in the file
Assessment 2: Report Due date: Week 12 Group/individual: Individual Word count / Time provided: 3600 words Weighting: 40% Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO-3, ULO-4, ULO-5 Assessment Details: This assessment is designed to assess develop your skills in Enterprise Architecture (EA). You are required to develop knowledge on EA methodology, EA Framework, data model and emerging EA. In completing this assessment successfully, you will be able to know major widely accepted Enterprise Architecture (EA) domains, layers, frameworks and governance, which will help in achieving ULO-3, ULO-4, and ULO-5. Report: Part-I (Case Study) GoldKeeper is a mid-size financial company. A couple of years ago GoldKeeper decided to establish a full-fledged EA practice to accommodate with the growing problems around non-transparency of its IT investments and poor business and IT alignment in general. To boost its EA initiative, the company decided to purchase a specialized software tool for enterprise architecture. For this purpose, its IT leaders studied the available offerings on the EA tool market, contacted most promising vendors, organized meetings with vendor representatives and listened to their presentations. As a result, GoldKeeper had selected and acquired a rather powerful and expensive tool for enterprise architecture from a well-known vendor. Then, the company had installed and configured the tool, established a central repository for storing architectural information and sent its architecture team to a special training supplied by the tool vendor. After the training, architects had documented most areas of the organizational IT landscape and associated business processes in the EA repository and started to update this information to keep it current. Architects were also impressed with the modeling, visualization and analytical capabilities offered by their new EA tool. However, GoldKeeper’s CIO is pretty skeptical towards the chosen EA tool. He believes that the company is only wasting money on the tool as it is essentially nothing more than a sophisticated repository of current-state information. Furthermore, the tool is used by only 4-5 people in the entire organization (all architects), does not facilitate informed decision-making among business stakeholders in any sense and does not contribute to achieving the original objectives of the EA initiative to improve business and IT alignment. As a newly manager at GoldKeeper, GoldKeeper’s CIO has asked you to provide a report that addresses the following: 1. Compare and contract five EA software tools that would have been implemented. Recommend 2 EA tools that facilitate informed decision-making among business stakeholders 2. Discuss five ways to increase the usage of the chosen EA tools by all stakeholders at GoldKeeper. 3. How can the EA tools be used to facilitate business and IT alignment? Report: Part-II ComTech is a diversified, multi-profile company. Essentially, it is a conglomerate company consisting of three diverse strategic units acting as independent businesses under separate brands in different industry sectors: Unit Alpha, Unit Beta and Unit Gamma. ComTech is governed from the central head office, which oversights the three subsidiary business units and their financial performance indicators, though without any operational interventions. Each strategic business unit has its own managing director with full discretion and responsibility over its competitive strategy, investment priorities, budget allocation and ensuing yearly profits. Unit Alpha is in the food manufacturing business. The unit produces and distributes a variety of goods including, but not limited to, vegetables, groceries, meat and dairy products. Each of these product lines requires unique production processes, storage arrangements, transportation approaches and underlying equipment and is organizationally implemented by a separate specialized product department. However, these products are delivered largely to the same circle of customers, including both major retailers and local food shops. All product lines are also served by a number of common unit-wide functions, e.g. HR, finance, accounting, logistics, legal, marketing and sales support. Unit Beta competes in the restaurant business with 78 IT staff. Specifically, the unit controls a chain of small fast-food restaurants occupying the low-cost market niche. In total, the chain includes more than 80 restaurants located in different geographies and more restaurants are planned to be opened in the foreseeable future. All restaurants offer same interiors, menus, prices, meals and services to their customers and imply standardized policies, working procedures and supporting equipment. However, each restaurant is run separately by a chief manager responsible for its overall financial well-being and all necessary business processes, e.g. recruiting, training, procurement, cooking, servicing, cleaning and complaints management. With the exception of Unit Beta’s lean central office, where chain-wide branding, marketing and other strategic decisions are made, the restaurants operate independently from each other and even have their own profit and loss statements. Finally, Unit