Added A.5.3 Capability Map provided by Carlos Tubbax

ekg-mm/chapters-0-intro/ekg-mm-overview.tex

@@ -120,7 +120,8 @@ \chapter{Overview}\label{ch:ekg-mm-overview}
     \cellPB          & \cellCB            & \labelKB{3-1} & \taglineB{3-1} \\ % A.3 Business Enablers
     \cellPB          & \cellCB            & \labelKB{3-2} & \taglineB{3-2} \\
     \cellPB          & \cellCB            & \labelKB{3-3} & \taglineB{3-3} \\
-    \labelPB{10}{a}  & \labelCB{4}{3}     & \labelKB{3-4} & \taglineB{3-4} \\
+    \cellPB          & \cellCB            & \labelKB{3-4} & \taglineB{3-4} \\
+    \labelPB{11}{a}  & \labelCB{5}{3}     & \labelKB{3-5} & \taglineB{3-5} \\
     % B. Organization Pillar
     \cellPO          & \cellCO            & \labelKO{1-1} & \taglineO{1-1} \\ % B.1 Executive Leadership
     \cellPO          & \cellCO            & \labelKO{1-2} & \taglineO{1-2} \\

ekg-mm/chapters-0-intro/ekg-mm-preface.tex

@@ -1,6 +1,29 @@
 \chapter{Preface}\label{ch:ekg-mm-preface}
 
-\improve[inline]{%
-    On the first page we should have caveats about this being a work in progress and encourage people to get involved,
-    whether a member or not, including just providing feedback. Link to the sign up page on the website
-}
+The \gls{ekgf} was chartered in early 2020.
+Of the many ideas discussed for initial projects, the founders agreed that writing and publishing a Maturity Model
+for the \gls{ekg} should be the first effort of the membership.
+
+The idea of representing the \gls{ekgmm} as four pillars titled Business, Organization, Data, and Technology,
+was presented in a June 2020 kickoff webinar.
+
+This concept was accepted.
+Weekly pillar Zoom working sessions began shortly thereafter.
+These ongoing workgroups debate the contents toward the achievement of consensus in each pillar.
+Once a week the team leaders meet to synchronize content.
+
+Our workgroups are lively and conversational.
+They are filled with people who are knowledge experts in their fields.
+They are often quite vocal in their points of view\,---\,always striving to make their work better and better and better.
+However, an Enterprise Knowledge Graph must, by definition, represent the views of the collective,
+not the views of individuals.
+Therefore, collectively, we present Maturity Model Release Version 1.0.
+Some may call it a draft version.
+Readers may find portions unfinished, and some sections say, “We welcome your input here.”
+This input will go into the EKGF Continuous Improvement Process.
+
+This is where you come in.
+Join our workgroups and participate in working towards Release Version 2.0.
+
+The Enterprise Knowledge Graph Foundation team \newline
+[email protected]

ekg-mm/chapters-a-business-pillar/a-3-business-enablers.tex

@@ -19,3 +19,4 @@ \chapter{Business Enablers}% A.3 Business Enablers
 \input{../../ekg-mm/sections/a-3-business-enablers-2-performance-management.tex}
 \input{../../ekg-mm/sections/a-3-business-enablers-3-risk-management.tex}
 \input{../../ekg-mm/sections/a-3-business-enablers-4-supply-chain-management.tex}
+\input{../../ekg-mm/sections/a-3-business-enablers-5-capability-map.tex}

ekg-mm/fragments-capability-contribution-to-ekg/a-3-5.tex

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+%
+% A.3.5 Capability Map -- Contribution to the EKG
+%
+The \textit{Business Capability Map} enables an enterprise to structure their Enterprise Knowledge Graph.
+Each capability is a candidate to become a \textit{use case} for the \gls{ekg}.
+
+A well-designed mature \gls{ekg} is a facade in front of all technical and organizational silos which means that\,---\,
+without any further structure\,---\,users do not experience these silos anymore.\index{silo}
+In many ways that may be a good thing but having silos\,---\,or different perspectives\,---\,can also be necessary.
+The \gls{ekg} allows an organization to rethink their silos without being held back by their current data or technology
+landscape (or "technical debt")\index{technical debt}.
+
+The \textit{Business Capability Map} is the ideal initial structure for the new \gls{ekg} "silos".
+Business Capability Maps are usually rather coarse-grained and visualized in a three-level hierarchy whereas the
+structure of the \gls{ekg} goes much further than that.
+Translating each capability to a "use case" is a good start but each of these use cases can be further broken down
+into smaller use cases where each use case becomes a highly reusable component of the \gls{ekg}.
+This leads to a hierarchical structure, a taxonomy so you will, of all use cases, also called "the \gls{uct}".
+This use case tree, at the higher levels, corresponds with the Business Capability Map and allows a business and
+its executives to "own" and control all the various parts of their \gls{ekg}.
+

