Interesting discussion. To clarify who I am, I am not working for a vendor (yet?), I am currently Enterprise Architect for a end-user company.
I don't say that BPM and formally defined processes is a killer application and that it's the perfect way for optimizing the business of a company. Definitely, I don't say that. I think only some very mechanistic and highly automated processes are potential candidates for BPM. What I say is that my business decision makers don't understand why they should invest in SOA if it does not help them to optimize their business processes, so they tend to consider that BPM and SOA are one same thing. I don't know how far this thinking is the result of vendors marketing. Kind regards. Robin --- In [email protected], Stefan Tilkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Robin, > > On Apr 26, 2007, at 3:04 PM, Robin wrote: > > But if you discuss more with enterprise architects or business people, > > there is no interest for them to build a SOA without some BPM. > I disagree 100%. At the enterprise level, everything is obviously > related to a company's business processes - but SOA does in no way > imply that these processes need to be formally defined, let alone > executable. In other words: I think one can be a believer in SOA as a > means to increase a business's agility because it improves business/ > IT alignment, but still be a non-believer in BPM. > > Here, > > SOA is an IT architecture which could increase the business agility > > and that one includes the use of BPM. > Why would it have to? > > Best regards, > Stefan > -- > Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq.com/blog/st/ >
