Please read this scenario prior to answering the questionYou are employed as an Enterprise Architect...

The Open Group OGEA-103 Full Course Access

The Open Group OGEA-103 View All Questions

The Open Group OGEA-103 Question Answer

Please read this scenario prior to answering the question

You are employed as an Enterprise Architect within a clinical research and health

technologies company. The company is dedicated to transforming healthcare with

new ideas and advancements. The company has multiple divisions that cover different

aspects of the business.

The company's Enterprise Architecture (EA) department has mature, well-developed

architecture governance and development processes following the TOGAF standard.

In addition to the EA program, the company has a number of management

frameworks in use. The Architecture Board includes representatives from each

division of the company. The Chief Information Officer (CIO) is the sponsor of the

Enterprise Architecture program. The CIO has actively encouraged architecting with

agility within the EA department as the preferred approach for projects.

Many of the company's rivals have begun using Artificial Intelligence (Al) in their

operations, and the indications are that this will be transformative for healthcare

delivery. This is something the EA department has been interested in for a while, and

they had recently submitted an architecture Change Request which was approved. As

a result, the CIO has approved a Request for Architecture Work to investigate the

implementation of Al in the company.

Areas for evaluation include:

How can staff use Al daily in their current roles?

How can Al enhance access to care for patients, and how to make that experience

seamless?

How can Al offer new workplace platforms and tools to increase efficiency?

Some of the top managers are worried about a change in the way of working, and if it

will achieve the goals. Many are not confident that the company's risk management

processes are adequate for a company-wide integration of generative Al. There are

also questions from staff about whether enough specific guidelines and polices have

been put in place for responsible use of Al.

Refer to the scenario

You have been assigned to the architecture development and asked how to address

the concerns and manage risk for the project. How do you begin?

Based on the TOGAF standard which of the following is the best answer?

You recommend that an analysis of the stakeholders is carried out. This willallow the architects to define groups of stakeholders who have commonconcerns and include development of a Stakeholder Map. The concerns andrelevant views should then be defined for each group and recorded in theArchitecture Vision document. To mitigate risk, you include a requirement thatthere be progressive development of the target architecture to ensure there is

You recommend that all the stakeholders be identified, and a CommunicationsPlan created to address the most powerful and influential stakeholders. Thisplan should include a report that summarizes the key features of thearchitecture with respect to each division and reflects the stakeholders'requirements. You will check with each key stakeholder that their concerns arebeing addressed. Risk mitigation should be explicitly addressed as acompon

You recommend creation of a simple solution concept diagram to show howthe stakeholders will be impacted, and the benefits to the firm. You would alsocreate a benefits diagram showing the various opportunities from adoption ofAl-based solutions. A meeting should be held with the main stakeholders toreview the diagrams. They can then decide the priorities and sequencingdecisions for the architecture development. Risk will be evaluated whende

You recommend that models be created for the Draft Business, Data,Application, and Technology Architectures. These can be used to minimize risk,and make sure that the system meets the local regulations for each division.Together with the problem description, and requirements, these should beincluded in the Architecture Vision document. A formal review should be heldwith the stakeholders to verify that their concerns are included in theArchi

Explanation:

In this scenario you are right at the start of an ADM cycle: a Request for Architecture Work has been approved to investigate AI, and there are strong stakeholder concerns and risk questions. According to the TOGAF standard, the correct place to start is Phase A: Architecture Vision, with a strong focus on stakeholder management and capturing their concerns and required views.

Option A is the only answer that correctly reflects this:

Stakeholder analysis & Stakeholder Map (Phase A core task)TOGAF explicitly states that in Phase A you must:

Identify stakeholders

Analyze and group them by common concerns

Use a Stakeholder Map to understand their influence, interest, and required engagement

Determine which views/viewpoints are needed to address their concerns in the architecture description coe.qualiware.com+1

Option A says:

“analysis of the stakeholders … define groups of stakeholders who have common concerns and include development of a Stakeholder Map. The concerns and relevant views should then be defined for each group and recorded in the Architecture Vision document.”

This is exactly how TOGAF describes stakeholder management and views in Phase A:

Stakeholder Map to classify and prioritize stakeholders

Concerns and required views captured and traced

These elements feeding into the Architecture Vision deliverable Visual Paradigm TOGAF+1

Concerns, views, and Architecture VisionTOGAF emphasizes that architecture views are constructed to address specific stakeholder concerns; you do not just build generic models. opengroup.org+1

Option A explicitly links concerns → views → Architecture Vision, which aligns with TOGAF guidance for early phases.

Capturing this in the Architecture Vision provides a high-level, shared understanding of what the AI initiative is trying to achieve and how stakeholder issues (e.g., responsible AI, risk processes, change in way of working) will be addressed.

Risk management and “architecting with agility”In the scenario, the CIO has encouraged architecting with agility. TOGAF is compatible with incremental and iterative development of the target architecture, especially when there is high uncertainty and risk. conexiam.com

Option A includes:

“a requirement that there be progressive development of the target architecture to ensure there is regular feedback.”

This “progressive development” and frequent feedback loop is exactly how you mitigate risk in an AI-heavy, change-sensitive initiative:

Frequent stakeholder feedback

Early validation of assumptions

Ability to adjust scope, constraints, and principles as risk and understanding evolve

This directly addresses management’s worry about the change in the way of working and whether risk management and responsible AI policies are adequate: these become explicit stakeholder concerns and requirements that are iteratively refined.

Why the other options are weaker / not TOGAF-aligned as a starting point

Option B

Focuses mainly on a Communications Plan and powerful stakeholders.

While TOGAF does expect a stakeholder communications plan, it is derived from a proper stakeholder analysis and Stakeholder Map, not a substitute for it.

It also treats risk as a “component of the architecture” rather than something to be addressed early through stakeholder concerns, principles, and iteration.

Option C

Jumps straight to a solution concept diagram and benefits diagram and defers risk evaluation to when the Architecture Roadmap is defined (Phase E).

In TOGAF, risk and stakeholder concerns must be addressed already in Phase A and refined throughout, not postponed to roadmap development.

Option D

Proposes creating draft Business, Data, Application, and Technology models and putting them into the Architecture Vision.

This is too detailed for the starting point: Phase A is about high-level vision, not full draft core architecture models (those belong in Phases B, C, D).

It also doesn’t emphasize Stakeholder Mapping and grouping by concerns, which is central to resolving the worries about way of working, risk, and responsible AI.

In summary, Option A is the best and TOGAF-consistent way to begin:

Start in Phase A: Architecture Vision

Perform stakeholder analysis and create a Stakeholder Map

Define stakeholder concerns and relevant views

Record them in the Architecture Vision

Add an explicit requirement for progressive (iterative) development of the target architecture for continuous feedback and risk mitigation

OGEA-103 PDF/Engine