•

Phase A: Architecture Vision

o

Develop a high-level aspirational vision of the capabilities and business value to be delivered

as a result of the proposed Enterprise Architecture

o

Define the scope and boundaries of the architecture engagement

o

Identify the key stakeholders and their concerns and expectations

o

Define the Architecture Vision statement and the Architecture Definition Document

o

Obtain approval and commitment from the sponsors and stakeholders

•

Phase B: Business Architecture

o

Develop the Target Business Architecture that describes how the enterprise needs to operate

to achieve the business goals

o

Define the Baseline Business Architecture, if not available

o

Perform a gap analysis between the Baseline and Target Business Architectures

o

Define candidate roadmap components for the Business Architecture

o

Resolve impacts across the Architecture Landscape

•

Phase C: Information Systems Architecture

o

Develop the Target Data Architecture that enables the Business Architecture and the

Architecture Vision

o

Develop the Target Application Architecture that supports the Business Architecture and the

Architecture Vision

o

Define the Baseline Data and Application Architectures, if not available

o

Perform a gap analysis between the Baseline and Target Data and Application Architectures

o

Define candidate roadmap components for the Information Systems Architecture

o

Resolve impacts across the Architecture Landscape

•

Phase D: Technology Architecture

o

Develop the Target Technology Architecture that enables the Information Systems

Architecture and the Architecture Vision

o

Define the Baseline Technology Architecture, if not available

o

Perform a gap analysis between the Baseline and Target Technology Architectures

o

Identify candidate Architecture Roadmap components based upon gaps between the

Baseline and Target Technology Architectures

o

Resolve impacts across the Architecture Landscape

Therefore, the correct matching of the objectives and the phases is:

•

1C: Develop the Target Data Architecture that enables the Business Architecture and the

Architecture Vision

•

2B: Develop the Target Business Architecture that describes how the enterprise needs to

operate to achieve the business goals

•

3A: Develop a high-level aspirational vision of the capabilities and business value to be

delivered as a result of the proposed Enterprise Architecture

•

4D: Identify candidate Architecture Roadmap components based upon gaps between the

Baseline and Target Technology Architectures

Reference: 1: The TOGAF Architecture Development Method

According to the TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, an Architecture Contract is a joint agreement

between development partners and sponsors on the deliverables, quality, and fitness-for-purpose of

an architecture1. It defines the scope, responsibilities, and governance of the architecture work, and

ensures the alignment and compliance of the architecture with the business goals and objectives1.

In the scenario, the Lead Enterprise Architect has asked you to review the draft Architecture

Contracts and recommend the best approach to address the Chief Engineer’s concern about the

consistency and quality of the deployment of the new processes for the battery pack production at

each location.

The best answer is C, because it follows the guidelines and best practices for defining and using

Architecture Contracts as described in the TOGAF Standard, Version 9.22. It ensures that the

contracts cover the essential aspects of the project objectives, effectiveness metrics, acceptance

criteria, and risk management, and that they are legally enforceable for third-party contractors. It

also recommends a schedule of compliance reviews at key points in the implementation process, and

a mechanism for handling any deviations from the Architecture Contract, involving the Architecture

Board and the possibility of granting a dispensation to allow the process to be customized for local

needs.

The other options are not correct because they either23:

A . For changes requested by an internal team, you recommend a memorandum of understanding

between the Architecture Board and the implementation organization. For contracts issued to third-

party contractors, you recommend that it is a fully enforceable legal contract. You recommend that

the Architecture Board reviews all deviations from the Architecture Contract and considers whether

to grant a dispensation to allow the implementation organization to customize the process to meet

their local needs.: This option does not address the need to review the contracts to ensure that they

address the project objectives, effectiveness metrics, acceptance criteria, and risk management. It

also does not recommend a schedule of compliance reviews at key points in the implementation

process. Moreover, it suggests that a memorandum of understanding is sufficient for internal teams,

which may not be legally binding or enforceable.

