GEA-NZ v2.0 Context Document

- From Vision and Direction to Deployment

Implementing the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT and Better Public Services

Government Enterprise Architecture for New Zealand (GEA-NZ) Version 2.0 CONTEXT DOCUMENT This document describes GEA-NZ v2.0 – our common language to aid in implementation of the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT and Better Public Services.

Government Technology Services (GTS) Architecture Team

Unclassified Disclaimer

For planning purposes only. This document should not be read as a commitment on the part of the Department of Internal Affairs or wider government to implement any particular initiative to which it refers. Individual initiatives remain subject to detailed planning processes and requisite approvals.

2

Document control Crown copyright ©. This copyright work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand licence. In essence, you are free to copy, distribute and adapt the work, as long as you attribute the work to the Department of Internal Affairs and abide by the other licence terms. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/nz/. Please note that neither the Department of Internal Affairs emblem nor the New Zealand Government logo may be used in any way which infringes any provision of the Flags, Emblems, and Names Protection Act 1981 or would infringe such provision if the relevant use occurred within New Zealand. Attribution to the Department of Internal Affairs should be in written form and not by reproduction of the Department of Internal Affairs emblem or New Zealand Government logo.

Document information Project ID/Name GEA-NZ v2.0 Context Document Author

Duncan Hall, Enterprise Architect, Government Technology Services, DIA

Title

GEA-NZ v2.0 Context Document

File name

2012-12-20 GEA-NZ v2.0 - Context Document

DMS reference

DMS Library: I&F-1382-10-02; Document ID: 754707DB

Revision history Version

Date

Author

Description of changes

01

26-07-2012

Duncan Hall

Initial draft outline for comment

02

16-08-2012

Duncan Hall

  

Enhancements from Brian More, Chief Architect Input from Elena Webb Circulated for further comment

03

06-09-2012

Duncan Hall

Further development; and input from GTS Architecture Team

04

03-10-2012

Duncan Hall

Diagrams updated Minor alterations to align with material condensed from version 03 to be published on the www.ict.govt.nz site

05

16-10-2012

Duncan Hall

Further input from stakeholders

06

20-12-2012

Duncan Hall

Following GEAG review, feedback incorporated

Distribution list Name

Role

Group

Government Enterprise Architecture Group (GEAG)



Department of Internal Affairs DMS Library: I&F-1382-10-02 Document ID: 754707DB

3

Document approval

4


Glossary of abbreviations and terms Abbreviation / Term

Explanation

AGA

Australian Government Architecture

AGIMO

Australian Government Information Management Office

AoG

All-of-Government

CDM

Capability Delivery Model

CHM

Compiled HyperText Markup Language

CMMI

Capability Maturity Model® Integration

COBIT

Control OBjectives for Information Technology

DIA

Department of Internal Affairs

EA

Enterprise Architecture

EAMMF

GAO‟s Enterprise Architecture Maturity Model Framework

FONZ

Functions Of New Zealand

FPR

FEAF Performance Reference model

FSR

FEAF Service Reference model

FTR

FEAF Technology Reference model

GAO

USA General Accounting Office

GAR

GEA-NZ Process Activity Reference model

GBR

GEA-NZ Business Reference model

GEA-NZ

Government Enterprise Architecture for New Zealand

GEAG

Government Enterprise Architecture Group

GIF

GEA-NZ Interoperability Framework

GIR

GEA-NZ Information Reference model

GTS

Government Technology Services division of DIA

ICT

Information and Communications Technologies

IEC

International Electrotechnical Commission

ISO

International Standards Organisation

ITIL

Information Technology Infrastructure Library

(NZ)FEAF

(New Zealand) Federated Enterprise Architecture Framework

MSP

Managing Successful Programmes

OGC

UK Government‟s Office of Government Commerce

P3M3

Portfolio, Programme and Project Management Maturity Model

P3O

Portfolio, Programme, and Project Offices


5

Abbreviation / Term

Explanation

PRINCE2

Management of PRojects IN Controlled Environments

RM

Reference Model

ROI

Return On Investment

SONZ

Subjects Of New Zealand

TBC

To Be Confirmed

TOGAF

The Open Group Architecture Framework

ToR

Terms of Reference

References No.

Title

N/A

Refer to Section Appendix A.

Author

Version

Date

Notes: In this document, items in [square brackets] such as [3] refer and hyperlink to source document references in Appendix A.

6


Contents Document control

3

Document approval

4

Glossary of abbreviations and terms

5

References

6

Executive Summary

9

1. 1.1 1.2

1.3

Document purpose, scope and structure Document purpose Document scope Inclusions Exclusions Document structure

10 10 10 10 10 10

2.

Context for this document

11

3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6

The GEA-NZ is important for All-of-Government ICT The GEA-NZ supports Better Public Services The GEA-NZ supports Directions and Priorities for Government ICT The GEA-NZ supports „Open and Transparent Government‟ The GEA-NZ supports the Government Enterprise Architecture Group ToR The GEA-NZ supports „Rethink Online‟ The GEA-NZ supports other Government legislation, policies, codes and plans

12 13 14 18 19 19 19

4.

External documents have informed, and will inform, GEA-NZ

19

5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10

Relationships within the GEA-NZ suite of documents GEA-NZ relationship to the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap GEA-NZ Strategic Contexts GEA-NZ Foundation Principles GEA-NZ Glossary of Terms GEA-NZ Architecture Standards GEA-NZ Strategic Service Visions GEA-NZ Whitepapers GEA-NZ Viewpoints GEA-NZ Image Library GEA-NZ Model GEA-NZ Model Structure GEA-NZ Regions and Zones GEA-NZ Reference Models GEA-NZ Reference Models to be developed or reviewed GEA-NZ Framework Numbering

20 20 22 23 24 24 24 25 25 25 26 26 28 35 41 43

6. 6.1 6.2

Risks associated with the GEA-NZ Risks inherent within the GEA-NZ Risks of not putting the GEA-NZ into action

45 45 46

7.

Governance for the GEA-NZ

47


7

8.

Evolution of GEA-NZ v2.0: past and future

50

9.

What might the target state for GEA-NZ look like?

52

Appendix A Source documents

55

Tables Table 1: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7: Table 8: Table 9:

GEA-NZ Contributions to Delivering Better Public Services Key GEA-NZ Zone Alignments to Directions and Priorities GEA-NZ Contributions to Directions and Priorities for Government ICT – Future Goals GEA-NZ Contributions to NZ Data and Information Management Principles Roadmap Capability Streams ≡ GEA-NZ Architecture Zones Roadmap Capability Stream Status Categories GEA-NZ Foundation Principles GEA-NZ Key Risks Key GEA-NZ Governance Groups and Functions

13 14 17 18 20 21 23 45 47

Figures Figure 1: Document Tree for this GEA-NZ Context Document Figure 2: Strategic Capability Planning Context Figure 3: Example Strategic Context Diagram for Channels and Touchpoints Figure 4: GEA-NZ v2.0 Tiered Model Structure Figure 5: Executive View of GEA-NZ v2.0 Figure 6: GEA-NZ v2.0 Business Region Figure 7: GEA-NZ v2.0 ICT Region with Zones and Blocks Figure 8: GEA-NZ v2.0 Technical Reference Architecture Metamodel Figure 9: GEA-NZ v2.0 Business Reference (GBR) Model Figure 10: FEAF Service Reference (FSR) Model Figure 11: FEAF Technology Reference (FTR) Model Figure 12: FEAF Performance Reference (FPR) Model Figure 13: GEA NZ v2.0 Reference Models Overview Figure 14: GEA-NZ Process Activity Reference (GAR) Model Concept Figure 15: GEA-NZ Information Reference (GIR) Model Concept Figure 16: GEA-NZ v2.0 Interoperability Framework (GIF) Figure 17: GEA-NZ v2.0 Framework Numbering Schema Figure 18: Governance Entities for GEA-NZ Figure 19: Roadmap Common Capability Delivery Model - Governance Gates and Artefacts Figure 20: Evolution of GEA NZ to Version 2.0

8

11 16 22 27 29 31 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 47 49 51


Executive Summary At the heart of both the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT and Better Public Services initiatives is the intention that agencies collaborate to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness. Common approaches are to be adopted for common needs. Hence there is a need for a common language and classification framework to describe business processes, ICT capabilities and solutions common across All-of-Government. The GEA-NZ provides this common language and classification framework. The GEA-NZ is descriptive, rather than prescriptive. Its focus is on classifying and describing business and ICT capabilities that enable sharing and re-use among agencies. The GEA-NZ has not been developed to replace existing agency business and ICT development plans or architectures, but to complement them while facilitating All-of-Government optimisation. The primary purpose of the GEA-NZ is to inform and guide the development of Government agencies‟ business processes and ICT infrastructures so that they can more effectively deliver Government‟s goals by making use of common approaches to common needs.

This document: 

Introduces and defines the GEA-NZ



Provides line of sight between the GEA-NZ and key Government policies and legislation



Links the GEA-NZ to the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap



Presents the foundation principles underlying development of the GEA-NZ



Discusses the risks of adopting and the risks of potentially not adopting the GEA-NZ



Describes the governance arrangements applying to the GEA-NZ



Describes past and future evolution of the GEA-NZ



Proposes a means of monitoring the effectiveness of the GEA-NZ over time


9

1.

