This whole post is from a comment I just made on the discussion board on the LinkedIn group Business Architecture Community.

In a value network, value is seemed to be created in a series of chained events where each contributing party creates a set of specific values to it’s closest receiver. This hints on the fact that value can transform in several dimensions (type, size, quality, importance and time) as it change hands. It also hints on the fact that you should focus your effort on creating value for the closest receiver.

There are excellent work done on this by several people and here are a few:

http://www.cs.vu.nl/~zderzsi/current/busital06.pdf more from Jaap Gordijn + the e3value tools and framework can be found at http://www.e3value.com

On the blog http://business-model-design.blogspot.com/ Dr. Alexander Osterwalder explains and elaborates on his methods for business model design and visualization.

I’ve use this notion of networked value to realign, build and strengthen teams.

To many times I’ve heard architects say that business architecture is more important than any of the other knowledge domains of architecture. This is simply not true! The truth is that business architecture is not the architecture of the business, it is only one part of the whole enterprise architecture needed to explain the business. The knowledge domain refered to as business architecture is just as needed by the business as any of the other knowledge domains.

The business architecture of the whole may be the scoping of the business architecture of  a part which maybe the scoping of the business architecture of a realisation.

Keeping this term war up will only increase the divide between “business” and “operations”.