mattcascio: @levarburton The visor was great fun. Thnx!

mattcascio: Once again, check your Facebook privacy settings for Place. http://t.co/jOZWgfe via @mashsocialmedia @mashable

mattcascio: RT @alleyinsider: Google's Brin and Page shouted at each other over Google decision to become evil (do ad targeting)--then Brin caved ht ...

Clearly we want one.  A thread on LinkedIn a couple of months ago attempted to define the value of EA, and produced a tirade of over 1,300 entries!  But while individuals were busy chatting, the Enterprise Architecture Research Forum took a different approach.  This body is a collaborative including the Open Group South Africa, the Meraka Institute, Real IRM, Telkom, Unisa and the University of Pretoria (link). 

This group started with a “definition of definitions.”  In other words, they thought about the requirements of a definition before producing the solution.  (What a novel idea :-). The requirements that they used come from a paper by Dr. Sam Vaknin.  Dr. Vaknin’s definition of definitions indicates that a definition should explain the meaning, use and function, essential characteristics, and the differentia of the concept. (link)

Using this model, the EARF created the following definition:

Enterprise Architecture is the continuous practice of describing the essential elements of a sociotechnical organization, their relationships to each other and to the environment, in order to understand complexity and manage change.

Let’s compare that definition to the “compromise” definition that emerged out of the “160 character challenge” on LinkedIn.  The LinkedIn thread that I’m referring to started as a post, by Kevin Smith (author of the Pragmatic EA Framework, or PEAF).  Kevin asked participants to define the “value” of Enterprise Architecture in a message short enough to send in an SMS text message.  While the length constraint was arbitrary, it was useful for insuring short responses.  Kevin then collected the data and, in a fairly rigorous process, analyzed it to produce a more succinct definition (link). 

Using the responses as a guide, Kevin found that three different aspects of Enterprise Architecture were appearing over and over in the various definitions so his construct includes all three.  He refers to these aspects as the “why, how, and what” perspectives.   Kevin’s combined definition follows:

The purpose of Enterprise Architecture is to enable an enterprise to realise its Vision through the execution of it’s Mission, whilst enabling it to respond to change and increasing its effectiveness, profitability, customer satisfaction, competitive edge, growth, stability, value, durability, efficiency and quality while reducing costs and risks by Strategic Planning, Architecture and Governance supported by a Decision Support framework in the context of aligning all parts of the enterprise using Models, Guidance, Processes and Tools.

Now, to be completely fair, I participated in Kevin’s “160 character challenge” on LinkedIn.  I do not have a single definition of Enterprise Architecture… I have three.  Just as a dictionary may show you many definitions for a word, I have found that the term Enterprise Architecture is used in three different ways: As the name of a business function, a reference to a team of people, and as a reference to a model that describes an enterprise. 

When creating my submission, I was not being particularly rigorous, so I see flaws in my definition as I type this blog entry. (to whit: EA is not limited to businesses).  That said, I will cite my original words rather than revise history.  Note: In order to fit into Kevin’s challenge, I submitted each of my definitions independently.  Recombined as a single definition, my contribution was as follows:

Enterprise Architecture - -- Noun
1. A business function that collects and manages business information for the purpose of improving the way that a business responds to current or future challenges and opportunities.
2. A rigorous model of the motivations, structures, information, processes, and systems of an enterprise created for the purpose of decision support.
-- Adjective (used with object)
3. A team of influencers and thought leaders within an enterprise chartered with understanding, optimizing, and improving the way the business operates.

Is there a right answer?  Which of these is a better definition?  Which misses the point?  Could we improve one of these entries and recognize it as canonical?  Is there a better definition of Enterprise Architecture, and if there is, what would it be? 

What is your opinion?

NickMalik13541887394330472419162548326484281780011347151034190127986311364658987488258139

mattcascio: RT @mashable: 10 Great Geeky Tattoos [PICS] - http://mash.to/2kN82

mattcascio: RT @popurls: The Five Most Endangered Words on the Internet http://pop.is/13rc0

mattcascio: RT @popurls: Why usability engineers don't design video games [pic] http://pop.is/1346m

mattcascio: RT @popurls: If you said, Holy &^%@! That idiot made a TCP header diagram in LEGO bricks!, then youre exactly right. http://pop.is/105q3

mattcascio: RT @TechCrunch OpenStack.org: RackSpace Open Sources Their Cloud Services Platform, And Gets NASA.. http://tcrn.ch/aQPZpD

mattcascio: RT @arstechnica: Millions of routers vulnerable to new version of old attack - by @drpizza - http://arst.ch/lo2

mattcascio: RT @alleyinsider: World Cup Streaming Numbers Show Online Video Not Replacing TV by @danrayburn http://read.bi/boZ0Jb

mattcascio: RT @igrigorik: crazy, android appstore went from 30 to 70k apps in last 3 months! that's an app every ~4 minutes... http://bit.ly/dqFW27

mattcascio: RT @mashable: How Non-Profits Can Maximize a Foursquare Account - http://ow.ly/2cFj6

mattcascio: RT @arstechnica: DNS root zone finally signed, but security battle not over - http://arst.ch/lnu

Google is launching a new tool on Monday that lets anyone create an app for Android phones.

Google App Inventor claims to enable non-coders to develop complete, working Android apps by connecting a series of “blocks.” Google has been testing App Inventor in schools for a year, reports The New York Times. At the time of writing, App Inventor is only available to those who apply via a form.

It’s a smart concept. Not only is the Android Market an open platform for developers (with no approval process, a la Apple’s App Store), but now we’ll likely see a vast array of specialized apps built by non-developers. This could radically increase the volume of apps in the Market versus the App Store.

The expansion may, of course, come at the cost of quality. We’ll see thousands of new Android apps, but will they be of a “cookie cutter” nature, offering very little value? There is, however, an upside in the long term: If App Inventor is so simple that schoolchildren can make apps, some those same children will soon become coders themselves and perhaps choose to develop apps for Android rather than iOS.

Google and Apple are currently in a heated battle to win the hearts and minds of developers. Google, it seems, wants to win over the non-developers too.

What do you think? Is App Inventor a winning play on Google’s part?

[img credit: glen edelson]

Reviews: Android, Android Market, App Store, Google

More About: android, Google, google app inventor, trending

For more Mobile coverage:

• Follow Mashable Mobile on Twitter
• Become a Fan on Facebook
• Subscribe to the Mobile channel
• Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

mattcascio: Brave squirrel just streaked the enclosed dog run. Excitement!!!

The days of having a separate login and password for each online service we use are behind us. Now, you can log into most sites and services using your social network’s ID.

The most popular social identities are Facebook, Google, Yahoo, and Twitter, but are they always being used in the same way? The infographic below, courtesy of social optimization platform Gigya, shows that users trust different identities on different services. For example, users are most likely to log on to entertainment sites via Facebook, but when it comes to news sites, the login of choice is Twitter. Furthermore, the infographic shows what profile data is available to services after users log in using various online identities.

Check out a bigger version of the infographic here.

Reviews: Facebook, Google, Twitter

More About: facebook, gigya, Google, online identity, social networking, twitter, Yahoo

For more Social Media coverage:

• Follow Mashable Social Media on Twitter
• Become a Fan on Facebook
• Subscribe to the Social Media channel
• Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

mattcascio: A Rough Primer on Enterprise Architecture http://tinyurl.com/32h3une

mattcascio: FLV head aches on Windows Server 2003 http://tinyurl.com/2fsg8l2

mattcascio: And germany 2-1-0 vs. Spain at World Cup. (that's W-L-D)