|
On 12 Jul 2006, at 13:08, Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > I like your basic definition of SOA (a set of best practices), but > I have to push back on this assertion: > > > Moving to an SOA is non-disruptive because it can be done > incrementally, project by project. > > From a technical perspective, yes -- SOA can be done incrementally, > but SOA is much more about culture than it is about technology. Agreed. > And a SOA initiative will be very disruptive from a cultural > perspective. It certainly has that potential, but the technical incremental implementation capability does support incremental business cultural change. This is actually proving of benefit at a company with whom I'm currently working. They have a culture that can be loosely, albeit unkindly, characterized as "Oooh, shiny!" followed by the sound of a stampede in the direction of the latest new technology. Incrementally introducing services gives the time to protect them from themselves by explaining where the practices are and are not appropriate. > If you look at SOA strictly as a technical approach, you won't be > very successful with it. As Steve, Alexander, and Keith said in > their responses, SOA is about IT/busines alignment. IT can't do it > alone. It must be a joint effort with the business. Agreed again. Regards, Patrick ---- S P Engineering, Inc. The experts in large scale distributed OO systems design and implementation. (C++, Java, Common Lisp, Jini, middleware, SOA) __._,_.___
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
