Skip to content

Architecting the People

An organization’s most critical capability lies in its DNA: most often, the people that make up the organization.  Thoughts and actions (within and outside the organization) are determined by the way the people think and act.  An organization’s vision for its future can be realized only if it lives in, and is amplified by the thoughts and actions of its people.  But thoughts and actions from different people are not always synergistic, nor even additive. Also, individual thoughts and actions are driven by many forces that may be at odds with the organization’s objectives.  Architecting the power structure, governance, motivational and cultural aspects of an enterprise may be the key to positioning an enterprise to achieve its objectives.

EA is not complete (and may even be undermined) without an appropriate consideration of these aspects.


I stand between
my world inside and out,
Have simply seen
past reasonable doubt,
It is the sheen …
how thought begets its clout,
It fastens keen
as hook to mouth of trout,
So meanings mean
and thought turns into shout,
Can I unlean?
Can North turn into South?

– Balaji Prasad

Thinking Alchemy

A pattern too far,
A pattern too many,
This view from a star,
Lights one, shrouds many.

Syntax’s aflight,
To roll into gold,
A structure so bright,
To have and to hold.

Meaning’s amiss,
Rends real world from me,
What feeling of bliss,
From thought’s alchemy.

Balaji Prasad – February, 2010

Thinking in Key

Thinking is seemingly free,
with richness and complexity,
yields pleasure for hours on end,
as into the clouds we ascend

Can thinking be a feeling we feel
while mixing the real and unreal?
as we play our lives in key
with the melody of “I’d like it to be”

– Balaji Prasad, February 2010

Elusive Enterprise Architecture

I think She’s here. No wait, She’s there!
Maybe She’s in the middle, maybe everywhere,
Is She of the mind, or a product of strife?
A surge with an end, or a day in a life?

Balaji Prasad, April 2009

The Semantic Forest

If the forest would stay a forest,
And the tree would stay a tree,
I’d know if my East were my West,
For my eyes – they’d clearly see.

– Balaji Prasad, April 2009

The web of semantic truth

We lie.  Not always deliberately.  The complexity that underlies reality often twists our tongues and brains to think and say the wrong things.  Convenience trumps integrity.  Our brains revel in discerning and pronouncing patterns that simplify and enable action.  But as wise people have said, it can be disadvantageous to make things simpler than they should.  But on the other hand, time is a force to be reckoned with too – we cannot endlessly analyze things to make sure we vaporize all uncertainty out of our decision-making processes.  Is there a balance to be found between simple views that enable action …  and complex, more realistic models that delay and make our actions less surer?

Can the Semantic Web help?  Can we say things in a simple abstract manner with sweeping generalizations, while being able to drill down into specific statements that collaborate to corroborate such 100,000-foot belief-truths?  If we had a language that allows us do unions and intersections, causes and effects, aggregations and divisions … maybe we would lie a little less.  Or maybe our lies and truths would move us from a binary existence to a grayer blur that deals in probabilities and semi-truths.  Maybe more uncomfortable, but closer to the real world that we live in.

– Balaji Prasad, 4/09