Analyst Report Wave Enterprise Architecture Management Suites

8/3/2019 Analyst Report Wave Enterprise Architecture Management Suites

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/analyst-report-wave-enterprise-architecture-management-suites 1/15

Making Leaders Success ul Every Day

Ap 15, 2011

The F este Wa e™: E te p seA h te t e Ma ageme t S tes,Q2 2011 He Pe et a d T m DeGe a

f E te p se A h te t e P fess a s

http://www.forrester.com/



© 2011 Forrester Research, Inc. All rights reserved. Forrester, Forrester Wave, RoleView, Technographics, TechRankings, and Total Economic Impact are trademarks o Forrester Research, Inc. All other trademarks are the property o their respective owners. Reproduction or sharing o thiscontent in any orm without prior written permission is strictly prohibited. To purchase reprints o this document, please email [email protected]. For additional reproduction and usage in ormation, see Forrester’s Citation Policy located at www. orrester.com. In ormation is

based on best available resources. Opinions refect judgment at the time and are subject to change.

F E te p se A h te t e P fess a s

ExEcuTivE SuMMAryForrester evaluated 10 o the leading enterprise architecture management suite (EAMS) vendorsacross 89 criteria and ound that Mega International (Mega), roux echnologies, So ware AG, andal abet are Leaders, collectively o ering the most-advanced EA tools evolving into the new EAMSmarket. Tis market is still being de ned, and several other vendors — Metastorm, IBM, Casewise, and

Avolution — have started transitioning rom second-generation EA tools to EA management suites.Tese our vendors are Strong Per ormers — excellent choices to consider, particularly or rms withI governance processes that are still maturing. Te risk o disappointment when adopting an EAMSis still relatively high, and adopting a second-generation EA tool that allows expansion to additionalstakeholders — while the tool evolves — can represent a sa er approach or many organizations. TeSalamander Organization is also a Strong Per ormer; it delivers a toolbox and services to “build yourown EAMS,” providing another sa e option. Despite its recognized leadership in second-generation EAtools supporting ArchiMate and OGAF, BiZZdesign has not yet started the journey toward o ering anEAMS, though it is still a good choice or traditional EA approaches.

TAblE oF conT EnTSIs The EA Management Suite The Next CenterO The IT Management Universe?

EA Management Suite Eva uation Overvie

No Vendor Has A Comp ete O ering A though Some Are C ose

Vendor Pro es

Supp ementa Materia

noTES & rESourcESF este d ted s e a - ased e a at sa d se mpa te ews t e a ate10 e d s: a fa et, A t , b ZZdes g ,casew se, ibM, Mega i te at a (Mega),Metast m, S ftwa e AG, The Sa ama deo ga zat , a d T Te h g es.

Re ated Research Documents“best P a t es: imp eme t g A EAMa ageme t S te ”Fe a 10, 2011

“ The E t F m EA T s T EA Ma ageme tS tes ”Septem e 21, 2010

Ap 15, 2011

The F este Wa e™: E te p se A h te t e Ma ageme tS tes, Q2 2011Mega i te at a , T Te h g es, S ftwa e AG, A d A fa et lead Th s up m gcategby Henry Peyret and Tim DeGennarow th A e c e a d Ma ke z e cah

2

3

5

8

12

http://www.forrester.com/go?docid=57485&src=59082pdf











© 2011, F este resea h, i . rep d t P h tedAp 15, 2011

The F este Wa e™: E te p se A h te t e Ma ageme t S tes, Q2 2011 F E te p se A h te t e P fess a s

2

IS THE EA MANAGEMENT SUITE THE NEXT CENTER O THE IT MANAGEMENT UNIVERSE?

Could the EA management suite be the next center o the I management universe? It’s aprovocative question. Forrester does not believe that an absolute answer exists; however, at the sametime, we must recognize that EAMSes’ I planning and governance, risk, and compliance (GRC)capabilities are becoming an increasingly important piece o the I management puzzle, particularly considering EAMSes’ link to the industrialization o I along with project port olio management(PPM) and business service management (BSM) packages. Forrester recognizes several drivers thatat least legitimize this question:

· An EAMS supports a broader set o roles outside the EA group. EAMSes provide support tonumerous I and business roles, such as the CIO, the project management o ce (PMO), headso development and operations, I strategists, risk managers, and I procurement, among others.

