Markdown Editor

Architecture Change Request Template (TOGAF Phase H)

Phase H change to an approved architecture: driver, affected items, simplification, incremental or re-architecting class, impact, options, decision, updates

आर्किटेक्चरपूर्णTOGAF Standard, 10th Edition (2025 release with Technical Corrigendum 1): Phase H, Architecture Change Managementchangerequest
एडिटर में खोलें.md डाउनलोड करें

उपयोग कैसे करें: Use it when an approved target, Transition Architecture, requirement or contract should change. Fill the driver, the affected architecture and the classification first, because the class decides the approval route. The main pitfall is calling a change incremental to avoid a new ADM cycle when it alters the target.

प्रीव्यू

Architecture Change Request: [ACR-YYYY-NN] [Change title]

An Architecture Change Request proposes a change to an approved architecture: its target, a Transition Architecture, a requirement, a principle or standard, or an Architecture Contract. It belongs to Phase H (Architecture Change Management) of the Architecture Development Method (ADM) in The TOGAF Standard, 10th Edition (2025 release with Technical Corrigendum 1), where the Architecture Board assesses each change and decides whether it is a simplification change, an incremental change or a re-architecting change that needs a new ADM cycle. This template records the driver, the affected architecture, the classification, the impact, the options, the recommendation, the decision and the follow-through. Replace every [bracketed] value and every row marked Example.

Document control

FieldValue
Document ID[ACR-YYYY-NN]
Change title[Short title]
Version[0.1]
Status[Raised / Under assessment / Awaiting decision / Approved / Approved with conditions / Rejected / Deferred / Implemented / Closed]
Requester[@requester, team]
Assessing architect[@architect]
Owner of the change (after approval)[@owner]
Approvers / reviewers[Architecture Board, sponsor, affected contract owners]
Architecture affected[Engagement name; ADD-ENG-001 version; ARS-ENG-001 baseline; roadmap version]
Date raisedYYYY-MM-DD
Decision required byYYYY-MM-DD
Urgency[Routine / Expedited / Emergency]
Classification[Internal / Confidential]
Last updatedYYYY-MM-DD

Approvals

RoleNameDecisionConditionsDate
Assessing architect[@architect][Recommendation][Conditions]YYYY-MM-DD
Lead architect of the engagement[@lead-architect][Supports / Does not support][Conditions]YYYY-MM-DD
Sponsor[@sponsor][Agrees / Does not agree][Conditions]YYYY-MM-DD
Architecture Board chair[@chair][Approved / Approved with conditions / Rejected / Deferred][Board outcome record]YYYY-MM-DD

Revision history

VersionDateAuthorChange summary
0.1YYYY-MM-DD[@requester]Driver, description and affected architecture raised
0.3YYYY-MM-DD[@architect]Example: Classification, impact and three options assessed
1.0YYYY-MM-DD[@chair]Example: Approved with conditions (outcome record ARB-2027-011)
1.1YYYY-MM-DD[@owner]Example: Implementation recorded; closed after post-change review

Contents

1. Change summary

FieldValue
Proposed changeExample: Feed customer changes from policy system A to the customer data hub through interim change data capture until the vendor's APIs arrive, instead of waiting for the APIs
DriverExample: Policy system A vendor has moved its API release by nine months (risk RSK-01 has materialised)
ClassExample: Incremental change
Architecture affectedExample: Transition Architecture TA-1, work package WP-02, requirements ARS-INT-01 and ARS-INT-04 (new), contract AC-02
CostExample: USD 175,000 over the interim period, drawn from the roadmap contingency; committed roadmap total unchanged at USD 2,415,000
Effect on datesExample: TA-1 exit moves by six weeks instead of nine months
Decision askedExample: Approve option B and the amendment of contract AC-02

