The previous versions of the DoDAF up until version 15 contained 4 views as a

The previous versions of the dodaf up until version

This preview shows page 4 - 7 out of 7 pages.

relational viewpoints that explain the connections between operational and system activities. The previous versions of the DoDAF up until version 1.5 contained 4 views as a results of the
Image of page 4
EA RESEARCH 5 data modeling process. The DoDAF V2.0 incorporates the original four views and expands to eight views with the purpose of servicing legacy systems while transforming to new mission and process capabilities and providing effective decision making. Figure 2 shows the original four views: The All View, The Operational View, The Technical Standards View and The Systems and Services View and the transition that occurred with the acceptance of DoDAF V2.0 to the Note. Retrieved from DoD Architecture Framework Version 2.02, Figure 2 DoDAF Viewpoints eight viewpoints currently in the DoDAF V.2.0 which include the All Viewpoint, Standards Viewpoint, Operational Viewpoint, Systems Viewpoint, Services Viewpoint, Data and Information Viewpoint, Capability Viewpoint and Project Viewpoint. Each of the viewpoints contain models that rely on the DM2 to describe the architecture, but not all of the models in the DoDAF need to be created. According to Piaszczyk (2011, pg. 308) the models described above evolve into views when data is introduced, creating the artifacts and many different perspectives. The author continues to explain that DoDAF V2.0 encourages a “Fit-for-Purpose View” which means that the stakeholder can take advantage of flexibility in the framework that is based on the needs of the decision maker.
Image of page 5
EA RESEARCH 6 Strengths and Weaknesses The strengths of the DoDAF lay in its various viewpoints which provide different perspectives built by the DM2. These are very unique to the DoD, but they describe the artifacts very well, contributing to the ability to make decisions and provide integration in the environment that DoD needs to operate in. I can see many weaknesses, one being that this is too complex a framework to master. Another weakness is the ability of all stakeholders, especially external ones, to align to the standards and syntax associated with DoDAF. I can see this framework being somewhat difficult to understand for a partner or contractor in a supply chain. Organizational Examples For weather reporting the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) uses the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS), which uses DoDAF to oversee the management requirements, document the structure and maintain the architecture of JPSS (Steiner, 2014).
Image of page 6
Image of page 7

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 7 pages?

  • Spring '16
  • DoD Architecture Framework, Department of Defense Architecture Framework, dod architecture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture