report

Assessment Brief: BIS2005 Enterprise Architecture

Trimester 1, 2021

Assessment Overview

Assessment 1: Case Study

Due date: Week 5

Group/individual: Group

Word count / Time provided: 3500

Weighting: 30% (Report: 25% Presentation: 5%

Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO1, ULO2, ULO3

Assessment Details:

This case study will assess your knowledge of key content areas (Week 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 contents) and to

identify further support needs. For successful completion of the case study, you are required to study

Assessment Task

Type Weighting Due Length ULO

Assessment 1: Case Study Propose EA artifacts, taxonomy of documentations that to be delivered for a particular case study. In addition, to discuss the operating model and types of IT initiatives.

Group

30% (Report: 25% Presentation: 5%

Week 5

3500 words (report

and power point

slides with embedded

audio)

ULO-1 ULO-2 ULO-3

Assessment 2: Report Write a report to examine the architecture function of a specific organisation and determining the operating model for a multi- profile company. The report should also cover the core concepts of data and information architecture and evaluate existing data and information architecture designs, continuity plans in the context of EA and role of audit and compliance standards in EA (details in the Assessment Brief).

Individual 40%

Week 12

3600 words

ULO-3 ULO-4 ULO-5

Assessment 3: Quiz Every quiz will be conducted based on the teaching and learning materials covered in previous two weeks, for an example, quiz 1 in week 3 will be based on week 1 and week 2 teaching and learning materials (details in the Assessment Brief).

Individual 30%

Week 2, 4, 6, 8 & 10

30 Minutes for each

quiz

ULO-1 ULO-2 ULO-3 ULO-4 ULO-5

the material provided (lecture slides, tutorials, and reading materials), engage in the unit’s activities,

and in the discussion forums. The prescribed textbook is the main reference along with the

recommended reading material. By completing this assessment successfully, you will be able to

identify key aspects of information systems. This will help in achieving ULO4.

The case study will be completed and submitted in week 5.

Case Study:

Data#10 is a mid-size governmental department providing important services of a social nature to the

population of a large territory. From the technology perspective, the organization can be considered

as a late adopter of innovations and characterized by relative underinvestment in IT, which has certain

implications for both its IT landscape and respective management practices. On the one hand,

Data#10’s IT landscape is very heterogeneous and includes many legacy information systems and

technologies some of which have been in use for decades. On the other hand, its IT-related

management practices are also rather archaic. For instance, the relationships between business and

IT leaders in the organization exhibit evident signs of “us and them” mentality, while new investments

in IT are viewed by business mostly as a means to reduce costs of the existing operations.

Data#10 has a centralized IT department headed by the CIO and responsible for developing and

supporting information systems for all its business units. The IT department employs around 140

specialists and consists of three main functions: architecture, development and service. The

architecture function includes a few architects focused predominantly on specific IT solutions.

Data#10 previously tried to uplift the maturity of its EA practice and extend the scope of architectural

planning beyond separate initiatives, but these attempts did not succeed and respective architects

had been made redundant.

Then, the CIO decided to undertake another deliberate effort to evolve Data#10’s EA practice with the

involvement of external consultants. For this purpose, the organization engaged a rather well-known

boutique EA consultancy to help initiate a full-fledged EA practice. The consultancy formed a project

team consisting of four architects specialized in different subject areas. This consulting team acted

according to a detailed engagement plan agreed with Data#10’s senior IT leadership. The plan

stipulated in which sequence and when exactly various EA artifacts will be produced. In total,

consultants worked for 2-4 months, analyzed the organization, interviewed numerous stakeholders

and developed all the EA artifacts specified in the plan. Specifically, they started from analyzing

Data#10 in terms of current and desired maturity of its business capabilities and mapped existing

applications to respective capabilities. Then, they captured all relevant data entities, documented all

technologies used in the organization, depicted current and defined target application portfolios and

created more detailed CRUD (create, read, update and delete) relationship matrices.

1. Develop a comprehensive roadmap specifying what projects should be executed in the next

12 months. The order of execution is very important, therefore you are also required to

develop a timeline the 12 months.

2. Based on your road map, discuss 4 key EA artifacts that would be delivered in first 2-3 months.

State 2 reasons why you have chosen to implement the 4 (four) EA artifacts

3. Discuss 5 (five) direct benefits and 5 (five) indirect benefits that Data#10 would have if the

Enterprise Architecture is successfully implemented in Data#10.

