Skip to content

DoDAF

DoDAF

Department of Defense Architecture Framework

1. Overview: DoDAF, the US DoD’s EA framework for representing complex defense systems through multiple views

    flowchart LR
    A["Heterogeneous defense systems<br/>lack interoperability;<br/>acquisition and operating costs balloon"] --"Standardize architecture<br/>via multiple views"--> B["DoDAF<br/>integrated architecture framework"] --"Improve interoperability<br/>and acquisition efficiency"--> C["Integrated operational<br/>capability for defense IT"]

    style A fill:#FFEBEE,stroke:#D32F2F,color:#000
    style B fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#1976D2,color:#000
    style C fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#388E3C,color:#000
  

Definition: An enterprise architecture framework used by the US Department of Defense (DoD) to describe the architecture of complex defense systems, programs, and organizations through a standardized system of views, achieving interoperability, more efficient system acquisition, and decision support.

Characteristics: (4-view system) Started as a 4-view system (AV, OV, SV, TV) in DoDAF 1.0, expanded to 8 view categories in DoDAF 2.0. (Defense-domain specialization) Unlike TOGAF or Zachman, it is specialized for the defense, military, and security domain — mission-centric architecture design. (JCIDS linkage) Linked to the US DoD’s JCIDS (Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System) and to national defense informatization systems elsewhere.


2. DoDAF’s core structure

A. The architecture view system

    flowchart TD
    subgraph R1[" "]
        direction LR
        AV["All View (AV)<br/>Overview view —<br/>architecture scope, purpose,<br/>assumptions, and overall context"]
        OV["Operational View (OV)<br/>Operational view —<br/>mission, business processes,<br/>information exchange flows"]
    end
    subgraph R2[" "]
        direction LR
        SV["Systems View (SV)<br/>System view —<br/>system/service composition,<br/>functions and interfaces"]
        TV["Technical View (TV)<br/>Technical view —<br/>standards, specifications,<br/>technical guidance, interoperability criteria"]
    end

    style AV fill:#1E3A5F,stroke:#1E3A5F,color:#fff
    style OV fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#1976D2,color:#000
    style SV fill:#F3E5F5,stroke:#7B1FA2,color:#000
    style TV fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#388E3C,color:#000
    style R1 fill:none,stroke:none
    style R2 fill:none,stroke:none
  
ViewKey questionKey deliverablesTarget stakeholders
All View (AV)What is this architecture for?AV-1 (Overview), AV-2 (Integrated Dictionary)All stakeholders
Operational View (OV)How is the mission carried out?OV-1 (High-level concept), OV-5 (Operational activities)Operations planners
Systems View (SV)Which systems support operations?SV-1 (System interfaces), SV-4 (Functional description)System engineers
Technical View (TV)Which standards and technologies apply?TV-1 (Technical standards profile)Technical architects

DoDAF 2.0 expanded view system

Additional viewDescription
Capability View (CV)Gap analysis between required and current capabilities
Project View (PV)Program/project schedule and investment planning
Services View (SvcV)Representation of SOA-based service architecture
Data & Information View (DIV)Data model and information structure

B. Applying defense IT architecture and its linkage elsewhere

    flowchart LR
    subgraph US["US DoDAF application"]
        direction TB
        U1["JCIDS<br/>Joint Capabilities Integration<br/>and Development System"]
        U2["PPBE<br/>Planning, Programming,<br/>Budgeting, and Execution"]
        U3["DAS<br/>Defense Acquisition System"]
    end

    subgraph KR["Korea's defense architecture linkage"]
        direction TB
        K1["Defense Informatization<br/>Basic Act — national defense<br/>informatization framework"]
        K2["Defense EA<br/>national defense enterprise architecture"]
        K3["MND IT<br/>defense informatization program management"]
    end

    US --"Methodology reference,<br/>standards linkage"--> KR

    style US fill:#E3F2FD,stroke:#1976D2,color:#1E3A5F
    style KR fill:#E8F5E9,stroke:#388E3C,color:#1B5E20
  

DoDAF vs. other EA frameworks

ComparisonDoDAFTOGAFZachman
Primary targetDefense, military, intelligence agenciesEnterprises in generalGeneral-purpose EA classification scheme
Central conceptMission and capabilityBusiness process / IT alignment6×6 classification matrix
MethodologyMulti-view architecture descriptionADM cyclical processClassification scheme (not a methodology)
StrengthsInteroperability, acquisition consistencyChange management, reuseCompleteness, systematic classification
Local linkageDefense EA, Joint Chiefs of Staff architecturePublic-sector EA, financial-sector EAEA documentation aid

3. Expected benefits and practical application of DoDAF

CategoryKey expected benefitPractical application
InteroperabilityStandardized interfaces across heterogeneous defense systemsSpecify information exchange between systems via OV/SV deliverables
Acquisition efficiencyPrevents redundant investment and identifies reusable componentsPerform current-to-target architecture gap analysis based on SV
Decision supportArchitecture-data-driven investment prioritizationUse the CV (Capability View) to visualize the gap between required and current capability
Public-sector applicationStandard basis for EA in defense and public informatization programsApply the DoDAF OV/SV deliverable structure when establishing defense EA