In today’s fast-changing business world, companies need ways to improve efficiency, innovation, and agility. The Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) and The Open Group Architecture Framework (TOGAF) are two popular frameworks. SAFe helps scale agile practices across organisations, while TOGAF provides a strategic approach to enterprise architecture. Combining these frameworks may seem challenging, but combining them can create a powerful synergy and balance of SAFe’s agility with TOGAF’s structure.

What are these frameworks?

SAFe focuses on agility through the adoption of several methods, such as design thinking, lean principles, agile principles, and more. The combination of these methods enables teams of teams to collaborate and deliver efficiently.  TOGAF aligns business goals with IT strategy. It offers a method for developing an enterprise architecture (EA) that supports long-term business strategies.

How SAFe and TOGAF Can Work Together

  1. Strategic Alignment and Vision: TOGAF provides the vision and strategic direction, which SAFe translates into actionable deliverables. This ensures agile teams align with long-term goals.

  2. Architectural Enablement in Agile Release Trains (ARTs): TOGAF guides the intentional architectural aspects within SAFe’s ARTs, ensuring each increment contributes to the broader enterprise vision.

  3. Governance and Iteration: TOGAF’s governance can oversee SAFe implementations, ensuring alignment with enterprise architecture. SAFe’s iterative nature allows continuous feedback and adaptation.

  4. Cross-Functional Collaboration: Both frameworks emphasise cross-functional collaboration; however, aligning closer to the SAFe framework will enable agility across the enterprise.

Considerations

  • Cross-training: Train enterprise and solution architecture teams in both frameworks to improve communication and alignment.

  • Adaptation and Customisation: Customising frameworks too much dilutes the benefits that each framework will give you.

Conclusion

SAFe and TOGAF approach architecture from different angles, and because of this, they certainly can coexist in the same enterprise; when done correctly, they can also complement one another. Before jumping in headfirst, you need to understand the strengths of each framework and assess if, by combining these frameworks, you will still get the required benefits. One word of caution: these frameworks work because they are implemented in their entirety; if you only implement half the framework, only expect half of the benefits.