Document purpose, scope and structure

1.1

Document purpose

This document answers questions such as: 

What is the GEA-NZ v2.0?



Why is the GEA-NZ v2.0 important to All-of-Government ICT and business outcomes?



How can the GEA-NZ v2.0 assist in delivering Government‟s goals for ICT?

1.2

Document scope

Inclusions This document focuses on describing the motivations for constructing and using the GEA-NZ v2.0, such as the directives of the Government of New Zealand, good practices performed in other government administrations and good practices performed in commercial enterprises. This document also provides a high level overview of the GEA-NZ v2.0 content, describing its structure and internal and external linkages.

Exclusions This document does not address the details of using the software used to construct and manage the GEA-NZ v2.0 work-in-progress model. This document does not describe in detail the composition of component models within the GEA-NZ v2.0.

1.3

Document structure

This document: 

Provides line of sight between the GEA-NZ v2.0 and key Government policies and legislation, including: 

Better Public Services Results [1] – [6]



Open Government [7] – [9]



Directions and Priorities for Government ICT [12], [13]



Other Government legislation and policies [14] – [30]



Links the GEA-NZ v2.0 to the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap [98]



Presents foundation principles underlying development of the GEA-NZ v2.0



Describes the composition of the GEA-NZ v2.0 and relationships internal and external to it


10

2.

Context for this document

Figure 1 presents a document tree for this document: 2012 Jun 25 Better Public Services Results, refer Section 3.1

[1] – [6]

2010 Oct 4 Directions and Priorities for Government ICT, refer Section 3.2

[12] – [13]

2012 Jun 15 Open Government, refer Section 3.3

[7] – [9]

[10]

2011 Aug Government Enterprise Architecture Group, refer Section 3.4

2011 Jul Rethink Online, refer Section 3.5

[11]

[14] – [30]

Other Government policies and legislation, refer Section 3.6

[31] – [51]

Other Government Reference Documents, refer Section 3.6

[52] – [95]

External sources of good practices for enterprise architecture, refer Section 4

Government Enterprise Architecture for New Zealand (GEA-NZ) Version 2.0 suite, refer Section 5 Government Common Capabilities Roadmap, refer Section 5.1 Strategic Contexts, refer Section 5.2

GEA-NZ v2.0 Context Document **This Document**

Foundation Principles, refer Section 5.3 Glossary of Terms, refer Section 5.4 Architecture Standards, refer Section 5.5 Strategic Service Visions, refer Section 5.6 Whitepapers, refer Section 5.7 Viewpoints, refer Section 5.8 Image Library, refer Section 5.9 Model, refer Section 5.10

Metamodel and Tiered Model Construct, refer Section 5.10

Figure 1: Document Tree for this GEA-NZ Context Document


11

3.

The GEA-NZ is important for All-of-Government ICT

Both the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT and Better Public Services focus on agencies collaborating to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness, with an expectation that common approaches will be adopted for common needs. To facilitate the implementation of common approaches there is a need for a common language and classification framework to identify and describe those business processes, ICT capabilities and solutions that are common across All-of-Government. The GEA-NZ provides this common language and classification framework. The GEA-NZ is descriptive, rather than prescriptive. It classifies and describes business and ICT capabilities in order to enable sharing and re-use among agencies. The GEA-NZ has not been developed to replace existing agency business and ICT development plans or architectures. It complements them, while facilitating All-of-Government optimisation. The GEA-NZ is a single unifying framework and common language for enterprise architecture that Government agencies can use to describe common capabilities and optimise delivery of All-of-Government goals. As summarised in Section 5.10 and in Section 8, GEA-NZ is undergoing continual improvement. Version 2.0 is the baselined version as of October 2012. The primary purpose of the GEA-NZ is to inform and guide the development of Government agencies‟ business processes and ICT infrastructures so that they can more effectively deliver Government‟s goals. The GEA-NZ facilitates: 

Defining the measurement of results



Comparing proposals for capability development



Identifying and reducing duplicated effort



Identifying oversights



Identifying opportunities for re-use and reducing the prevalence of „point‟ solutions

The qualitative outcomes for All-of-Government and agency ICT from adopting the GEA-NZ include: 

Reducing the risks of fragmented ICT development



Reducing the costs of duplicated effort



Improving the quality of deployed solutions



Improving the sustainability of deployed solutions



Improving the ability to share information between government agencies



Improving the ability for information held by government agencies to be accessed and used by external users

Traceability from the GEA-NZ v2.0 to Government goals is illustrated in this Section.


12

3.1

The GEA-NZ supports Better Public Services

Within the fifth theme of the Better Public Services programme [1] “Improving interaction with government” two target result areas are defined: “9. New Zealand businesses have a one-stop online shop for all government advice and support they need to run and grow their business. 10. New Zealanders can complete their transactions with the Government easily in a digital environment.” The GEA-NZ v2.0 supports both of these results areas through providing models to plan for better integration and presentation of government services and transactional capabilities in digital environments. In addition to the results targets 9 and 10, there are several other references in the Better Public Services documentation that provide motivation for activity and deliverables from work on the GEA-NZ v2.0. These references include but are not limited to: 

Functional leadership, and



Better services and value for money

GEA-NZ v2.0 supports the recommendations contained in the Better Public Services Advisory Group Report [31] as summarised in Table 1. Table 1: GEA-NZ Contributions to Delivering Better Public Services

Better Public Services Goals: Government agencies working more closely together and organising themselves around results that make a difference to New Zealand

GEA-NZ Provides: A single unifying architecture framework with a common language to facilitate cross-agency teamwork and improved efficiency

Sharing functions and services, purchasing goods and services, and developing systems together

An architecture framework constructed to highlight opportunities to share common approaches to common needs

Greater use of technology and a shift to digital channels, so New Zealanders can more easily access government services

A consistent roadmap and underlying architecture focused on development of common capabilities such as Web services

Agencies improving how they measure and report on performance

A common language that supports more consistent means of reporting on performance

Greater responsiveness within the public sector to the needs and expectations of New Zealanders, and a commitment to continuous improvement

A flexible framework that can incorporate new „Viewpoints‟ to meet the evolving needs of agencies – refer Section 5.8, and as the GEA-NZ matures a focus on continuous improvement – refer Section 9


13

3.2

The GEA-NZ supports Directions and Priorities for Government ICT

The GEA-NZ v2.0 supports Directions and Priorities for Government ICT [12], [13] by supporting activities such as: 

Using cross-government ICT products and services to meet relevant business needs where they are available, unless there is a compelling business reason not to



Working with the lead agencies providing such products and services to ensure that they meet business purposes



Aligning agency ICT strategies with the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT



Strengthening cross-government business capability and the business fit of common capability ICT products

Table 2 summarises the key alignments from the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT to GEA-NZ Zones illustrated in Figure 5 on Page 29 and . Table 2: Key GEA-NZ Zone Alignments to Directions and Priorities

Directions and Priorities for Government ICT Direction 1: Provide clear leadership and direction

Key Related GEA-NZ Zones 2.1 People / Process Zone

Priority 1.1: Enhance governance arrangements led by Chief Executives with stronger leadership of system level ICT investment and performance.

2.1 People / Process Zone

Priority 1.2: Align agency ICT management with the ICT Directions and Priorities.

3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 1.3: Develop funding models that incentivise collaboration across government.

2.3 Investment Zone

Direction 2: Supporting open and transparent government

3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone 3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone

Priority 2.1: Improve public access to government data and information

3.2 Communications Zone 3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone 3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 2.2: Support the public, communities and 2.1 People / Process Zone business to contribute to policy development 3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone and performance improvement Priority 2.3: Create market opportunities and services through re-use of government information.

2.2 Information / Data Zone 3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone 3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone

Direction 3: Improving integrated service delivery

3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone

14


Directions and Priorities for Government ICT Priority 3.1: Prioritise investment in shared solutions for integrated, multi-channel, service delivery across government.

Key Related GEA-NZ Zones 3.2 Communications Zone 3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone 3.4 Business Processes and Integration Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 3.2: Improve the management and content of government's web presence.

3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone

Direction 4: Strengthening cross-government business capability

3.1 End User Devices Zone 3.4 Business Processes and Integration Zone 3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 4.1: Rationalise investment, procurement and delivery of ICT infrastructure and software.

3.1 End User Devices Zone 3.2 Communications Zone 3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 4.2: Reduce duplication by standardising and consolidating common business processes.

2.2 Information / Data Zone 3.4 Business Processes and Integration Zone 3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone

Priority 4.3: Establish authoritative data sources to improve efficiency of business processes.

2.2 Information / Data Zone 3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone

Priority 4.4: Align training and recruitment of the State Services workforce with the ICT Directions and Priorities.

2.1 People / Process Zone

Direction 5: Improving operational ICT management

3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 5.1 Improve the effectiveness of legacy system asset management

3.1 End User Devices Zone 3.2 Communications Zone 3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone 3.4 Business Processes and Integration Zone 3.5 Business and Operational Functions Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 5.2 Improve ICT cost structures by leveraging operational scale across government.

2.3 Investment Zone 3.1 End User Devices Zone 3.2 Communications Zone 3.3 Channels and Touchpoints Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Priority 5.3 Engage with the ICT industry to improve innovation and reduce costs.

