--- In [email protected], Todd Biske <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's hard to take a blanket statement regarding redundant capabilities and say whether it is good or bad. Part of it depends on the current corporate governance policies Indeed, it's real a dilemma. I say it's a paradox - an inefficiency paradox. The paradox is effectiveness requires redundancy. Moreover, I say it's better starting analysis with the paradox not the individual firm (1). Anne starts her analysis with the paradox, I think. She said, "If the system were truly service orientated, it would no longer have redundant capabilities " I think she is saying the aim or goal of SOA is universality (and that refactoring redundancies a lifestyle), but, note the `if' and `truly' this is describing the ideal, the reality is there will always be redundancies. The inefficiency paradox will always exist because "maximum impact may require inefficient (redundant) production" (2). For me, business and politics is all about - who has to go to who on whose terms for what [services]. Sorting all this out, well, starting with the inefficiency paradox is very helpful approach for me. You see how people are simply playing the paradox and that's what's driving industries. So, SOA reframes the reality of the inefficiency paradox (good) - update who has to go to who on whose terms for what - but SOA can't eliminate the paradox itself. I hope this makes sense. Galen (1) The Nature of the Firm (1937), R. H. COASE "Since there is apparently a trend in economic theory towards starting analysis with the individual firm and not with the industry, .." (2) "Paradox, process and perception: the role of organizations in clinical practice guidelines development", by Steven Lewis, MA. "Science aims for objectivity and universal application. Logically, national and even international guidelines would seem to be both feasible and efficient. However, other things being equal, physicians respond more readily to the counsel of their peers and local opinion leaders. Effective CPGs almost invariably have a local champion with credibility and clout in the community or institution. The paradox is that maximum impact may require inefficient (redundant) production, which may result in a series of similar, and in some cases identical, guidelines."
