---

---

Every so often, the ultimate measure of an enterprise solution architecture (ESA) is its viability. so, how do you measure the viability of an ESA?

Let’s take a look at key considerations from an enterprise business, system solutions, and economic viewpoint.

Viability Metrics

Enterprise Business Considerations

• Alignment with business objectives such as compliance, value stream benefits, flexibility
• Operational excellence such as good customer experience and operational efficiency
• Security compliance such as GDPR, and HIPPA

Enterprise Solution Considerations

• Time to adapt to new requirements (e.g., regulatory changes, market shifts).
• Flexibility and modularity (ability to add/remove components without disrupting the system)
• Performance benchmarks such as throughput, response time, reliability, and resource utilization.
• Integration complexity, such as the intricacy of APIs, and dependencies on legacy systems.

Economic Considerations

• Total cost of ownership (TCO)
• Return on Investment (ROI)
• Mean time to recover (MTTR) and mean time between failures (MTBF)
• Maintenance costs and effort required for updates

Often, stakeholder satisfaction (primarily end users and IT teams) is the key to measuring ESA viability.

Viability Assessment Method

Viewpoint	Method
Enterprise business	Gap analysis between the as-is and to-be architecture Map architectural services to business outcomes using the agile ESA modeling approach Compliance checklists and audits
Technical/application solution	Significant Case Scenario Walk-through Test or  Scenario-Based Architecture Analysis Method (SAAM) Agile ESA modeling or simulation Risk matrices (likelihood vs. impact analysis)
Economic efficiency	Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) Break-even analysis to determine payback periods Use of monitoring tools such as Prometheus or Splunk for real-time insights

Viability Process

While there is no set approach to defining a viability process, there are some common practices.

• Definition of success criteria: Align with business KPIs (e.g., 30% cost reduction in 1 year).
• Baseline metrics: Measure current performance (e.g., TCO, latency).
• Gap analysis: Compare baseline to target architecture.
• Risk mitigation: Address critical risks (e.g., vendor lock-in through open source alternatives).
• Iterative validation: Refine architecture based on PoCs and stakeholder feedback.

Gotcha: Viability vs. Architectural Technical Debt
The relationship between the viability of an enterprise solution architecture and architectural technical debt is nuanced. While a viable architecture tends to reduce technical debt, the reverse isn’t universally true.

Summary

A viability assessment requires the efforts of both the enterprise solution architecture and project management teams. Considering all stakeholders’ viewpoints, a holistic view can be developed around an ESA model. A viable ESA model addresses key considerations of the enterprise business, system solutions, and economic metrics, and delivers long-term value while minimizing risk.

With a clear set of metrics for assessing viability, ongoing viability measurement becomes much easier in many AI-enabled platform environments.

---