(1) I make a distinction between SOA & its Governance. The main point of my post is that there is a pattern and maturity process to SOA Governance.
(2) Don't see a necessity for "rephrasing". SOA Governance is challenging and remains a barrier to successful adoption. Lack of SOA governance is a common reason for failure. No news here... (3) "SOA" has been around for more than a decade now. It is relatively mature, because SOA awareness is significantly higher than for example 5 years ago; there are loads of reference material, best practices, design methodologies, newer generations of tooling, customer case studies, self-proclaimed experts... and the vendor ecosystem has already gone through consolidation. --- In [email protected], Michael Poulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I allow myself to re-phrase Babak: the absence or shortage of SOA Governance "remains one of the most challenging barriers and key causes of SOA failure..." > > Interesting, how SOA can reach a "relative maturity" without Governance?.. > > - Michael > > > > > ________________________________ > From: babakh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Tuesday, December 2, 2008 3:16:48 PM > Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] SOA Governance Maturity Model > > > Successful SOA rollout is dependent on SOA Governance. Despite the > relative maturity of SOA, SOA Governance remains one of the most > challenging barriers and key causes of SOA failure... > > You can read more on this subject at > http://soa-biz. blogspot. com/2008/ 12/soa-governanc e-maturity- model.html > > Thanks! > Babak Hosseinzadeh > [EMAIL PROTECTED] tegy.com >
