 And welcome Chris Armstrong. Thank you very much Chris and thank you everybody for joining us this afternoon And my apologies for not being able to sit in on the previous sessions I just got in from the US moments ago. So got to be got to be agile just in time but for those of you that may remember the The event in Cannes a couple years ago was a very similar situation, but I didn't even actually have time to change I showed up in shorts and Hawaiian shirts. So at least I got a chance to look a little bit a Little bit more professional today. So what I want to talk about is how at APG We've been looking at IT for IT with a real broad lens particularly thinking about it as the enterprise architecture of IT and Again just a little bit about APG, you know We're contributors here at the open group in Togaf Archimate as well as IT for IT We're also members of the object manager group contribute to Standards like UML, SysML, BPMN, so on and so forth and we're partners with a number of tool vendors And so I presume Again by not being here. I've lost the context of what Speakers before me have talked about so I presume you guys have seen this picture before today, right? So the whole idea of a value chain for the business of IT and you know Basically, you know our position to help support this is that you know if the whole idea of value streams and value chains And capability models are good things for the business then by God We should try to apply those things in a similar way to the business of IT And as I'm sure you've also seen similar sort of pictures like this talking about you know What content is within the IT for IT reference architecture? There's both normative normative and informative content And we're going to take a look at actually some of the more informative stuff particularly around capabilities and how we can actually use a Togaf driven capability based planning approach towards trying to improve the business of IT So you guys have seen this picture. I'm sure also three or four thousand times today so You know again, we really look at this as being a you know logical application architecture these functional components that represent the kinds of Solutions that we need to have in place to manage the business of IT The interdependencies between them with data objects that you know the the data fabric behind it under on top of a Service backbone and I know when when I first looked at this You know really coming from again an enterprise architecture Perspective because a big part of what APG does is help and user organizations adopt EA best practices using Togaf And tooling is I was like ah ha finally we've got something to you know An opportunity to get some reuse because I'm sure you guys have you know heard this value proposition You know many many many times which is you know Everybody needs to have IT to run their business But the kinds of things they need IT to do are pretty uniform across Industry and so you know the the whole idea that there's a reference architecture out here that we can now leverage in this Perspective I think is very very very exciting So if we take a look at you know, what elements within The IT for IT and how do they map to something that some other folks here might be familiar with the Togaf nine content metamodel So we basically you know did an informal mapping and really considered that what IT for IT has to offer as it relates to this way Of describing the enterprise is we got a set of you know, we got a set of capabilities. All those those are informative some roles although we're some of that stuff was I think Diminished in the 2.0 specification. We've got events measures some things around business motivation, you know drivers objectives and goals We of course have Services logical application components and data entities So again when we just do a quick out-of-the-box assessment of you know, what's within the reference architecture? How does that map to the current best practices in Togaf? We thought it had a pretty decent coverage, but I'll show you some adjustments that that we've made based on fit for purpose and Practice and I believe we have a schedule a session scheduled sometime on Thursday to talk a little bit more closely About the alignment between IT for IT and Togaf Because it seems to us to be a natural marriage So I presume people are familiar with this picture here the Togaf ADM again if you've been in the enterprise architecture Sessions, I'm sure you've seen the crop circle diagram a number of times And it might be new to some of the folks that are stepping in here from an IT for IT perspective But this is the core development method that Togaf has to offer you know a repeatable tested practice for establishing an enterprise architecture capability Describing baseline and target architectures and then of course doing that for some purpose doing it being able to do some transformational planning and then actually provide guidance about that transformation planning unfolding with activities in phase G implementation governance And so what we're going to do is I'm just going to basically take you through kind of a high High-level tour of the Togaf ADM and how we've been able to exploit the IT for IT reference architecture to do architecture-driven capability based improvement for IT and I think the thing that's really exciting about this is that we've actually have Both Charlie and I have been working on a couple of end-user client organizations that have been Coincidentally asking for exactly the same thing. So it was a very compelling Convergence of forces We're able to you know try to figure out how to these two Wonderful solutions from the open group potentially work together. So what we're showing here is a a very simple uml activity diagram of the steps in the Preliminary phase of the Togaf ADM. This is actually excerpts from a solution that we've created called the APG Togaf process library ATPL. We basically built a complete model of the Togaf 9 standard using an OMG Specification called SPEM the system and software process engineering metamodel and then used an eclipse based tool To capture all the content that's in the 700 plus pages of the specification And then one of the nice value ads that we can do is create some simple diagrams like this to represent the behaviors of each individual phase So in particular if we take a look at the six steps of the ADM One of the things we're supposed to do is you know tailor Togaf and any other selected