2.1 People / Process Zone 3.6 Foundation Zone

Figure 2 on Page 16 is taken from the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap [98]. It illustrates how GEA-NZ provides a common language and the links from the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT to both the GEA-NZ and the Roadmap.


15

Figure 2: Strategic Capability Planning Context


16

Table 3 summarises the GEA-NZ contributions to the future state goals of the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT. Table 3: GEA-NZ Contributions to Directions and Priorities for Government ICT – Future Goals

Directions and Priorities for Government ICT – Future State Goals: Government delivers services as a seamless customer experience.

GEA-NZ Provides: A unifying framework and language to describe common customer needs and common solutions to meet those needs

ICT investment is focused and prioritised.

A unifying framework and language to:  Identify and reduce duplicated effort  Identify opportunities for re-use  Reduce the prevalence of „point‟ solutions

Government information and data is used by the market to deliver innovative services.

Standards for interfaces to facilitate the access and consumption of Government information and data

ICT systems are designed and run in a way that meets privacy and security requirements.

A unifying framework and language that assists in identifying and addressing requirements for privacy and security

Leadership puts priority on business improvement and common capability.

A unifying framework and language to assist in defining the measurement of results and comparing proposals in common capabilities

Customers and innovators outside government are helping to improve our services.

A published framework and language that supports Government agencies and external providers in working collaboratively to improve existing and develop new services

Common approaches are adopted for common needs, shifting the focus of agency ICT functions towards the effective delivery of core business objectives and priorities.

A unifying framework and language to describe common business processes

New and innovative ideas and resources are pooled and built on.

A unifying framework and language that helps identify opportunities for re-use of new and innovative ideas and resources

ICT operational management is more cost effective.

A unifying framework and language that helps identify and reduce rework and the prevalence of „point‟ solutions

Greater ICT literacy in the State Services workforce

A unifying framework and language to describe common customer needs and common solutions to meet those needs


17

3.3

The GEA-NZ supports ‘Open and Transparent Government’

The GEA-NZ v2.0 supports „Open and Transparent Government‟ [7], [8], [9] through recognising the need for, and providing placeholders for, models for management of government-sourced and government-managed information in digital environments. Table 4 summarises the GEA-NZ contributions to the New Zealand Data and Information Management Principles. Table 4: GEA-NZ Contributions to NZ Data and Information Management Principles

New Zealand Data and Information Management Principles (extracts): Readily Available Open data and information are released proactively and without discrimination.

GEA-NZ Provides: Unified models and language to plan for management of government-sourced and government-managed information.

They are discoverable and accessible and released online.

Standards for interfaces to facilitate the access and consumption of Government information and data.

Trusted and Authoritative Data and information support the purposes for which they were collected and are accurate, relevant, timely, consistent and without bias in that context.

Unified models and language to plan for management of government-sourced and government-managed information.

Where possible there is an identified authoritative single source. Well Managed Agencies are stewards of government-held data and information and must provide and require good practices which manage the data and information over their life-cycle, including catering for technological obsolescence and long-term preservation and access.

A unifying framework and language to describe common business processes. Standards for interfaces to facilitate the access and consumption of Government information and data

Good practices also include collaborating with other agencies and the public, facilitating access, strengthening awareness, and supporting international cooperation. Reusable Data and information are released:  at source, with the highest possible level of granularity  in re-usable, machine-readable format  with appropriate metadata; and  in aggregate or modified forms if they cannot be released in their original state.


Standards for interfaces to facilitate the access and consumption of Government information and data

18

3.4

The GEA-NZ supports the Government Enterprise Architecture Group ToR

The GEA-NZ v2.0 is a deliverable of the functions described in the Government Enterprise Architecture Group (GEAG) Terms of Reference (ToR) [10]. In particular, the GEAG is responsible for leading the development and governance of the GEA-NZ. This includes approving standards, and championing and communicating the key messages of the GEA-NZ principles, associated models and frameworks.

3.5

The GEA-NZ supports ‘Rethink Online’

The GEA-NZ v2.0 supports Rethink Online [11] through delivering: 

A unifying framework and language to enable agencies to more easily be able to share investments in technology, designs and contracts between agencies



Clearer identification of duplicate channels, highlighting opportunities for rationalisation



Identification of common initiatives incorporated in the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap [98] for reuse by other agencies as part of a reusable online environment for government

3.6

The GEA-NZ supports other Government legislation, policies, codes and plans

The GEA-NZ v2.0 supports and is also supported by various Acts and Government reports, issues paper, declarations, plans, strategies and reference models as listed in references [14] to [30].

4.

External documents have informed, and will inform, GEA-NZ

Some of the externally-sourced artefacts that have informed, and will inform, development of the GEA-NZ v2.0 include: 

Examples of good practices from other government administrations, for example references [52] to [66]



Examples of good practices as documented in standards, quasi-standards or emergent standards, for example references [67] to [74] and [91] to [95]



Examples, case studies and other information reported at conferences and in journals, for example references [75] to [90]


19

5.

Relationships within the GEA-NZ suite of documents

The internal structure of the GEA-NZ v2.0 suite of documents is illustrated in the bottom half of Figure 1 on Page 11. Further details of these documents and their internal relationships are presented in this Section.

5.1

GEA-NZ relationship to the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap

The Government Common Capabilities Roadmap (Iteration 2.0) [98] is a collection of plans that identify changes to common capabilities to deliver the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT [12] . The relationships between the Roadmap and the GEA-NZ are illustrated in Figure 2 on Page 16. The Roadmap categorises its „Common Capability Specifications‟ into six „Capability Streams‟ that are equivalent to the „Architecture Zones‟ of the GEA-NZ v2.0, as described in Table 5. Table 5: Roadmap Capability Streams ≡ GEA-NZ Architecture Zones

Capability Stream ≡ Architecture Zone End User Devices

Description Devices used to access services and peripheral devices, such as printers. Includes end user computing hardware and applications.

Communications

Communications technologies including Internet and private networks, voice, video and multi-channel communications.

Channels and Touchpoints

Mechanisms used to access service delivery capabilities from end user devices via communications capabilities.

Business Processes and Integration

Means to orchestrate and manage services offered in Business and Operational Functions capabilities. Uses services such as authentication and integration services. Includes Enterprise Applications Integration, Enterprise Service Bus technologies, workflow management and data integration.

Business and Operational Functions

Core business services capabilities. Includes mission critical business data and information, and the systems that perform business operations on this data.

Foundation

Capabilities that underpin traverse and support other capabilities. Examples include software running on common infrastructure, common security systems and common business or ICT management systems.

Within the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap [98] each „Capability‟ is further categorised into time-dependent status categories, as described in Table 6.


20

Table 6: Roadmap Capability Stream Status Categories

Status Concept

Description Ideas that require further ratification before being established as projects. Considered to have the potential to provide:  Cross-agency common approaches to common needs  Cross-agency improvements in efficiency and effectiveness The availability date is provided as guide only. If a Common Capability in Concept is not ratified, it may be removed or deferred for review in the future.

Planning

A project that has been initiated but is not yet in execution.

Development

A project that has progressed to execution. This may include pilot implementation with selected agencies.

General Availability

The capability is available to agencies.


21

5.2

GEA-NZ Strategic Contexts

As part of the development of Common Capability Specifications, single page „Strategic Context‟ diagrams have been prepared. An example Strategic Context diagram for the Channels and Touchpoints Capability Stream/Architecture Zone is illustrated in Figure 3 below. It is intended to evolve these Strategic Contexts once the Government ICT Strategy 2017 has been completed and published.

Government Common Capabilities Roadmap – Strategic Context Architecture Zone / Capability Stream: Associated Building Blocks:

Current State

Future State

Internet Access

Gateway Access

Call Centre

Agency

Business

Correspondence

Citizen

Face-to-Face

Internet Access

Gateway Access

Business ?

Correspondence

Call Centre

Agency

Face-to-Face

Citizen ?

Agency

Agency

Agency

Unified Channels and Touchpoints Agency

Agency

Agency

Current State – Synopsis • • • • • • • •

Agency

Agency

Agency

Agency

Agency

Agency

Agency

Future State – Synopsis

Agency centric service delivery to citizens and business with • Engaging with citizens, business and partners where, how and multiple web sites, call centres and points of presence when they want Service delivery reflects government structure rather than citizen • Online is the most common way of getting government services needs, with few joint services delivered because this channel best meets user needs • Service delivery is structured to support Limited ability to meet citizen demand for citizen needs, not government‟s online information and services Common Capability – Key Enablers structure, with channels and touchpoints Fragmented user experiences with varying clustered around shared topics and levels of quality and maturity • Online Presence: Reusable audiences Duplicated investment in infrastructure, web environment and shared • Service delivery is coordinated and content and capability online platform collaborative across government Minimal collaboration and integrated • Voice Presence: Reusable , • Shared access to resources, from service delivery shared voice platform technology components to reusable Fragmented, agency centric planning and • Collaboration: Common, designs to shared supplier agreements governance secure shared workspaces, • Improved cross agency collaboration and Lack of clarity around overall costs and intranets and other collaboration interoperability effectiveness tools for State Sector employees • Costs and effectiveness are monitored • Gateway Services: Multiand understood channel gateway for G2G, G2B • More flexibility to manage changes in and G2C messaging customer demand, technology trends and • Service Delivery: Integrated government needs multi-channel, multi-agency • Increased use of B2B and e-Commerce citizen-centric service delivery interactions platforms • Increased use of partners to deliver information and services

Figure 3: Example Strategic Context Diagram for Channels and Touchpoints


22

5.3

GEA-NZ Foundation Principles

Foundation principles developed for the GEA-NZ v2.0 are presented in Table 7. Table 7: GEA-NZ Foundation Principles

Principle Descriptive

Description GEA-NZ provides a common language and classification framework to describe common capabilities for sharing among agencies. It does not mandate methods for developing agency Enterprise Architectures; however GEA-NZ provides an approach that is designed to be used to accelerate their development.