4. Discuss 5 (five) key roles that Enterprise Architecture Business Strategy Practice will play in

Data#10.

5. Discuss the operating model that you will implement in Data#10 and why you have chosen

the operating model.

6. Discuss the roles of Vision and Standard in implementation of Data#10’s EA?

7. Discuss 5 types of IT initiatives that you have considered very important to Data#10’s EA

Marking Information: The case study will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 30% 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

Case Study Q1 (20% marks)

Not able to develop a comprehensive roadmap specifying what projects should be executed in the next 12 months

Developed a roadmap specifying what projects should be executed in the next 2 – 3 months, provided solution is acceptable but details missing

Most of the roadmap are identified but minor points are missing

All the road map identified, provides very good solutions, examines the EA clearly

All the problems are clearly identified, provided excellent solutions and EA very clearly.

Q2 (10% marks) 4 key EA artifacts that would be delivered in 2-3 months discussed and stated 2 reasons why implementation of the 4 (four) EA artifacts important in the first 2 - 3 months but not properly discussed.

4 key EA artifacts that would be delivered in 2-3 months discussed and stated 2 reasons why implementation of the 4 (four) EA artifacts important in the first 2 - 3 months but details missing

5 4 key EA artifacts that would be delivered in 2-3 months discussed and stated 2 reasons why implementation of the 4 (four) EA artifacts important in the first 2 - 3 months presented in detail.

4 key EA artifacts that would be delivered in 2-3 months discussed and stated 2 reasons why implementation of the 4 (four) EA artifacts important in the first 2 - 3 months presented in detail, comprehensively examine the relation of EA

4 key EA artifacts that would be delivered in 2- 3 months discussed and stated 2 reasons why implementation of the 4 (four) EA artifacts important in the first 2 - 3 months presented in detail, very comprehensively examine the relation of EA

Q3 (10% marks 5 (five) direct benefits and 5 (five) indirect benefits that Data#10 would have if the Enterprise Architecture is successfully implemented in Data#10 discussed but lots of missing information

5 (five) direct benefits and 5 (five) indirect benefits that Data#10 would have if the Enterprise Architecture is successfully implemented in Data#10 but details missing

5 (five) direct benefits and 5 (five) indirect benefits that Data#10 would have if the Enterprise Architecture is successfully implemented in Data#10 discussed in details.

5 (five) direct benefits and 5 (five) indirect benefits that Data#10 would have if the Enterprise Architecture is successfully implemented in Data#10 comprehensively examine the relation of EA

5 (five) direct benefits and 5 (five) indirect benefits that Data#10 would have if the Enterprise Architecture is successfully implemented in Data#10 discussed in details, very comprehensively examine the relation of EA

Q4 (10% marks 5 (five) key roles that Enterprise Architecture Business Strategy Practice will play in Data#10 discussed but lots of missing information

5 (five) key roles that Enterprise Architecture Business Strategy Practice will play in Data#10 but details missing

5 (five) key roles that Enterprise Architecture Business Strategy Practice will play in Data#10 discussed in details.

5 (five) key roles that Enterprise Architecture Business Strategy Practice will play in Data#10 comprehensively examine the relation of EA

5 (five) key roles that Enterprise Architecture Business Strategy Practice will play in Data#10 discussed in details, very comprehensively examine the relation of EA

Q5 (10% marks Operating model that that the group will implement in Data#10 and why the group has chosen the operating model discussed but lots of missing information

Operating model that that the group will implement in Data#10 and why the group has chosen the operating model discussed but few details missing

Operating model that that the group will implement in Data#10 and why the group has chosen the operating model discussed in detail.

Operating model that that the group will implement in Data#10 and why the group has chosen the operating model discussed and comprehensively examine the relation of EA

Operating model that that the group will implement in Data#10 and why the group has chosen the operating model discussed in details, very comprehensively examine the relation of EA

Q6 (10% marks Roles of Vision and Standard in implementation of Data#10’s EA not properly discussed

Roles of Vision and Standard in implementation of Data#10’s EA identified properly, but missing points

Roles of Vision and Standard in implementation of Data#10’s EA properly discussed, provided

Roles of Vision and Standard in implementation of Data#10’s EA discussed and detailed explanation.

Roles of Vision and Standard in implementation of Data#10’s EA discussed and with excellent explanation.

