You're facing conflicting business goals. How do you choose the right IT architecture solution?

I’m a fan of top-down approach instead of bottom-up. In this case, let’s get the conflicting business goals sorted by going to the source. Put the spot light on the conflicts and communicate/present the same to the key business stakeholders once the conflicts are sorted then the enterprise architecture unit’s job begins given the streamlined goals and business strategy to identify the gaps, epic challenges in the as is landscape, market and technological disruptions and competition initiatives and come up with the target picture.

In my experience, and more often than not, business goals aren't exactly conflicting. We always have departments working in silos without a good understanding of how their goals align with the overall objective of the organization. That is why I am an advocate for constant change management practice to ensure that every part of the organization understand how it all comes together. I do like a blend of Top-down and Bottom Up approach in understanding and prioritizing business goals. This helps get a clear perspective of leadership but also operational understanding of the actual users of the systems. Prioritization would definitely help identify what has more impact and what should be in the IT architecture.

We should expect conflicting business in most of our work as business architects: Nearly all business pursuits have conflicting tradeoffs, incentives and goals. The key to aligning for success is starting with a strategy decomposition of the company's most crucial imperatives and gaining support on the capabilities and the people, process, information and/or technology focus areas that will require our investment to create our bridge to the outcomes. This work before we start on a problem, ensures we are solving the most important problems before we get started in the solutioning space. When we are given a problem we need to do the work to connect it with strategy, or align with efforts that can achieve our effort's goals on their way.

As consultants we have elicited business goals from the top management of our enterprise customers through workshops. Workshops with stakeholders helps in analysing each of the goal and the alignment of each goal to the overall mission, vision of the enterprise. Each goal is then analyzed to enumerate potential areas that will need to be transformed. These potential areas could include business, operational, marketing and/or technology initiatives that will help work towards meeting each of the goals.

The complexity of the business needs to be well understood and defined to the IT world. The limitations must be addressed to understand the objectives of the initiative. To align business to IT by creating clear and precise IT strategy to cater for the business context, key initiatives, and a strategic roadmap. To have a business-aligned IT strategy, it is important to visualise and understand business objectives and needs. Having a storyboard could provide the direction to build the much needed IT mission and vision statements and IT guiding principles, elicit business context from key stakeholders such as the IT team to identify key initiatives and build their profiles, construct your strategic road map.

Start by conducting a thorough analysis of the conflicting business goals. Use frameworks like SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) to understand each goal's impact on the organization. According to Gartner, aligning IT architecture with business objectives is crucial for strategic success. Identify the core requirements and priorities behind each goal. This helps in clarifying which goals are non-negotiable and which ones can be compromised or adjusted. Understanding the broader business context ensures that the chosen IT architecture aligns with the most critical organizational needs.

Matching your Business Goals to your IT Goals requires understanding of the Business Direction and longer term strategy. Lining up with the direction that your Business is heading, and being able to provide for support of that direction. Being ahead of the curve to provide the framework for your Business to succeed.

The question is flawed. There are numerous considerations between business goals and IT architecture. It's not feasible to transition directly from a business goal to IT architecture, even if goals aren't conflicting. Start by identifying objectives supporting the goals. Then, find the products/value streams fulfilling these objectives. Assess necessary capabilities for your value streams and identify those needing attention. Only then consider automating these capabilities (doing IT architecture). Essentially, investigate conflicting goals and their alignment with the company's strategy. If they both follow the strategy, your strategy is inconsistent. Address it with top management. Otherwise, drop the goal contradicting the strategy.

Is so important to understand who are your stakeholder to address a concern to build a new architecture solution, once you have identify them you have to link a connection and trust to identify your requirement, is key in this moment ask powerful question to stablish in main a holistic vision about business or IT needs and constraint. Keep in mind trends, or antitrends to implement fit architecture.

Start by understanding what capabilities will be required to meet the business goals. Your organization may already have some of these capabilities. Some may need to be developed, some may need to be enhanced. Once you have a good understanding of the capabilities, analyze the architecture and the specific technology needed to offer that business capability.

Architecture options have evolved over a period of time. There is a lot more stress on connecting with ecosystems for most businesses. Rarely do businesses work in silos these days. Information flow/Capability sharing across different partners, collaborators means that the architecture provides the flexibility to adopt to quick changes in the overall market scenarios.

