IRD goes it alone on enterprise architecture

SUBSCRIBE
Newsletter & Subscriptions Computerworld is New Zealand's only specialised information systems fortnightly.
Subscribe now for $100 (23 issues) and save more than 37% off the cover price!
SIGN UP
Newsletter & Subscriptions
Get the latest news from Computerworld delivered via email.
Sign up now
Inland Revenue has issued a request for proposal (RFP) for appointment of a panel of suppliers of enterprise architecture services, but is proceeding on the basis of its own needs

Inland Revenue has issued a request for proposal (RFP) for appointment of a panel of suppliers of enterprise architecture services, but at this stage is proceeding on the basis of its own needs.

This is despite enterprise architecture being one focal point for the effort to rationalise ICT across government agencies where possible. A project is under way to develop a Government Enterprise Architecture for New Zealand (GEA-NZ), as part of the Directions and Priorities policy in government ICT.

GEA-NZ is intended to be “a single unifying framework that will provide a common ICT language including architecture, models/patterns, standards, techno-economics, and common definitions across government,” says the pertinent section of the ict.govt.nz website.

The Government Enterprise Architecture Group (GEAG) is coordinating the development of the architecture and will govern it once it is developed.

The IRD request, however, is to satisfy an immediate need, says a spokesperson. “Inland Revenue is an active contributor to the opportunities occurring in the all-of-government procurement environment,” the IRD says. “At this stage our procurement process is designed to meet our current enterprise architecture requirements.

However, the spokesperson adds, “we will continue to be part of cross-government procurement processes in the future.”

The appointment of a panel of EA suppliers to IRD is intended to centralise and streamline the process for procuring EA services, to encourage “compliance in procuring EA services for delivery of work which cannot be met by IR’s permanent EA resource pool.’ It also aims to achieve “timely resource assignment turnaround to those requesting EA services where requested resources or skill sets are not available from the permanent pool of EA resources,” says the RFP.

Cost containment and cost visibility is seen as another benefit, as is “building a mutually beneficial business relationship between IR and EA services panel suppliers.”

As Computerworld went to press, spokespeople for GEAG were unavailable to comment on how procurement efforts will be harmonised in the longer term.
Comments
FEA I thought the NZ government already had one: http://ict.govt.nz/guidance-and-resources/enterprise-architecture
Posted by Anonymous at 10:08:46 on July 20, 2012

Flag abuse

DIA and now, now IRD These two organisations have effectively made EA an institutionalised mediocrity. They cannot get out of their own way. Each one think the silver EA bullet will save them and millions of dollars later will end up with a very expensive and completely ineffective EA function. TAlk about killing the legitimate EA respected and much needed practice.
Posted by Henk at 20:12:32 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

Whole of govt ICT no better The whole of government ICT effort is being run by DIA. They have no yet proven their capability to do this. On the contrary, those organizations currently obligated to use their services are deeply unhappy with the drop in service from their previous arrangements. If I were the IRD, I'd make my own arrangements now too. It might given them some options once the whole of government ICT effort rolls out more widely.
Posted by Anonymous at 9:09:38 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

Whole of govt ICT no better Absolutely - the whole of government bandwagon has got a bit unrealistic. For simple things like printing and laptops then sure, but a whole of government EA? No wonder IRD is moving to satisfy it's own needs, I wouldn't have any faith in getting a clear decision on a realistic all of government EA anytime soon either, let alone anything DIA is involved in the delivery of.
Posted by Anonymous at 12:33:46 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

Whole of govt ICT no better I'd agree if we were talking about a smaller, adaptive agency but not IRD. I can't help wondering how much money one organisation can spend on drawing pretty pictures and then whining about not having the right governance.
Posted by Anonymous at 20:10:40 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

Bad reputation As I understand it IRD have about 25+ in-house architecture resources. How much more resource do you need before EA starts being effective? It's not hard to see why EA is starting to get a bit of a reputation around town.
Posted by Anonymous at 8:12:17 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

Bad reputation Its not the capability of the architects thats the problem.
Rather its the senior executives that pay lip service to the approach whilst actively defeating the purpose for the sake of their own pet projects
Posted by Anonymous at 20:03:29 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

Bad reputation Don't blame EA - blame those who say they can do it!
Posted by Anonymous at 9:50:16 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

Bad reputation Hear, hear!

I'd add to that the fact that an "all of Government" EA is misleading at best in its intention as the best we can hope for IMHO is a framework for EA, which will probably be rehashed from FEAF or the Australian Government Architecture Reference Models any way.

That unified view has value in standarding language, thinking and elements of EA, but an organisation must own its own Architecture. Vendors can provide some important IP, but the architecture thinking must be something the organisation has deeply embedded and implemented everywhere, from business to technology infrastructure.
Posted by Anonymous at 12:12:26 on July 18, 2012

Flag abuse

computerworld
Computerworld NZ has now reached LinkedIn! Join to expand your networks and meet others interested in information systems.