Description: Synthesizes lessons learned, scope, business capabilities, roadmap. Something to do that sums up an engagement. “Here’s what was gleaned; these are the next steps.” An opportunity to synthesize the various aspects of engagement with the stakeholder. Brings together the various perspectives into a coherent narrative that contextualizes next steps.
Pertains to solutions architecture.
This document is to help stakeholders move from talking to doing, to A Case for Action should be done to help synthesize the major artifacts, lessons, and recommendations for next steps after an EA engagement. This artifacts summarizes what has been learned / accomplished in the engagement, and helps stakeholders organize/move to deliver on the outcomes identified in the engagement.
Culmination of a scoping study
The tool supplements a project charter or program charter (depending on the scope). Arguably this comes before the program charter (ie: “ we need a program manager to start the process…”)..
The case for action is taken to the group that has the means (or access to this). Basically, to start the funding process.
Goals: Provide decision-makers and other stakeholders in your EA engagement with a comprehensive representation of the current state and the solution possibilitiesrecommendations for next steps.
Context: To improve an identified capability.
Scope: It has broad applicability, but the depth and detail in the document would likely vary with scope of the need addressed. This tool wouldn’t be used for small funding requests.The tool supplements a project charter or program charter (depending on the scope).
Source: Examples provided by Jenni Laughlin, University of Washington
As a consensus-building and client engagement tool.
To sum up Summarize work to date and prepare for hand-off and possible adjustment in the futureshare recommendations on next steps the business can take.
Build consensus on what was accomplished in an EA engagement and what the next steps are.
This is a synthesis of a discovery effort
Creators:
Architects in the discovery effort (may include solutions architect, information architect, etc)
Business Analyst
Sponsor/champion
Consumers
All stakeholders. The presentation may need to be tailored to specific audiences, but the core material should generally apply.
Sponsors, Business Owners, Architecture and/or Portfolio Review Boards, Subject Matter Experts, Service Owners, Line of Business People, Technology owners
Roles: Architects should facilitate and author this.
Steps:
Pre-condition: Analysis is nearing completion and is ready to be summarized.
Pre-condition: Stakeholders have gone through norming process about the as-is, to-be, and initial roadmap draft.
Gather artifacts and determine which can be applied as is and which should be tailored for publication
Author introduction to introductionto create a narrative context and frame
Present roadmap
Outline justification for roadmap
Construct a recommendation on the immediate next steps / recommendations.
Templates: The following list, which is excerpted from the table of contents of a U. Wash document, illustrates the structure of this tool and drives the method.
At University of Washington, we did something similar to help our business partners in Facilities define the lifecycle of building-related documentation, create a roadmap, and launch a technology initiative:
We also did something similar to help launch the Admissions Modernization initiativeeffort at the University of Washington:
After this method, it could be relevant to proceed to:
Project charter
Before this method, it could be helpful to use
Panel | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Architecture Methods > Case for Action |
Panel | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
|
Panel | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Want to help with this page? Please see the Method Contributor Guide. Stewards for this page:
Other contributors:
|
Powered by a free Atlassian Confluence Community License granted to Internet2. Evaluate Confluence today.