2. Change driver and source

2.1 Driver type

Driver typeTypical examplesThis request
Business strategy or operating modelNew product, merger, divestment, new channel[ ]
Regulation or legalNew law, supervisory finding, court decision[ ]
Supplier or technology eventRelease delay, end of support, price change, new capabilityExample: [x]
Lessons learned from deliveryA design that does not work as assumed[ ]
Compliance review findingA contract cannot be met as written[ ]
Dispensation expiryAn exception ends and the underlying issue remains[ ]
Standards or principles updateA standard retired, a new principle adopted[ ]
Performance and value monitoringSuccess measures off track at a plateau[ ]

2.2 Evidence

ItemDetail
SourceExample: Vendor roadmap letter dated YYYY-MM-DD; confirmed in the supplier review meeting
What changedExample: The customer API for policy system A moves from release R7 to R9, about nine months later
Link to known riskExample: Vision risk RSK-01 (vendor cannot deliver APIs before contract renewal)
Who raised it[@requester], WP-02 delivery lead
Consequence if no changeExample: WP-02 cannot master policy system A customers; TA-1 exit slips nine months; TA-2 and the KPI-01 benefits follow

3. Description of the proposed change

3.1 Current and proposed position

AspectCurrent (approved)Proposed
Example: How policy system A customer data reaches the hubVendor customer API, planned for release R7Interim change data capture from the policy system A database, published as customer events in the target format; switch to the vendor API when R9 is live
Example: TA-1 definitionHub is master for customers from systems A and B through APIsHub is master for customers from systems A and B; system A fed by the interim path
Example: Integration principle AP-01Met through published APIsMet for consumers; the interim feed is a provider-side exception with an end date
[Aspect][Current][Proposed]

3.2 Why now

Example: The data hub contract (AC-02) has a TA-1 checkpoint in about three months (2027-08-30). Deciding now lets the team build the interim feed in parallel with the hub configuration; deciding after the checkpoint would add the build time to the delay.

3.3 Out of scope of this request

Example: the choice of change data capture product (left to the platform team within the approved standards), and any change to policy systems B and C.

4. Affected architecture

Item typeIDItemEffect of the change
Architecture Definition DocumentADD-ENG-001 section 4.2Target data architectureNote the interim feed for system A; target unchanged
Transition ArchitectureTA-1 (Example)FoundationExit criteria reworded; date moves six weeks
Work packageWP-02 (Example)Customer data hub and data qualityAdds the interim feed; cost and duration change
RequirementARS-INT-01 (Example)Events carry golden ID and schema versionApplies to the interim feed as well
RequirementARS-INT-04 (Example, new)Interim feed publishes the same customer events as the target APIAdded to the specification
ContractAC-02 (Example)Data hub vendor and data teamAmended: new requirement and checkpoint
PrincipleAP-01 (Example)Integrate through published interfacesTemporary provider-side exception, dated
Building blockExample: Change data capture serviceNew, interimRetire when the vendor API is live
Success measureSM-02 (Example)Golden ID coverageTA-1 target date moves six weeks
Decision recordExample: ADR-021 (new)Interim feed for policy system ARecords the option choice
[Type][ID][Item][Effect]

5. Change classification

5.1 Classes and routes

The three class names come from Phase H; the descriptions, examples and routes below are this template's suggestions. Set your own routes in the Architecture Board charter.

ClassWhat it means hereTypical examplesRoute
Simplification changeReduces, consolidates or tidies the architecture without changing what it delivers or its targetRemoving a duplicate standard, merging two building blocks, retiring an unused interfaceLead architect approves; recorded in the change register; board informed
Incremental changeAdds to or alters part of the architecture while the target direction and its basis stay the sameInterim component, changed Transition Architecture, new requirement inside existing goalsArchitecture Board decides; existing deliverables updated, or selected phases repeated
Re-architecting changeAlters the target, its goals or its fundamental constraintsNew business model, replacing a core platform choice, goals that no longer holdNew Request for Architecture Work and a new ADM cycle; board and sponsor decide

