Profile

Cover photo
Tom Graves
Works at Tetradian Consulting
Lives in England
197 followers|41,002 views
AboutPostsPhotosVideos

Stream

 
To rethink 'the future of work', we must also rethink and resolve the dysfunctional impacts of the money-economy: [post] The future of work, and money http://ow.ly/KFD6K #entarch #work #economics #rbpea
1
Add a comment...
 
"Modelling is the new literacy" [post] More on the 'Why' for new toolsets http://ow.ly/Jo7uP #entarch #tools #sensemaking
As you may have noticed, I've been kinda struggling somewhat to fully explain the 'Why' behind all of this talk of 'new toolsets for enterprise-architecture' and related disciplines. And then, out of the blue, via a reTweet from Phil Beauvoir of 'Archi' fame, comes this: ...
2
Add a comment...
 
Deregulation and extra money merely makes the game worse: [post] When Monopoly goes beyond a game... http://ow.ly/JbFtO #bizarch #economics #rbpea
Back when we were kids, there was one well-worn answer to those long damp dreary days of the English so-called summer: pull out the board-games! One of which, of course, was Monopoly: Which worked well, for a while. As kids, it was at about the right level of challenge for us: there was some ...
1
Add a comment...

Tom Graves

Shared publicly  - 
 
In enterprise-architecture, how should we describe ‘self-service’ – in which the customer uses the organisation’s systems to place an order, or search for information? [post] On modelling 'self-service' with Archimate http://ow.ly/IQ4wj #entarch #itarch
1
Add a comment...
 
The 'why' behind the neew for new toolsets in enterprise-architecture: [post] Toolsets for associative modelling http://ow.ly/I972V #entarch #rbpea #strategy #change
Back on the toolsets theme, what's the Why behind all this focus on a new type of toolset? Why won't the existing toolsets do the job? In practice, the core concern is as per the previous post 'Toolsets, pinball and un-dotting the joins'. What we need to work with, and on, is the development ...
1
Add a comment...

Tom Graves

Shared publicly  - 
 
Should enterprise-architecture be quantitative or qualitative? Actually, it needs to be both! [post] More on theory and metatheory in EA http://ow.ly/HHo7Z #entarch
“Yes, we need theory in enterprise-architecture”, people will often say to me, “but which theory should it be? Should it be quantitative, everything defined in terms of metrics? Or should it be qualitative, and forget about metrics entirely? Which one are you saying it should be?” ...
1
1
Fred Blue's profile photo
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
197 people
John Gotze's profile photo
Trevor Snaith's profile photo
TELE MENSAGEM's profile photo
Paula Thornton's profile photo
Cynthia Kurtz's profile photo
Viktor Markowski's profile photo
Michael Aikins's profile photo
blur Group's profile photo
GO KIMMINHOE (BILLYjKIM)'s profile photo

Tom Graves

Shared publicly  - 
 
Some examples of broader thinking about what's implementable for enterprise-architecture toolsets: [post] A tale of three toolsets http://ow.ly/KtLSX #entarch #rbpea #ux
Time to get back on the toolsets trail… First, though, I'll let Phil Beauvoir have his own rant about the current state of supposed 'EA-toolsets' – as per a series of Tweets he pushed out a few days ago: Better to have fewer features with an intuitive and simple design than a mass of ...
1
Add a comment...

Tom Graves

Shared publicly  - 
 
Are the big-consultancies at last starting to wake up to the changes in enterprise-architecture? [post] Hoist by their own petard (again) http://ow.ly/JnhP8 #entarch #bizarch
1
Add a comment...

Tom Graves

Shared publicly  - 
 
What risks do you face if you tie your reputation too tightly to someone else? [post] Hidden perils of co-branding http://ow.ly/IWm6a #bizarch #entarch #rbpea
For any organisation that's in the public-eye, a co-branding deal sounds like a perfect win-win: you get a pile of useful cash merely for letting someone put up a load of posters around the place. What could possibly go wrong with that? Uh… a lot, actually… The key point in this is that there ...
1
Add a comment...
 
How could we connect across all of our tools for enterprise-architecture? - and why should we? [post] From tools to toolset http://ow.ly/Ikabg #entarch #bizarch #change
Okay, I'll admit to a certain amount of frustration here… Yes, I've been talking a lot about toolsets for enterprise-architecture and the like, the 'Why' for a new type of toolset, the workflows within which such toolsets would appear and how those toolsets could be used within such workflows, ...
1
Add a comment...

Tom Graves

Shared publicly  - 
 
How do we get our enterprise-architecture tools and frameworks to 'play nicely' with each other? [post] Tools and metatools http://ow.ly/HTt9B - on frameworks that self-adapt to any context #entarch #change #RBPEA
Meta-this-that-and-the-other – metamodels, metaframeworks, metamethodology, metatheory, even metatools? What is all this stuff about 'meta-'? And what is 'meta-', anyway? One answer is that it's about a kind of recursion that we often need in our work, in which something is applied to itself, ...
1
Add a comment...

Tom Graves

Shared publicly  - 
 
Yes, we need a proper theory of EA - yet for that to be useful, we first need a solid theory-of-theory! [post] Theory and metatheory in enterprise-architecture http://ow.ly/HxTpX #entarch #rbpea
What's the role of theory in enterprise-architecture? Could there be such as thing as 'the theory of enterprise-architecture'? Can we use that theory, for example, to separate useful EA models from useless ones? It seems that Nick Malik thinks so, as per his recent post 'Moving Towards a Theory ...
1
Fred Blue's profile photoTom Graves's profile photo
2 comments
 
Many thanks, Fred

You're absolutely right, of course.

Reality, though, is that I've struggled for years with how I could move
some of this stuff onto podcasts or videos - seems that (for me, anyway)
for stuff as difficult as this, podcasts and videos seem to make it even
less comprehensible than it was in the first place... :-(

Real problem is that I don't know how to simplify it without
dumbing-it-down to the point where it loses the point. So much of this
stuff is horribly subtle, and it really does take reading over it
several times - or better, experiencing it first-hand several times - to
make sense of it. I've managed to make some of it a bit more
comprehensible through graphics such as the SCAN base-diagram, but I'm
not even much good at that (as you can see... :-( )

The only other way I know how to explain it better is in a room with a
whiteboard, followed by walking around in the respective context and
pointing out the little details that illustrate the point.

To be honest, though, I'm a bit stuck about this: workable suggestions
would be most welcome! :-)

Thanks again, anyway - best regards etc
- tom g.
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
197 people
John Gotze's profile photo
Trevor Snaith's profile photo
TELE MENSAGEM's profile photo
Paula Thornton's profile photo
Cynthia Kurtz's profile photo
Viktor Markowski's profile photo
Michael Aikins's profile photo
blur Group's profile photo
GO KIMMINHOE (BILLYjKIM)'s profile photo
Places
Map of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has lived
Currently
England
Previously
Australia (Victoria) - USA (California)
Work
Employment
  • Tetradian Consulting
    present
Basic Information
Gender
Male