· An EAMS centralizes the most-strategic in ormation on I and the business. EAMS arti actsare expanding rom data, process, and organizational models into budgets, strategies, risks, andother in ormation categories. O en other applications — such as asset management, BSM, PPM,or application port olio management (APM) tools — are already collecting these arti acts, butthe EAMS connects all o these to provide additional viewpoints, impact analysis, or simulationto the new EA stakeholders previously described.

· BSM and PPM ailed to become the center o I management universe. Many PPM and BSMprojects achieved only relative success — and some ailed. Tis act as well as the momentumaround I planning and road mapping are signs that the ocus or the “industrialization o I ”is reorienting toward EAMS.

The EA Management Suite Market Is Sti In De nition

Even though vendors such as al abet started to address this new market or EA tools 10 years ago, joined by roux echnologies about ve years ago, the market remains in a stage o de nition. Every player will try to shape this new market by putting orward its strengths. Examples include Megalinking its EAMS to governance, risk, and compliance, IBM taking a modular approach to EAMSadoption, and So ware AG linking its EAMS to service-oriented architecture (SOA) plat orms.

Many EA buyers do not yet see this shi and continue to seek the usual second-generation EA tools,ocusing on amiliar criteria such as metamodel customization. Tey o en shi their thinking

when they recognize the di culty o addressing management concerns using only data and processmodels. Only then do they recognize the value EAMSes can add via capabilities such as campaign-based surveys; automated data-quality checking; new analysis capabilities, including system orthroughput simulations; risk assessments; and support or governance processes to help acceleratedecision-making.



© 2011, F este resea h, i . rep d t P h ted Ap 15, 2011


3

Tis market still needs evangelization; many o the second-generation vendors have not done a great job positioning these new needs to customers in order to help them move to the next generation. As aresult, we see a huge percentage o customer churn in which many customers pre er to change tools

rather than ask their existing vendor how it could accompany them along their journey toward EAMS.

EA MANAGEMENT SUITE EVAlUATION OVERVIEw

o assess the state o the EAMS market and see how the vendors stack up against each other,Forrester evaluated the strengths and weaknesses o top EAMS vendors.

Criteria Emphasized Supporting EA Stakeho ders

A er examining past research, user need assessments, and vendor and expert interviews, wedeveloped a comprehensive set o evaluation criteria. We evaluated vendors against 89 criteria,

which we grouped into three high-level buckets:

· Current o ering. Within this category, we evaluated how well the o erings help stakeholdersachieve their objectives as well as products’ in ormation collection capabilities, publishing andreporting capabilities, templates, change management capabilities, and product architecture.

We divided the current o ering criteria into two parts. Te rst part ocuses on the stakeholderroles supported — the CIO, the PMO, EA, and others — along with their most typical objectivesand the eatures they need in order to achieve those objectives. Forrester deems that thesecriteria cover 80% o stakeholders’ needs.

Forrester chose to prioritize by role to: 1) simpli y our readers’ weightings customization by emphasizing the roles most organizations would most like to involve in the EA program; 2)make the new criteria easier or customers to understand; and 3) allow or deeper comparisonsamong vendors that present eatures and capabilities completely di erently. Tis approachaccentuates products’ di erences but allows comparisons because we scored most criteriabased on how di erent vendors were able to address them rather than based on speci c itemso unctionality. In addition, Forrester adjusted some scores based on the vendor’s ability todemonstrate the eature through screenshots or during its demo. For optimal analysis, productevaluators should compare the score explanations or multiple vendors or each criterion.

Te second part o the evaluation ollows the typical criteria organization around products’eatures and unctions, as these other requirements are di cult to attribute to roles and thus didnot t into our role-based categorization approach. Tis second set o criteria does not illustratethe substantial di erences between vendors that we were able to highlight using the previous seto criteria; every vendor would have been a Leader based only on these criteria.

· Strategy. We evaluated vendors’ product strategy, strategic alliances, and corporate strategy.





4

· Market presence. We evaluated vendors’ installed base o customers, revenue over the past ourquarters, revenue growth over the past our quarters, and product and support delivery ootprint.

inding 10 Vendors A ready P aying In The EAMS Market Is Difcu t

Forrester evaluated 20 vendors be ore narrowing the list down to the 10 included in this assessment:al abet, Avolution, BiZZdesign, Casewise, IBM, Mega, Metastorm, So ware AG, Te SalamanderOrganization, and roux echnologies. Each o these vendors has demonstrated potential to servethe EAMS market by (see Figure 1):

· Providing value-add oriented toward EA stakeholders outside the EA team. Forrester askedeach o its potential participating vendors to provide a preliminary list o EA stakeholder rolesthat it believes its product supports as well as an associated set o dashboards serving these roles.We chose the vendors with at least three roles supported.