5.2 Classification questions

QuestionAnswer (Example)Points to
Does the change alter the target architecture?No; the target still uses the vendor APINot re-architecting
Does it change business goals, drivers or principles?No; one principle gets a dated exceptionNot re-architecting
Does it change a Transition Architecture, a work package or a requirement?Yes: TA-1, WP-02, ARS-INT-04Incremental
Does it only remove or consolidate without changing outcomes?No; it adds an interim componentNot simplification
Does it change a signed contract?Yes: AC-02Board decision needed
Does it move cost beyond the approved envelope?No, funded from contingency (USD 140,000 left)Sponsor agreement; board informed of contingency use

5.3 Result

FieldValue
Proposed classExample: Incremental change
ReasoningExample: The target and its basis are unchanged; one Transition Architecture, one work package, one contract and the requirements change. Option C in section 7 would be re-architecting and is assessed only to show the board the alternative
RouteExample: Architecture Board decision at the next meeting; update existing deliverables; no new ADM cycle

6. Impact assessment

DimensionImpact of the proposed change (Example)Rating
Business outcomeTA-1 benefits arrive six weeks late instead of nine months lateLow negative
Success measuresSM-02 at 60% moves from month 8 to month 9.5; SM-01 at TA-2 unaffected if TA-2 keeps its dateLow negative
CostUSD 85,000 build plus USD 10,000 per month to run for nine months: USD 175,000Medium
ScheduleTA-1 exit plus six weeks; TA-2 unchanged by using float in WP-03Low
Delivery riskNew interim component; vendor database schema could change without noticeMedium
Security and privacyDatabase-level access to personal data; needs a service account with read-only rights and monitoringMedium
Compliance and contractsAC-02 amended; vendor support terms checked for database accessMedium
OperationsOne more component to run, then retireLow
People and skillsPlatform team needs change data capture skills; one engineer trainedLow
PrinciplesAP-01 exception on the provider side for about nine monthsMedium
[Dimension][Impact][High / Medium / Low]

6.1 Cost arithmetic

ItemOption B amount (Example)
Interim feed build and testUSD 85,000
Run cost: USD 10,000 per month for 9 monthsUSD 90,000
TotalUSD 175,000
Roadmap base; contingency 15% (USD 315,000); committed totalUSD 2,100,000; USD 315,000; USD 2,415,000
Option B funded from contingency: contingency leftUSD 315,000 minus USD 175,000 = USD 140,000
Committed total after the changeUSD 2,415,000 (unchanged)
Capital envelope (CNS-01)USD 2,500,000

Example check: adding USD 175,000 on top of the committed USD 2,415,000 would give USD 2,590,000, which breaks CNS-01 by USD 90,000. Funding the change from contingency keeps the commitment inside the cap; option A (USD 255,000) would leave only USD 60,000 of contingency for the rest of the programme.

7. Options considered

CriterionA: Wait for vendor APIB: Interim change data captureC: Bring forward policy system A consolidation
Change classNone (accept the delay)IncrementalRe-architecting (changes target sequence and platform basis)
TA-1 date effectPlus nine monthsPlus six weeksPlus twelve months for re-planning and delivery
Added cost (Example)About USD 255,000: legacy CRM extended support USD 120,000 plus dual running USD 15,000 per month for 9 monthsUSD 175,000Brings WP-05 (USD 460,000) forward and needs a new funding decision
Effect on targetNoneNoneTarget changes
RiskCRM support gap; KPI-01 benefits slipInterim component and schema driftLarge, new cycle
PrinciplesMetAP-01 dated exceptionMet
ReversibilityHighHigh: retire the feedLow
RecommendationNoYesNo, unless option B proves infeasible

7.1 Option evaluation notes

Example: Option A looks cheapest only if the cost of delay is ignored; once the extended CRM support and nine months of dual running are counted, it costs more than option B and delivers later. Option C solves the root cause but turns a supplier delay into a new architecture cycle; it remains the fallback if the vendor's database terms forbid change data capture.

