Managing the IT Capability
Enterprise
Architecture
Management
British Petroleum
Case Study
Company Profile – British Petroleum
British Petroleum (BP) is a global oil and gas
company with operations in 100 countries and
exploration and production in 29 countries. BP
is globally ranked number 3 in Oil and Gas and
employs 97,600 people in more than 100 offices
worldwide. The company recorded sales in
2007 of $284.3 billion with a net income of
$17.8 billion and has over 1.2 million shareholders.
IT plays a critical role in BP’s operations with
2,500 full time staff (4,000 including contractors
and outsourcing providers). Enterprise Architecture
is an essential part of IT governance and there
are 15 group Enterprise Architecture (EA) staff
with 175 Solution Architects deployed across
the IT function. The overall IT budget for BP is
approximately $2.5 billion.
Why is Enterprise Architecture
Management (EAM) critical for BP?
The business need for
Architecture Management
As with many IT organisations, BP IT is asked
by business to consistently provide the right
capabilities, at the right time and at the right cost.
There are a number of challenges to realising value
from enterprise architecture frameworks including:
///Traditionally, emphasis often tends to be on
defining processes and artefacts for an ‘end
state’ technical design when in reality business
is ever changing
///EA is often seen as a ‘program’ with enterprise
wide implementation of best
practices and control, which can often be
perceived as constraining and/or controlling
speed of innovation
BP’s need for Architecture Management
BP operates within a federated structure of
Architecture with a consolidated Group EA function
responsible for setting group-level technical
standards and co-ordinating architecture activities
across all the business facing IT teams. Each
major business unit has an embedded IT function
(Integrated Supply & Trading, Exploration and
Production and Refining and Marketing) with a
Chief Architect who is responsible for embedding
local Architecture Management practices.
In order to realise economies of scale across BP,
this organisational model requires:
///Standardized frameworks, governance,
processes and extended use of shared services
///An integrated target architecture and
increased EA input to IT.
BP joined IVI and participated in pilot studies of
the new Enterprise Architecture Framework. The
EAM maturity level (Figure 1) is measured against
eight key capability building blocks grouped by
three category areas (Figure 2).
///Metrics and value indicators are can often
be absent from discussions.
Enterprise Architecture Management is sometimes
perceived as a governance program or control, thus
diminishing the potential business value
of the effort.
Figure 1
Maturity curve for Enterprise
Architecture Management
Source: Innovation Value Institute
However there was significant variation across
business units including:
BP Assessment
Assessment results indicate a maturity
level of 2 – Basic (Figure 2).
However the average maturity levels mask
variation between EA teams. As the pilot was
carried out from an individual point of view it
enabled teams to focus on capabilities within
their individual organisations and scope of
responsibility. For almost all capabilities, one or
more teams self-assessed at maturity level ‘3’.
1
Initial
Figure 2
Average Capability
Maturity for 6 Teams
Source: Innovation
Value Institute
///Architecture activities take place
at localised levels
///Value informally understood but with
a limited number of metrics captured
///Architecture roles and responsibilities
defined but vary considerably across teams
The group EA function has the potential to
deliver greater business value with the key
areas of improvement, namely – Architecture
Planning, Governance/Processes, Framework,
Value measurement.
2
Basic
3
Intermediate
4
Advanced
Planning Architecture
2.6
Planning
5
Optimising
Average
2.6
Strategic
Planning
2.7
Practices Architecture
2.1
Framework
2.3
Architecture
Processes
2.0
Architecture
Governence
2.4
Architecture
Value
1.9
Org Structure
& Skills
2.7
People
2.6
Communications &
Stakeholder Mgmt
IT&S Functions
IT&S Enterprise
Architecture
E&P Tech. & Services
R&M
Global Infrastructure
IT&S, IST
Potential areas
of best practice
2.4
Creating a Roadmap to increase EAM maturity
The assessment provides a useful roadmap with
key targets to address within the next 24 months
by focussing on the highest priority areas and
leveraging existing best practices.
Current State
12 month target
2–3 year target
Maturity level
2–3
3
4
Characteristics
Target architecture and
roadmaps defined for
most segments / functions
except for E&P and
Group level
Consistent, business driven
target architecture & roadmaps
(for some business and all
technical domains) in place
Consistent, business
driven target architecture
& roadmaps (for all
business and all technical
domains) in place
Figure 3
Detailed View
of Architecture
Planning capability
Source: Innovation
Value Institute
Some business buy-in for
Functions, IST, R&M
Standard formats not
always used across
domains even within the
same segment or function
For all embedded teams,
all domains
-D
efinitions defined
and agreed
-O
wners agreed
-A
s-is and target
architectures documented
- Implementation roadmap
agreed and fed into
planning process
Summary
Participation in the IT-CMF pilot test has delivered
significant benefits to BP. One of the key findings
for the company was the identification of varying
maturity levels amongst different divisions within
the company.
Efficient yearly thorough
refresh process
Technology more
proactive in bringing
opportunities to
the business
Large proportion of the
roadmap delivered by
leveraging existing assets
This is encouraging for all teams as it confirms
that higher maturity is achievable and not just
aspirational. At the same time, it also provides a
company specific model of ‘centres of excellence’
for different capabilities
For more information visit www.ivi.ie
Copyright © 2010 Innovation Value Institute