· Demonstrating some international presence . I it is to have a chance or success, an EAMSimplementation requires strong vendor support through service and methodology. Tere ore,we asked vendors to demonstrate an international presence not only on the sales side but alsoon the service side.

igure 1 E a ated ve d s: P d t i f mat A d Se e t c te a

Source: Forrester Research, Inc.

Vendor

alfabet

Avolution

BiZZdesign

Casewise

IBM

Mega International

Metastorm

Software AG

The Salamander Organization

Troux Technologies

Product evaluated

planningIT

Abacus

BiZZdesign EA tool suite

Corporate Modeler Suite

Rational System Architect

Mega Suite

Metastorm Enterprise

ARIS Platform

MooD Platform

Troux

Product versionevaluated

6.0

3.3

3.0

2009.2 R2

11.4

2009 SP4

6.2

7.1

2010

9

Versionrelease date

Q2 2010

Q2 2010

Q4 2010

Q4 2009

Q2 2009

Q3 2009

Q1 2010

Q4 2010

Q1 2010

Q3 2010

Vendor selection criteria

The vendor provides value-add oriented toward EA stakeholders outside the EA team.

The vendor demonstrates some international presence.





5

NO VENDOR HAS A COMPlETE O ERING — AlTHOUGH SOME ARE ClOSE

Te evaluation uncovered a market in which (see Figure 2):

· Tere is no one vendor that covers all roles completely. Each vendor has its strengths andsome weaknesses. Tus, it’s not surprising to see customers adopting two EA products tocomplement each other and ll gaps. Some combinations we see o en are a best-o -breedsecond-generation EA tool such as ARIS or Metastorm on one side completed by an EAMSsuch as roux echnologies’ or al abet’s o ering. As more vendors such as Mega, IBM, So wareAG, and Metastorm are developing a strategy and eatures to join the EAMS market, Forresterpredicts that this multivendor approach will diminish as vendors complete their coverage.

· Mega, roux echnologies, So ware AG, and al abet lead the pack. Tese vendors lead thepack primarily because they have no big or overly important holes in their coverage. Tey also

demonstrate some best-o -breed eatures, such as GRC or Mega, APM and PPM or al abet,process and per ormance or So ware AG, and APM and standards management or rouxechnologies.

· Metastorm, IBM, Casewise, Avolution, and Te Salamander Organization ollow. TeseStrong Per ormers o er competitive options, and each o their products could o er anorganization a better alternative to the Leaders’ o erings i the product better serves theorganization’s EA stakeholder audience. I you need an EAMS that primarily targets enterprisearchitects and a ew other EA stakeholders, such as process and business analysts, Casewise andMetastorm are strong o erings. I you need an EAMS that primarily targets solution and projectarchitects, you should consider IBM Rational System Architect (RSA). Avolution is particularly good or EA teams with multiple scenarios and or in rastructure and operations architects.Government de ense agencies should consider Te Salamander Organization.

· BiZZdesign is ocused on a di erent market. BiZZdesign represents a strong player in thesecond generation o EA tools but has not yet decided to ollow the EAMS vision. Scoring —which was directed toward the EAMS vision — refects this. For the numerous customers whoare not yet mature enough to adopt an EAMS and want to stick with a simpler and less risky approach, BiZZdesign is a very good t to serve the EA team in its architecture responsibilities,though it does not ocus on serving external roles. BiZZdesign quali ed or this wave by showing interesting dashboards or EAs that had the potential to serve other roles; however, our

evaluation revealed that these dashboards’ ability to serve stakeholders outside EA was poorcompared with the other evaluated vendors’ dashboards.

· Collaboration eatures are unanimously weak. In the upcoming EAMS market, some eaturesare still in their in ancy. Most o the vendors are o ering some social computing capabilities thatgo urther than the usual workfow-based processes and collaboration (check-in, check-out) thata common repository provides. But Forrester does not consider o ering eatures such as wikis,





6

instant collaboration, whiteboards, discussion orums, and tagging enough to maintain quality content in a sustainable manner. EA stakeholders are not naturally inclined to use an EA tool toshare their knowledge or the bene t o only enterprise architects. Forrester recommends that

vendors add metrics to measure value and reward contributors to instigate a virtuous circle —and, consequently, sustainability.

