Tool first or Purpose first for EA

Quite possibly... Should I have bought a (flat-pack?) shed first, and then go shopping for the tools required? Or, should I buy the tools first, and then go shopping for my d-i-y shed?

Note: We are not discussing whether tools are useful or should we use tools? Tools are *definitely* useful and we *should* use appropriate tools, when required.

Best regards,
Joseph

On Jun 15, 7:15 am, "alan lloyd" wrote:

> Great one Ken .. sounds like we are of the same vintage..

> I remember when my dad used to build garden sheds with a hand saw and a
> hammer..

> The last shed I put up was 1000 times more sophisticated than that i.e had
> electric roller doors.. and the tools were different too - a lot of them for
> some reason had wires with mains plugs on them :-)

> Could one say - that without an understanding of the tools available -
> there would similar lack of understanding of the material at hand and the
> processes to use them?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: the-enterprise-architecture-network@googlegroups.com

> [mailto:the-enterprise-architecture-network@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of
> Ken Orr
> Sent: Monday, 14 June 2010 5:09 AM
> To: The Enterprise Architecture Network
> Subject: Re: Tool first or Purpose first for EA

> I can also remember doing EA before tools. Indeed, I remember doing
> programming
> when the only tools were assemblers and core dumps, but I can't
> imagine going
> back to that point even though I saw some marvelous programs developed
> using
> only primitive tools, blackboards, paper and pencil and brain power.

> The point about tools is that there are certain problems dealing with
> scale that cannot
> really be attacked without tools, tools that those of us "doing EA"
> invented for
> the express purpose of "doing EA better".

> Ken Orr

> On Jun 12, 10:53 am, Glen wrote:
> > Amazingly enough, we created and implemented EAs before there were any
> > "tools". I created my first EA in the mid 80's and there were many
> > people earlier than I. We had word processing and some rudimentary
> > drawing capabilities plus pencil and paper. This didn't stop us from
> > being effective and I'm not sure it was really all that inefficient.
> > It certainly didn't line the pockets of the tool vendors. Most of
> > the work was and still is getting the EA adopted and the systems
> > (business and technical) compliant.

> > On May 18, 11:06 am, Eswar Ganesan wrote:

> > > Hi All,

> > > What is the best practice of developing an Enterprise Architecture -
> > > "Architecture Strategy first and Tool second" or "Tool First and
> > > Architecture Strategy second".

> > > I have seen a situation wherein the tool has been bought first and then
> few
> > > people are sitting around with the tool and identify that the tool can
> do
> > > process modeling, data modeling, application landscaping and technology
> > > collaboration diagram etc - so the approach for EA has taken shape such
> that
> > > - okay, these are the 15 templates that are available in the tool and
> lets
> > > make it a mandate across the company so that if someone has to model
> some
> > > diagram around this 15 template then they have to come to this team
> which
> > > can help doing this. Is this EA?

> > > In my opinion, EA design and strategy - the motivation element comes
> first -
> > > make it a case that the purpose, framework and approach for EA defined
> and
> > > then decide on tool and approaches to deliver architectural
> deliverables.
> > > What do you fellow architects comment on this, thanks,

> > > Regards,
> > > Eswar