An Enterprise Architecture is a "model" or a "framework" which represents an enterprise at one point in its life cycle. This framework can be used to assist with planning and analysis of the enterprise, to select hardware and software products, to design organizational "reporting structures", and to study flow of materials and information through the enterprise. Without an Enterprise Architectural model, executives, managers, and technologists in an enterprise are essentially "running blind": making decisions based on their personal perception of the enterprise which is often not shared with the rest of the organization.
The Architecture of a Production Facility may be represented in various forms, depending on the nature of the Physical Plant. The simplest example is an architectural drawing of a building where people may carry out some service function. More complex facilities such as a continuous Process Plant (like an Oil Refinery) are represented by Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs), while Discrete Manufacturing Plants (like an automotive assembly plant) may be represented by Material Flow Diagrams (MFDs). Variations on these and other formats have been developed to represent the physical production facilities for most other industry sectors.
|
A key development in the design of physical architectures and production facilities was the ability to do quantitative analysis. Initially this took the form of calculation of static loads in structures and equipment. This quantification allowed the evolution from load bearing walls designed by trial and error (whose pinnacle was the medieval cathedral) to modern structures of glass and steel. Quantitative modelling also made possible design of more complex and efficient machines. |
Later, the ability to do quantitative modelling was extended to the flow of materials. Although some design of production facilities (like oil refineries or automotive manufacturing) was possible with manual calculations, it was the invention of the digital computer that really made it possible to optimize designs. |
|
The increasing complexity if these facilities made graphical representation of the production facility essential. To this end, a number of graphical visualization tools were invented, including PFDs (Process Flow Diagrams) for continuous process industries, and MFDs (Material Flow Diagrams) for discrete manufacturing industries. Other industries required different formats to represent their production facilities such as "Sequence Diagrams" for batch-oriented production operations, or "Time and Motion Diagrams" for service industries, etc. Industry-specific facility architecture diagrams are discussed at more length in the "Physical Architectures" section of this web site.
Finally, with the advent of even better computers and software modelling techniques, it became possible to "dynamically" model the production facility. This made it possible to predict "feedback" effects such as instability due to recycle of material, cyclical bottlenecking, etc. A large number of software products are available to do "steady state" modelling, and a smaller number capable of "dynamic" modelling. However, these products tend to be industry-specific, and limited to only one or two phases of the enterprise life-cycle. These are therefore discussed at more length under the "Products" area of this website for each specific industry and enterprise phase.
As the enterprise evolves through each phase, the information in a facility architecture diagram is expanded to the next level of detail. Process Flow Diagrams are expanded to produce P&IDs (Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams), MFDs are expanded to produce M&IDs (Mechanical and Instrumentation Diagrams. and so on, until the actual facility is built from detail engineering documents such as 3D layouts, wiring diagrams, etc. This process of development is described in more detail in the Engineering Tools area of this website. After commissioning, these diagrams are maintained to document the "as built" status of the production facility.
The Human and Organizational Architecture may be represented by a series of organization charts. An Organization Chart defines the "positions" to be filled by people, and the flow of authority through the hierarchy. This parallels the "equipment" and material flows depicted by PFDs and MFDs in process and discrete industries.
Development of Organizational design parallels physical facility design. Historically, rigid, experience-based organizational structures were the norm. For example, a Roman Legion (about 6000 men), was organized into 10 cohorts, each cohort was commanded by 6 centurions, and each centurion commanded 100 men. This organization saw little change during a thousand years.
The arrival of the industrial revolution brought accelerated rates of change in all aspects of the enterprise. More flexible, adaptable organizations were required to cope with these changes. New organizations also required increased numbers of specialists with high value skills who could no longer be treated as interchangeable footsoldiers.
Most recently, flexible work teams, Quality Circles, Outsourcing, and other innovations have fundamentally changed the rules of enterprise organization. At the same time, group profit sharing, personal development, and other new reward mechanisms are changing the dynamic of the workplace.
In order to predict and optimize behavior of the Human and Organizational component of the enterprise, modern modeling tools simulate the effect of organization on enterprise performance, and even model the flow of information across the interface between the "people" component of the enterprise, and the information systems component.
As the enterprise evolves through each phase, different organizational structure is required. Beginning with a very "high level" Organization Chart during the Conceptual Engineering Phase, as the enterprise design is developed during each successive phase, the Organization Chart is elaborated to define increasing levels of detail until eventually every position is defined (and budgeted). This process is usually completed by the end of "Detail Engineering" of the Production Facility.
Development of the Human and Organizational component of the enterprise continues during the construction phase, until at startup, each person in the organization has a position description, work processes and procedures, reporting requirements, etc., and has been trained in their roles and responsibilities. Work Flow Diagrams for each Human task, as well as interfaces with the Control and Information Systems and the Physical Production Facility are developed during this phase. Modelling of these activities can be a powerful tool to optimize the Human and Organizational Components of the enterprise, as well as the Control and Information Systems and Physical Production Facilities.
The Control and Information System Architecture defines the automated flow of informaton and control through the enterprise. It also defines flow of information to the Human component of the organization, and the return of commands to automated systems at all levels. The Control and Information System also includes "low level" automated control loops, and those higher level control functions which have been automated.
The control and information system architecture is the newest of the architectures, since automation of any kind was not possible before the industrial revolution. The "Jaquard Loom" was probably the first programmed discrete manufacturing production machine, and its automation, although revolutionary was very locallized. The first regulatory control loop was the centrifugal regulator invented to control steam pressure on locomotives. Although control loops in early refineries were many, most were given "set points" by an operator in a local "unit control room", so graphical representation could be limited to the PFD and P&ID. By this process, the P&ID evolved to define both the "low level" automation functions, and the physical production facility. In this the P&ID is unique, in that it also shows the interface between the low level control functions and the physical production facility.
P&IDs do not, however, represent the "higher level" Control and Information Systems functions or networks. Initially, this was not necessary, since the Human and Organizational component of the Enterprise was responsible for all of these functions. Most recently however, the advent of industrial LANs, Enterprise Integration, MRPII (Manufacturing Resource Planning), etc., has resulted in very complex "higher level" systems. These must be visualized in order to understand and analyze them.
| Until the multitude of providers of software tools adopts a common Enterprise Model (such as PERA), information integration between their tools will remain difficult if not impossible |
Many tools are available for modelling each of the three enterprise components individually, and these are discussed for each phase of each industry elsewhere in this web site. However, no tools are available which can effectively model all three, let alone all of the interfaces between them. This is the great challenge facing the next generation of enterprise architects, and it will require a fundamentally different approach to modelling, and software interfacing. Perhaps the new generation of OOP (Object Oriented Programming) and database interface tools can help, however, until the providers of such tools adopt a common Enterprise Model (such as PERA), no such interface between their industry-specific and phase-specific modelling tools will be possible.