8. Recommendation

Example: Approve option B as an incremental change, with these conditions:

  1. C1: The vendor confirms in writing that read-only database access for change data capture is within support terms, before build starts.
  2. C2: The interim feed passes the same contract tests as the target API (ARS-INT-04) before it feeds the hub in production.
  3. C3: The security architect approves the service account design and monitoring before go-live.
  4. C4: The interim feed is retired within three months of the vendor API going live; the AP-01 exception ends on that date or on YYYY-MM-DD, whichever is earlier.
  5. C5: If C1 fails, the assessing architect returns with option C as a new Request for Architecture Work.

9. Decision

FieldValue
DecisionExample: Approved with conditions
Decided byExample: Architecture Board, outcome record ARB-2027-011
Decision dateYYYY-MM-DD (Example: 2027-06-07)
Class confirmedExample: Incremental change
Option chosenExample: B: Interim change data capture
ReasonsExample: Lowest total cost including delay; target unchanged; reversible
Dissent or concerns recordedExample: Security member asked for a penetration test of the feed before go-live (added as C6)

9.1 Conditions

IDConditionOwnerDueStatus
C1 (Example)Vendor written confirmation of support terms[@supplier-manager]YYYY-MM-DD[Open / Met]
C2 (Example)Contract tests passed against both sources[@wp02-lead]YYYY-MM-DD[Open / Met]
C3 (Example)Service account design approved[@security-architect]YYYY-MM-DD[Open / Met]
C4 (Example)Interim feed retired after vendor API go-live[@platform-lead]YYYY-MM-DD[Open / Met]
C5 (Example)Fallback to option C if C1 fails[@architect]YYYY-MM-DD[Not triggered]
C6 (Example)Penetration test of the feed[@security-architect]YYYY-MM-DD[Open / Met]
[Cn][Condition][@owner]YYYY-MM-DD[Status]

9.2 Decision outcomes available

OutcomeMeaning
ApprovedProceed as recommended
Approved with conditionsProceed once the listed conditions are met, or while meeting them
DeferredDecide later; state what information is missing and the new date
RejectedDo not proceed; the approved architecture stands
Referred to a new cycleThe change is re-architecting; raise a Request for Architecture Work

10. Implementing the change

10.1 Repository and document updates

ItemUpdateOwnerDone
ADD-ENG-001Note interim feed in section 4.2; new version[@data-architect][ ]
ARS-ENG-001Add ARS-INT-04; update traceability; new version[@requirements-owner][ ]
RoadmapTA-1 exit criteria and date; WP-02 cost and duration; contingency drawn (USD 175,000)[@lead-architect][ ]
Contract AC-02Variation VAR-02 with ARS-INT-04, conditions C2, C3 and C6[@contract-owner][ ]
ADR-021Record the decision and options[@architect][ ]
Change registerEntry with class, decision and status[@board-secretary][ ]
Principle exceptionAP-01 exception logged with end date[@board-secretary][ ]
[Item][Update][@owner][ ]

10.2 Delivery actions

ActionOwnerDue
Example: Build and test the interim feed[@platform-lead]YYYY-MM-DD
Example: Update the WP-02 plan and budget[@wp02-lead]YYYY-MM-DD
Example: Schedule the compliance check of the feed at the TA-1 checkpoint[@architect]YYYY-MM-DD
[Action][@owner]YYYY-MM-DD

Record decisions in the architecture decision log (architecture/architecture-decision-log) and full records with the ADR template (architecture/adr-full). Project-level changes to scope, cost and schedule follow the project change control process (project/change-control).

11. Communication

AudienceMessageChannelWhenOwner
Example: WP-02 team and hub vendorInterim feed approved; contract amendment; new checkpointContract meetingWithin 5 working days[@contract-owner]
Example: WP-03 teamTA-2 date unchanged; float usedProgramme meetingNext meeting[@programme-manager]
Example: Sponsor and steering groupDecision, cost, dates, conditionsSteering reportNext report[@lead-architect]
Example: Distribution segment architectsCustomer events unchanged for consumersArchitecture community updateWithin 10 working days[@architect]
Example: Security operationsNew service account and monitoringTicket and briefingBefore go-live[@security-architect]
[Audience][Message][Channel][When][@owner]