Explore various IT architecture options that could meet the business goals. Consider traditional, cloud-based, hybrid, and emerging technologies. McKinsey advises evaluating the flexibility, scalability, and integration capabilities of each option. Create a list of potential architectures and their features, noting how each addresses the different business goals. This comprehensive overview helps in identifying which architectures can potentially balance the conflicting objectives and deliver the required functionalities.

Agreed architectural choice is important however is it really a choice. Do you get a blank page or are their constraints or dependencies already in place that must be included and those implications. Knowing those absolutes and/or preferences is critical to form a design approach

We don't go straight from the problem space to architecture options. Take the time to generate a voice of the customer and a value stream or journey map that creates a completeness of vision to achieve the company strategy across related efforts before going into solutioning mode. Let's do this work in the cost-benefit analysis location of the article.

After meeting the management for vision, mission, goals, it is important to connect with different Line Of Business heads to gather their aspirations and challenges. A well defined agenda that prompts these business heads helps collect the right type of information about their growth strategies, the current stumbling blocks in the landscape and some aspirational positions.

Engage stakeholders from different departments to gather input and perspectives on the IT architecture options. Conduct workshops, interviews, and surveys to understand their priorities and concerns. Forrester emphasizes the importance of stakeholder alignment in making successful IT decisions. Stakeholder input ensures that all relevant viewpoints are considered, reducing resistance and increasing buy-in. This collaborative approach helps in identifying a solution that is acceptable to all parties and supports the diverse business goals.

Stakeholder input is like gathering requirements from various microservices in a distributed system. Each stakeholder represents a different 'service' with unique needs and constraints. By involving them, you're essentially performing a comprehensive system analysis. It's similar to conducting integration tests - you're ensuring that your chosen architecture not only meets individual department needs but also works cohesively across the entire business ecosystem. This collaborative approach helps in designing an architecture that's both robust and adaptable to diverse business demands.

Perform a risk assessment for each IT architecture option. Identify potential risks such as security vulnerabilities, compliance issues, and technological obsolescence. According to Gartner, proactive risk management is vital for ensuring the long-term viability of IT solutions. Evaluate the likelihood and impact of each risk and develop mitigation strategies. A thorough risk assessment helps in identifying architectures that offer the best balance between benefits and potential drawbacks, ensuring that critical risks are managed effectively.

Risk assessment in architecture selection is like performing a thorough security audit and stress testing of your system design. It's about identifying potential vulnerabilities and failure points before they become critical issues. Think of it as implementing exception handling in your code - you're preparing for worst-case scenarios. By evaluating risks such as scalability limitations, integration challenges, or security threats, you can choose an architecture that not only meets your current needs but also provides a stable foundation for future growth and adaptability.

I suggest going wider than cost and benefits. I often use my friend Ed Horne's "BTFO" framework. This is a Business, Technology, Operational and Financial decision framework that lets us look at each dimension and paint them green, yellow or red, with 1-2 words to explain the situation when the answer isn't green. From here we can see a macro view of the tradeoffs of various options and make a recommendation that can be understood simply by all stakeholders.

Conduct a detailed cost-benefit analysis for the shortlisted IT architecture options. Consider both direct costs (such as implementation and maintenance) and indirect costs (like training and downtime). McKinsey suggests evaluating the return on investment (ROI) and total cost of ownership (TCO) to understand the long-term financial implications. Compare these costs against the benefits each architecture provides in achieving the business goals. This analysis helps in selecting a solution that offers the most significant value for money, aligning financial feasibility with strategic objectives.

Based on the insights gained from goal analysis, architecture evaluation, stakeholder input, risk assessment, and cost-benefit analysis, make the final selection of the IT architecture solution. Ensure that the chosen architecture aligns with the most critical business goals, offers a balanced approach to conflicting objectives, and provides a sustainable, scalable, and secure foundation for future growth. Forrester recommends documenting the decision-making process and rationales to maintain transparency and accountability. This structured approach ensures that the final selection is well-supported, justifiable, and poised for successful implementation.

One thing that people tend to forget is the impact on the current capabilities of the organisation. Do you have the right team / skills to use the new tool (end user training consideration), support of system (internal / external), what happens to old systems/processes (do you need to audit, retain) and process re-engineering where appropriate.

Change Management. Make sure everyone is carried along. The Best Architecture is only as useful as the users. If the Users believe their input was not valued through the selection and implementation of the Architecture; then there comes the challenge of under utilization of the best of systems.

Confirm business motivations and identify drivers for conflicting goals, for example has organization’s strategy changed, has ecosystem or regulatory environment changed, are there new business or technology risks or opportunities emerging, etc.? Clarifying these helps realign the conflicting goals.