tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6106782.post3592328592107126917..comments2024-03-27T10:47:33.255+00:00Comments on Architecture, Data and Intelligence: System Theory for ArchitectsRichard Veryardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04499123397533975655noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6106782.post-64321317339338996762013-03-04T00:39:41.498+00:002013-03-04T00:39:41.498+00:00General comment about the applicability of systems...General comment about the applicability of systems theory to EA (since most of the math and science behind ST is over my head)...<br /><br />I see the two relating to each other along the axis of emergence. EA attempts to guide the enterprise (system) toward strategic business outcomes (states) that require many people, processes and technologies (autonomous parts/agents) to work together in balance. <br /><br />At the enterprise level, value emerges through these complex interactions in unpredictable ways and the resulting organization is greater than the sum of its parts. Not to approach EA from a systems perspective is to assume these elements can be guided mechanistically and predictably from a central control point. <br /><br />Personally, my experience has invalidated that assumption. Instead, I apply EA through a ST lens. This shifts focus away from reducing complex enterprise problems down to their component parts and changing how those parts operate toward understanding how relationships between parts produce emergent value and establishing the right rules to guide their behavior. <br /><br />It's a much "softer" approach than traditional Newtonian and Deming methods, and far less predictable and measurable, but can produce much more significant, sustainable results. Marc Rixhttp://www.linkedin.com/in/marcrixnoreply@blogger.com