GAP analysis report - appears not work properly

[Peter S]

I originally reported this problem on August 10 but to date have not had a proper answer. The last information that was sent to me was an explanation of how to use the Gap analysis report which was not the problem.

My problem is not with using the GAP analysis tool. I can set up a GAP
analysis report fairly easily, the problem is that the tool does not appear
to support the GAP analysis technique used in TOGAF.

The Gap analysis tool appears to be based upon the comparison between two packages. One package containing the elements of the Baseline architecture the second containing the elements of the Target architecture. The Tool will identify components that have been created in the target architecture as well as identifying elements that have not been carried through to the target architecture. That is those elements that have been eliminated.  The problem is that an element can, and often is, carried through from the baseline architecture to the target state.

For example if I had a business that included sales orders. Within the
business I had business functions for

        Direct orders
        Postal orders
        Email order

The business is moving to a Web-based business model and in the target state
will have the following business functions.

        Email order
        Web based order


Now according to the GAP analysis tool these business functions would be held in different packages say Baseline and Target.
If I produce a Gap report then the gap tool will identify
        1. That the Direct orders business function has been eliminated
        2  That Postal orders business function has been eliminated
        3. That Web based orders business function has been created.

All of this is fine except that the Business function 'Email order' has been
retained in the target architecture (perhaps with some changed
requirements). It should appear in the X and Y grid of the GAP analysis
report representing a function that exists both in the current and target
state architectures.

The problem with this is that to properly reflect this the one function
would need to be stored in two separate packages.


Is there any way of achieving this?