ekg-mm/fragments-capability-contribution-to-enterprise/a-3-5.tex

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+%
+% A.3.5 Capability Map -- Contribution to Enterprise
+%
+As a business/IT transformation enabler, capabilities may provide certain benefits to enterprises:
+
+\begin{itemize}
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities provide business with a common language.}
+          Capabilities offer business professionals and C-level executives a common understanding of which areas of an
+          enterprise they need to address.
+          The larger the enterprise, the more useful this idea is since business issues and strategy may revolve
+          around many business units, lines of business, business processes, or even enterprise boundaries.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities may enable more precise investments.}
+          Measuring the \gls{roi} of investment projects can be very difficult as the results might be spread across a
+          myriad of different \glspl{lob} or business units.
+          Instead of reconciling results from all these different places,
+          one could merely look at the resources being allocated at a certain capability and this may allow
+          business executives to have better estimates of the impact of their investments on the
+          enterprise as a \textit{whole}.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities serve as a baseline for strategic planning, change management and impact analysis.}
+          By shifting the focus from business units, lines of business, IT systems and business processes
+          to business capabilities, one is able to increase the traceability of strategic decisions into the
+          daily operations and the business performance of the enterprise as a whole.
+          So, capabilities serve as a starting point for tracking the impact horizontal and vertical
+          impacts of strategic and tactical decisions from the executive team.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities lead to better business service specification and design.}
+          Capabilities provide business-focused abstraction of the functionalities and information that
+          information systems must provide.
+          For instance, such capabilities may help in the selection or construction of services in a
+          \gls{soa} as they directly embody business requirements.
+\end{itemize}
+
+In a few words, capabilities provide business executives the possibility to cut through the complexity inherent
+to most enterprises in order to make sounder decisions for strategic planning, impact analysis and investment planning.
+Using capabilities enables business to make decisions based on \textit{what} needs to be resolved without initially
+dealing with the \textit{how}.
+At the same time, it provides a way to tie the \textit{how} to the results of the \textit{what}
+for further validation that business efforts are delivery the expected results and for better alignment.
+On the other hand, the alternative to this approach involves repeating the traditional silo-focused approach of
+looking at hundreds or even thousands of IT systems,
+before being able to look at actual business actions and business results.

