Enterprise architecture governance
Enterprise architecture governance is the control system that keeps strategy, platforms, and delivery aligned across complex institutions.
What you get
- Baseline inventory and target architecture
- Transition architectures tied to budget
- Architecture review board and ADR process
- Standards and exception register
- Rationalisation plan with tracked savings
- Governance KPIs for the board
Applied at: NATO HQ · NATO / NCIA · EEAS · UN OICT · BRD · IBM · PIR2-IT
What it means in practice
In practice, enterprise architecture governance means defining a controlled target state, documenting key decisions, enforcing review mechanisms, and preventing fragmentation across projects, platforms, and vendors.
Common governance patterns
TOGAF ADM, architecture review boards, Architecture Decision Records, standards and exception registers with expiry dates, transition architectures, and portfolio rationalisation tied to a governed target landscape.
Typical architecture and governance patterns
Core patterns: target-state architecture, Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), design authority, review boards, standards and exceptions management, transition states, control evidence, and architecture principles. Execution context: cross-institutional transformation, regulated environments, public-sector modernization, and delivery settings where control matters as much as speed. Outcome: fewer duplicated platforms, decisions that can be traced and defended, and savings that show up in the budget.
Why this matters
Without architecture governance, large institutions accumulate drift, duplicate investments, incompatible systems, and unmanaged risk. With it, decisions remain legible, delivery stays aligned, and transformation becomes executable rather than rhetorical.
Related capabilities
Impact in numbers
Figures as recorded on named engagements — each one is listed on the Projects page.
How I approach it
- Baseline honestly. Applications, interfaces, data and contracts — what exists and what it costs.
- Set target and transition states. Where the estate must be in three years, and the steps that are affordable.
- Give decisions an owner. Architecture review board, ADRs and an escalation path with real authority.
- Manage standards and exceptions. Every exception has an owner, a reason and an expiry date.
- Rationalise. Retire, consolidate or replace, with savings tracked to the budget line.
- Measure drift. KPIs on duplication, technical debt and decision lead time reported to the board.
Where it was applied
- NATO HQ / NCIA · 2015 – 2016NNHQ target architecture and ICT migration — US$110M component of the US$3B new headquarters.
- NATO / NCIA · 2023 – 2024CS-NDW governance framework — decision authority, accountability chains, escalation paths and ARB integration.
- EEAS · 2022 – 2023Yearly EEAS portfolio (Technical Coherence, Digital Transformation, Cyber Defence); 224 components assessed, 91 retired, 116 consolidated.
- UN OICT · 2016 – 2019408 applications assessed, 181 retired, 175 consolidated — US$2.1M savings.
- BRD — Groupe Société Générale · 2011 – 2013Enterprise architecture strategy and roadmap across 900+ servers and 550+ applications.
Where programmes usually go wrong
- An ARB that approves everything and records nothing.
- Standards with permanent exceptions — the exception becomes the standard.
- A target architecture that is not linked to the budget or the procurement plan.
- Rationalisation counted in applications retired, never in money saved.
- Architects separated from delivery, so the design and the build diverge.
Questions worth asking before you fund it
- How many architecture decisions were recorded last quarter, and how many were revisited?
- Which capabilities are you paying for twice?
- Who can overrule the ARB — and how often has it happened?
- What does one more year on the legacy estate cost?