Business Architecture is a complete expression of the enterprise; a master plan which „acts as a collaboration force” between aspects of business planning such as goals, visions, strategies and governance principles; aspects of business operations such as business terms, organization structures, processes and data; aspects of automation such as information systems and databases; and the enabling technological infrastructure of the business such as computers, operating systems and networks.

The Zachman Framework is a schema - the intersection between two historical classifications that have been in use for literally thousands of years. The first is the fundamentals of communication found in the primitive interrogatives: What, How, When, Who, Where, and Why. It is the integration of answers to these questions that enables the comprehensive, composite description of complex ideas. The second is derived from reification, the transformation of an abstract idea into an instantiation that was initially postulated by ancient Greek philosophers and is labeled in The Zachman Framework: Identification, Definition, Representation, Specification, Configuration and Instantiation.

Since The Zachman Framework classification was observed empirically in the structure of the descriptive representations (the architecture) of buildings, airplanes and other complex industrial products, there is substantial evidence to establish that The Zachman Framework™ is the fundamental structure for Enterprise Architecture and thereby yields the total set of descriptive representations relevant for describing an Enterprise.

The Zachman Framework typically is depicted as a bounded 6 x 6 "matrix" with the Communication Interrogatives as Columns and the Reification Transformations as Rows. The Framework classifications are represented by the Cells, that is, the intersection between the Interrogatives and the Transformations. This matrix would necessarily constitute the total set of descriptive representations that are relevant for describing something... anything: in particular an enterprise.

The Zachman Framework is a metamodel and unlike a methodology, does not imply anything about:

1. Whether you do Architecture or whether you simply build implementations that is, whether you build Primitive Models, the ontological, single-variable intersections between the Interrogatives and the Transformations or whether you simply build ad hoc, multi-variable, composite models made up of components of several Primitive Models.

2. How you do Architecture: top-down, bottom-up, left to right, right to left, where to start, etc., etc.

3. The long-term/short-term trade-off relative to instantiating the expression of the components of the object that is, what is formalized in the short-term for implementation purposes versus what is engineered for long-term reuse.

4. How much flexibility you want for producing composite models (Enterprise implementations) from your Enterprise Architecture (primitive models), that is, how constrained (little flexibility) or unconstrained (much flexibility) you make the horizontal, integrative relationships between the Cell components across the Rows and the vertical, transformational relationships of the Cell components down the Columns.

5. Although these are significant, identifiable, methodological choices, they are not prescriptions of The Framework structure.

The Zachman Framewor is the basis for Architecture - We know what architecture is for industrial products (buildings, airplanes, locomotives, computers, etc., etc.) because in the Industrial Age, it was the industrial products that were increasing in complexity and the industrial products that were changing. If we had not gotten extremely sophisticated relative to architecture for industrial products, we would not likely be able to create and change complex industrial products and we would likely still be in the Industrial Age learning about Product Architecture.

Now that we are in the Information Age, it is the Enterprise that is increasing in complexity and the Enterprise that is changing. It is my opinion that Enterprise Architecture is the determinant of survival in the Information Age. Therefore, The Framework for Enterprise Architecture, The Zachman Framewor, has some profound significance in putting definition around Enterprise Architecture, the survival issue of the Century. We have yet a LOT to learn about Business Architecture and The Zachman Framework would be a good place to start.


BENEFITS

Let's have a look on the words of John Zachman:

"There are four reasons why you do Architecture: Alignment, Integration, Change and Reduced Time-to-Market.

• Do you care that the systems I/S is producing actually are aligned with Management's requirements and warrant the expenditure of funds allocated to I/S?
• Do you care whether the data in the Enterprise means the same thing to anyone who uses it, that messages can be cost-effectively transmitted and received whatever time of day or night or day of the year, and that business rules can be uniformly enforced throughout the Enterprise?
• Do you care whether changes to the Enterprise can be made with minimum time, disruption, and cost?
• Do you care whether I/S can produce "custom" implementations on demand, reducing their time-to-market to virtually zero?

If you care about any or all of these things, YOU ARE GOING TO DO ARCHITECTURE, because without Architecture, you cannot do ANY of these things.”

Architecture is an asset. You can save orders of magnitude more money and time, but you have to invest in Architecture to enable you to do something you otherwise are unable to do, namely: "Alignment", "Integration", "Change" and "Mass Customization".

From other perspective the benefits of applying the Zachman Framework to the definition and implementation of Enterprise Architectures are as follows:

Simplicity
The definition of the framework is based on a single outline representing the viewpoints and layers to be taken into account in the definition of the architecture. This simplifies understanding of the working framework, expectations and assessment of the effort to adapt to a given context. Above and beyond simplicity, however, the completeness of the framework makes it possible to go down to a level of detail and complexity comparable to that of architecture frameworks aimed at the Defense and Finance industries. In fact, each of the perspectives resulting from the intersections in the layers and viewpoints matrix can be described at three levels of detail. The Zachman framework is considered the most straightforward Enterprise Architecture, given its simplicity and ease of understanding.

Flexibility
The Zachman framework leaves doors open to the interpretation and execution of the different artifacts and activities required as part of the construction of the Enterprise Architecture. This allows each firm, in whatever context, to adapt the framework to its own needs and capabilities. Both the artifacts and the representations obtained in each viewpoint and definitional layer are capable of adaptation.

Standardization and adaptability
Zachman is considered a de facto Enterprise Architecture standard and has become an industry benchmark. Many other architecture frameworks are compatible or can be integrated with Zachman, because it has been so widely implemented. Using the Zachman framework you can increase the coverage of needs in Enterprise Architecture. Zachman is more mature and horizontal than other EA frameworks, and it is therefore an ideal framework to establish the basis for the additional use of other working methodologies and frameworks.