I have found that the "business requirements" pointed by Rob are usually coming 
from the Operational Support Process groups, they think in tools and narrowed 
activities. If you talk to business people above that level, they refer to 
business tasks and their maximum technical exposure is at the level of 
operational or reference databases, or Web applications; they do not know about 
screens, fields, and so on. I believe the IT has to get requirements from the 
latter business level. Operational Support Process groups are equal to an Excel 
spreadsheet - they do not matter to the business tasks, they are the answer to 
HOW realise an operation with existing resources. If resources change, this HOW 
gets obsolete right away.

An "idea of being business driven" is based on real business tasks, services, 
functions, and features, not on the automation of support operations that only 
make the Business-IT gap even deeper day by day.

- Michael



________________________________
From: Rob Eamon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, November 3, 2008 4:43:02 PM
Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Rhody tells you how to sell SOA


--- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, "Nibeck, 
Mike" <mike.nibeck@ ...> wrote:
>
> The idea of being business driven is almost non existent anymore. 

I agree, at least in part.

A part of the reason is possibly this: business "requirements" rarely 
are. Instead, business requirements documents are usually full of 
technical decisions and solutions. Screen shots. File format layouts. 
Screen flow wire diagrams. All great tools. None are geared towards 
defining business requirements.

But perhaps its just a naming issue. It seems perfectly reasonable 
for folks in groups other than IT to specify functional 
solutions/approache s in many cases. e.g. "We need a field to capture 
XYZ on screen ABC." While there is a business level need lurking 
behind that, it's a specific technical solution, not a business 
requirement.

For many things, this level of specification is fine. For other 
things, it can lead to tunnel vision.

Getting funding for an "SOA project" is similar to the above problem. 
It assumes an approach before understanding the needs. It assumes the 
approach is *the* important part.

-Rob

 


      

Reply via email to