architecture framework So that's where again we can do that. Well, that's where we can do that mapping of the reference architecture to our EA content metamodel And then if we're gonna, you know, hopefully be trying to do this for real We're gonna need to implement this in a set of architecture tools So we're gonna have to go ahead and implement those IT for IT extensions in our enterprise Architecture tooling which of course could be a part of modernizing The the landscape of IT so we could actually be using IT for IT and Togaf to implement the ability to do IT for IT using Togaf. So this is the whole idea of bootstrapping enterprise architecture with enterprise architecture So if we take a quick look and I don't my glasses, I can't see that thing there So I'm gonna have to stand over here and hopefully not fall off the edge So here we basically have a very high-level conceptual model of the core IT for IT metamodel the whole idea that we've got a value chain that composed of a set of value streams those map to Functional components that may expose a set of services. There are a set of functional requirements that are specified in the normative Specification those map then down to data objects and relationships among those data objects There's also the whole idea of a state model associated with systems of record Integration and then there's again the informative content that's in the spec in the standard again Not necessarily the focus of some of the work that some of the tool vendors are going to be doing to implement the data architecture But things again like capabilities key activities events related to the value stream critical success factors KPIs scenarios roles and then again a Generic kind of data flow that incorporates both systems of record of for integration as well as systems of engagement And what we've ended up doing and this is where I'll show you some examples as we you know took a you know a toga Like metamodel and then mapped it to things that are pertinent to the IT for IT reference architecture And so this is based in great part by some of the work that we've been doing over the past Three four or five years at nationwide insurance in the United States of property and casualty and financial services organization where we have the whole idea of Business functions mapping to a set of capabilities where in in the way that we're looking at business functions This is a way to represent a Set a subset of the organization that's responsible for performing a set of behaviors So we really think of a function is more of a structural thing as opposed to a first-class behavioral thing We can map processes to scenarios applications And these are we'd be physical real applications pieces of software that we buy from vendors or build ourselves We can map those to functional components business actors can be related to roles and then applications can also be Related to one another through data flows and the data objects that they share so one of the things if you haven't you know Had the displeasure of hearing me talk before as I do quite a bit of modeling And I need to build a meta-model of like everything in order to understand it and to explain it So again forgive me for all the box and line diagrams are going to see but this is the way that I try to Make it concrete and real and hopefully again implementable in some of the commercial tools that are out there So the first step in doing architecture transformation in the toga FADM is Set of activities described in phase a architecture vision, and this is basically where we're trying to get our arms around You know, what is the problem that we're trying to solve? Do we agree that it's a good idea to try to solve that problem? What would be some of the essential characteristics of that target state? Vision and use that as a way to basically kick off the idea of an architecture project and of course This is where a lot of things often Go down the tubes in a lot of organization because the whole idea of an architecture project Is this something that often makes people's eyes cross because in most organizations funding is tied to solution delivery projects and The whole idea with the ADM is that we do a bunch of architectural activities to provide context for what those solution delivery Projects should be as it relates to intentionally and deliberately Converging on a target architecture. So again, this is an excerpt out of the APG toga F process library One of the things that's not described in toga F that we took liberty to do in these types of diagrams It particularly in phases a and phase e Opportunities and solutions is to try to demonstrate that these are really four-way Collaborations between different groups of people. It's not just all about the enterprise architect So we have some organizational development activities requirements management or business analyst capabilities enterprise architecture and project management and there's a number of Handful of these that are pretty obvious that we can you know exploit reuse out of the it for it reference architecture particularly The idea of evaluating business capabilities as a way to help inform us as to where investment Opportunities could and should be made based on different characteristics of a capability model We can also Use some of the KPIs that are in the reference architecture to help us define You know, how are we going to assess the success of reaching that a new state in our IT business? And then we can you know, we need to articulate in developing the architecture vision. What is our? Expected outcome, you know, what are we trying to get out of you taking an architecture-driven approach towards? Modernizing and uplifting IT such as are we trying to simplify the environment? Are we trying to optimize the environment or we try to do innovation so on and so forth? So here we have an example of a you know a heat map that we've created using the the IT for IT reference architecture Based on the idea that there's a couple of attributes about a capability such as its current maturity future maturity Current level of performance future level of performance and we'll dive a little deeper into some more Empirical measures in just a little bit, but this is a pretty typical way that I presume you guys have seen enterprise Architecture content rendered before again We've got the the four value streams are the outer boxes strategy to portfolio requirement deploy request to fulfill Detect a correct and then