On 02/05/07, Jerry Zhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Business Process not= GE. BP is the interface between > customers and the organization. Because BP is defined > as such (begin and end with customers in delivering a > service/product). There are other proceses: > management process (ie planning) and support process > (ie. HR).
BP is NOT the _interface_ between customers and the organisation. BP is about either the execution or measurement of that interaction. As a customer when I "buy" a share in GE the fact that there is a BP (or not) behind that is irrelevant to me, I have an interaction. When I walk into the shops of a retailer and buy a can of beans, or Dutchy Oaten Biscuits, there is no Business Process from that retailer that I care about, they are providing a _service_ to me. > > SOA is good for BP because of requirement of constant > change customers/demands/products/services > /regulations/policies etc. SOA is created for change. > SOA may not be good for other types of process. In > that case, traditional applications will work well. The huge assumption here is that business process is everything in a business, and it isn't. Sales for instance is one of the truly mythical "process" driven areas of a business. I think here this is the same point I raise with John Evdemon. There are clearly two forms of SOA forming, the technical delivery one (which is what you appear to be refering to) and the conceptual and architectural one which operates at a level of abstraction that is _higher_ than execution or measurement efforts such as BP. SOA is NOT technology. All of the technology bit is about the Service Oriented Design/Development/Delivery of IT (a joke that only works in the UK, like the SOA jokes of the Netherlands). > > Web services being used not= SOA being used. Web > services are often used where they are not need to. > > Process is the unit of analysis for BPM in the same > way object is the unit of analysis for OO. Process > needs to be modeled, tracked, monitored, and measured. > BP can be modeled by BP type and BP instances with > two goals respectively: strategic (ie customer > satisfaction) and operation goals (ie fast delivery). > Two goals are measured differently and the model > itself is a way of strategy implemenation. > > There is not comparison between BPM and Procedure > orientation. They are at different levels of > abstraction. To do so is like to compare organ > function (ie. liver, kidnney) with psycholology. What one is a formal science and the other is populated by quacks? :) There is a comparison in that both BP and Procedural take the execution thread as having primacy. That caused issues in medium systems and its hard to see how that won't, and I have seen it, cause major issues at enterprise levels. > > David Taylor's convergent engineering is good at OO > level for organizations with mechanistic structure > (see Mintzberg' "Structure in Fives") and is not good > to model other types of organizations such ad hoc > organizations. > > OO is powerful but we are two levels of abstraction > above now. To fully utilize IT potential and we need > to model large businesses in all levels of abstraction > and utilze all technologies. I'm not arguing that OO is everything, I'm arguing that just as OO is better than procedural so Business SOA is a better contextual framework for supporting business than BP. > > Kind regards > > Jerry > > --- Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm really struggling to picture the business > > process that = GE. > > > > To say that SOA is limited to usefulness around BP > > is (IMO) a little odd. > > I've worked on agent projects where we used services > > and had BDI as the > > method for defining how they worked, I've worked > > with goal driven parts of > > organisations and use that, but pretty much always > > used service as the > > "container" for those definitions. > > > > The current IT obsession with process also tends to > > think that all processes > > are executable and that the IT execution is the same > > as the business process > > (or should be). BPM is visual COBOL, its a > > procedural language with async > > support that is still at its heart bound by the same > > limitations that made > > OO such a powerful metaphor over procedural in the > > 90s. > > > > Steve > > > > > > On 01/05/07, Jerry Zhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > From your perspective, you received a service > > from GE. > > > From GE perspective it is a business process that > > > ended in delivering a service/product to you, a > > > customer. > > > > > > Of course, process is not all that is used to > > model an > > > enterprise. It is the operating processes where > > SOA > > > is most useful. > > > > > > Jerry > > > > > > --- Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <jones.steveg%40gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > I'm not buying the Process is a higher level of > > > > abstraction than service. > > > > Lets put it this way > > > > > > > > General Electric offer me a service as a > > > > shareholder, there is a defined > > > > contract and a defined value and a defined set > > of > > > > interactions. In > > > > otherwords its the entire General Electric > > company > > > > that I'm interacting > > > > with. This isn't even the most abstract service > > I > > > > can think of, take the > > > > UN, EU or whatever all can be, fairly easily, > > > > described as a service. > > > > > > > > You can't describe a business just in terms of > > its > > > > processes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 28/04/07, Jerry Zhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <jerryyz%40yahoo.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Form business people's perspective, yes, SOA > > and > > > > BPM > > > > > are the same thing. From IT people's > > perspective, > > > > > they are different as much as they are > > different > > > > > between OO and SOA. > > > > > > > > > > We often say that Service is higher level of > > > > > abstraction than Objects. In the same line, > > > > Processes > > > > > in BPM is higher level abstraction than > > Service. > > > > Both > > > > > business logic and infrustracture units at > > these > > > > > different levels of abstraction are different. > > I > > > > see > > > > > BMP is the highest level of abstration in the > > > > > evolution of IT started from machine language > > 0's > > > > and > > > > > 1's. > > > > > > > > > > Jerry > > > > > > > > > > --- Todd Biske <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <todd.biske%40gmail.com> > > > > <todd.biske%40gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 27, 2007, at 8:51 AM, Robin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is consistent with the statements that > > came > > > > out > > > > > > of the SOA > > > > > > Consortium Executive briefings. The CIOs > > > > > > participating pretty much > > > > > > said the same thing, as the first of the > > five > > > > > > published insights was > > > > > > that "There should be no artificial > > separation > > > > > > between BPM and SOA." > > > > > > > > > > > > -tb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > > > > protection around > > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