B . For changes undertaken by internal teams, you recommend a memorandum of understanding

between the Architecture Board and the implementation organization. If a contract is issued to a

contractor, you recommend that it is a fully enforceable legal contract. If a deviation from the

Architecture Contract is found, you recommend that the Architecture Board grant a dispensation to

allow the implementation organization to customize the process to meet their local needs.: This

option has the same problems as option A, and also implies that the Architecture Board should

always grant a dispensation for any deviation, which may not be appropriate or desirable in some

cases.

D . You recommend that the Architecture Contracts be used to manage the architecture governance

processes across the locations. You recommend deployment of monitoring tools to assess the

performance of each completed battery pack at each location and develop change requirements if

necessary. If a deviation from the contract is detected, the Architecture Board should allow the

Architecture Contract to be modified meet the local needs. In such cases they should issue a new

Request for Architecture Work.: This option does not address the need to review the contracts to

ensure that they address the project objectives, effectiveness metrics, acceptance criteria, and risk

management. It also does not recommend a schedule of compliance reviews at key points in the

implementation process. Moreover, it suggests that the Architecture Board should always allow the

Architecture Contract to be modified for any deviation, which may not be appropriate or desirable in

some cases. It also implies that a new Request for Architecture Work should be issued for each

deviation, which may not be necessary or feasible.

Reference:

1: The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Chapter 3: Definitions and Terminology, Section 3.1: Terms and

Definitions

2: The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Chapter 43: Architecture Contracts

3: The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Chapter 44: Architecture Governance

Thank you for your visit.

The Architecture Landscape is a class of information within the Architecture Repository that shows

an architectural view of the building blocks that are in use within the organization today (the

Baseline Architecture), as well as those that are planned for the future (the Target Architecture). The

Architecture Landscape typically contains a list of the applications in use within the enterprise, along

with their relationships and dependencies, as well as other relevant architectural information. The

Architecture Landscape helps to identify opportunities for re-use, consolidation, or retirement of

existing applications, as well as gaps or overlaps in the current or future architecture.

Reference: : The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Part IV: Architecture Content Framework, Chapter 34:

Architecture Landscape : The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Part VI: Architecture Capability

Framework, Chapter 47: Architecture Repository

This statement best describes iteration and the ADM. The ADM is iterative over the whole process

between phases and within phases because it allows for feedback loops and refinements at any point

in the architecture development and transition process. Iteration enables architects to address

changing requirements, assumptions, constraints, and environments; to validate and improve

architectures; to manage risks and issues; and to ensure stakeholder satisfaction and value

realization. Reference: The TOGAF® Standard | The Open Group Website, Section 3.1 Introduction to

the ADM.

According to the TOGAF standard, the deliverables that match the descriptions are as follows:

1 Architecture Principles: These are general rules and guidelines, intended to be enduring and

seldom amended, that inform and support the way in which an organization sets about fulfilling its

mission1. They reflect a level of consensus among the various elements of the enterprise, and form

the basis for making future IT decisions1.

2 Architecture Contracts: These are the joint agreements between development partners and

sponsors on the deliverables, quality, and fitness-for-purpose of an architecture2. They are used to

ensure that the architecture is implemented and governed according to the agreed-upon

specifications and standards2.

3 Request for Architecture Work: This is a document that is sent from the sponsoring organization to

the architecture organization to trigger the start of an architecture development cycle3. It defines the

scope, schedule, budget, deliverables, and stakeholders of the architecture project3.

4 Architecture Requirements Specification: This is a set of quantitative statements that outline what

an implementation project must do in order to comply with the architecture4. It defines the

requirements for each architecture domain, as well as the relationships and dependencies among

them4.

Reference: 1: Architecture Principles 2: Architecture Contracts 3: Request for Architecture

Work 4: Architecture Requirements Specification

An Architecture Board is an executive-level group responsible for the review and maintenance of the

strategic architecture and all of its sub-architectures1. It is a key element in a successful Architecture

Governance strategy2.

An Architecture Board is typically made responsible, and accountable, for achieving some or all of

the following goals2:

Providing the basis for all decision-making with regard to the architectures

Consistency between sub-architectures

Establishing targets for re-use of components

Flexibility of the Enterprise Architecture: To meet changing business needs To leverage new

technologies

Enforcement of Architecture Compliance

Improving the maturity level of architecture discipline within the organization

Ensuring that the discipline of architecture-based development is adopted

Supporting a visible escalation capability for out-of-bounds decisions

Therefore, the correct answer is option D, which captures one of the goals of an Architecture Board

as stated in the TOGAF Standard, Version 9.22.