ekg-mm/fragments-capability-summary/a-3-5.tex

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+%
+% A.3.5 Capability Map -- Summary
+%
+\index{capability!map}
+\index{business!capability map}
+In recent years, the word capability\index{capability} has steadily been drawing attention in the business world
+as a way to narrow the gap between business and IT.
+A capability is described by Ulrich and Rosen, (p.1, 2011) as:
+
+\citequote{%
+    A business capability, or simply a “capability,” defines what a business does.
+    It does not communicate or expose where, why, or how something is done\,---\,only what is done.
+    Specifically, the business capability is “a particular ability or capacity that a business may possess or
+    exchange to achieve a specific purpose or outcome.%
+}{the_business_capability_map}
+
+Understanding \textit{what} a business does is at least as important as understanding \textit{how} it does it.
+Focusing on the \textit{what} rather than on the \textit{how} often provides the right level of abstraction
+of complex ecosystems in a way that can be easily digested by business executives and planning teams.
+Dissecting a business as a set of basic capabilities allows one to view complex organizations and
+business environments in a wide range of different ways.
+Additionally, one could zoom in on lower levels of abstraction to reach higher levels of detail
+depending on the needs of the target audience.
+
+Consider the example of the high-level capability called \textit{customer 360°}.
+This capability refers to having a complete picture of the customer and this is a capability many organizations may
+benefit from.
+A customer may be called a taxpayer in the context of a government institution, a patient in the context of a hospital
+and a student in the context of a university.
+Being able to manage different aspects of a customer might be imperative for many businesses depending on
+their business strategy.
+For instance, \textit{customer 360°} as a high-level capability could entail the \textit{customer trend analysis} and
+\textit{customer management information} capabilities as lower-level capabilities.
+
+In other words, this means that capabilities are \textit{concerns} that could be refined into lower-level capabilities
+that in turn could be further refined.
+The advantage of functional decomposition in this hierarchical and modular way is that it increases reusability
+of capabilities across business lines, enterprises or even industries.
+Additionally, decomposing capabilities in different levels of abstraction offers a better sense of how c
+apabilities fit in on the overall view of the enterprise.
+
+Capabilities should follow certain principles as follows:
+
+\begin{enumerate}
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities define what a business does and not how a business does it.}
+          This implies that a capability does not refer to a process or value stream.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities are nouns, not verbs.}
+          To make the distinction between a capability and a process, capabilities should be named with nouns such as
+          customer management instead of a verb managing customers.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities should be defined in business term and not in technical terms.}
+          Executives and other business professionals should be able to clearly understand what a capability means
+          \,---\,and take ownership of it\,---\,without being bothered with the technical details of the systems
+          that implement it.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities should be stable (i.e. least volatile) as possible.}
+          There is a fundamental set of high-level capabilities that are necessary to run a business regardless
+          of the sector of industry it is located in. Additionally, high-level capabilities may rarely change
+          within an organization unless there are significant changes to its business strategy or organization.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities are not redundant.}
+          Capabilities appear once and only once on a capability maps even though they are shared by more than division,
+          business line or business unit of an enterprise.
+    \item \textbf{There should only be one business capability map per business.}
+          In order to bring transparency across the organization, there should be a single unified and harmonized
+          business capability map per business.
+          Therefore, business capabilities spread throughout different business units, divisions, department,
+          lines of business, etc should be only appear once in the business capability map.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities map to\,---\,but are not the same as\,---\,business processes, business units,
+          \glspl{lob} and value streams.}
+          There is rarely a one-to-one mapping between a business process, a business unit, an \gls{lob} or
+          a value stream, and a capability.
+          Therefore, mistaking a capability with one these other concepts may result in an overly complex overview of
+          things that are constantly repeated across the enterprise.
+          Additionally, we’re trying to understand the what rather than the how and this would not be possible if
+          capabilities are mistaken with  process-related concepts.
+    \item \textbf{Automated capabilities are still business capabilities and not IT capabilities.}
+          Capabilities are owned by the business as they are made by and for the business.
+          Therefore, a capability that has been automated with an IT system is not an IT capability.
+          Instead, it is nothing else than an \textit{automated business capability}.
+    \item \textbf{Capabilities are the most valuable when incorporated in the overall pictures of a business’ ecosystem.}
+          While being useful in a stand-alone basis for discussion and planning, capabilities fulfil their biggest
+          potential by being combined into a larger business capability map that represents the business ecosystem
+          of an enterprise.
+\end{enumerate}

ekg-mm/fragments-capability-summary/d-2-13.tex

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
     \begin{itemize}
         \item The data is relatively clean and there is either a real-time requirement or a massive volume of data.
         \begin{itemize}
-            \item Virtualization\,---\,as provided by various vendors like \stardog and \graphdb\,---\,may be a
+            \item Virtualization\,---\,as provided by various vendors like \stardog and \ontotextgraphdb\,---\,may be a
             good option because it gives an easy path from \iindex{SPARQL} to whichever backend database,
             translating SPARQL "on-the-fly" to \iindex{SQL} or other query languages.
         \end{itemize}

ekg-mm/fragments-capability-tagline/a-3-5.tex

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Defining what a business does and which outcomes it wants to achieve.

ekg-mm/sections/a-3-business-enablers-5-capability-map.tex

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+%
+% A.3.5 Capability Map
+%
+\ekgmmCapability{a-3-5}{capability-map}{Capability Map}
+
+\ekgmmCapabilityContributionToEnterprise{a-3-5}
+
+\ekgmmCapabilityContributionToEKG{a-3-5}
+