Q7 (10% marks 5 types of IT initiatives that you have considered very important to Data#10’s EA discussed but with wrong information

5 types of IT initiatives that you have considered very important to Data#10’s EA discussed but with missing information

5 types of IT initiatives that you have considered very important to Data#10’s EA discussed with good information

5 types of IT initiatives that you have considered very important to Data#10’s EA discussed with excellent information

5 types of IT initiatives that you have considered very important to Data#10’s EA discussed with comprehensive and excellent information

Structure, grammar, presentation and Harvard style referencing (10% marks).

Paper 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.

Paper shows some organization. At times, difficult to read and does not flow logically from one part to another. There are some spelling and/or grammatical errors; technical terms are generally are poorly defined. Includes Few references with errors.

Paper is generally well organized and most of the argument is easy to follow. There are some spelling and/or grammatical errors; technical terms are generally are poorly defined. Writing is mostly clear but may lack conciseness. All references cited correctly using citation style with some minor errors.

Paper is generally well organized and most of the argument is easy to follow. There are only a few minor spelling or grammatical errors, or terms are not clearly defined. Writing is mostly clear. All references cited correctly using citation style.

Paper is coherently organized and the logic is easy to follow. There are no spelling or grammatical errors and terminology is clearly defined. Writing is clear and concise and persuasive. Harvard formatting style and citation of references in the body of the report.

Presentation slides Visual Appeal (4% marks)

There are too many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. The slides were difficult to read, and slides contained information copied onto them from another source. No visual appeal.

There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information was contained on many slides. Minimal effort made to make slides appealing.

There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information on more than three or more slides. Presentation has good visual appeal.

There are few errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information on two or more slides. Presentation has significant visual appeal.

There are no errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Information is clear and concise on each slide. Presentation is visually appealing/engaging

Presentation topic knowledge/con tent (4% marks)

Presenters did not understand topic. The presentation was a brief look at the topic, but many questions were left unanswered. Majority of information irrelevant and significant points left out.

The presentation was informative, but several elements went unanswered. Much of the information irrelevant; coverage of some of major points.

The presentation was a good summary of the topic. Major information covered; presentation contain some irrelevant information.

The presentation was a very good summary of the topic. Almost all-important information covered; presentation contain little irrelevant information.

Presentation was excellent and shows extensive knowledge of topic with comprehensive and complete coverage of information.

Presentation skills (5% marks)

Unsatisfactory presentation with no clarity, appropriate pause, intonation and is not capable to engage listeners.

Satisfactory presentation with some clarity and pause.

Good presentation with clarity and pause in majority of speech.

Very good presentation with clarity and pause and able to engage listeners for most of the time.

Excellent presentation with clarity, pause, intonation and is capable to engage listeners all the time.

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) InnoTech is a large steel manufacturing company established several decades ago. Historically,

InnoTech grew largely via mergers and acquisitions of smaller companies occupying adjacent or

complementary market niches and underwent a number of corporate restructurings. Presently, at the

highest level the company is split into two major divisions: Division Alpha and Division Beta. Both

divisions are governed from the lean central head office and report their quarterly financial indicators

to top business executives for their consideration. However, operationally these divisions represent

essentially independent businesses with non-overlapping suppliers, products, customers and markets.

Each division is managed by an appointed executive director reporting directly to C-level corporate

leadership. Divisions are free to set their own agendas, pursue their own competitive strategies and

make their own investment decisions, though major investments must seek approval at the corporate

level.

Division Alpha is an established and large-scale, but highly centralized manufacturing shop. It

specializes on fabricating a single line of products, which are distributed directly to a narrow circle of

wholesale customers over stable supply chain network arrangements. The division has a rather

conservative IT investment strategy intended primarily to achieve better automation of existing

operations and enable smooth, uninterrupted and efficient business processes. It has a central

division-wide IT department employing around 150-180 in-house specialists and also involving about

100-120 external contractors working on a full-time basis. The IT department is responsible for

providing necessary IT support across all activities of Division Alpha’s value chain, e.g. production,

warehousing, sales and delivery as well as various supporting activities including HR, finance and legal

services.