these are the capabilities that are part of the IT for IT reference architecture again These are the informative part of the standard not normative But we find them very useful nonetheless and again using a typical five-level scale for representing our current level of maturity to try to give us an idea of you know based on a pure capability maturity perspective where where are the places that we need some of the most help and Based on this diagram, it looks like you know procurement project management service level management are some of the places that are pretty much chaotic and are dependent on the heroic efforts of individuals and Again when we think about you know what are when we're articulating an architecture vision What is some of the you know expected outcome of you know taking an enterprise architecture driven approach for Towards modernizing and uplifting the business of IT might be again doing IT capability management I mean how many folks out there in your organizations are using a capability based approach for Trying to wrap your arms around the business Couple of people all right, so you know some opportunity for looking at this perhaps a little bit more closely It's a very big trend that we've been seeing at least in the US with a lot of our clients that again Capability driven approach based in providing context inside of a value stream to again inform people on where they should be making investments as a good place to start One of the things that I think is a really important thing to think about is you know We do a lot of activities, you know primarily to support the frontline business Functions of our organization, but we can put we can you know take those things and apply them introspectively as well So the whole idea of doing application portfolio management for the IT Applications that run the business of IT and we see a lot of organizations focus on doing application portfolio management of the normal business applications and how many of your organizations do a p.m. For business applications and How many of those do it similarly on IT applications? All right, so we got some people that saw the opportunity to not be a hypocrite Because that's one of the things that obviously you're at risk at doing when you're trying to do enterprise architecture to everybody else But overlook the opportunity and how we can use enterprise architecture to improve IT Then we've got the whole idea of using enterprise architecture to set up an IT data management foundation One of the common situations that we've seen pervasively throughout a lot of our clients And this is a big part of what you know the the the data fabric And the schemas that are going to be coming out of IT for it You're going to try to address is that all IT apps want all the data from all other IT apps And so we end up seeing a lot of point-to-point integration between You know 60 to 70 IT apps and then what ends up happening is we end up losing track of what the actual system of record is because some people are Taking shortcuts and getting data from intermediate transient systems that get it from a original source system So we see a lot of opportunity where IT or for IT can help with that technology lifecycle management again particularly trying to put an agile spin on that particularly as it also relates to Trying to implement a lean IT a la concepts around agile and DevOps So just a quick glimpse of if you haven't read through the whole standard Here are some examples of the KPIs that are associated with the first value stream strategy to portfolio So things like trying to understand, you know business and IT alignment visibility into our overall demands How well we're you know rationalizing our service portfolio doing the financial analysis on our service portfolio And I think we got another well yet another set here as well Investment tracking a customer satisfaction stewardship of IT investments as well as of course information risk management and security alignment and You know again We've been using this content in a number of our end user organizations to again to not have to just get up in front of a You know a C-level set of executives and scratch our head about gee How would we know if IT got better again the reference architecture with IT for IT has a lot to offer So now let's continue on in the crop circle and go to phase B business architecture So this of course is where the capability model becomes even more pervasive And so if we take a look at the different Steps of this particular life cycle and this these steps are also consistent with the remaining Architecture description phases for application architecture data architecture and technology architecture So we call this the nine-step program. We need to start off by selecting reference models of viewpoints and tools So again, that's where we can use it for IT as a reference architecture to get us going Again, if we're using the capability model, which is what we're going to take a look at in just a couple of minutes We can use that capability model to map things that we're discovering in our baseline and target of business application and data architectures We can use that reference architecture as a foundation for doing a gap analysis and for doing a capability based impact analysis and this is where you know, we find again having a capability lens on the IT investment portfolio Is a really important thing because we find a lot of organizations are you know making investments and and trying to understand How much they're spending in different capabilities what the health of their capabilities are the agility of their capabilities? And that's good to understand those baseline assessments But we also need to understand investments that are in flight so having some traceability between our enterprise architecture capability model in our portfolio management capability of projects and programs in flight is a great way to you know Uplift the rigor in that part of the life cycle So one of the the nice things that That I like also about the IT for IT Reference architecture is that we've been taking a model-driven approach towards doing this and I find this very encouraging So and I don't know if you guys have talked earlier today about the state of the IT for IT model In sparks enterprise architect and is that an asset that we're still thinking about how we make that available to the general public? So work in progress and I'm just here to say you know one of the privileges