June 1, 2010
I just wrote the first DAMA/ICCP exam for the Certified Data Management Profeessional (CDMP) certification.
By the onsite scoring, I passed easily, the offical results will take a few weeks.
This exam was Core IT skills and basuically covers the full gamut of IT skills that an IT profeessional would need. For me, after all these years in IT, it was largely a rehash of stuff I already know but with a twist. The exam is written more from a business perspective with business terminology, rather than the IT terms I am so familiar with. I had to be careful with the terms but especially these days, there is a lot of value in knowing how to talk to the buisnes so that was focus was good.
For the most part I found the study material and the exam covered real substantial material rather than some tricky esoteric stuff that these certifications sometimes get into. Highly recommended.
My next exam will be the data management one. That is a current interest for me so I am looking forward to studying the material.
See http://www.irmac.ca for more info on the CDMP exams.
September 28, 2009
There is much discussion in enterprise architecture circles about IT co-opting title Enterprise Architect meaning a person who does IT architecture
While it is unfortunate that the term EA has been co-opted by IT, it is easy to see why it happens.
It starts with many businesses having no enterprise architects or no idea of enterprise or business architecture really. Of course the business does have an ad-hoc or accidental architecture but no one thinks about it, they are content in not knowing what they don’t know.
If the business is simple enough, IT can take that ad-hoc architecture and codify it into something that works, or works mostly. But at some point there is too much complexity and someone has to codify the architecture before IT can make sense of it.. At this point the business usually starts complaining that IT doesn’t understand the business. In fact, without a defined architecture, the business doesn’t really understand the business either but they just don’t notice.
So someone in IT is going to get the job to define enough of the business architecture that IT can work with. If that person does it formally with something like TOGAF, s/he will end up being called the enterprise architect, as the first person to reveal at least some of the enterprise architecture. Of course it will be IT-centric too, since it is only being written for IT in the first place.
It is a misnomer of course. Revealing a part of the business architecture is not really an enterprise architect’s work but what should we call this person? The “Person who writes down enough architecture so IT can build something useful” isn’t a great job title either.
September 28, 2009
I stumbled into enterprise architecture this summer while attending CloudCamp which was hosted by the TOGAF Toronto 2009 conference. The Open Group was kind enough to let me attend a couple of the introductory sessions at TOGAF 2009.
I like TOGAF. The ADM and the cyclic process nature of it make sense to me. An architecture should be a dynamic thing, not something static. There are some holes still but look how far it has come from V7 and I think it is well on its way to becoming the standard for EA in the next release or two. The fact that it is an open standard helps too.
My current interest in EA is largely focused on data architecture, probably closer to what is called Master Data Management (MDM). A natural lead from being a DBA I expect. I see a lot of overlap between the data architecture part of EA and MDM, like different views onto the same thing.
Watch for more about about EA and MDM here going forward.