Division Beta has a more complex, dynamic and diversified business model. It offers three core lines

of products focused largely on different market segments and customer groups. These product lines

require substantially different manufacturing processes, distribution channels, sales approaches and

marketing campaigns. However, all products are fabricated from similar raw materials and

components procured from the same suppliers. Moreover, customer bases of these products also

partially overlap, and the department’s leadership is planning to leverage cross-selling opportunities

more actively in the future. Organizationally, Division Beta is structured into three major units aligned

to its three product lines and an additional supporting unit providing shared division-wide services to

the main business, e.g. HR, finance, accounting and IT. Its IT department employs around 450-500 IT

staff qualified in different technologies used in the division’s IT landscape. To accommodate with the

quickly changing market conditions, Division Beta invests a significant share of its profits in new IT

systems and infrastructure. It has an aggressive IT investment strategy aimed at enabling innovative

ways of working.

Questions

1. How many architects does the InnoTech needs for each of the positions described above? Provide detailed explanation to justify the needs.

2. Discuss 5 (five) major general skills requirements for architecture positions

3. Describe 5 role of the Architecture Manager in Innotech

Report: Part-II (Determining the Operating Model of a Multi-Profile Company)

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. 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.

Questions

1. What is an operating model of ComTech on each of its three strategic business units?

2. What business processes are standardized ComTech within each of its business units?

3. What specific types of data are integrated across ComTech within each of its business units?

4. What is the highest-level structure of the IT landscape in ComTech in each of its business units?

5. Recommend operating model that should be implement in ComTech. Provide 3 reasons for your recommendation

Report: Part-III

MoneyInvectors is a mid-size financial company. 5 years ago MoneyInvectors 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,

MoneyInvectors wants to implement Big Data technologies that would empower their staff and

customers for example, implementation of analytical Big Data Technologies would enable

MoneyInvestors staff to approve credit card application within 30 minutes of the submission of the

application.

However, MoneyInvectors’s CIO is pretty skeptical towards the implementation of Big Data

technologies. He believes that the company is only wasting money on the Big Data technologies as it

is essentially nothing more than a sophisticated collection of data.

As a newly promoted IT manager at MoneyInvestors, you are required to write a report that discusses

the following:

1. 5 (five) major difference between Big Data and EA.

2. 5 (five) challenges that MoneyInvestors may have with implantation of Big Data Technologies and how the challenges should be resolved.

3. 5 (five) major difference between Big Data and Ordinary Data.

4. 5 (five) ways that MoneyInvestors would benefits from Big Data disruptive technologies implementation.

5. What do you under with the term ‘cloud computing’? Discuss the important of cloud computing in Enterprise architecture.

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 (15% 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 on Operating model identification, comparison presented in detail, comprehensively examine the relation of EA

Shows full knowledge on Operating model identification, comparison presented in detail, very comprehensively examine the relation of EA

Report Part-III: (30% marks)

Big data, cloud computing not discussed properly, Provide wrong solutions

Big data, cloud computing discussed but missing points

More than adequate design, most of the solutions are properly, provided

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.

The report shows some organization. At times, difficult to read and does not flow logically from one part to another. There are some spelling and/or grammatical errors; technical terms are generally are poorly defined. Includes Few references with errors.

The report is

generally well

organized and most

of the argument is

easy to follow. There

are some spelling

and/or grammatical

errors; technical

terms are generally

are poorly defined.

Writing is mostly

clear but may lack

conciseness. All

references cited

correctly using

citation style with

some minor errors.

The report is generally well organized and most of the argument is easy to follow. There are only a few minor spelling or grammatical errors, or terms are not clearly defined. Writing is mostly clear. All references cited correctly using citation style.

The report is coherently organized and the logic is easy to follow. There are no spelling or grammatical errors and terminology is clearly defined. Writing is clear and concise and persuasive. Harvard formatting style and citation of references in the body of the report.

Assessment 3: Quiz

Due date: Week 2, 4, 6, 8, 10

Group/individual: Individual

Word count / Time provided: 30 minutes

Weighting: 30%

Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO1, ULO2, ULO-3, ULO-4, ULO-5

Assessment Details:

This quiz will assess your knowledge of key content areas (Week 1 to Week 10 contents) and to identify

further support needs. For successful completion of the quiz, you are required to study the material

provided (lecture slides, tutorials, and reading materials), engage in the unit’s activities, and in the

discussion forums. The prescribed textbook is the main reference along with the recommended

reading material. By completing this assessment successfully, you will be able to identify key aspects

of Enterprise Architecture.

Marking Information: The quiz will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 30% of the total

unit mark.