Just enough

Enterprise Architecture‟s outcome should be better informed decisions to deliver improved business results. So „just enough‟ GEA-NZ related work should be undertaken to support better decision making – rather than crafting elaborate artefacts or architectures for their own sake. A consequence of the Pareto principle: the ‟80-20‟ rule.

Pragmatic

In the sense of „of practical significance and importance for immediate decision making‟ – rather than delivery to a notion of idealised completeness. Another consequence of the Pareto principle, sometimes expressed as „the perfect is the enemy of the good‟.

Incremental development

Rather than trying to achieve too much in a „big bang‟ approach; GEA-NZ has been and will continue to be developed and used in a lightweight manner. „Big bang‟ approaches have high risks. Incremental development for GEA-NZ is prioritised to focus on enabling the allof-government programmes associated with delivery of the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT and Better Public Services outcomes.

Collaborative

Agencies are grappling with their own issues and demands. Rather than demanding a prescriptive approach to agency documentation, the intent is to allow flexibility for „alignment‟ through translation to the GEA-NZ common language and classification framework. It does not impose conditions of documentation conformance or compliance.

Knowledge capture and sharing

Agencies invest in solutions to achieve their agency specific business outcomes. These solutions may comprise components and knowledge valuable for re-use across agencies. Re-use reduces duplicated investment. The GEA-NZ common language and classification framework provides a single unifying framework to capture knowledge from agencies for sharing across allof-government.

Reuse of good practices

Considerable investment in common language and classification frameworks for government enterprises has been undertaken elsewhere. GEA-NZ builds on these experiences – for example from the Australian Government Architecture (AGA) and USA FEAF, and it includes prior work from the New Zealand e-GIF and FEAF.


23

5.4

GEA-NZ Glossary of Terms

The GEA-NZ Glossary of Terms version 1 is available on the GEAG Shared Workspace at: https://see.govt.nz/geag/GEANZ/GEA-NZ%20Glossary%20of%20Terms/GEANZ%20Glossary%20of%20Terms%20v1.0.docx The purpose of the GEA-NZ v2.0 Glossary of Terms is to: 

Establish a common language to promote consistency and collaboration among the GEA-NZ suite of artefacts



Provide the single source of truth for terms used across Government agency architecture practices



Provide an artefact to capture terms and knowledge that will grow over time

5.5

GEA-NZ Architecture Standards

The purpose of a GEA-NZ Architecture Standard is to articulate criteria (some of which may be mandatory), guidelines or best practices to which target architectures defined in the GEA-NZ must or should conform.[99] Paraphrasing TOGAF 9.1 [73], standards typically fall into three classes: 1. Legislative, Regulatory and Policy Obligations Standards mandated by legislation or government directive and therefore agencies must comply with them. 2. All-of-Government Enabling Industry Standards Standards established by industry bodies, then selected for All-of-Government adoption. Industry standards facilitate interoperation and sharing across agencies. But they fall outside of the control of government agencies and therefore must be actively monitored. 3. Agency Standards Standards set within an agency based on business aspiration and internal business enablement, e.g. selection of standard applications to support portfolio consolidation. The GEA-NZ v2.0 model (refer Section 5.10 below) has inherited previous ICT standards such as the Government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF) version 3.3 dating from 2008 [48], as well other Standards such as Authentication Standards. These standards applicable to the ICT region are now undergoing review and update to reflect contemporary standards. Other standards will continue to be evolved to capture other aspects such as product and provider standards.

5.6

GEA-NZ Strategic Service Visions

As the GEA-NZ develops, „GEA-NZ Strategic Service Visions‟ will define objective future states (also termed „to be‟ or „target‟ states) for services. As illustrated in the bottom right hand corner of Figure 2 on Page 16, a Strategic Service Vision presents a summary high level scoping document and draft vision for a topic to be considered for entry as a Concept in the Common Capabilities Roadmap.

24


5.7

GEA-NZ Whitepapers

As the GEA-NZ develops, GEA-NZ Whitepapers will summarise strategic visions, or future states, for particular parts of the GEA-NZ, or architecture topics. Whitepapers will be used to: 

Better understand issues, and / or



Inform decisions about, and / or



Resolve problems related to the GEA-NZ [99]

A whitepaper is a concise view of a specific topic to assist development of an idea or Concept.

5.8

GEA-NZ Viewpoints

A GEA-NZ „Viewpoint‟ sets context and defines GEA-NZ detail from a specific stakeholder perspective, such as the „Functional Components‟ required to deliver a particular business outcome. Business outcomes are generally constructed from more than one Service and more than one ICT component. So a Viewpoint will likely include processes and information sourced from across the GEA-NZ framework. By way of example, a citizen centric transactional Web presence would most likely require multiple services and multiple capabilities from multiple Blocks across GEA-NZ, e.g.: 

„Channels and TouchPoints‟



„Business Process and Integration‟, and



„Business and Operational Functions‟

5.9

GEA-NZ Image Library

The purpose of the GEA-NZ v2.0 image library is to provide a central readily accessible repository of images that can be re-used in the GEA-NZ v2.0 suite of artefacts, and to aid agencies in developing their own artefacts. The GEA-NZ v2.0 Image Library is available on the GEAG Shared Workspace at: https://see.govt.nz/geag/GEANZ/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2fgeag%2fGEANZ%2fGEA% 2dNZ%20Image%20Library&FolderCTID=&View=%7b4347A8A8%2d4802%2d4ACE%2dB701%2d AD733EE2B134%7d The GEA-NZ v2.0 Image Library contains images in the following categories: 

GEA-NZ



Government ICT Roadmap – Common Capability - Iteration 1.0



Reference Models - FEAF 0.9.2


25

5.10 GEA-NZ Model The modelling tool used to instantiate the GEA-NZ v2.0 models is OpenText‟s “ProVision for Enterprise Architecture”, http://www.opentext.com/2/global/products/products-business-processmanagement/products-opentext-provision-for-enterprise-architecture.htm Each model includes: 

A custom modelling language



Custom properties



Custom gallery objects

These models are designed to capture complex information in a consistent manner. Key information can be exported from the models in a variety of formats to enable consumption. For example diagrams, spreadsheets and text can be exported and amalgamated into other artefacts. The models are managed by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) Government Technology Services Architecture team.

GEA-NZ Model Structure The GEA-NZ v2.0 model has a three-tiered structure, illustrated in Figure 4 on Page 27.

26


Figure 4: GEA-NZ v2.0 Tiered Model Structure


27

The GEA-NZ Framework Tier This tier is the top tier illustrated in Figure 4. It enables the single unifying framework, information categorisation, and structure for the common language used by the other two tiers in the model. It provides the overall model framework and contains the Reference Models, which are described below. It does not contain content such as standards, common capabilities, or technologies.

The All-of-Government GEA-NZ Tier This is the middle tier illustrated in Figure 4. It is also called the GEA-NZ Master model. This tier is built on the structure and classifications inherited from the GEA-NZ Framework tier. It enables All-of-Government efficiency by including All-of-Government applicable metadata and models such as reference architectures, patterns, common capabilities, technologies, and traceability to Government policies. The Government Common Capabilities Roadmap is represented at this tier.

The Agency (e.g. DIA) GEA-NZ Model Tier This is the bottom tier illustrated in Figure 4. This tier is designed for agency use, including for example agency-specific standards. As with the All-of-Government tier, the Agency tier also inherits the structure and classification from the Framework tier to enable the identification of areas of commonality. Where applicable for an Agency, the Agency model can reuse content from the All-of-Government tier. Furthermore, the development of Agency tier models can provide content (e.g. reference architectures and patterns) that could be fed back for reuse at the All-of-Government tier.

GEA-NZ Regions and Zones The GEA-NZ model has 3 major subdivisions called „Regions‟, 2 of which are further subdivided into „Zones‟. For GEA-NZ v2.0, the ICT Zones are themselves further sub-divided into „Blocks‟. An executive view of the GEA-NZ is illustrated in Figure 5 on Page 29.


28

Figure 5: Executive View of GEA-NZ v2.0


29

GEA-NZ Strategy Region The Strategy Region contains the strategy and planning viewpoints documenting the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT and other applicable references. The strategy region informs the architecture and roadmap direction of travel. It ensures direct line of sight so that strategies can be translated into business outcomes.

