<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Enterprise Canvas, Part 1: Context and Value</title>
	<atom:link href="http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/07/02/enterprise-canvas-pt1/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/07/02/enterprise-canvas-pt1/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=enterprise-canvas-pt1</link>
	<description>Random ramblings over the metaphoric edge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 05:34:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom G</title>
		<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/07/02/enterprise-canvas-pt1/comment-page-1/#comment-39923</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 11:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://weblog.tomgraves.org/?p=1044#comment-39923</guid>
		<description>Pat - agreed. A couple of fairly crucial points, though. The vision for the enterprise has a wider scope (and probably more abstract scope) than the organisation for which we&#039;re creating an architecture: so the &#039;vision&#039; isn&#039;t the usual organisation-centric marketing puff, but something more descriptive, more engaging, that encompasses &lt;em&gt;all&lt;/em&gt; players in the extended-enterprise. The other point is that, in order to succeed in its task, the enterprise-vision statement or phrase has a very specific structure: more on that in the later post &lt;a href=&quot;http://weblog.tomgraves.org/index.php/2010/07/12/structure-for-enterprise-vision/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&#039;A structure for enterprise vision&#039;&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pat &#8211; agreed. A couple of fairly crucial points, though. The vision for the enterprise has a wider scope (and probably more abstract scope) than the organisation for which we&#8217;re creating an architecture: so the &#8216;vision&#8217; isn&#8217;t the usual organisation-centric marketing puff, but something more descriptive, more engaging, that encompasses <em>all</em> players in the extended-enterprise. The other point is that, in order to succeed in its task, the enterprise-vision statement or phrase has a very specific structure: more on that in the later post <a href="http://weblog.tomgraves.org/index.php/2010/07/12/structure-for-enterprise-vision/" rel="nofollow">&#8216;A structure for enterprise vision&#8217;</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat</title>
		<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/07/02/enterprise-canvas-pt1/comment-page-1/#comment-39880</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 14:25:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://weblog.tomgraves.org/?p=1044#comment-39880</guid>
		<description>Vision and Values (and Beliefs) are many times overlooked or construed as a mission statement. The vision helps one to select what to do and how to do it. It defines the somewhat liquid boundaries of the enterprise. Simon Sinek describes this http://www.startwithwhy.com/ . Those that fail to address and reevaluate the vision will not be as successful as those who have a clear vision.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vision and Values (and Beliefs) are many times overlooked or construed as a mission statement. The vision helps one to select what to do and how to do it. It defines the somewhat liquid boundaries of the enterprise. Simon Sinek describes this <a href="http://www.startwithwhy.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.startwithwhy.com/</a> . Those that fail to address and reevaluate the vision will not be as successful as those who have a clear vision.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

