From cgenerali at cutter.com Thu Dec 8 09:26:56 2005 From: cgenerali at cutter.com (Cutter IT Journal) Date: Thu Dec 8 10:20:12 2005 Subject: [Authors] Call for Papers: Enterprise Architecture Best Practices Message-ID: <4111-220051248142656649@cutter.com> CALL FOR PAPERS Cutter IT Journal Mike Rosen, Guest Editor Abstract Submission Date: 19 December 2005 Articles Due: 26 January 2006 Enterprise Architecture: Best Practices? It seems that Enterprise Architecture (EA) is finally becoming mainstream. Opinions on what is driving this movement include requirements on government agencies and contractors, IT complexity and the new economy, requirements for business-IT alignment, and service-oriented architecture (SOA). Although we could debate which, if any -- or all -- of these factors are at work, there is little doubt that EA programs are proliferating. Yet, few of the organizations that have implemented EA programs have realized the benefits promised with their creation. The causes for EA underperformance are as varied and debatable as the initial motivations for EA and usually consist of a combination of factors, including: inappropriate organizational structures and relationships, ineffective governance models and strategies, enterprise funding and tracking mechanisms that promote quick fixes rather than total-cost-of- ownership, lack of integration into the development processes, inappropriate artifacts, over-reliance on frameworks, lack of tools, and weak leadership or executive buy-in. More often than not, EA is its own worst enemy in terms of delivering value that matters and promoting the benefits of EA. Yet all is not lost. Successful EA programs are delivering value to a select set of businesses, enterprises (medium and large) and government agencies. What makes these initiatives stand out? THE MARCH 2006 CUTTER IT JOURNAL INVITES USEFUL DEBATE AND ANALYSES on what approaches organizations are taking to ensure their EA delivers business value. What is your perspective on the best practices that lead to EA success? TOPICS OF INTEREST MAY INCLUDE (but are certainly not limited to) a combination of the following: * Models and guidelines for architectural governance: what works, what doesn't, when, why? * How to provide EA value to decision support processes: what is EA's role in business alignment, strategy, and portfolio management? * How to get development teams to follow EA guidelines and standards * How to integrate EA into the outsourcing and contracting process to achieve architectural goals and governance. * The role of EA tools and frameworks in developing, delivering, and promoting EA value * The role of metrics in quantifying the value of an EA program * The impact of EA leadership in fostering value up, down, and across the organization * How EA organizational structures can affect success TO SUBMIT AN ARTICLE IDEA Please respond to Mike Rosen (mrosen@cutter.com), with a copy to itjournal@cutter.com, by 19 DECEMBER 2005 and include an extended abstract and an article outline. ARTICLE DEADLINE Articles are due on 26 JANUARY 2006. EDITORIAL GUIDELINES Most Cutter IT Journal articles are approximately 2,500-3,500 words long, plus whatever graphics are appropriate. If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to contact CITJ's managing editor Karen Pasley (kpasley@cutter.com) or the Guest Editor, Mike Rosen (mrosen@cutter.com). Editorial guidelines are available at AUDIENCE Typical readers of Cutter IT Journal range from CIOs and vice presidents of software organizations to IT managers, directors, project leaders, and very senior technical staff. Most work in fairly large organizations: Fortune 500 IT shops, large computer vendors (IBM, HP, etc.), and government agencies. 48% of our readership is outside of the US (15% from Canada, 14% Europe, 5% Australia/NZ, 14% elsewhere). Please avoid introductory-level, tutorial coverage of a topic. Assume you're writing for someone who has been in the industry for 10 to 20 years, is very busy, and very impatient. Assume he or she will be asking, "What's the point? What do I do with this information?" Apply the "So what?" test to everything you write. PROMOTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES We are pleased to offer Journal authors a year's complimentary subscription and 10 copies of the issue in which they are published. In addition, we occasionally pull excerpts, along with the author's bio, to include in our weekly Cutter Edge e-mail bulletin, which reaches another 8,000 readers. We'd also be pleased to quote you, or passages from your article, in Cutter press releases. If you plan to be speaking at industry conferences, we can arrange to make copies of your article or the entire issue available for attendees of those speaking engagements -- furthering your own promotional efforts. ABOUT CUTTER IT JOURNAL No other journal brings together so many cutting-edge thinkers, and lets them speak so bluntly and frankly. We strive to maintain the Journal's reputation as the "Harvard Business Review of IT." Our goal is to present well-grounded opinion (based on real, accountable experiences), research, and animated debate about each topic the Journal explores. FEEL FREE TO FORWARD THIS CALL FOR PAPERS TO ANYONE WHO MIGHT HAVE AN APPROPRIATE SUBMISSION. From