ROI works where you are talking about ROI, i.e. top line increase. If the focus is cost reduction then a cost reduction calculation works better.
I've done quite a bit around doing TCO modelling (or even TVO - Total Value of Operation) and monitoring and its hard because most of the time companies don't have the clarity. The key is that one model doesn't work for IT you need (IME) at least four basic ones Differentiation - MASSIVE market impact. Measure it based on the share price or other pieces ROI - Topline impact (TVO) Cost - TCO Utility - Cost against business metric Steve 2008/10/28 Michael Poulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I prefer to calculate ROI instead of cost, and two values - short-term and > long-term ROI. A lot of current problems in the companies is in that they > calculated just the cost of implementation... Do you know how to calculate > potential benefits in monetary metrics? > > - Michael > > ________________________________ > From: htshozawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 9:59:17 PM > Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Rhody tells you how to sell > SOA > > Understood. The definition of flexibility isn't ambigous. > > Also want to point out the there is a cost associated with obtaining > flexibility. I think it's better to calculate the benefit that may be > obtained from flexibility to see if it is more than the cost > associated with it. > > H.Ozawa > > --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Michael > Poulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED] .> wrote: >> >> Exactly, it "does not equal profit", and may be not good for every > process. If I look at the Business with Service Eye (where process is > just an implementation) , flexibility is what is needed in frequently > changing external environment. If the latter does not change or > changes slowly, flexibility is not that crucial. >> >> So, the first is a requirement for flexibility that comes from the > business needs/market/ external environment; which business > service/process has to be made flexible is the second. >> >> I tried to point that flexibility is not that ambiguous. >> >> - Michael >> > > >