GEA-NZ Business Region The Business Region contains 3 Zones:

People / Process This Zone addresses the People and Processes that supports the business

Information / Data This Zone addresses the Information / Data that supports the business

Investment This Zone addresses Investment, which is an enabler for development of the capabilities in the roadmaps

The Business Region uses or will use 4 reference models, refer to GEA-NZ Reference Models below for further explanation: 

The „GEA-NZ Business Reference Model‟ (GBR)



The „FEAF Performance Reference Model‟ (FPR) which it shares with the ICT Region



The „GEA-NZ Process Activity Reference Model‟ (GAR) – to be developed post GEA-NZ v2.0



The „GEA-NZ Information Reference Model‟ (GIR) – to be developed post GEA-NZ v2.0

The structure of the Business Region is illustrated in Figure 6 on Page 31.


30

Figure 6: GEA-NZ v2.0 Business Region


31

GEA-NZ ICT Region The ICT Region contains 6 Zones:

End User Devices This Zone addresses devices used by state sector employees and clients to access common services, as well as peripheral devices such as printers.

Communications The Communications Zone includes Internet and private government networks, voice, video and multi-channel communications technologies.

Channels and Touchpoints The Channels and Touchpoints Zone is a group of assets that make services available to end users. The service consumer touches the service delivery capability here from their client device, via the Communications Zone.

Business Processes and Integration The Business Processes and Integration Zone models capabilities to orchestrate and manage services offered in the Business and Operational Functions layer, and utilises services such as authentication.

Business and Operational Functions This Zone provides core business services, contains mission critical business data and information and the systems which perform business operations on this data.

Foundation Infrastructure The Foundation Zone provides the common infrastructure, security and management supporting the other ICT Zones


32

The ICT Region has 4 reference models, refer to discussion below for further explanation: 

The „FEAF Service Reference‟ (FSR) model



The „FEAF Technology Reference‟ (FTR) model



The „FEAF Performance Reference Model‟ (FPR) which it shares with the Business Region



The „GEA-NZ Interoperability Framework‟ (GIF)

The structure of the GEA-NZ v2.0 ICT Region down to Block level is illustrated in Figure 7 on Page 34.


33

Figure 7: GEA-NZ v2.0 ICT Region with Zones and Blocks


34

To facilitate understanding and communication of key concepts to key stakeholders, Functional Components from across various GEA-NZ Blocks can be aggregated within the model into „Functional Groupings‟, as illustrated in Figure 8.

Figure 8: GEA-NZ v2.0 Technical Reference Architecture Metamodel

GEA-NZ Reference Models The GEA-NZ has several „Reference Model‟ classification taxonomies. Existing Reference Models include: 

The „GEA-NZ Business Reference‟ (GBR) model – applicable to the Business Region



The „FEAF Service Reference‟ (FSR) model – applicable to the ICT Region



The „FEAF Technology Reference‟ (FTR) model – applicable to the ICT Region, particularly the Foundation Zone



The „FEAF Performance Reference Model‟ (FPR) is a Reference Model under development applicable to both the ICT and Business Regions. It is included to level 2 as a guide to the sorts of measures to be included in a GEA-NZ Performance Reference (GPR) model.

GEA-NZ Business Reference’ (GBR) Model The Business Region has a „GEA-NZ Business Reference‟ (GBR) model that provides a functional (as opposed to organisational) view of the Government‟s lines of business. This functional view decomposes the Government‟s internal operations and services independently of the agencies performing them. The GBR model has been adapted from the Australian Government Architecture


35

(AGA) v3.0 and from the NZ FEAF V0.9.2 BRM – specifically the Functions Of New Zealand (FONZ). The GBR has 4 „Areas‟: 1. GEA-NZ Services For New Zealand (SONZ) Describes the mission and purpose of the New Zealand Government in terms of the services it provides both to and on behalf of New Zealand individuals, businesses and other organisations, including provision of externally-focused government services and the obligations to support and protect the nation's population. 2. Service Paths Business Area Represents the functions used by the New Zealand Government in providing its Services for New Zealand. A Service Path provides an avenue, or pathway, through which government services are provided to New Zealand individuals, businesses and other organisations. A given Service for New Zealand may involve a number of these avenues. 3. Services Support Business Area Includes: Governance, Planning and Budgeting, Public Affairs and Revenue Collection 4. Management of Government Resources Includes: Administrative Management, Business Management, Financial Management, Human Resources Management, ICT Management, and Information and Knowledge Management

The structure of the GBR is illustrated in Figure 9.

Figure 9: GEA-NZ v2.0 Business Reference (GBR) Model

36


FEAF Service Reference (FSR) model The FSR identifies and classifies ICT services to provide a foundation for sharing and re-use across agencies. It is adapted from the US FEAF v2.3 Technical Reference Model. The FSR has 7 „Service Domains‟ which are further subdivided into „Service Types‟, each of which is further subdivided into „Service Components‟. The FSR Service Domains are: 1. Customer Services 2. Process Automation 3. Business Management Services 4. Digital Asset Services 5. Business Analytical Services 6. Back Office Services 7. Support Services

The structure of the FSR is illustrated in Figure 10.

Figure 10: FEAF Service Reference (FSR) Model


37

FEAF Technology Reference (FTR) model The FTR identifies and categorises standards and technologies that support the secure delivery, exchange and construction of the service components. It is adapted from the US FEAF v2.3 Technical Reference Model. The FTR has 4 „Service Areas‟, each of which is further subdivided into „Service Categories‟, each of which is further subdivided into „Service Standards‟. The FTR Service Areas are: 1. Service Access and Delivery 2. Service Platform and Infrastructure 3. Component Framework 4. Service Interface and Integration

The structure of the FTR is illustrated in Figure 11.

Figure 11: FEAF Technology Reference (FTR) Model


38

FEAF Performance Reference (FPR) model The Business and ICT Regions share a „GEA-NZ Performance Reference‟ (FPR) model that defines common output measurements. For GEA-NZ v2.0 the FPR model has been adapted from the US FEAF. The FPR contains 6 „Measurement Areas‟, each of which is further subdivided into „Measurement Categories‟, each of which is further subdivided into „Measurement Groupings‟. The FPR Measurement Areas are: 1. Mission and Business Results 2. Customer Results 3. Processes and Activities 4. Technology Measurement 5. Human Capital Measurement 6. Other Fixed Assets

The structure of the FPR is illustrated in Figure 12.

Figure 12: FEAF Performance Reference (FPR) Model

Relationships between Reference Models The relationships between the GBR, FSR and FTR are illustrated in Figure 13 on Page 40.


39

Figure 13: GEA NZ v2.0 Reference Models Overview


40

GEA-NZ Reference Models to be developed or reviewed Placeholders for Reference Models yet to be developed include: 

The „GEA-NZ Process Activity Reference Model‟ (GAR) – a placeholder for a model to be developed, applicable to the Business Region



The „GEA-NZ Information Reference Model‟ (GIR) – a placeholder for a model to be developed, applicable to the Business Region

GEA-NZ Process Activity Reference (GAR) Model The GAR will contain hierarchical process domains containing common process activities that can be used to identify similar processes across different lines of business and agencies A conceptual illustration of how the GAR might be structured is presented in Figure 14.

Figure 14: GEA-NZ Process Activity Reference (GAR) Model Concept


41

GEA-NZ Information Reference (GIR) Model The GIR will contain hierarchical information domains that will be used to classify similar information across government agencies A conceptual illustration of how the GIR might be structured is presented in Figure 15.

Figure 15: GEA-NZ Information Reference (GIR) Model Concept

GEA-NZ Interoperability Framework (GIF) The GEA-NZ Interoperability Framework (GIF) has subsumed the e-GIF version 3.3 dating from 2008 February. It has been and will continue to be refined to reflect contemporary standards. An illustration of how the GIF is currently structured is presented in Figure 16 on Page 43.


42

Figure 16: GEA-NZ v2.0 Interoperability Framework (GIF)

GEA-NZ Framework Numbering A consistent numbering schema has been adopted within the model to aid identification of levels within model hierarchies. The numbering schema is illustrated in Figure 17 on Page 44.


43

Figure 17: GEA-NZ v2.0 Framework Numbering Schema


44

6.

Risks associated with the GEA-NZ

Two general categories of risk are associated with the GEA-NZ v2.0: 

Risks inherent in developing and putting into action the GEA-NZ v2.0



Risks inherent in not putting the GEA-NZ v2.0 into action

6.1

Risks inherent within the GEA-NZ

Paraphrasing [61]: Like any programme that involves the development and maintenance of an enterprise asset, GEA-NZ v2.0 is intended to deliver specific capabilities and expected mission benefits for an estimated cost according to a defined schedule. Accordingly, agency enterprise architecture plans will face a myriad of risks that might affect the accomplishment of these commitments and thus should be proactively managed. These risks should be formally managed in accordance with relevant risk management guidance. To the extent that any of the core elements in this framework are not being satisfied, a risk to the programme will exist, although the severity of the risk may vary depending on the specific core element. For example, an agency that has developed a GEA-NZ v2.0 compliant methodology and associated tools, but lacks important information, data, or technology content in its enterprise architecture, risks developing systems that are not defined and designed in a manner that promotes interoperability. Currently identified key risks inherent in implementing the GEA-NZ v2.0 are presented in Table 8. Table 8: GEA-NZ Key Risks

Ref: Category: 1. Governance

Description: Inadequate management of risks

Managed By: DIA GTS Architecture

2.

Governance

Inadequate project management

DIA GTS Architecture

3.

Governance

Inadequate communication of the benefits of GEA-NZ

GEAG

4.

