MXA has been advised that we have been assessed as suitable for inclusion on the Department of Infrastructure and Transport Panel. We were successful in each of the categories for which we applied. These categories are:
- Category 2 – Business & Systems Analysis
- Category 3 – Enterprise, Information & Application Architects
- Category 4 – ICT Security
- Category 17 – ICT Procurement
- Category 18 – ICT Strategic Planning & Advice
This is a another positive step for MXA. It will allow us to offer value more directly to the Department of Infrastructure and Transport and its associated Agencies.
Today MXA was advised that we have been assessed by the Department of Defence (DMO) as suitable for inclusion on the DMOSS panel. MXA was successful for all of the categories that we applied for, which included a range of categories related to ICT Architecture, Business Analysis and ICT Management Consulting. This is a positive step that will allow us to offer value more directly to the following agencies that participate in the DMOSS panel:
- Attorney-General’s Department
- Australian Antarctic Division
- Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
- Australian Customs and Border Protection Service
- Australian Federal Police
- Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency
- Department of Defence
- Department of Human Services
Lots of enterprises struggle with the sprawl of technology products and standards. ICT Managers know that reducing the variety in the set of products that must be supported will reduce costs and improve support levels.
One of the core tools of the Enterprise Architect is the Technical Reference Model or TRM.
In Australian Government, the AGA provides a reference taxonomy that can be used to develop a TRM. You can learn all about the AGA TRM here: http://www.finance.gov.au/e-government/strategy-and-governance/aga-rm/trm.html Talking to people who have used it, and having used it myself in two government agencies, I can say that it is not an easy model to work with. The categories seem outdated and awkward. (AGIMO are working on an update.)
If your objective is to define a set of standard technologies that will provide the basis for rationalising and consolidating your technology set, then a simple visual model like this might work. (Note this is only meant to be a sample, not a complete model, and I’m not trying to make any comment re the particular vendors listed.)
In my experience, a simple diagram like this offers the following benefits:
- No modelling tools required
- Simple format that is easily understood
- Avoids clutter with product version details (although a detailed format with products versions can be useful too)
- Provides a clear path to less complexity in your technology environment
Would this work in your organisation?
MXA is now listed here:
…as a company that Australian Government Agencies can use. This is not a panel, but can simplify procurement arrangements, especially for work under the $80K limit described in the CPGs.
Being a believer in sharing ideas with other architects in Canberra, I make a priority of being actively involved in the following forums:
- The Commonwealth Architects Forum (“the CAF”)
- The National Security EA User Group
The ACS has an Architecture Special Interest Group in Canberra – something I’ve been meaning to look up for years.
As the owner of the Canberra Enterprise and Solutions Architects linked-in group, I plan to set up some face-to-face meetings in the near future.
What other architecture forums are there in Canberra that I should know about? Post a reply.
This is a backward looking post, just to get the blogging started…
I had a great opportunity (thanks Peter Outeridge) to speak at the annual ACS conference in 2010, exactly one year ago today.
The slides (including my speakers notes) can be viewed here. The embedded movie files probably won’t work, but you can listen to Daniel Goleman here (note the timings in the slide notes if you want the relevant bits).
It was a great experience for me, and I was happy with how the presentation went and the feedback I received. I had to move very quickly to get through it even though I had 45 minutes. The audience responded well to the varied content, and I broke things up in the middle with a survey of the audience to make a point.
As you can see from the program, I was the first speaker in the architecture stream. I spoke just after Matt Yannopoulos (Defence CTO) and just before Ed Lewis who teaches an Enterprise Architecture course at Masters level at ADFA.