TOGAF Enterprise Architecture Practitioner — Question 75

Please read this scenario prior to answering the question

You are the Chief Enterprise Architect at a large food service company specializing in sales to trade and wholesale for example, restaurants and other food retailers.

One of your company’s competitors has launched a revolutionary product range and is running a very aggressive marketing campaign. Your company’s resellers are successively announcing that they are not interested in your company's products and will sell your competitor’s.

The CEO has stated there must be significant change to address the situation. He has made it clear that new markets must be found for the company’s products, and that the business needs to pivot, and address the retail market as well as the existing wholesale market.

A consideration is the company’s ability and willingness to change its business model, and if it is a temporary or permanent change. An additional risk factor is one of culture. The company has been used to a stable business with a reasonably well known and settled client base - all with its own local understandings and practices.

The CEO is the sponsor of the EA program within the company. You have been engaged with the sales, logistics, production, and marketing teams enabling the architecture activity to start. An Architecture Vision Architecture Principles, and Requirements have all been agreed. As you move forward to develop a possible Target Architecture you have identified that some of the key stakeholders' preferences are incompatible. The incompatibilities are focused primarily on time-to- market, cost savings, and the need to bring out a fully featured product range, but there are additional factors.

Refer to the scenario -

You have been asked how you will address the incompatibilities between key stakeholder preferences.

Based on the TOGAF standard which of the following is the best answer?

Answer options

• A. You would seek to understand value preferences and priorities of the stakeholders. You would develop alternative Target Architectures, highlighting the gaps between current state and the alternatives. You would consider combining features from one or more alternatives in collaboration with the stakeholders. A formal stakeholder review should then be held to decide which alternative is fit for purpose and should be moved forward with. You will then secure the funding required.
• B. You would use the Architecture Vision, Principles and Requirements to define a set of criteria for alternatives and create a set of architecture views to illustrate the impact of the alternative Target Architectures. You would identify the impact on planned projects. You would understand the strengths and weaknesses of the alternatives. You would conduct a formal stakeholder review to decide which alternative to move forward with. You will determine the funding required.
• C. You recommend that since the CEO has stated that the company must pivot it is better to compromise on a full product range rather than time-to-market. You would develop just enough of the Target Architecture to demonstrate fitness of the proposed approach. You would limit the description to just where there is a gap between the current baseline. You would seek approval by the stakeholders to move forward with developing the Target Architecture in detail.
• D. You would review the Stakeholder Map and ensure that you have addressed and represented the concerns of all department heads. You will involve them in resolving the incompatibilities. The Communications Plan should include a report that summarizes the key features of the architecture with and how incompatibilities were resolved to reflects the stakeholders’ requirements. You will check with each key stakeholder they are satisfied with how the incompatibilities have been resolved.

Correct answer: B

Explanation

Option B is the correct answer because it focuses on using established criteria and architecture views to evaluate alternatives thoroughly, which is essential in addressing stakeholder preferences and ensuring alignment. Options A and D, while valuable, lack the structured approach to defining and assessing alternatives as specified in TOGAF. Option C suggests compromising on the product range, which may not align with the goal of developing a comprehensive solution that meets stakeholder needs.