Governance

Inadequate attention to alignment with agency plans

ICT Council

5.

Governance

Inadequate agency commitment to alignment

ICT Council

6.

Governance

Inadequate change control

GEAG

7.

Human Resources

Inadequate skills development in agencies hinders uptake

ICT Council

8.

Human Resources

Loss of DIA staff skilled in implementation

DIA GTS Architecture

9.

Budget

Lack of funding to acquire staff and tools

ICT Council


45

Ref: Category: 10. Budget

Description: Inability to identify and execute „quick wins ‟

Managed By: GEAG

Other risks often termed „barriers‟ or „challenges‟. Examples include: 

Organisational parochialism



Cultural resistance to change



Attempting to do too much too quickly



Inadequate understanding of the purpose, content and value of enterprise architecture

6.2

Risks of not putting the GEA-NZ into action

Risks of not using GEA-NZ v2.0 largely result in failure to realise the potential benefits of adopting good practices for enterprise architecture, and perpetuation of: 

Inability to deliver Better Public Services Results 9 and 10 by not being able to effectively integrate together currently disparate agency ICT systems



Reduced ability to deliver to the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT by not being able to adequately identify and deliver common approaches to common needs



Fragmented sub-optimal „point‟ solutions that address requirements common across multiple agencies



Lack of economies of scale leading to escalating ICT procurement and operating costs



An increasingly complex ICT environment across All-of-Government



Inability to implement changes fast enough to match stakeholders‟ expectations



High costs to deliver the Government‟s goals for ICT

46


7.

Governance for the GEA-NZ

Figure 18 (published at http://ict.govt.nz/directions-and-priorities/governance ) depicts the entities and their inter-relationships in performing governance for the GEA-NZ:

Ministerial Committee on Government ICT

System Governance

Government Business Reform Group

Chair ICT Strategy Group

Data and Information Re-use Chief Executives Steering Group


Government ICT Council ICT Supply Management Group

Working Group

Lead Agencies, Programmes and Initiatives

Chair

Programme

...CIO 1

CIO 8

CCPG 1

CCPG 2

...

CCPG n

Programme

Programme

...

Programme

GCIO Office: Advise, Co-ordinate, Integrate, Secretariat, Support

Delivery Programmes and Initiatives Figure 18: Governance Entities for GEA-NZ

Table 9 summarises [10] the functions performed by the key groups depicted in Figure 18: Table 9: Key GEA-NZ Governance Groups and Functions

Group Ministerial Committee on Government ICT

ICT Strategy Group

  

Functions Set the strategic direction for Government ICT Set ICT investment priorities Gain early oversight and understanding of ICT investment plans

Chief Executives appointed by the State Services Commission to:  Advise ICT Ministers on ICT strategy  Align Government use of ICT  Encourage agency Chief Executives to use ICT. to reduce costs and improve service quality  Approve the Government Common Capability Roadmap  Provide advice to the Ministerial Committee on Government ICT on agency contributions to ·strengthening cross-government business capability and on the business fit of common capability ICT products


47

Group Government ICT Council

Functions Senior officials responsible for:  The Government Common Capability Roadmap,  The Government Enterprise Architecture, and  The ICT Supply Management approach


  

Specialists responsible for the Government Enterprise Architecture, associated standards and frameworks such as the Government Enterprise Architecture for New Zealand (GEA-NZ) The DIA GTS Architecture Team maintains and evolves the Government Common Capabilities Roadmap as directed by Cabinet EGI (10) 226 The DIA GTS Architecture Team also supports the GEAG by developing and maintaining the GEA-NZ

ICT Supply Management Group

Commercial experts responsible for ensuring that there is a sustainable, competitive ICT market that will meet the Government's requirements and ensures that Government's investment in the existing supply base is protected and is delivering ongoing value for money.

Office of the Government Chief Information Officer



Common Capability Planning Group(s)

Several groups of senior officials and subject matter experts responsible for particular subject areas within the Government Common Capability Roadmap

Lead Agencies

Lead agencies will retain accountability for executing on the delivery and operation of common capabilities once these have been confirmed and agreed within the Government Common Capability Roadmap through the work of the other governance groups.



Monitor the development and maintenance of the Common Capability Roadmap Represent the leadership and maintenance of the Directions and Priorities for Government ICT

Key governance gates and required artefacts for those gates are illustrated in the capability delivery model for the All-of-Government Common Capability Roadmap illustrated in Figure 19 on Page 49.

48


Artefacts

Governance

Vision / Options Review

Roadmap Status Key C

D GA

General Availability



• Investment Case

P

• High Level Requirements

• Technology and Market Research may include RFI

• Solution Capabilities (reqs.)

Supply Architecture Business …

 Definition

• Whitepaper

Strategic Fit Review

• Key planning artefacts

Planning Review

• Architecture Viewpoint

Planning Development

ICT Council • • • •

Concept

P

GA

 Vision

• Strategic Service Vision ( including Capability Specification )

Operate

D

• Limited coalition of demand



Build

Solution Delivery Lifecycle

• Whitepaper: Evolve, bound, and refine strategy incl. standards, interfaces and initial non-functionals

Supply Architecture Business …

• Inform and broadcast

• Refine scope of draft vision

• Identify working group

• High level scope (1 page)  Idea

ICT Council

C

Design

P

C

• • • •

Planning

Diagram context

• Investment Logic Mapping

Strategy

Government Common ICT Capability Roadmap to Lifecycle Alignment

Normal Solution Delivery Lifecycle Agency x Agency y

 Initiate

• Key Business Case artefacts

Initiate Review

Other Government Governance Processes including Capital Asset Management Framework

Figure 19: Roadmap Common Capability Delivery Model - Governance Gates and Artefacts


49

8.

Evolution of GEA-NZ v2.0: past and future

The GEA-NZ has evolved to version 2.0 from earlier versions as illustrated in Figure 20 on Page 51.

Future evolution beyond GEA-NZ v2.0 will be based on pragmatic development of aspects that provide the greatest benefit to achieving the Government‟s goals for ICT. For example, aspects of the current GEA-NZ v2.0 documentation suite identified in this context document as having potential for development in the short term include: 

The GEA-NZ Interoperability Framework (GIF), refer Sections 5.5 and 5.10



GEA-NZ Strategic Service Visions, refer Section 5.6



GEA-NZ Whitepapers, refer Section 5.7



GEA-NZ Viewpoints, refer Section 5.8



GEA-NZ Process Activity Reference (GAR) model, refer Section 5.10



GEA-NZ Information Reference (GIR) model, refer Section 5.10


50

Figure 20: Evolution of GEA NZ to Version 2.0


51

9.

What might the target state for GEA-NZ look like?

A target state for GEA-NZ is one of sufficiently well developed maturity across dimensions of: 

Enterprise Architecture creation and management



Governance of the use of GEA-NZ



Programme management for GEA-NZ use across All-of-Government

Various maturity model frameworks, quasi standards and standards will be considered to provide good practice quantitative and semi-quantitative metrics of performance and success. For example: 

P3M3 [59]



EAMMF [60], [66]



CMMI [67], [68], [69]



COBIT [70], [71], [72]



TOGAF [73]



ISO/IEC 38500:2008, also published as AS/NZS 28500:2010 [91]

A 7 stage model to characterise the maturity of GEA-NZ (paraphrased from the USA GAO [61]) is: Stage 1: Creating awareness of the need for GEA-NZ alignment across All-of-Government Stage 2: Establishing commitment and direction: 

Agency policies exist for development, use and maintenance of agency architecture models that are aligned, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models



An executive committee is responsible and accountable for ensuring that agencies develop, use and maintain agency architecture models that are aligned with, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models



The executive committee takes proactive steps to address barriers to agency development, use and maintenance of models that are aligned with, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models



A Government Chief Architect office exists

Stage 3: Creating the management foundation for agency architecture model development and use: 

Agency work is funded to ensure alignment with GEA-NZ models



A programme management office exists to support agency implementation of models that are aligned with, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models


52



Key positions in the programme management office are filled



A programme management plan for agency adoption exists and reflects relationships with other All-of-Government programme management plans



A programme management work breakdown structure and development schedule for agency adoption exists

Stage 4: Developing GEA-NZ for All-of-Government 

Agency representatives are actively engaged in development of models that are aligned with, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models



The programme management office is staffed



Risks are managed relating to agency development and implementation of models that are aligned with, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models

Stage 5: GEA-NZ is used for targeted results 

The executive committee has approved the All-of-Government GEA-NZ



Key stakeholders have approved their agencies‟ models that are aligned with, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models



Staffing plans are in place for the GEA-NZ programme management office – possibly rotating staff from agencies through the programme management office

Stage 6: Evolving the GEA-NZ and its use for All-of-Government transformation 

The executive committee continues to approve revised versions of the All-of-Government GEA-NZ



Revised versions continue to be approved of agency models that are aligned with, or can be aligned with, the GEA-NZ models



The GEA-NZ programme management office and agency enterprise architecture programme offices share resources on a regular basis

Stage 7: Continuously improving the GEA-NZ and its use to continuously improve All-of-Government performance 

For example, the programme management office has a continuous improvement function

Monitoring success of achieving „sufficiently well developed maturity‟ for the GEA-NZ requires: 

Establishing an appropriate set of metrics against which to measure performance



Defining a target state of sufficiently well developed maturity for the performance metrics