Option A is incorrect, because conducting assessments of the maturity level of architecture discipline

within the organization is not a direct responsibility of an Architecture Board, but rather a part of the

Architecture Capability Framework3.

Option B is incorrect, because allocating resources for architecture projects is not a direct

responsibility of an Architecture Board, but rather a part of the Architecture Governance

Framework4.

Option C is incorrect, because creating the Statement of Architecture Work is not a direct

responsibility of an Architecture Board, but rather a part of the Architecture Development

Method5. Reference:

1: Architecture Board - The Open Group3

2: TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2 - Part VI: Architecture Governance Framework - Architecture Board

3: TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2 - Part VI: Architecture Governance Framework - Architecture

Capability Framework

4: TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2 - Part VI: Architecture Governance Framework - Architecture

Governance Framework

5: TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2 - Part II: Architecture Development Method - Phase A: Architecture

Vision

The Business Transformation Readiness Assessment is a technique that can be used to evaluate the

readiness of the organization to undergo change and to identify the actions needed to increase the

likelihood of a successful business transformation. This technique can help to address the concerns

of the key stakeholders about the risks and value of the proposed reorganization. The technique

involves assessing the following aspects of the organization: vision, commitment, capacity, capability,

culture, and communication. Based on the assessment, the risks associated with the transformations

can be identified, classified, and mitigated for. The technique also helps to identify the dependencies

between the set of changes, including gaps and work packages, and the improvement actions to be

worked into the Implementation and Migration Plan. The technique also supports the determination

of the business value, effort, and risk associated for each transformation, which can be used to

prioritize and sequence the work packages and the Transition Architectures1 Reference: 1: The

TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Part III: ADM Guidelines and Techniques, Chapter 27: Business

Transformation Readiness Assessment

The image shows a diagram that illustrates the basic concepts of architecture description as defined

by the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011 standard1, which is also adopted by the TOGAF standard2.

According to the ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011 standard, an architecture description is a work product

used to express an architecture, and it consists of one or more architecture views1.

An architecture view is a representation of a system from the perspective of a related set of

concerns, and it conforms to an architecture viewpoint1.

An architecture viewpoint is a specification of the conventions for constructing and using an

architecture view to address specific stakeholder concerns1.

Therefore, the correct answer is option A, which identifies the items labeled as “A” and “B” in the

image as an architecture viewpoint and an architecture view, respectively. Reference:

1: ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011 - Systems and software engineering — Architecture description1

2: TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2 - Part IV: Architecture Content Framework - 31. Architectural

Artifacts2

Architecture governance is the practice of ensuring compliance with the enterprise architecture and

its principles, standards, and goals. Architecture governance provides the means to establish,

monitor, and control the architecture development and implementation processes, and to resolve

any issues or conflicts that may arise. Architecture governance also ensures that all stakeholders are

represented and involved in the decision-making process, and that their interests and concerns are

balanced and aligned. Statements 1 and 2 highlight the value and necessity for architecture

governance to be adopted within organizations, as they emphasize the importance of responsibility,

accountability, fairness, and transparency in the architectural activities. Statements 3 and 4 are more

related to the benefits and outcomes of having a good enterprise architecture, rather than the

governance aspect.

Reference: : The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Part VI: Architecture Capability Framework, Chapter

50: Architecture Governance : The TOGAF Standard, Version 9.2, Part III: ADM Guidelines and

Techniques, Chapter 29: Architecture Governance

Business Transformation Readiness Assessment is a joint effort between corporate staff lines of

business and IT planners to evaluate the readiness of the organization to undergo change. It involves

assessing factors such as vision, commitment, capacity, capability, culture, and motivation that may

influence the success of a business transformation initiative. Reference: The TOGAF® Standard | The

Open Group Website, Section 3.3.2 Business Transformation Readiness Assessment.