cgenerali at cutter.com Thu Dec 15 13:37:54 2005 From: cgenerali at cutter.com (Cutter IT Journal) Date: Thu Dec 15 15:16:03 2005 Subject: [Authors] Call for Papers: Enterprise Architecture Best Practices Message-ID: <4111-2200512415183754396@cutter.com> CALL FOR PAPERS REMINDER Cutter IT Journal Mike Rosen, Guest Editor Abstract Submission Date: 20 December 2005 Articles Due: 26 January 2006 Enterprise Architecture: Best Practices? It seems that Enterprise Architecture (EA) is finally becoming mainstream. Opinions on what is driving this movement include requirements on government agencies and contractors, IT complexity and the new economy, requirements for business-IT alignment, and service-oriented architecture (SOA). Although we could debate which, if any -- or all -- of these factors are at work, there is little doubt that EA programs are proliferating. Yet, few of the organizations that have implemented EA programs have realized the benefits promised with their creation. The causes for EA underperformance are as varied and debatable as the initial motivations for EA and usually consist of a combination of factors, including: inappropriate organizational structures and relationships, ineffective governance models and strategies, enterprise funding and tracking mechanisms that promote quick fixes rather than total-cost-of- ownership, lack of integration into the development processes, inappropriate artifacts, over-reliance on frameworks, lack of tools, and weak leadership or executive buy-in. More often than not, EA is its own worst enemy in terms of delivering value that matters and promoting the benefits of EA. Yet all is not lost. Successful EA programs are delivering value to a select set of businesses, enterprises (medium and large) and government agencies. What makes these initiatives stand out? THE MARCH 2006 CUTTER IT JOURNAL INVITES USEFUL DEBATE AND ANALYSES on what approaches organizations are taking to ensure their EA delivers business value. What is your perspective on the best practices that lead to EA success? TOPICS OF INTEREST MAY INCLUDE (but are certainly not limited to) a combination of the following: * Models and guidelines for architectural governance: what works, what doesn't, when, why? * How to provide EA value to decision support processes: what is EA's role in business alignment, strategy, and portfolio management? * How to get development teams to follow EA guidelines and standards * How to integrate EA into the outsourcing and contracting process to achieve architectural goals and governance. * The role of EA tools and frameworks in developing, delivering, and promoting EA value * The role of metrics in quantifying the value of an EA program * The impact of EA leadership in fostering value up, down, and across the organization * How EA organizational structures can affect success TO SUBMIT AN ARTICLE IDEA Please respond to Mike Rosen (mrosen@cutter.com), with a copy to itjournal@cutter.com, by 20 DECEMBER 2005 and include an extended abstract and an article outline. ARTICLE DEADLINE Articles are due on 26 JANUARY 2006. EDITORIAL GUIDELINES Most Cutter IT Journal articles are approximately 2,500-3,500 words long, plus whatever graphics are appropriate. If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to contact CITJ's managing editor Karen Pasley (kpasley@cutter.com) or the Guest Editor, Mike Rosen (mrosen@cutter.com). Editorial guidelines are available at AUDIENCE Typical readers of Cutter IT Journal range from CIOs and vice presidents of software organizations to IT managers, directors, project leaders, and very senior technical staff. Most work in fairly large organizations: Fortune 500 IT shops, large computer vendors (IBM, HP, etc.), and government agencies. 48% of our readership is outside of the US (15% from Canada, 14% Europe, 5% Australia/NZ, 14% elsewhere). Please avoid introductory-level, tutorial coverage of a topic. Assume you're writing for someone who has been in the industry for 10 to 20 years, is very busy, and very impatient. Assume he or she will be asking, "What's the point? What do I do with this information?" Apply the "So what?" test to everything you write. PROMOTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES We are pleased to offer Journal authors a year's complimentary subscription and 10 copies of the issue in which they are published. In addition, we occasionally pull excerpts, along with the author's bio, to include in our weekly Cutter Edge e-mail bulletin, which reaches another 8,000 readers. We'd also be pleased to quote you, or passages from your article, in Cutter press releases. If you plan to be speaking at industry conferences, we can arrange to make copies of your article or the entire issue available for attendees of those speaking engagements -- furthering your own promotional efforts. ABOUT CUTTER IT JOURNAL No other journal brings together so many cutting-edge thinkers, and lets them speak so bluntly and frankly. We strive to maintain the Journal's reputation as the "Harvard Business Review of IT." Our goal is to present well-grounded opinion (based on real, accountable experiences), research, and animated debate about each topic the Journal explores. FEEL FREE TO FORWARD THIS CALL FOR PAPERS TO ANYONE WHO MIGHT HAVE AN APPROPRIATE SUBMISSION.