· Scenario management is also a capability in its in ancy. Scenario management is a complexeature that allows users to tell a story through a combination o models, assumptions, analysis,and actions (projects). Depending on his or her ultimate goal — strategy, risk mitigation, projectport olio, tech standards, etc. — each user will use the scenario management eature at a di erentlevel. Tis requires tools to manage multiple scenario variants as well as — potentially — to allowusers to switch rom one current scenario to another. oday, most o the vendors are stillexploring a scenario management capability and continuing to enhance its eatures.

All the evaluated products are able to do more or less everything — but with more or less e ort. Teprimarily di erence among the products is which ones are able to support your objectives “out o the box” with the least e ort in terms o customization, development, reporting design, etc. Someare better or port olio management; others are better or budget; others are better or standardsmanagement; and so on. Te amount o e ort users must expend to collect, quali y, and aggregatethe in ormation and views they need — and then extract the value — can really make a bigdi erence between products.

Tis evaluation o the EAMS market is intended to be a starting point only. Readers are encouraged to view detailed product evaluations and adapt the criteria weightings to t their individual needs

through the Forrester Wave™ Excel-based vendor comparison tool. We particularly encourage readersto identi y their stakeholders and those stakeholders’ objectives and then weight the model accordingly based on the criteria with the potential to generate the best buy-in rom these stakeholders.





7

igure 2 F este Wa e™: E te p se A h te t e Ma ageme t S tes, Q2 ’ 11


Go online to download

the Forrester Wave tool

for more detailed product

evaluations, feature

comparisons, and

customizable rankings.

Risky

Bets Contenders Leaders

Strong

Performers

StrategyWeak Strong

Current

offering

Weak

Strong

Market presence

alfabet

Avolution

BiZZdesign

Casewise

IBM

MegaInternational

Metastorm

SoftwareAG

The SalamanderOrganization

Troux Technologies





8

igure 2 F este Wa e™: E te p se A h te t e Ma ageme t S tes, Q2 ’11 (c t.)


a l f a b e t

A v o

l u t i o n

B i Z Z d e s i g n

C a s e w

i s e

I B M

M e g a

I n t e r n a t i o n a l

M e t a s t o r m

S o f t w a r e

A G

CURRENT OFFERINGStakeholder objectivesCollection of information

Publishing and reportingTemplatesChange managementProduct architecture

STRATEGY

Product strategySolution costStrategic alliancesCorporate strategy

MARKET PRESENCE

Installed baseCustomer referencesRevenuesLicense versus serviceRevenue growthDelivery footprint

3.654.012.50

4.003.005.003.50

3.504.002.003.602.90

2.482.500.005.000.001.002.20

F o r r e s t e r ’ s

W e i g

h t i n g

50%30%20%

20%10%10%10%

50%33%

0%33%33%

0%40%

0%10%

0%10%40%

2.57

2.28

2.50

2.00

4.00

3.00

2.90

3.10

2.00

5.00

4.20

3.10

2.92

3.40

0.00

1.00

0.00

5.00

2.40

2.19

2.12

1.25

2.00

3.50

3.00

2.50

1.90

1.00

3.00

2.20

2.50

1.32

1.85

0.00

1.00

0.00

0.00

1.20

2.74

1.95

2.00

4.00

3.50

3.00

3.00

2.96

3.00

3.00

3.40

2.50

2.44

2.60

0.00

3.00

0.00

3.00

2.00

2.44

2.62

2.00

3.00

1.75

3.00

1.80

3.86

3.00

3.00

4.20

4.40

3.72

3.50

0.00

3.00

0.00

1.00

4.80

3.433.392.50

4.002.505.003.60

4.535.004.004.204.40

3.723.500.005.000.003.003.80

3.031.832.50

4.003.505.003.30

3.934.004.003.404.40

3.663.900.005.000.000.004.00

2.982.642.50

3.004.003.003.90

4.664.004.005.005.00

4.564.600.005.000.003.004.80

T h e

S a l a m a n

d e r

O r g a n

i z a t i o n

T r o u x

T e c h n o

l o g

i e s

2.812.992.00

3.002.005.002.10

2.834.003.002.002.50

1.101.800.001.000.000.000.70

3.953.593.50

5.003.005.003.70

3.834.003.005.002.50

2.322.600.003.000.001.002.20

All scores are based on a scale of 0 (weak) to 5 (strong).

