The Value of becoming a Certified Enterprise Architect

If you’re reading this (thank you), then you have more than a casual interest in enterprise architecture. You may be a seasoned practitioner, or someone who has recently been introduced to the field, or (most likely) somewhere in between.
Anyone who has spent some amount of time in the field knows that this is a relatively young discipline. Yes, the underpinnings of EA – systems theory, organizational dynamics, model building and component-based design (to name a few) – have been around for some time. Just as never-seen-before molecules are combinations of a base set of elements (112 by some counts), so are new and valuable applications of enterprise architecture emerging out of industry, government and academia. In my view, we have only begun to reap the business benefits of architecture as an ongoing practice to direct the course of organizations in an uncertain world.
Among the readers of EABlue, it is safe to say that we are all students of enterprise architecture, continually striving to integrate architecture with day-to-day operations and finding innovative ways to make EA “actionable”. One area that I believe deserves more attention is the interplay between enterprise architecture and solution design (watch this space for a blog on this topic).
If you’ve been involved in an enterprise architecture program, you quickly build up a repertoire of war stories. The great thing about other people’s experiences is that you can reap all the benefits (well almost) of what they learned without necessarily going through the same painful and blissful experiences.
Which brings me to the point of this blog. I am proud to announce the availability of an EA certification course series from IBM Rational. Many of you may recall that we had partnered with Carnegie Mellon University in offering an enterprise architecture certification program. That program has been re-launched, but with some changes: the materials have been updated, the duration of the three classes are normalized, and we are now partnering directly with Dr. Scott Bernard as the principal author of the curriculum (along with IBM). Students who successfully complete all three courses (there is also a 10-day boot camp) will receive a Certified Enterprise Architect certificate from the International Enterprise Architecture Institute (iEAi).
As one who has had the privilege to deliver this material previously, I am very excited that we are able to offer these classes on a public and an in-house basis. I learn new things each time I teach a class, and the same can be said of the other instructors, I’m sure. Not only is there value in the material that is presented (which is augmented by the instructor’s experience in the field), but students find a treasure trove of shared experiences from the apprentices, journeymen and grizzled veterans alike who make up a typical class.
The three courses are Basics of Enterprise Architecture, Applied Enterprise Architecture, and Advanced Enterprise Architecture. The courses are designed for those who are, or will be, participating in an enterprise architecture program, or those who have responsibility for the outcomes of an EA program. You will learn how to make a business case for EA, the importance and history of enterprise architecture frameworks, how to identify the capabilities for a future architecture, and how use EA as a means of aligning the organization to articulated business goals with emphasis on IT investments, to name just a few of the topics. Perhaps most is important is how EA integrates with the governance and decision-making processes across the enterprise.
As enterprise architecture is yet an evolving discipline, having credentials from two recognized organizations (IBM and iEAi) is a definite plus. To be sure, there are other certification programs available. Some of these focus on one particular framework or approach. However, the enterprise architecture course series from IBM Rational brings together the essentials of Zachman, TOGAF, DoDAF, the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework along with Dr. Bernard’s EA(3) approach. While there is no single way to do enterprise architecture, I would posit that there is a common set of principles undergirding virtually all approaches. Among these is that the motivation for change can come as strategic direction, changes in the business model, or shifts in technology. To effectively manage change at the enterprise level and to move the organization systematically toward a state that is animated by vision may define the agile enterprise.
I invite you to learn more. IBM Enterprise Architecture course series.
4
Comments
Mike Walker
Hi Scott,
Some of my initial thoughts are:
– Another certification program in the market that is further complicating the EA
– Looks to be vendor driven which means there is a strong tie to IBM products, namely Rational (very obvious from the title and called out in the program description)
– With the partnership with an external body that may be good but until someone goes through it and evaluates it’s tough to tell how unbiased it really is.
– I understand that IBM had a very close alignment (all their internal architects used the TOGAF + IBM materials to certify) with the Open Group and TOGAF. – Has that relationship been severed? If so, why?
– What I do like is they are taking a best of breed approach and not just looking at one EA body.
It’s a little too early to tell where this is going or if it will have traction but I am definitely interested in learning more about it.
http://www.mikethearchitect.com/2010/07/ibm-rational-enterprise-architecture-program.html
Regards,
Mike Walker
Scott McBride
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your comments.
Until there is a single accreditation body that is empowered to grant EA certifications, we’re going to see various organizations offer their own certifications. This is a good thing, IMO. It reflects the need to have people in the profession having some level of exposure to a growing body of theory and practice. The programs themselves are a precursor to formalizing enterprise architecture as a profession on par with computer science and software development.
The material is vendor-neutral and we are very sensitive to this offering being perceived as a means to market IBM products and services (yes, we do demonstrate System Architect as an example of repository-based EA). That being said, the course is delivered by practitioners who collectively have had experiences with many of the major tools and EA approaches.
The EA(3) method of Dr. Scott Bernard provides a consistent track for presenting the concepts of horizontal integration, vertical alignment, separation of concerns, componentized architectures, etc. Yet EA(3) is a teaching vehicle; in the module on frameworks, we present all the major approaches including TOGAF. We do not present the IBM EA approach (and you’ll get many answers if you ask what that is). Yet we do emphasize the importance of having a documented approach to conducting EA.
To address your concern about severing ties with TOGAF, I’m surprised that you came to that conclusion. The EA certification program in no way affects our continued relationship with The Open Group.
Again, thanks for your comments. If you have have other observations, feel free to reply or blog.
Regards,
Scott
Jason MacKenzie
Scott,
I’m currently considering taking this program on June 13 in Dallas. Now that we’re almost a year on from this post I’m curious about your perspective on this program versus others.
Would I be able to contact you via email with a few questions?
Thanks and all the best,
Jason
Jeff French
Scott,
I don’t think there will ever be the one true EA certification ever again. The industry has outgrown that point. Instead, Certification Programs should look to an accreditation model. Is your certification accredited? I would argue that this issue is probably heavily addressed by affiliating Certification programs with universities and having the right professors (like Bellman or Bernard) providing tenured oversight. Accredited Certifications can then recognize each other formally, and avoid religious flavor wars.
-Jeff
Leave a Reply