of membership is you know We get access to that but I think it would be a great value add for the end user community because You know having the reference architecture to PDF is better than nothing But then why should everybody have to type it all over again to you know use that in enterprise architecture tool sets? So there's a very nice complete model. That's been the basis for trying to pull all this stuff together so here we see the same for value streams and Some of the different chunks of model content around you know capabilities functional capabilities data objects and Capability mag capability mapping it will take a brief look at some of those as well So here we see the capability model. It's a very simple capability model When I take a look at the ones that are most frequently used by lines of business They tend to be you know, two three four five sometimes even Deeper levels of hierarchy. This one is pretty straightforward It's just a two-level hierarchy where we've got the value stream at the top and then these capabilities under the underneath them as some of you may Recognize or you may have already been aware of this is that again IT for IT is using the Archimate notation another open group standard To represent the IT for IT reference architecture But one of the things that we had to do is we had to go beyond what Archimate 2.1 currently offers for example There's no such thing as a capability within Archimate although that's something we're talking about for the next version There's also some nice default Capability interactions that are described that basically show in the case of the the strategy to portfolio value stream and related value streams You know, how do these different capabilities interact with one another and what are some of the events that trigger these interaction and then some of the outgoing? consequential events so again, I think again having a Straw man of some business architecture content to describe the business IT I think is pretty exciting and pretty compelling particularly when we take a look at how we can try to exploit that and we'll take a look at that here when we take a closer look into data architecture and application architecture So if we take a look at, you know some of the the data object data architecture content, you know We basically have for each of the value streams here is a detect for correct some of the You know the core business objects the underlying a service backbone And ancillary objects to have been basically kind of give us a head start on What these different types of data elements are what their semantics are in their relationships? one of the things that Archimate doesn't address terribly explicitly is the whole idea of attributes for data objects So the team's been using basically uml classes to represent the explicit properties for some of these different elements To again provide a little bit more fidelity about what we mean by each of these data objects and Then for a particular kind of data flow if you remember back a couple of class diagrams before There's a you know systems of engagement interaction or in integrations and systems of record integration And this is a even though it's not necessarily explicitly Shown this way. I really look at these as uml state machine diagrams again trying to represent What are the different states of these different entities and how are they coupled with one another because that's often the real trick that the Change in state of a particular object Informs and perhaps changes at the state of a related object So here we're trying to represent the relationship between the event and the incident data object And the states of each of them and then the little dashed lines between them We're trying to represent how again something that's in progress an event that's in progress causes the associated incident to be open so really taking a Systematic a model-driven approach towards really trying to wrap our brains around the data architecture of it And then if we take a look at application architecture This is again certainly the the focal point of you know the functional component description of the landscape So here we see the strategy to portfolio value stream the functional components some of the relationships and data that's flowing in between them from outside as well as The the the data fabric and the relationships between those so to us even though they're not Called this in the it for it metamodel. These are again functional components. They are ultimately Logical application components per the togaf 9 metamodel so they describe you know the kinds of things that Pieces of software should do without necessarily naming an explicit piece of software But of course in the real world. We actually have explicit pieces of software So here what we see is just a simple example of how we started off by taking And we actually for whatever it's worth. We went to a BDNA's technopedia I don't forget you're familiar with that as a you know the De facto knowledge base of all software products known to man on the planet earth Great business model wish I had thought of it To basically alleviate end users from having to call the same vendors and ask them the same questions all the time So we went into a technopedia and basically selected a bunch of it Applications as an example for the next set of slides that you'll see and then mapped those Applications to capabilities So here we've got you know sparks enterprise architect is being used for architecture, you know sales force and Microsoft CRM Used for customer relationship management change management tools defect management tools and then what we're representing here is a Derived health score and risk score We've worked with a lot of organizations coming up with some empirical methods for calculating these different things You know for whatever it's worth this data here is you know just random numbers for the purposes of Doing some nice color coding that you'll see in a little bit But the idea that you know the health of an application can be based on It's a number of defects in the backlog the skill set Availability the number of security vulnerabilities the risks associated with it can also be Quantified empirically with different sorts of measures and then the actual cost of operating each of these assets One of the things that perhaps you know Coming from an enterprise architecture perspective as opposed to an IT ops perspective that I was Pretty surprised by is how