VENDOR PRO IlES

leaders: The Most-Advanced EA Too s In The Ne EAMS Market

· Mega is the most advanced second-generation EA tool migrating to EAMS with strong GRC. Mega is a long-established player in the EA tools market, starting rom the rst generationo EA tools in the 1990s with data modeling and a repository. Mega developed Mega Advisoror dashboards, recognizing that the value o EA tools is no longer coming rom modelingbut rom extracting and representing in ormation or di erent stakeholders. Tree years ago,Mega made an important shi , expanding into the GRC market through acquisition and new





9

capabilities such as risk calculation and simulations that are particularly strong or the nancialservices industry. Despite incomplete integration between Mega’s GRC and EA tools, Forresterbelieves that Mega represents the most advanced second-generation EA tool migrating toward

EAMS. Te company also has a strong adaptable methodology and service arm. Its go-to marketstrategy to sell to the new stakeholders is still in development.

In addition to serving enterprise architects, Mega is a particularly good t or organizations thatinvolve the ollowing EA stakeholders: business analysts, I risk managers, test managers, andcompliance or quality managers.

· roux echnologies is the strongest or standards and application port olio management. A er the merger o roux echnologies ( roux) and Computas Metis in 2005, roux spent twoyears cra ing its strategy or the EAMS market and developing a web-based plat orm to enablethat strategy. With the strongest current product o ering, roux is leading the EAMS category in terms o depth o unctionality. In addition, it o ers methodologies and services to help itscustomers get the most rom these capabilities. Te company is also a thought leader that takesthe approach that the right way to message and evangelize the market is by addressing direct EAissues such as standards, application decommissioning, and data center consolidation. Teseeatures are based on strong con guration management database (CMDB) and PPM inter aces.roux o ers the most complete product or in ormation collection — roux Collector — inaddition to manual collection and quality capabilities. Despite this, we still see some customersstruggling with the quality and completeness o their own data sources. Consequently, rmswithout access to reliable and complete data will have trouble quickly getting to ull value. Tus,EA as well as I management maturity are key success actors when adopting roux’s product.

roux is also one the most fexible EAMSes, which can unintentionally drive customers’implementations into a pit all: Customers tend to customize too much rather than agreeing tomake the politically more di cult changes at organizational or process levels. roux representsthe EAMS category o products that should be managed more as a packaged application interms o implementation.

In addition to serving enterprise architects, roux is a particularly good t or organizations thatinvolve the ollowing EA stakeholders: the CIO, the PMO, I nance, and CxOs.

· So ware AG promises the best business connection to EAMS. IDS Scheer has been theleader o the business process analysis category or a long time, but recently that market hasnot provided the growth it expected. Tere ore, it expanded into the enterprise architecturemarket, becoming a Leader with its strong EA eatures and unctionality. A er So ware AGpurchased IDS Scheer, its Architecture o Integrated In ormation Systems (ARIS) bene tedrom large technology development investments, but the EAMS market also requires somecontent development — a journey that So ware AG began only in mid-2010. Te combinationo So ware AG’s product and service arm provides the vendor with the strength to be success ul





10

in this market, with di erentiators including the business orientation the company is knownor, ties to So ware AG’s SOA plat orm, and the company’s metadata strategy with CentraSite.So ware AG will become even stronger in the EAMS market i it continues with EAMS as a

crucial element o its strategy.

In addition to serving enterprise architects, So ware AG’s product is a particularly good t ororganizations that involve the ollowing EA stakeholders: business analysts and quality managers.

· Al abet is the thought leader and a defning orce in the EAMS category. Within the EAMScategory, al abet is clearly the visionary. Te company started 10 years ago by adding a timedimension to its existing EA arti acts and repository as well as adding fexible reporting. Releasea er release, al abet continues to have the best vision or the upcoming eatures to completeits existing port olio o I management tools. In areas where some o the eatures its producto ers overlap with existing packages such as PPM, CMDB, APM, or asset management tools,the eatures it delivers will work well, particularly in the most-mature EA organizations. Al abetsu ers on the strategy side rom limited service availability that it has not yet lled using systemintegrators. Consequently, al abet is a particularly good t or mature EA initiatives in largecompanies where governance processes are already in place or the organization is willing toadopt the processes al abet provides. Tese large companies will bene t rom al abet’s port olio,investment, and other unique product capabilities.