Gamma runs a chain of resort hotels. These hotels gravitate towards the high-end price segment and offer premium-quality services to their customers. Unit Gamma’s competitive strategy implies improving its brand recognition and achieving consistent customer experience. For this purpose, the unit’s leadership plans to standardize all customer-facing and, to a lesser extent, back- office processes across all hotels of the chain as well as all its suppliers and service providers. Moreover, Unit Gamma also intends to become “closer” to its customers and build lifelong customer relationships. This strategy requires collecting more information about customers, their individual preferences and transaction histories, aggregating this information globally and leveraging it for providing customized services, launching loyalty programs, developing special offers and promoting personalized discounts. As an EA manager at Comtech, you are required to write a report that discusses the following: 1. Describe five major roles that landscape as EA Artifacts will play in CommTech. 2. Discuss with aid of diagram a 5 year IT roadmaps for Unit Beta. 3. Discuss how solution designs as an EA Artifacts should be implemented in Unit Gamma 4. What are the benefits of a successful implementation of EA practice in Unit Gamma? 5. Based on IT staff ratio model and degree of decentralization as a factor, name and discuss architects positions that would be required in Unit Beta. Report: Part-III MoneyBank is a mid-size financial company. 5 years ago MoneyBank decided to establish a full-fledged EA practice to accommodate with the growing problems around non-transparency of its IT investments and poor business and IT alignment in general. The establishment of EA practice was successful and it was completed last 2 year. Due to recent advancement in technologies, MoneyBank wants to implement Cloud Computing technologies that would empower their staff and customers for example, implementation of analytical Cloud Computing Technologies would enable MoneyBank staff to approve credit card application within 30 minutes of the submission of the application. However, MoneyBank’s CIO is skeptical towards the implementation of Cloud Computing technologies. He believes that the company is only wasting money on the Cloud Computing technologies as it is essentially nothing more than a sophisticated collection of data. As a newly promoted IT manager at MoneyBank, you are required to write a report that discusses the following: 1. 5 (five) major benefits of implementation of Cloud Computing in Moneybank. 2. 5 (five) challenges that MoneyBank may have with implementation of Cloud Computing Technologies and how the challenges should be resolved. 3. 5 (five) major differences between Cloud Computing, Enterprise Architecture and Big Data. 4. You are required to recommend EA governance committees, describe four types of governance committees that you would recommend for MoneyBank. Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100% and will be weighted 40% of the total unit mark Marking Criteria Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark) Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark Report Part-I: Case Study (30% marks) Not identifying the problems, provided solution is very weak. Problems are identified very briefly, provided solution is acceptable but details missing, briefly examine the EA Most of the problems are identified, provide good solutions, examine the EA but major points are missing All the problems are identified, provides very good solutions, examines the EA clearly All the problems are clearly identified, provided excellent solutions and EA very clearly Report Part-II: (30% marks) Questions on Report Part II is poorly examine in the relation of EA Questions on Report Part II is answered but details missing, comparison presented briefly, very briefly examine the relation of EA Questions on Report Part II is adequately addressed, comparison presented in detail, briefly examine the relation of EA Shows sound knowledge, identification, comparison presented in detail, comprehensively examine the relation of EA Shows full knowledge on EA practice, identification, comparison presented in detail, very comprehensively examine the relation of EA Report Part-III: (30% marks) Questions on Report Part II is poorly examine in the relation of EA Questions on Report Part II is answered but details missing, comparison presented briefly, very briefly examine the relation of EA Questions on Report Part II is adequately addressed, comparison presented in detail, briefly examine the relation of EA Comprehensive analysis of situation and provide correct solutions with explanation. Comprehensive analysis of situation and provide correct solutions with excellent explanation. Structure, grammar, presentation, and Harvard style referencing (10% marks). The report is poorly organized and difficult to read – does not flow logically from one part to another. There are several spelling and/or grammatical errors; technical terms may not be defined or are poorly defined. Writing lacks clarity and conciseness. Include few references without following Harvard style reference guidelines or no reference.