Recently, I was brought in, at a Fortune 500 organization, as an Enterprise Architect by their newly established Enterprise Architecture practice. I was to work on a couple of major initiatives. In the kick-off meeting, a Program Manager for one of those initiatives raised this question - "We already have a couple of architects working on this program. Why do I need a third one?". To be fair, he wasn't resisting my presence. He simply wanted to know the value I was going to add. It was a fair question, especially considering the fact that he was indirectly paying for my role.

I am sure different flavors of this question (why does an organization need Enterprise Architecture (EA) or what exactly is the role of an Enterprise Architect etc.) have been asked in several other organizations and answered. Here is my take on it:

I've had a couple recent experiences with large companies Enterprise Architecture (EA) practices and generally found that one of two scenarios exist.  Either they have a robust and well defined EA methodology and are strictly (or at least have the illusion of) adhering to it, or they understand what EA means but have chosen to only implement or govern tactical pieces of it.

Large companies generally have the staff and resources available to support and maintain a corporate wide EA discipline but what about small to mid-size businesses?  It is likely impractical to expect smaller companies or organizations to implement and promote all of the processes and deliverables that frameworks such as TOGAF or Zachman prescribe.  However, there are a few important items that I will call out that I have seen be extremely effective when implementing EA.