An organisation may accept that it needs an application architecture as part of its strategy but often a discussion follows about what such an architecture should comprise. Many of the technical people do not want to include vendor names in architecture drawings; it is OK to have a box labelled ERP but not one marked SAP.
My view is pragmatic; once a company has adopted, say, SAP, this will be a major element in their strategy for many years to come. Having ‘SAP’ as part of an application architecture is more realistic that just labelling the box ‘ERP’.
A top-level application architecture shows the major applications and the interfaces between the packages. A case history example is shown above. This diagram was the key figure in a corporate strategy proposal; the document included business case and cost/benefit costs. The key concept was a single ERP solution for the global business. The main board accepted this strategy and a single active instance of SAP, supporting all of the operations, resulted. The Chairman’s motive was not the potential cost savings but the harmonisation of the global businesses after a major merger – a single chart of accounts drove the business change desired.
Comments