A coherent direction. A workable path to delivery.
When investments, systems and responsibilities pull in different directions, another technology choice may not resolve the problem. I help clarify the intended outcome and connect architecture, governance and delivery around it.
For organisational leaders, CIOs, programme owners and public bodies planning change or reviewing an implementation that has stalled.
Clarify the business need, the affected processes and the decision to be made. Separate symptoms, constraints and assumptions from the intended result.
An agreed question, scope and criteria for success.
02
How does the whole system fit?
Review capabilities, data, applications, infrastructure and interfaces. Identify dependencies, duplicated work and the decisions that need an owner.
A current-state view and the material architecture gaps.
03
Which direction is justified?
Compare feasible options against value, cost, risk and organisational capacity. Define the target architecture and the changes needed to reach it.
A reasoned recommendation and a prioritised transformation roadmap.
04
How will delivery be accepted?
Agree responsibilities, dependencies and milestones. Define what must be demonstrated in testing and acceptance before an implementation is considered ready.
A delivery and acceptance framework with accountable next steps.
Concrete outputs, agreed to fit the question.
ICT priorities connected to organisational objectives.
A current-state assessment and target architecture.
An options assessment with a reasoned recommendation.
A roadmap with responsibilities, dependencies and acceptance criteria.
TOGAF · EIRA · ISO/IEC 38500
Architecture methods in the service of the decision.
TOGAF provides an enterprise architecture method; EIRA offers a reference architecture for interoperable digital public services. ISO/IEC 38500 addresses governance of IT. We use relevant methods proportionately and check applicable legal requirements separately. A framework label alone does not demonstrate a sound architecture or a compliant service.
Official reference points
These sources provide context. Applicability and current requirements are checked for the specific engagement.
My experience includes IT leadership and board responsibility, strategies and enterprise architectures for Croatian ministries, and implementation of the SCF management information system. The published CIP4SI and CEKOM examples show how architecture, resources, risk and delivery connect in practice.
Describe the intended change, the current difficulty and the decision ahead. We can establish the scope and the evidence needed. Keep internal architecture documents for an agreed direct exchange.
A clear starting point The first conversation clarifies your problem, the intended outcome, the available evidence and the possible scope of work. We agree the next step together.