12. Monitoring and closure

12.1 Monitoring

IndicatorExpectedCheck atOwner
Example: Interim feed events passing contract tests100%Weekly until TA-1 exit[@wp02-lead]
Example: TA-1 exit datePlanned date plus six weeks or earlierTA-1 checkpoint[@lead-architect]
Example: Actual cost against USD 175,000Within 10%Monthly[@finance]
Example: Vendor API release R9 statusOn the new dateSupplier review[@supplier-manager]
[Indicator][Expected][When][@owner]

12.2 Closure criteria

  • All conditions in section 9.1 met or formally closed
  • All updates in section 10.1 done and versioned
  • Interim component retired, or its retirement scheduled with an owner and the principle exception end date confirmed
  • Post-change review held and lessons recorded (project/lessons-learned)
  • Change register entry set to Closed

12.3 Post-change review

Example: Review held YYYY-MM-DD. The interim feed met contract tests from week two. TA-1 exited five weeks late against six planned. Lesson: add a supplier API readiness check to the design checkpoint of every contract that depends on a vendor interface.

12.4 Change register entry

ACR IDTitleClassDriverDecisionBoard recordStatusClosed
ACR-2027-03 (Example)Interim feed for policy system AIncrementalSupplier eventApproved with conditionsARB-2027-011ClosedYYYY-MM-DD
[ACR-YYYY-NN][Title][Class][Driver][Decision][ARB-YYYY-NNN][Status]YYYY-MM-DD

13. Glossary and references

13.1 Glossary

TermMeaning in this document
Architecture Change ManagementPhase H of the ADM: keeping the approved architecture fit for purpose as drivers change
Change registerThe list of all change requests with class, decision and status
DispensationA time-limited permission to deviate from an architecture requirement, principle or standard without changing the architecture
Incremental changeA change to part of the architecture that leaves the target direction and its basis unchanged
Re-architecting changeA change to the target, its goals or its fundamental constraints, handled by a new ADM cycle
Simplification changeA change that reduces or consolidates the architecture without changing what it delivers
Transition ArchitectureA stable intermediate state between the baseline and the target
[Term][Meaning]

13.2 References

IDReferenceVersion / date
REF-01The TOGAF Standard, 10th Edition (The Open Group, catalogue C220), incorporating Technical Corrigendum 1 (U254, 15 May 2025)19 May 2025
REF-02Architecture Board Charter (architecture/architecture-governance-charter)[x.y]
REF-03Architecture Definition Document (architecture/architecture-definition-document)[x.y]
REF-04Architecture Requirements Specification (architecture/architecture-requirements-specification)[x.y]
REF-05Architecture Roadmap and Transition Architectures (architecture/architecture-roadmap-transition)[x.y]
REF-06Architecture Contract (architecture/architecture-contract)[AC-nn]
REF-07Architecture Compliance Assessment (architecture/architecture-compliance-assessment)[x.y]
REF-08Request for Architecture Work, for re-architecting changes (architecture/request-for-architecture-work)[x.y]

Standard and licence note

Structure aligned with The TOGAF Standard, 10th Edition (2025 release with Technical Corrigendum 1), published by The Open Group: Phase H (Architecture Change Management) of the Architecture Development Method, with its classification of changes as simplification, incremental or re-architecting, and links to the Architecture Definition Document, Architecture Requirements Specification, Architecture Roadmap and Architecture Contracts. TOGAF and ArchiMate are registered trademarks of The Open Group. This template uses only the names of phases, deliverables and change classes; all text is original. It was written from general professional practice, without reading, quoting, paraphrasing or summarising the text of the standard, and it reproduces no definitions, tables or lists from it. The class descriptions, routes, classification questions and decision outcomes are suggestions of this template, not requirements of the standard. Check the current edition and any technical corrigenda at opengroup.org and obtain the standard for its own guidance. Template licence: MIT.

संबंधित टेम्पलेट