 So, Chris is going to start. So, I'm going to introduce Chris very briefly. As I said, Chris is the current Chair of the Open Group IT for IT Forum. He's a member of the faculty tenured at the University of South Florida. Well, thank you very much. It's a great honour and pleasure to be here. The linkage from the Futurology is about creativity and my role simply today is to explain who we are, what the problem we've been addressing and the great work that we have been able to put together with the folks in the room over the last two years. So, the problem which I've looked at for a time, a lack of cooperation across all of IT leads to what systems thinkers call sub-optimality. Much research on software failure talks about not so much catastrophic failure but how software systems disappoint. I think the sense of disappointment many of you have understood. Secondly, insufficiently integrated IT management lacks prescriptive guidance. So, the group came together when they realised that they were all trying to solve what seemed to be a very, very similar problem. They were each trying to be creative in a side-o. They quickly realised that there was an opportunity here to demonstrate some creativity. The other aspect of this, critical to the success of business, was the inability to gain true insight in order to make good decisions. So, some empirical research, you know, the scientist in me as a university person these days, that rang true too. And then finally, immaturity in this ever-turbulent and ever-innovating world makes it virtually impossible to tack complexities like cloud, agility, mobility, bring your own device and all of the other, what are now called disruptive innovations. So, Clayton Christensen, another man with a Scandinavian-sounding name who is in fact another Harvard guy like Michael Porter, came out with this idea. We are confronting it in the IT for IT forum. So, this is the dynamic problem that we've tried to address. IT for IT is an evolving open group standard. Today is the launch. IT for IT provides a reference architecture for managing the business of IT, IT management in the broadest sense, enabling insight and also with an emphasis on evolution and continuous improvement. It's our hope and indeed aim that in this way the new standard will enable IT execution across the entire value chain in a better, faster, cheaper way and with less risk. The open groups IT for IT forum is fundamentally vendor-neutral, technology agnostic so that we can be responsive and agile and industry agnostic so we can be vertically and horizontally innovative. That is the broad goal. At the moment we are made up of two groups, if you will. The original founding members of the IT for IT consortium, representatives of whom are in this room with us. So, as the morning progresses, it will be my pleasure with Alan Brown to introduce you to some of the founding fathers, if you will, from the original consortium. Colleagues at Shell, Hewlett Packard, the Dutch Insurance Business Act Mayor, Munich Ray, who I don't think we have a representative from here today, Accenture, PricewaterhouseCoopers and AT&T, all contributed, if you will, the initial stimulus for this and today we are growing rapidly. I'm thrilled to announce that we now have members in the open group IT for IT forum that include Cap Gemini, BP, Logicalis, Umbrio, I think we have two representatives from Umbrio who are welcome. It's nice to see you face to face who unfortunately aren't able to stay for the whole week. ATOS, IBM, architecting the enterprise and Microsoft. The work of the original consortium began back in 1911. It was stimulated by a conversation among major customers of one of the vendors and through the first year we rapidly moved to, or they I should say, rapidly moved to the development of a reference architecture based addressing of this problem. So in August 2012 the early phases of the reference architecture, the very early versions, were created. Through 2012 and 2013 we moved to the first substantial release and as you can see also we moved through a number of levels. So the architectural emphasis of this, so I'm struggling here to make a pun on the challenge of architecting and gardening the enterprise but I'll let that go. We have a strong architectural emphasis. This makes sense to an awful lot of existing forums in the open group, not least because we've been careful to pay attention to what TOGAF and the Archimate forums already do. So we have a multi-level structure to the enterprise architecture and you can see on the timeline at the bottom that that's evolved to the point that we're at today. October 2014 when we fully publicly launched this forum we have a substantial but still rapidly evolving enterprise architecture for the business of IT. What I'd like to do now is to step briefly out of sequence to enable Georg to step up and explain the relationship between our use of Michael Porter's value chain concepts and the reference architecture that we have in IT for IT. Thanks Georg. Thank you.