Comparing UAF to DoDAF-20240125_140035-Meeting Recording

AFIT Instructor Steve Glazewski, AFIT/LSS, presents a comparison between DODAF and Unified Architecture Framework (UAF). Here’s a comparison between the Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) and the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF):

Unified Architecture Framework (UAF)

• UAF, with its tight coupling to SysML, “prepares” you better for a slightly smoother transition into Digital Engineering when starting a System or Service acquisition effort than equivalent DoDAF models did.  That’s mainly because of the SysML, and it presumes some sort of transportability of the data FROM the requirements process at the tippy-top of the left arm of the Systems Engineering “V” to the Digital Engineering (DE)/Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) process that runs down that left arm of the “V.”  The point there being that no DE/MBSE = no difference at all.
• Origin: Evolved from the Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM), combining elements from both frameworks.
• Purpose: Provides a comprehensive approach to enterprise architecture, supporting a wide range of stakeholders and viewpoints.
• Flexibility: Designed to be adaptable, allowing for the creation of DoDAF-compliant views as well as additional useful views.
• Scope: Broader in scope, aiming to integrate various architectural frameworks and methodologies into a unified approach.

Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF)

• Origin: Developed specifically for the U.S. Department of Defense to ensure standardized architecture practices across the department.
• Purpose: Focuses on architecture description through a set of predefined views, ensuring consistency and interoperability within the DoD.
• Structure: Provides detailed guidelines and models for architecture development, emphasizing conformance to ensure data reuse and common understanding.
• Scope: Primarily targeted at defense-related projects, with a strong emphasis on classified and unclassified architecture development.

Key Differences

• Flexibility vs. Specificity: UAF offers more flexibility and broader applicability, while DoDAF is more specific to defense needs and provides detailed guidelines for conformance.
• Integration: UAF aims to integrate multiple frameworks and methodologies, whereas DoDAF is focused on standardizing architecture within the DoD.
• Stakeholder Focus: UAF supports a wider range of stakeholders, while DoDAF is tailored to the needs of the DoD and its specific stakeholders.