Start with the value proposition. The Level 0 capabilities are the things the organisation exists to do; the value proposition is the test for whether the Level 0 capability is right. Then decompose to Level 1, working with the people who own the work, not the architects who are designing the map. The map is a model of the work, not a model of the architecture.
Capability-Driven Planning
The capability map is a shared model of what the organisation does, independent of who does it, where it lives, or what technology supports it. The investment portfolio is the translation of strategy into work. The operating model is what keeps both current as the organisation changes.
On this page
§ 01 ·
What capability-driven planning is
Capability-driven planning is the discipline of separating the what (what the organisation does) from the how (how it is organised, what technology supports it, who does the work). The capability map is the model of the what; the investment portfolio is the model of the how; the operating model is what keeps both current as the organisation changes.
The capability map is a hierarchical decomposition of the organisation's capabilities (the things it must be able to do to deliver its value proposition). The decomposition is to the level of detail that is useful for the conversation: too coarse, and the map is a slogan; too fine, and the map is a project plan. The right level is the level at which the capability has a clear owner, a clear set of supporting systems, and a clear set of metrics.
The investment portfolio is the translation of strategy into work. The portfolio has capabilities (the targets), investments (the work to reach the targets), and metrics (the evidence that the work is on track). The portfolio is reviewed at a cadence that matches the work: monthly for operational, quarterly for tactical, annually for strategic.
Two failure modes recur.
- The orphan map. The capability map is built and never used. The artefact exists, the conversation does not.
- The cover story. The capability map is built and used as a justification for projects that were already decided. The map is a cover for a budget conversation, not a model of the work.
The right answer is to build the map with the people who will use it, and to use it for the conversations that actually drive decisions.
§ 02 ·
The architecture
The architectural primitives that have held up.
The capability hierarchy
The map is hierarchical: Level 0 capabilities, Level 1, Level 2, and beyond. The hierarchy is to the level of detail that is useful for the conversation. Level 0 capabilities are the things the organisation exists to do (e.g., "deliver products to customers"). Level 1 are the major sub-capabilities. Level 2 are the specifics.
The capability owner
Every capability at the level of detail in use has an owner. The owner is accountable for the capability's performance, evolution, and investment. The owner is not necessarily the person who does the work; the owner is the person accountable for the work.
The investment linkage
Every investment in the portfolio is linked to one or more capabilities. The linkage is explicit (the investment improves capability X) and the linkage is the basis for prioritisation (an investment that improves three capabilities is more valuable than one that improves one).
The metric linkage
Every capability at the level of detail in use has a metric. The metric measures the capability's performance, not the investment's performance. An investment that improves the metric is a good investment; an investment that does not improve the metric is not.
The map, the linkage, and the operating model are the three pieces. The map is the vocabulary; the linkage is the translation; the operating model is the discipline.
§ 03 ·
State of the practice
3
Level 0 capability categories most commonly used (Run the Business, Change the Business, Grow the Business).
Industry observation
~50-200
Capabilities in a typical enterprise capability map (Level 1 and 2 combined).
Industry observation
1
Right answer to how many levels: the level at which the conversation is useful.
§ 04 ·
Questions we get asked
With an explicit linkage in the portfolio.
- Every investment has a primary capability (the capability it most directly improves).
- Optional secondary capabilities are the capabilities it indirectly improves.
- The linkage is the basis for prioritisation and for the post-implementation review.
The map is current if the conversations that use it are current.
- If the strategy conversation is referencing the map, the map is current.
- If the investment conversation is referencing the map, the map is current.
- If the architecture conversation is referencing the map, the map is current.
A map that is not referenced is a map that is not current.
§ 05 ·
Patterns we design our practice to avoid
A capability map that is built as a project deliverable is a map that is out of date the day after the project ends. The map needs an owner, a review cadence, and a conversation that uses it. A map without a conversation is a poster.
A capability map built to support a reorganisation is a map biased toward the new structure. The map is supposed to be a model of what the organisation does, independent of who does it. A map that encodes the reorganisation has lost its value as a shared model.
A map that decomposes to the level of individual systems is a project plan. The right level is the level at which the capability has a clear owner, a clear set of supporting systems, and a clear set of metrics. Below that level, the map is noise.
§ 06 ·
Evidence & references
Public frameworks and writing that inform our practice.
OMG, 2015 (current)
The standards-body framing. BMM is the most rigorous of the capability-driven planning models, with a clear vocabulary for the ends (vision, goals, objectives), the means (missions, strategies, tactics), and the influencers (assumptions, constraints).
BIZBOK: Business Architecture Body of Knowledge
ABPMP, current
The practitioner body of knowledge. BIZBOK is the most useful of the capability-driven planning references because it is written for practitioners, not academics, and because it is updated regularly.
Enterprise Architecture As Strategy
Ross, Weill, Robertson, Harvard Business Review Press, 2006
The book that made the case for capability- driven planning to a business audience. The contribution is the framing of the capability map as a shared model, not a technical artefact.
TOGAF: The Open Group Architecture Framework
The Open Group, current
The most widely adopted EA framework. TOGAF's Architecture Development Method (ADM) is the process; the capability map is one of the artefacts. The framework is heavy; the vocabulary is useful.
Building a capability map?
Weighing a capability-driven planning initiative, building a capability map, or trying to make the investment portfolio more than a budget conversation? Useful at the boundary between the strategy and the work. A short conversation is the right next step.
Learn more