In addition to serving enterprise architects, al abet is a particularly good t or organizationsthat involve the ollowing EA stakeholders: the CIO, the PMO, business relationship managers(BRMs), I risk managers, I operations, the head o I development, I nance, I

procurement, test managers, and CxOs.

Strong Per ormers: Competitive Options That May Represent A Sa er Approach or Many

· Metastorm o ers interesting technologies to become an EAMS player. A er Metastormpurchased Pro orma in order to build a combination business process analysis (BPA)/BPM suite,its investment in ProVision lagged even while the EA market was already shi ing to EAMS. Teconsequence is that despite new and very good technological capabilities including MetastormM3 (web-based modeling) and Metastorm Smart Business Workspace (dashboarding), theproduct missed some content development, such as dashboards that speci cally address certainroles’ needs. With Open ext’s acquisition o Metastorm, Forrester hopes the company will invest

urther in its current product, which could become a strategic piece or Openext. Despite thequestions a merger creates, Metastorm still provides a very good second-generation EA tool that,with its impressive technological support eatures, is well on its way toward EAMS. However, theproduct requires some consulting and services, and or now Metastorm has limited bandwidthto provide this.

Metastorm is a particularly good t or organizations that involve mainly enterprise architectsand business analysts or business processes improvements.





11

· IBM o ers a modular approach to EAMS adoption. IBM acquired elelogic SystemArchitect — ormerly Popkin So ware System Architect — last year; the product becameIBM Rational System Architect. With IBM’s multiple product o erings — including RationalAsset Management and Rational Focal Point — as well as its connection with requirementsmanagement products such as RequisitePro and Doors, with ivoli CCMDB, with WebSphere,and with the Jazz plat orm, IBM is preparing the next step toward the “industrialization o I .”Te IBM strategy and o ering make a lot o sense as a oundation to build an “I strategy orI management” centered on a complete and integrated IBM o ering or I management. Techallenge is that this promise is not yet realized, and it could take time be ore the real bene ts o such an integrated approach will be truly visible to IBM customers.

IBM is a particularly good t or organizations that involve the ollowing EA stakeholders: the PMOand test managers in addition to the usual developers, solution architects, and enterprise architects.

· Casewise builds on its ease o use to construct an EAMS strategy. Casewise has or a longtime been a Leader in the EA tools and BPA tools markets. It struggled during the 2009recession but brought in new management and a new strategy that will drive it toward theEAMS market. Among its existing customers, it bene ts rom a good reputation built primarily on its product’s ease o use and customization capabilities. Te challenge Casewise will ace willbe to keep that ease o use while developing the EAMS’s complex unctionality.

Casewise is a particularly good t or organizations that today mainly involve EAs and businessprocess analysts.

· Avolution is a newcomer with a surprisingly strong showing. Avolution is a complete anddi erentiated second-generation EA tool. It is a relatively recent entrant to this market, andit uses new technologies including web- and XML-based repositories, which allow or greatcustomization and provide unique capabilities such as systems simulation and scenariocomparisons. Avolution supports the broadest set o EA rameworks. As a result, it o ers strongsupport or in rastructure and operations architects and managers, including capabilities suchas response-time prediction, mean time between ailures (M BF) computing, resource usage,and more. Avolution also o ers 3D representations o data, which Forrester believes are theuture state o the art or easier navigation and representation o very complex in ormation —although this capability is complex to set up at present.

Avolution is a particularly good t or organizations that involve the ollowing EA stakeholders:I operations and I nance.

· Te Salamander Organization provides a toolbox and services to build your own EAMS. Te Salamander Organization started in 1996, mainly in the UK, and o ers a plat orm calledMooD to support governance and EA together. It ocuses primarily on the government and





12

de ense sectors and related industries such as aerospace, energy, and systems integration.MooD provides a plat orm or the development o EA management suites; it grew out o Salamander’s experience o exploiting architectural approaches in the business domain.

Te Salamander Organization delivers a web-based plat orm (MooD Active Enterprise),repository, and collection (MooD Business Architect). Te MooD plat orm can supportEAMS implementations in complex, regulated, and highly constrained contexts in which theadaptation o the plat orm to these individual contexts makes all the di erence.

