Enterprise Architecture Management Tool Market Sounding

This Tender is invited by the Issuer. Overview The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) is conducting a market sounding exercise, by way of a Request for Information (RFI), to gather information on modern enterprise architecture management (EAM) tools that could establish a reliable, connected and sustainable architecture repository. This is an information-gathering activity only; it will not select a preferred supplier, establish a panel or award a contract. Purpose Architecture information is currently distributed across modelling tools, spreadsheets, documents, SharePoint and other repositories. This limits consolidated visibility of business, information, application and technology relationships, lifecycle risks, dependencies and architecture governance outcomes. The RFI will test the capability and maturity of available platforms, alignment with DEWR functional and non-functional requirements, implementation and migration approaches, integration options, support models, delivery risks and indicative commercial arrangements. The intended outcome is an evidence-based comparison of market capability to inform future business case, investment and procurement decisions. About DEWR has developed an EAM Requirements Matrix, a Vendor Response Template, an indicative Pricing Schedule and an Evaluation Plan. The current environment and initial use cases have been documented to support market responses. Architecture and portfolio information is currently distributed across spreadsheets, documents, SharePoint, service management and project repositories. The RFI will explore options for a modern EAM platform and an incremental minimum viable product approach. Scope The scope of this market sounding includes testing: Capability and maturity of available EAM platforms Alignment with DEWR functional and non-functional requirements Implementation and migration approaches Integration options Support models Delivery risks Indicative commercial arrangements Users and Their Needs The platform is expected to support specialist and non-specialist users, including enterprise, solution, security, business, information, data, technology and infrastructure architects; business analysts; application, technology, capability and service owners; information custodians and data stewards; governance participants; project teams; ICT managers; executives; platform administrators; contributors; reviewers; approvers; and read-only users. Users need a connected source of architecture information that supports modelling, portfolio and lifecycle management, impact analysis, road mapping, governance workflows, reporting and collaboration. Non-architect users need business-friendly ways to review, contribute to and maintain relevant information. Executives and governance bodies need clear dashboards, heatmaps, lifecycle views and traceability between strategy, capabilities, applications, information and technologies. Technical and Business Constraints The proposed platform must address the detailed functional and non-functional requirements supplied with the RFI, including applicable Australian Government security, privacy, records management and regulatory obligations, and support information up to and including PROTECTED. The environment spans public cloud, private cloud or managed hosting, departmental and shared-services applications, multiple suppliers and separate development, test, production and disaster recovery arrangements. Potential integration points include Microsoft Entra ID, Microsoft 365, SharePoint, ServiceNow, Power BI, Azure DevOps and Sparx Enterprise Architect. Repository volumes, final licence quantities, migration scope, information quality and integration priorities are not yet confirmed. Information Requested Respondents must identify assumptions, limits, dependencies, prerequisites, exclusions, customer responsibilities and any additional licensing or services. Roadmap capability must be distinguished from capability available in the proposed production release. For comparative pricing, respondents must use the common assumptions in the Pricing Schedule: 5 administrators, 20 architect/modellers, 100 contributors and 300 viewers. These are planning assumptions only and are not committed contractual volumes. Responses should address the following response format elements: References Relevant case study Presentation Other Instructions to Tenderers Indicative milestones will be confirmed before publication. The planned sequence is: RFI publication Clarification period Response closing date Conformance review and individual assessment Comparative and consensus assessment Demonstrations or clarification sessions if required Endorsement of the RFI findings and recommended next steps