Periods ( 2004 version) changed to Timing Cycles	Column 5 changed from “Timing Periods” (2004 version), to “Timing Cycles”. This is better understood by the enterprise community.
13	Audience perspective	Audience perspective moved to the LHS, earlier in RHS. Also, the labels are more meaningful
14	Model names	Model names are moved to RHS; also the labels have been changed.
15	Composite Integration	Earlier, people had this misconception that There is no integration exists between the Columns. Also, the concept of “primitives” and “composites” are not clearly understood. The fact is that the models of the Enterprise integrate horizontally. Addition of the “Integration lines” linking cells across the rows brings the much needed clarity on “primitive” and “composites”. As you are aware “primitives” are single variable element within a cell. These single variable element within cell integrated with another single variable element of another cell resulting in a “composite”. It’s important to have independent variables and then integrating the variables across each Row to create composites. This ignorance of has serious ramification, as several Enterprise Architects are building composite models and hard-binding multiple concepts together in their Architecture making it brittle.
16	Alignment Transformation	It’s important to note that the models of the Enterprise transform vertically. Each Row is different and is the result of a transformation, not a decomposition of detail. Most people who mis-represent The Zachman Framework as a “waterfall," think that each Row represents another level of detail, i.e.: the highest level of detail at the top of The Framework (Row 1) and the most excruciating level of detail at the bottom of The Framework (Row 5). This is not the case at all. The models of each Row “ transform” they do not get more detailed. In the reification process (down each column), an idea (or Scope-Row 1) has to go through 6 well-known phases in order to reach reality (Operations-Row 6). This is important to guarantee that the “reality” retains an alignment with the initial idea as it was conceived and designed.

BTW, hope you are aware that “Enterprise Architecture” is comprised of Rows 1-5. The instantiated Enterprise is represented in Row 6.
My top 5 favorites are:

1. New graphic is subtitled, as “The Enterprise Ontology.”
2. Horizontal integration lines ( across the cells) which clearly clearly establishes that integration exists between the Columns
3. The vertical integration lines which convey the idea of transformation ( phases of reification) when moving from the top to the bottom of each column
4. The new labels are meaningful and aimed at enterprise community in general
5. The framework cells are represented in white background so that we could easily comprehend the horizontal integration and vertical transformation among the cells

What’s your favourite? Take the poll

A passing note, every human being are different, yet follow a common structure (anatomy). Similarly, every enterprise are different, yet follow a common structure i.e. Zachman Enterprise Architecture.