Mobile Applications - Guide to Cloud Computing for Business and Technology Managers - page 474

the network of components displays the defining characteristics of any
“small worlds” network, namely, local robustness and global accessibility.
Agility Pattern 7 Self-organization: The components of agile enterprises are
self-aware, and they interact with other components via on-the-fly integra-
tion, adjustment, or negotiation.
22.1.3.3 Scalable
Agility Pattern 8 Evolving standards (framework): The components of agile
enterprises operate within predefined frameworks that standardize inter-
component communication and interaction, determine component compat-
ibility, and evolve to accommodate old, current, and new components.
Agility Pattern 9 Redundancy and diversity: The components of agile
enterprises replicate components to provide the desired capacity, load bal-
ancing and performance, fault tolerance, as well as variations on the basic
component functionality and behavior.
Agility Pattern 10 Elastic capacity: The components of agile enterprises
enable dynamic utilization of additional or a reduced number of resources
depending on the requirements.
Chapter 3, Section 3.1.2 “Enterprise Component Architecture” presents con-
temporary view to enterprise agility and architecture.
22.1.4 Framework for Change Proficiency
How do we measure enterprise agility? This section establishes a metric
framework for proficiency at variation i.e. change; an enterprise's change
proficiency may exist in one or more of dimensions of variations. And, these
dimensions of changes can form a structural framework for understanding
current capabilities and setting strategic priorities for improvement: how
does the agile enterprise know when it is improving its changeability or los-
ing ground; how does it know if it is less changeable than its competition;
and how does it set improvement targets? Thus, a practical measure of varia-
tion proficiency is needed before we can talk meaningfully about getting
more of it or even getting some of it.
It must be highlighted that measuring competency is generally not unidi-
mensional nor likely to result in an absolute and unequivocal comparative
metric. Change proficiency has both reactive and proactive modes. Reactive
change is opportunistic and responds to a situation that threatens viability.
Proactive change is innovative and responds to a possibility for leadership. An
organization sufficiently proficient at reactive change, when prodded, should
be able to use that competency proactively and let others do the reacting.
Would it be proficient if a short-notice variation was completed in the time
required, but at a cost that eventually bankrupted the company? Or if the