Gaining consensus on measures of current baseline performance


53



54

As development and use of the GEA-NZ evolves, review the target state and re-measure performance using metrics consistent or comparable with the metrics used to characterise current performance


Appendix A Source documents Source documents are categorised into: 

Applicable documents



Reference documents



GEA-NZ v2.0 component artefacts

Applicable documents In the event of conflict between the contents of an applicable document and this document, the contents of the applicable document shall prevail. [1]

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Office of the Minister of State Services: “Better Public Services Results: Targets and Public Communication”; Cabinet paper CAB (12) 315, 2012 June 25

[2]

Office of the Minister of State Services: “Supplementary Note: Better Public Services Legislative Proposals”; Cabinet paper, 2012 May 14

[3]

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Office of the Minister of State Services: “Better Public Services Paper 2: Better System Leadership”; Cabinet State Sector Reform and Expenditure Control Committee paper, 2012 May 4

[4]

State Services Commission: “Better Public Services: Improving interaction with government”; http://www.ssc.govt.nz/bps-interaction-with-govt accessed 2012 August 1

[5]

New Zealand Cabinet: “Better Public Services: Reform Programme”; Minute of Decision CAB Min (12) 1/1, 2012 January 25

[6]

Office of the Prime Minister, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, Office of the Minister of State Services: “Better Public Services: Reform Programme”; Cabinet paper, 2012 January 19

[7]

Office of the Minister of Internal Affairs, State Sector Reform and Expenditure Control Committee: “Release of the 2012 report On Agency Adoption of the Declaration on Open and Transparent Government”; Cabinet paper, 2012 June 15

[8]

Cabinet Committee on State Sector Reform and Expenditure Control: “Release of the 2012 Report on Agency Adoption of the Declaration on Open and Transparent Government”; Minute of Decision SEC Min (12) 7/7, 2012 May 29

[9]

New Zealand Cabinet: “Open Government”; Minute of Decision CAB Min (11) 29/12, 2011 August 8

[10] Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua, Office of the Government Chief Information Officer: “Government Enterprise Architecture Group Terms of Reference”; version 2.0.0 – final, 2011 August


55

[11] Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua, Office of the Government Chief Information Officer: “Rethink Online - A new approach for government use of and investment in online channels”; 2011 July [12] New Zealand Cabinet: “Directions and Priorities for Government ICT”; Minute of Decision CAB Min (10) 35/5A, 2010 October 4 [13] Minister of Finance, Minister of State Services, and Minister of Internal Affairs: “Directions and Priorities for Government ICT”; Cabinet Economic Growth and Infrastructure Committee paper EGI (10) 266, 2010 September 17 [14] Government of New Zealand: “Official Information Act 1982”; reprint as at 2012 July 1 [15] Government of New Zealand: “Privacy Act 1993”; reprint as at 2012 July 1 [16] Government of New Zealand: “Public Records Act 2005”; reprint as at 2012 June 30 [17] Government of New Zealand: “Copyright Act 1994”; reprint as at 2011 October 7 [18] Government of New Zealand: “Statistics Act 1975”; reprint as at 2011 August 30 [19] Government of New Zealand: “New Zealand Sign Language Act 2006”; reprint as at 2008 June 30 [20] State Services Commission Te Komihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “Gateway Reviews – Lessons Learned Report”; 2011 July [21] State Services Commission Te Komihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “New Zealand Government Open Access and Licensing framework (NZGOAL)”; version 1, 2010 August [22] State Services Commission Te Komihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “Trusted Computing and Digital Rights Management Standards and Guidelines”; version 1.0, 2007 July [23] State Services Commission Te Komihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “Trusted Computing and Digital Rights Management Principles & Policies”; version 1.0, 2006 September [24] Government Communications Security Bureau Te Tari Whakamau Irirangi: “New Zealand Information Security Manual”; version 1.01, 2011 June [25] Privacy Commissioner Te Mana Matapono Matatapu: “Credit Reporting Privacy Code 2004”; version applicable from 2012 April 1 [26] Privacy Commissioner Te Mana Matapono Matatapu: “Justice Sector Unique Identifier Code 1998”; consolidated as at 2011 June 30 [27] Privacy Commissioner Te Mana Matapono Matatapu: “Health Information Privacy Code 1994”; 2008 December edition [28] Privacy Commissioner Te Mana Matapono Matatapu: “Telecommunications Information Privacy Code 2003 Incorporating Amendment No 3”; issued 2003 May 2 [29] Privacy Commissioner Te Mana Matapono Matatapu: “Superannuation Schemes Unique Identifier Code 1995”; issued 1995 October 18

56


[30] Ministry of Economic Development Manatū Ōhanga: “New Zealand‟s Cyber Security Strategy”; 2011 June


57

Reference documents Reference documents are intended to provide supplementary or background information. In the event of conflict between the contents of a reference document and this document, the contents of this document shall prevail. [31] Better Public Services Advisory Group: “Better Public Services Advisory Group Report”; 2011 November [32] Secretariat for Sector Reform: “Better Public Services – Draft Issues Paper – Leadership for Improved Results”; Draft Secretariat issues paper, 2011 November [33] Secretariat for Sector Reform: “Better Public Services – Draft Issues Paper – Reaching out and letting in: more open information and greater citizen participation as levers for change”; Draft Secretariat issues paper, 2011 November [34] Secretariat for Sector Reform: “A Greenfields New Zealand State Sector”; Secretariat note, 2011 June [35] KPMG (Lead author Avery. G): “Portfolio, Programme and Project Management (P3M) Capabilities in Government – Increasing Success Rates and Reducing Costs”; report to New Zealand Treasury, 2011 March 15 [36] Data and Information Re-use Chief Executives‟ Steering Group: “2012 Report On Agency Adoption of the New Zealand Declaration on Open and Transparent Government”; New Zealand Open Government Data and Information Programme Secretariat; 2012 June [37] Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua: “Information Management – Plan and Roadmap for Internal Affairs 2012 – 2015”; draft, 2012 June [38] Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua: “The Department of Internal Affairs ICT Roadmap”; version 1.0, 2012 May [39] Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua: “DIA Online Strategy 2012-2015”; version 1.1, 2012 May 1 [40] Statistics New Zealand Tatauranga Aotearoa: “Principles and Protocols for Producers of Tier 1 Statistics”; 2007 May [41] Archives New Zealand Te Rua Mahara o te Kāwanatanga: “Digital Continuity Action Plan – Managing Information for Public Sector Efficiency”; 2009 August 7 [42] National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa: “Creating A Digital New Zealand: New Zealand‟s Digital Content Strategy”; August 2007 [43] Ministry of Economic Development Manatū Ōhanga: “Digital Strategy 2.0”; 2008 August 28 [44] Ministry of Education Te Tāhuhu o te Mātauranga: “ICT Strategic Framework for Education 2006-07”; 2006 November [45] Ministry of Justice Tāhū o te Ture, Department of Corrections Ara Poutama Aotearoa: “Justice Sector Information Strategy 01 July 2006 – 30 June 2011”; 2006 July 5 [46] National Health IT Board: “National Health IT Plan”; 2010 September


58

[47] Land Information New Zealand Toitū te whenua: “A New Zealand Geospatial Strategy”; 2007 January [48] State Services Commission Te Kōmihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “New Zealand Egovernment Interoperability Framework (NZ e-GIF)”; Version 3.3, 2008 February [49] State Services Commission Te Kōmihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “New Zealand Federated Enterprise Architecture Framework Reference Models (NZFEAF RM)”; version 0.9, 2009 August [50] State Services Commission Te Kōmihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “Subjects of New Zealand (SONZ) Thesaurus”; version 1.50, 2006 June 13 [51] State Services Commission Te Kōmihana O Ngā Tari Kāwanatanga: “Functions of New Zealand (FONZ) Thesaurus”; version 2.0.30, 2004 September 15 [52] Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO): “Strategic Vision for the Australian Government‟s use of Information and Communication Technology”; draft: version 2.0 – 2011, 2012 April 26 [53] Williams H.: “Review of the Operational Activities and Structure of the Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO)”; 2012 January [54] Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO): “Australian Government Architecture Reference Models – How To Use Guide”; version 1.0, 2011 August [55] Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO): “Australian Government Architecture Reference Models”; version 3.0, 2011 August [56] Reinecke I.: “Implementing the ICT Strategic Vision – A report for the Secretary of the Commonwealth Department of Finance and Deregulation on the draft ICT Strategic Vision”; 2011 May [57] Reinecke I.: “Information Policy and E-governance in the Australian Government – A report for the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet”; updated as at 2009 July 31 [58] Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO): “Cross-Agency Services Architecture Principles”; 2007 April [59] UK Office of Government Commerce (OGC): “Portfolio, Programme and Project Management Maturity Model (P3M3®)”; version 2.0.1, 2010 February 1 [60] United States General Accountability Office: “Report to the Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate – Organizational Transformation – Military Departments Can Improve Their Enterprise Architecture Programs”; GAO-11-902, 2011 September 26 [61] United States General Accountability Office: “Executive Guide – Organizational Transformation – A Framework for Assessing and Improving Enterprise Architecture Management (version 2.0)”; GAO-10-846G, 2010 August 5 [62] United States General Accountability Office: “Report to Chairman, Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives – Enterprise Architecture – Leadership Remains Key to Establishing and Leveraging Architectures for Organizational Transformation”; GAO-06-831, 2006 September 12 Department of Internal Affairs DMS Library: I&F-1382-10-02 Document ID: 754707DB