little most companies know how much they spend on applications They know they spend a bunch of money on a bunch of applications But it's not real clear exactly how much should we spend on this application so on and so forth So coming up with an understanding of how much does it cost to support and operate these assets? Is not a simple thing at all and in the places where we've been able to implement it has often required some re-engineering in IT Finance as it relates to how they track and report Financial data and of course cost information often has multiple components licensing cost labor cost PPM cost Licensing costs so on and so forth. So I guess what I want to what I'm trying to say is that you know the simple data values that you See here there may be quite a bit of Heavy lifting and re-architecting of the enterprise to really figure out what those things are from an empirical perspective And then a typical kind of investment Disposition about where do we want to make our investments in these particular physical applications as we take the IT landscape forward? and then so here we see again an explicit mapping of these applications to the Capabilities using the kind of architecture tooling you'd expect to use in modern-day Solution or enterprise architecture projects and then this gives us the ability to create similar sorts of heat maps Where in this case? This is the strategy to portfolio Value stream we're just showing or we're just showing one slice of the four and then the top-level capabilities in each one and just to keep things simple, you know a couple two three Actual physical software applications that are supporting each one of those capabilities with a investment Disposition being indicated with colors about whether it's for strategic We want to maintain it or we want to retire it and then you know for whatever it's worth This just might be me coming from you know the top level down You know sure, you know the enterprise architecture of the of IT does involve Technology architecture, but that's you know simple stuff, you know, you got databases and application servers and networks and stuff like that Again, I think you we would do those types of activities very traditionally the way we would do a lot of Technology life cycle management, but now let's talk about really the you know the so what about all this stuff So great, so I got the IT for IT reference architecture I've got you know models and tools, you know to map all this stuff out again We're not doing this just because we got nothing better to do. We're actually supposed to be helping us Informed decision-making put together a plan of action and then execute it and that's really what the whole point of phase e In the toga f ADM is all about so You know what you're gonna what you're gonna take a look at in the upcoming slides is an implementation again of This fit for purpose capability based planning meta model for whatever it's worth, you know We're thinking of you know trying to influence the architecture form in you know Making capabilities a first-class element in the toga f the next version of toga f meta model because it kind of just hangs off Phase e stuff in the current meta model, but the idea that you know again We've got a value chain that's composed of value streams that then are mapped to capabilities And those capabilities again may have child parent relationships, so there may be a hierarchical decomposition We've got the idea that there may be some you know performance and maturity indicators about the current state in the future state Investment disposition, but also the idea that there are different categories of capabilities I'll figure this out before the end of this presentation and Different types of capabilities and so this is the idea that a capability is core to our business It supports the core and then what we've been seeing more recently is the idea of enabling capabilities Which often tend to be very technological in their emphases, but are still considered business capabilities But they have a lot of technology to make them actually work and then we've got you know What kind of Cape or what type of capabilities this has got competitive capability? Is it a differentiating capability or is it a commodity capability? And these are again additional dimensions that can help inform us do Investment planning because what we see in a lot of organizations is people making you know Seven eight-figure investments and things that presumably they already decided were non differentiating Or spending custom application dollars on a commodity Capability that could be supported by a package implementation For example, then we've got again applications being mapped to those capabilities to supporting them in addition to having Again a health score risk score annual cost investment disposition We want to understand their operational status as well as some dates about their overall life cycle And we want to have some idea about how the capabilities map to processes and how those Processes may need to be uplifted in the business architecture and a set of requirements that describe what we're going to do when we actually drive the architecture transformation And so here we have an example of The application level data that you saw in the Excel spreadsheet earlier has now been aggregated up to the capability model where we can see An average health score and an average risk score and a total cost Sorry about that as well as again different properties of each one of these capabilities And then we're able to again create additional views of the IT application landscape Again through this capability model lens and this is basically trying to represent the health Or the relative health of each of these capabilities based on the health of the underlying IT applications So again, we see again a similar sort of Green yellow red color coding here to again inform us where we should be making our investments Or where we should not be making our investments and one of the things that we'd expect to be able to produce out of our Repository is some sort of life cycle road map something that's trying to show the evolution of these different IT applications over time and so here we see you know sparks enterprise architect version 12 is you know proposed in 2014 it's under development in the second part of 214 and then it becomes operational in 2015 and then you know additional Operational states having to do with decommissioning or that we want