Federal CIO appointment, enterprise architecture and innovating / improving via technology

By now, you've probably heard that Vivek Kundra has been appointed Federal Chief Information Officer (CIO) at the White House.  I don't know Mr. Kundra, but I've seen nothing but positive reaction from those who do.

What I find interesting is the responsibility of enterprise architecture as described in the press release:

"The Federal Chief Information Officer directs the policy and strategic planning of federal information technology investments and is responsible for oversight of federal technology spending.  The Federal CIO establishes and oversees enterprise architecture to ensure system interoperability and information sharing and ensure information security and privacy across the federal government. The CIO will also work closely with the Chief Technology Officer to advance the President’s technology agenda."

The next paragraph continues with the CIO's business mission:

"President Obama said, "Vivek Kundra will bring a depth of experience in the technology arena and a commitment to lowering the cost of government operations to this position.  I have directed him to work to ensure that we are using the spirit of American innovation and the power of technology to improve performance and lower the cost of government operations. As Chief Information Officer, he will play a key role in making sure our government is running in the most secure, open, and efficient way possible.""

Now, my question is, doesn't (shouldn't) enterprise architecture also contribute to "American innovation" and using "the power of technology to improve performance and lower the cost of government operations."?

Is this delineation of enterprise architecture and chief technology office restricted to US government IT?  Or, is it starting to crop up in corporate IT as well?

What do you think? Is this delineation a good thing?  Or, do you find it troublesome? 

Comments

[Michael Burke]

I think you're trying to derive meaning and implications where there isn't any.

In fact, I don't understand where the contradiction is at all. In one sentence it says he's working on EA. In the other, it says he'll be working to .

How do 2 sentences (that don't even appear to be inconsistent) suddenly become a trend in the federal government - and possibly industry?

[Darren Collins]

Concur with the comment above (Mr. Burke). I don't see the contradiction.

However, deriving meaning in the statment could lend someone to believe the focus would be on driving adoption of the current eGOV initiatives, and looking (Using EA) find other business areas that could be in the eGOV program. Maybe "Relocation" for an example.

Wouldn't a common archtecture is these areas have operational reductions?

[brenda]

Michael and Darren,

Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I agree that an EA program and a (mission driven) technology innovation program are complimentary. My question -- obviously not well stated -- is what is the role of the EA program and participants in technology innovation? Does the EA team contribute to the discovery, research and definition of technology innovation? Or, is the EA team's responsibility further downstream, in institutionalizing the innovation with a common architecture, standards and related practices?

Often, in corporate IT, EA is responsible for driving and institutionalizing innovation. The CTO role isn't that prevalent.

Hope this clarifies what I was trying to say.

thanks,
Brenda

[Darren Collins]

Brenda,

Sorry for the delay. Your question is very valid. The EA title as I grew up was to bring forth a technical architecture i.e. solution to advance, fix, or just enhance the current state. That role is now the CTO as discribed above.

So where deos leave EA. It's now is a very powerful (BUSINESS) tool for driving the strategy of an organization into it's future state. Pretty much what you said (totally abbreviated though). As discussed above the CTO will decide what the technical future state will look like using the needs/requirements from the EA effort.

For all those reading. Yes, we know this is grossly understated.