Te Salamander Organization demonstrated good capabilities supporting these EA stakeholders:the CIO, test managers, and governments-speci c roles.

Contender: A Bui d-Your-O n EAMS O ering That Is A so Sa e Option

· BiZZdesign provides a strong second-generation EA tool but lags in the EAMS space.

BiZZdesign is a Dutch company with o ces in Europe (the UK and the Benelux) and America.In addition to its EA tool, it also o ers training and consulting on best practices based onArchiMate and OGAF. Te BiZZdesign tool suite includes BiZZdesign Architect, BiZZdesigner,GripManager or monitoring change in projects, Risk Manager or operational and nancialrisks, and InSite, a portal or dynamic publication o models.

BiZZdesign is best suited or enterprise architects — particularly those using ArchiMatenotation and OGAF.

SUPPlEMENTAl MATERIAl

On ine Resource

Te online version o Figure 2 is an Excel-based vendor comparison tool that provides detailedproduct evaluations and customizable rankings.

Data Sources Used In This orrester wave

Forrester used a combination o three data sources to assess the strengths and weaknesses o eachsolution:

· Vendor surveys. Forrester surveyed vendors on their capabilities as they relate to the evaluationcriteria. Once we analyzed the completed vendor surveys, we conducted vendor calls wherenecessary to gather details o vendor quali cations.

· Product demos. We asked vendors to conduct demonstrations o their product’s unctionality.We used ndings rom these product demos to validate details o vendor’s product capabilities.





13

· Customer re erence calls. o validate product and vendor quali cations, Forrester alsoconducted re erence calls with one and sometimes two o each vendor’s current customers.Forrester also uses daily interactions with customers actually changing their EA tool as well asForrester involvements in customers’ EAMS projects to tune questions and opinions.

The orrester wave Methodo ogy

We conduct primary research to develop a list o vendors that meet our criteria to be evaluatedin this market. From that initial pool o vendors, we then narrow our nal list. We choose these

vendors based on: 1) product t; 2) customer success; and 3) Forrester client demand. We eliminate vendors that have limited customer re erences and products that don’t t the scope o our evaluation.

A er examining past research, user need assessments, and vendor and expert interviews, we developthe initial evaluation criteria. o evaluate the vendors and their products against our set o criteria, we

gather details o product quali cations through a combination o lab evaluations, questionnaires,demos, and/or discussions with client re erences. We send evaluations to the vendors or their review,and we adjust the evaluations to provide the most accurate view o vendor o erings and strategies.

We set de ault weightings to refect our analysis o the needs o large user companies — and/or otherscenarios as outlined in the Forrester Wave document — and then score the vendors based on aclearly de ned scale. Tese de ault weightings are intended only as a starting point, and readers areencouraged to adapt the weightings to t their individual needs through the Excel-based tool. Tenal scores generate the graphical depiction o the market based on current o ering, strategy, andmarket presence. Forrester intends to update vendor evaluations regularly as product capabilitiesand vendor strategies evolve.



Forrester Research, Inc. (Nasdaq: FORR)

is an independent research company

that provides pragmatic and orward-

thinking advice to global leaders in

business and technology. Forrester

works with pro essionals in 19 key roles

at major companies providing

proprietary research, customer insight,

consulting, events, and peer-to-peerexecutive programs. For more than 27

years, Forrester has been making IT,

marketing, and technology industry

leaders success ul every day. For more

in ormation, visit www. orrester.com.

Headquarters

Forrester Research, Inc.

400 Technology Square

Cambridge, MA 02139 USA

Tel: +1 617.613.6000

Fax: +1 617.613.5000

Email: orrester@ orrester.com

Nasdaq symbol: FORR

www. orrester.com

M a k g l e a d e s S e s s f E e D a

For in ormation on hard-copy or electronic reprints, please contact Client Support

at +1 866.367.7378, +1 617.613.5730, or clientsupport@ orrester.com .

We o er quantity discounts and special pricing or academic and nonpro t institutions.

For a complete list of worldwide locationsvisit www.forrester.com/about.

Research and Sales OfcesForrester has research centers and sales ofces in more than 27 cities

internationally, including Amsterdam; Cambridge, Mass.; Dallas; Dubai;

Foster City, Cali .; Frank urt; London; Madrid; Sydney; Tel Aviv; and Toronto.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Date post:	06-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	jair-casales
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times