59

[63] United States General Accountability Office: “Report to Congressional Requesters – Information Technology – Leadership Remains Key to Agencies Making Progress on Enterprise Architecture Efforts”; GAO-04-40, 2003 November 17 [64] United States General Accountability Office: “Report to Congressional Committees – Information Technology – Enterprise Architecture Use across the Federal Government Can be Improved”; GAO-02-6, 2002 February 19 [65] United States Department of Commerce: “Enterprise Architecture Capability Maturity Model”; version 1.2, 2007 December 10 [66] United States Department of Commerce: “Enterprise Architecture Communications Plan”; version 1.0, 2006 February 27 [67] Carnegie Mellon University – Software Engineering Institute (SEI) – CMMI Product Team: “CMMI® (Capability Maturity Model® Integration) for Development – improving processes for developing better products and services”; version 1.3, 2012 April 5 [68] Carnegie Mellon University – Software Engineering Institute (SEI) – CMMI Product Team: “CMMI® (Capability Maturity Model® Integration) for Services – improving processes for providing better services”; version 1.3, 2012 February 27 [69] Carnegie Mellon University – Software Engineering Institute (SEI) – CMMI Product Team: “CMMI® (Capability Maturity Model® Integration) for Acquisition – improving processes for acquiring better products and services”; version 1.3, 2011 September 1 [70] ISACA (formerly the Information Systems Audit and Control Association): “COBIT 5 (Control OBjectives for IT release 5) – A Business Framework for the Governance and Management of Enterprise IT”; 2012 May 29 [71] ISACA (formerly the Information Systems Audit and Control Association): “COBIT 5 (Control OBjectives for IT release 5) – Enabling Processes”; 2012 May 23 [72] ISACA (formerly the Information Systems Audit and Control Association): “COBIT 5 (Control OBjectives for IT release 5) – Implementation”; 2012 April 11 [73] The Open Group: “Open Group Standard – The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF)”; available at https://www2.opengroup.org/ogsys/jsp/publications/PublicationDetails.jsp?catalogno=I112 (accessed 2012 July 11), version 9.1, 2011 November 24 [74] United Nations Statistical Commission: “Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics”; available at http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/statorg/FP-English.htm (accessed 2012 July 23), 1994 April 15 [75] Ojo A., Janowski T., Estevez E.: “Improving Government Enterprise Architecture Practice – Maturity Factor Analysis”; Proceedings of the 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 4260 – 4269, 2012 January 4 [76] Arvidsson V.: “The Revolution That Wasn‟t: Investigating Barriers to Platform-based EService Delivery Partnerships”; Proceedings of the 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 2633 – 2642, 2012 January 4

60


[77] Janssen M., Kamal M., Weerakoddy V., Joha A.: “Shared Services as a Collaboration Strategy and Arrangement in Public Service Networks”; Proceedings of the 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 2218 – 2227, 2012 January 4 [78] Dwivedi Y. K., Weerakoddy V., Janssen M.: “Moving Towards Maturity: Challenges to Successful E-government Implementation and Diffusion”; The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, Volume 42 Number 4, pp 11 – 22, 2012 January 16 [79] Kurdi R., Taleb-Bendiab A., Randles M., Taylor M.: “E-Government Information Systems and Cloud Computing (Readiness and Analysis)”; Proceedings of the 2011 Developments in Esystems Engineering conference, pp. 404 – 409, 2011 December 6 [80] Dou Z., Wang Y.: “A Risk Identification Framework of Electronic Government Affairs”; Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, pp. 221 – 224, 2011 November 26 [81] Chung W.: “Getting More out of Government Enterprise Architecture”; Journal of Enterprise Architecture, Volume 7 Number 4, pp 23-41, 2011 November [82] Borras J. A.: “The Transformational Government Framework”; Proceedings of ICEGOv2011, pp. 157 – 166, 2011 September 26 [83] Maheshwari D., Janssen M, Fleur van Veenstra A.: “A Multi-level Framework for Measuring and Benchmarking Public Service Organizations: Connecting Stages-of-growth Models and Enterprise Architecture”; Proceedings of ICEGOv2011, pp. 73 – 80, 2011 September 26 [84] Valtonen K., Mäntynen S., Leppänen M., Pulkkinen M.: “Enterprise Architecture Descriptions for Enhancing Local Government Transformation and Coherency Management – Case study”; Proceedings of the 2011 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshop, pp. 360 – 369, 2011 August 29 [85] Van Steenbergen M., Foorthuis R., Mushkudiani N., Bruls W., Brinkkemper S., Bos, R.: “Achieving Enterprise Architecture Benefits: What Makes the Difference?”; Proceedings of the 2011 15th IEEE International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshop, pp. 350 – 359, 2011 August 29 [86] Estevez E., Janowski T., Marcovecchio I., Ojo A.: “Establishing Government Chief Information Officer Systems – Readiness Assessment”; Proceedings of the 12th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, pp. 292 – 301, 2011 June 12 [87] Copeland Wilson S., Linders, D.: “The Open Government Directive: A Preliminary Assessment”; Proceedings of iConference 2011, pp. 387 – 394, 2011 February 8 [88] Aagesen G., Fleur van Veenstra A., Janssen M., Krogstie J.: “The Entanglement of Enterprise Architecture and IT-Governance: The Cases of Norway and the Netherlands”; Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences – 2011, 2011 January 4 [89] Jansen A.: “E-Government – Just a Matter of Technology?”; Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences – 2011, 2011 January 4 [90] Meziani R., Saleh I.: “E-government: ITIL-Based Service Management Case Study”; Proceedings of iiWAS2010, pp. 509 – 516, 2010 November 8


61

[91] International Standards Organisation, International Electrotechnical Commission: “International Standard: Information technology – Security techniques – Information security risk management”; ISO/IEC 27005, 2011 June 1 [92] Standards Australia, Standards New Zealand: “Australian/New Zealand Standard – Corporate governance of information technology”; AS/NZS ISO/IEC 38500:2010 (ISO/IEC 38500:2008), 2010 March 1 [93] Standards New Zealand: “Joint Australian New Zealand International Standard – Risk management – Principles and guidelines”; AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009, 2009 November 20 [94] Standards Australia: “Information technology – Security techniques – Code of practice for information security management”; AS/NZS ISO/IEC 27002:2006 (Incorporating Amendment No. 1), 2006 July 6 [95] Standards Australia: “Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements”; AS/NZS ISO/IEC 27001:2006, 2006 June 23 [96] Hjort-Madsen K.: “Architecting Government – Understanding Enterprise Architecture Adoption in the Public Sector”; Doctoral Dissertation, IT University of Copenhagen, 2009 March 31 [97] Poutanen J.: “The Social Dimension of Enterprise Architecture in Government”; Journal of Enterprise Architecture, pp 19 – 29, 2012 May

62


GEA-NZ v2.0 component artefacts [98] Department of Internal Affairs Te Tari Taiwhenua: “Government Common Capabilities Roadmap”; iteration 2.0, candidate release version 2.0, 2012 May [99] GEA-NZ v2.0 Glossary of Terms version 1, available on the GEAG Shared Workspace at: https://see.govt.nz/geag/GEANZ/GEA-NZ%20Glossary%20of%20Terms/GEANZ%20Glossary%20of%20Terms%20v1.0.docx [100] GEA-NZ v2.0 Image Library available on the GEAG Shared Workspace at: https://see.govt.nz/geag/GEANZ/Forms/AllItems.aspx?RootFolder=%2fgeag%2fGEANZ%2fG EA%2dNZ%20Image%20Library&FolderCTID=&View=%7b4347A8A8%2d4802%2d4ACE%2 dB701%2dAD733EE2B134%7d [101] GEA-NZ v2.0 ProVision model


63

GEA-NZ v2.0 Context Document

GEA-NZ v2.0 Context Document

Suggest Documents

SINAMICS V20 - Daum

SINAMICS V20 Inverter - Siemens

Преобразователь SINAMICS V20

SINAMICS V20 Inverter - Store

Sinamics V20 - Giancarlo Mariani

LIFESTYLE® V30 LIFESTYLE® V20

Umrichter SINAMICS V20

SINAMICS V20 - Siemens

Manuel GATEMAN V10-V20

Dubai Final-v20.indd

SINAMICS V20 - broszura PL.pdf - ALLMAR

SINAMICS V20 - Viking Electric Supply

chi2001 Transit v20 - Google Sites

MatchPlus: A CONTEXT VECTOR SYSTEM FOR DOCUMENT

DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT IN CONTEXT OF COLLABORATIVE ...

Leveraging corporate context within knowledge-based document ...

Incremental Context Mining for Adaptive Document Classification

FOIA Document Context - National Park Service

chi2001 Transit v20 - Semantic Scholar

V20-1+FS-320, V20-3+FS-320.pdf - Google Drive

V20 Reference Sheet-signed.pdf - Google Drive

Brochure - SINAMICS V20 - Siemens - Industry Sector

Keyence FS-V20 Series Sensor - Hasmak

Gordon2010 Stop v20 EN - Google Sites