LEARN. PRACTICE. GROW.Concept and mechanism
In phases E, F, and G, architecture moves toward delivery through options, migration planning, and implementation governance. A transition architecture describes a coherent intermediate state rather than merely a calendar date. Group work by value, dependencies, capacity, and risk. A cheap component to migrate may depend on another that is not ready. Sequencing should include coexistence, training, testing, and retirement of old components. The platform’s final cost does not necessarily represent transition cost. Make these differences visible to the sponsor before committing dates or financial benefits.
Guided application
In an exercise, the old platform costs 40 thousand euros per month and the new one 25 thousand. Two months of coexistence cost 130 thousand before other charges; the 15-thousand monthly difference appears only after retirement. During delivery, compare the implemented solution with agreed requirements and decisions. Address deviations through analysis, ownership, a deadline, and decision authority. Handover to APS requires demonstrated ability to monitor, recover, and escalate alongside documentation. Before cutover, confirm stop criteria and data recovery. Restoring an old image is insufficient if the schema has already changed. Governance should produce usable decisions and conformance evidence.
Two months at 40+25 cost 130; future savings do not eliminate coexistence.
Common pitfalls
Retirement without checked dependencies; exception without expiry; handover as file delivery.
Related topics: Context, mandate, and value · Stakeholders, conflicts, and views · Vision, scope, and feasibility
Govern intermediate states, costs, and operational capability.
Reference: Plan your migration · OGEA-102; TOGAF Standard, 10th Edition