Anne has been doing great work looking at this stuff. ++ http://www.burtongroup.com/Client/Research/Download.aspx?cid=1454
I think you might have to be a Burton client to use this link... Miko --- In [email protected], "Anne Thomas Manes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1. > > To rephrase, lack of governance (i.e., the complete process) severely > impedes SOA. > > Jeff asked me this question privately last week. Today he asked me > whether 'business & I.T. alignment' is killing SOA. My response to him > was: > > I think lack of understanding of what it really takes to do SOA is > what kills SOA. To fully deliver the returns promised by SOA, it needs > to be part of a much larger initiative to transform IT. The following > perspectives will significantly limit the potential return on > investment: > > - Technology-centric effort > - Project-centric effort > - Integration-focused effort > > Characteristics that facilitate success: > > - Investment in social capital, i.e. learn to speak "business" and > establish trust > - Enterprise-wide perspective > - Prioritization of projects based on desired business outcomes > - Focus on improving data quality and process optimization > - Major changes to the IT department, e.g., new CIO, reorganization, > adoption of agile > > Anne > > p.s. (this was not part of my original response to Jeff) > The major changes to the IT department aren't essential, but they > cause a massive shake-up that typically sparks a significant change in > the attitude of the IT staff -- both in the way they interact with > each other and the way they interact with people in other groups. It's > the change in attitude that facilitates success > > > On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Michael Poulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Looks like we have to define vocabulary before getting into this discussion. > > > > Following TOGAF and some SOA related publications: > > - Governance is a process of creation policies and procedures > > - Management is the means that implements governance by enforcing and > > controlling compliance with policies and procedures > > > > One of the forms of procedures is architectural/design reviews conducted by > > Architectural organizations at corporate/enterprise level, at LOb and BU > > levels. Since SOA is growing into enterprise level, SOA Governance becomes a > > part of EA Governance. > > > > "people with diverse skills and background" may be leveraged by 1) > > education; 2)direct management; 3)constant control > > > > We should not mix management problems and process (escalation and conflict > > resolution) with governance. I would recommend to look into ITIL v.3 to see > > how IT services (operations) are now viewed in the manner very similar (but > > not the same) to SO governance. > > > > - Michael > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: Yogish Pai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 7:38:27 PM > > Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Is Governance Killing SOA? > > > > Yes! Governance is hampering SOA (I would not say that it is killing SOA) > > and has got nothing to do with technology, products or standards. > > > > It is all about how to leverage people with diverse skills and background, > > alignment and consistency between various governance processes (Corporate, > > IT, EA, SOA, etc) and politics (escalation process, conflict resolutions, > > who makes what decision, etc.). > > > > Based on my limited observation, I am yet to see a clearly defined approach > > by the leadership team to deal with each of these issues. Yes! these topics > > need to be clearly defined and communicated out to the enterprise. > > > > - Yogish > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > > From: JP Morgenthal <morgenthaljp@ avorcor.com> > > To: service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com > > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:49:55 AM > > Subject: Re: [service-orientated -architecture] Is Governance Killing SOA? > > > > In my experience, a conceptual understanding of what is a service > > is killing SOA. I'd like to believe after the last 14 years that > > I have built a good experience base for design of services (that > > includes CORBA). I design nice service-oriented boundaries and > > software engineers look at it and just go straight for the > > tightly-coupled modeled and then tell me, "no, it's not > > tightly-coupled because it's based on an interface." > > > > Interface-based design and design-by-contract are not > > one-in-the-same, but as long as a majority of individuals > > implementing SOA don't understand this delicate delineation, SOA > > will suffer. Clearly, for many software engineers, they see a > > service as a reusable component, while for many of us that have > > been at this game awhile, we see a service as a more declarative > > entity oriented strongly toward a business bent. > > > > Having to share SOA design with engineers that don't get it has > > consistently led to a failure to move forward with the SOA design > > in favor of a modified component-oriented design. Hence, failed > > SOA. > > > > On Thu Jul 17 11:49:20 CDT 2008, jeffrschneider > > <jeffrschneider@ hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> > >> Is governance killing SOA? > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Jeff Schneider > >> > >> > >> > > > > >