to decommission it That it's been decommissioned and it's actually been retired and looking for that overlap and making sure that we don't have any gaps as we're Uplifting existing applications and retiring old ones So when we're in phase e opportunities and solutions We're trying to do again a similar four-way collaboration between business analysis or requirements management organizational development ea and program management Two of the activities that I think again IT for IT helps us out explicitly is for again consolidating the results of gap analysis and Then using Archimate and the IT for IT reference architecture to define the major chunks of work as they're called in togaff and Archimate work packages and So here we're basically, you know, this is very representative of some of the work We've been doing with some us base base clients You know we there is a current IT operating model version 2.0 and this is this symbol here this little cube with the little steps on it Is the representation of a plateau which is Archimates? Language for a state of the architecture so the baseline architecture is represented by a plateau The target architecture is represented by a plateau and all transition architectures in between are also represented by plateaus So here we're basically trying to say using Archimate the IT operating model version 2.0 is going to be related to a new IT operating model version 2.1 and it's going to be based on Us actually creating three different deliverables So what's the outcome of achieving itom 2.1? increased enterprise architecture reuse reduced complexity of the IT landscape and streamlined service demand management just as an example And then we can go and do a whole bunch of architecture work, you know do our mappings of Capabilities to applications Describe the interactions between our applications Describe which processes that we're using so in this particular case The the target plateau has new versions of some of these software applications and some existing versions as well As well as some new versions of processes about we're going to have a new process for configuring our Tools a new way of managing enterprise architecture version 2.1 and a 2.0 in version of managing product development and then what I neglected to show you just because I didn't want to Overwhelming me with too many models Although if you're if you're interested in more stop by I'll be happy to sling models at gel all night long Is we actually then do a comparison of the baseline itom 2.0 plateau to the itom 2.1 plateau And then out of that we're able to basically actually generate the gap analysis So togaff talks about gap analysis being perhaps an activity that's performed by people We feel that if you've got the right kind of tooling behind it that you should be able to exploit your tools to help you do This and so here we've got the whole idea of again the baseline and target plateaus What elements both capabilities applications and processes are we going to preserve so those are things in the current state that are going to also exist as is in the target state what things we're actually going to eliminate and what are some new things that we're actually going to create and I didn't have time to prepare an alternate view of this but it would it would make a lot of sense to represent this graphically as well as opposed to also just a you know a Tabular report or what togaff calls a catalogue and so when we think about trying to you know map this whole idea of a plateau and work packages and other elements to a an actual roadmap we took a look at the Archimate med model and Refined it and made it a little bit more constrained So first of all the whole idea of a roadmap is basically something that describes a set of architectural elements that have a Lifecycle state that's changing over time based on you know that the fact that the The roadmap has a time span usually based on quarters and that we can basically You know represent that that roadmap is related to a particular plateau That plateau is an aggregation of work packages, which may turn out to be Programs or projects when we actually get down to find green portfolio management, but that's associated with Addressing a certain certain set of requirements that are going to address the gaps that we've identified And so here we've got the actual work packages So for the IT operating model 2.1, we've got a you know an enterprise architecture tool implementation a Tool integration work stream with another product We've created model flow and then upgrading some other APG tool So we basically said kind of seems like there's three chunks of work to do in order to reach this Itom 2.1 target architecture and then I want to try to you know really figure out What does it mean to deliver this so you know what we have basically here is a you know a five-way traceability view Where we've got you know the bodies of work in the middle So those are the three work packages that we saw before The processes that are a part of the target state the applications that are a part of the target state And then identifying a set of requirements of what are we going to do to actually improve or change each of the processes and associated applications and again the requirements are these little Rectangle or octagonal things in purple in the second and fourth swim lane and then after we've connected those requirements to The different parts of the plateau we can then create a integrated report that represents What different things are we going to have to change about different applications and different processes as it relates to Achieving the target architecture of the it operating model version 2.1 So conclusions Our experience is certainly indicating that it for it provides a you know a fantastic foundation for helping us apply Enterprise architecture towards trying to transform the business of it whether that's in you know capability management information management portfolio management life cycle management Lean it and of course IT for IT by itself is a great wonderful thing But when you when you couple it with the togaf Standard in particular the architecture development method and how we can use our can archmage to do visualization Of our architectures. It seems to us to be a hopefully an effective demonstration How we can really exploit three standards that the open group has invested it So that's what I got for you guys Thanks so much for your kind participation and attention