Page tree

Architectural Thinking Framework

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

The Architectural Thinking Framework® has the goal to ensure that all the solutions of an organization fit together in order to balance the dimensions

– customer value
– finance
– sustainability

in a way that maximizes the overall value from an enterprise-wide viewpoint in the short and the long term.

The Architectural Thinking Framework®

Architectural Thinking is not a process or discipline. Instead, it makes use of a content-oriented framework that defines artifacts and their relations that need to be created by various processes (such as strategy, governance or solution development). The Architectural Thinking Framework® enables consistent, connected, company-wide structures that ensure traceability from business vision to technology implementation. It is lean enough for Agile but works as well with classical project management methods.

Navigable picture is here


  1. Auf dieser Seite ist der Satz "Navigable picture is here" oberhalb des Bildes. Auf der Seite Overview ist dieser Satz darunter. Sollte vielleicht einheitlich sein.

    Ist es gewünscht, dass in der linken Navigation "Seiten" und "Seitenhierarchie" zu lesen ist?

    Navigation im Picture funktioniert am Computer (IE 11)

    Schaut üebrsichtlicher aus als am Handy

  2. I’d suggest to to distinguish business function from capability.
    Business function is the label given to an asset, capability define the qualitative and quantitative attributes of that asset.
    E.g. Automotive—Business function “Production”—quantitative: how many cars I’m able to produce in one day
    Qualitative: different kind of cars with (station wagon, spider, crossover and so on).

    The Business function is a fixed asset, capabilities can change in terms of quantitity and quality.
    I’d put emphasis on capabilities because, in the general blue print of the Organization, the issue to distinguish business functions and (related) capabilities is not important.
    But when it comes to evaluate Portfolio, it’s very important to distinguish.

  3. Alessandro Merlotti : Thx for your comment, 

    >>'But when it comes to evaluate Portfolio, it’s very important to distinguish.' I do not really understand what you mean by that.

  4. I would move "Architectural Thinking is not a process or discipline." to the end of the paragraph where it appears, not the beginning.  

  5. I am aligned with the motivation of this framework. In fact, I have a similar architecture model as this framework. Where mine differ with ATF is that I break down the Solution further to Application Functions or I would loosely call it architecture building block (ABB). The ABB should be linked to the value streams to provide validation that the ABB are required and necessary. This allows further deliberation at the function level on the qualitative measure of the function eg. how mature is this function, such that it is able to serve the strategic visions or the business capability. Hope this helps

Write a comment…