<http://it.toolbox.com/people/madgreek/>*You can read Mike Kavis's
blog at:
http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/madgreek/soa-pay-now-or-pay-forever-28585
Gervas*
<<An article written by Joe McKendrick called SOA eased the way for
recent shotgun financial mergers
<http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=1227> inspired me to take
this discussion one step further. To me, the biggest benefit of SOA done
right is agility. I define agility in IT as the ability to adapt to
change at the speed of business. Companies that invest in architecture,
specifically in SOA, are in a much better position to adapt to mergers
and acquisitions, connect to partners and suppliers, take on new
business opportunities, and continually drive down the costs of
maintenance and support.
I read many blogs and subscribe to numerous group discussions on SOA,
EA, and cloud computing. There is so much discussion arguing the
semantics, the ROI, and the viability of these
technologies/architectures that it sometimes becomes discouraging. At
some point we need to hike up our boot straps and invest in our
business's future and stop fire fighting. Those companies that invest
now (and do it right) will create a competitive advantage over those
that do not. Here are just a few of the harsh realities that our
businesses are faced with:
* Decreasing margins
* Fierce global competition
* Mergers/ Acquisitions/ Consolidations
* Recession
* Demanding, connected, and empowered consumers
* Increased regulatory constraints
* Dynamic business requirements
* Green initiatives
All of these things mentioned above are issues that we must deal with on
top of our company specific issues and requirements that are far
exceeding our capacity. To keep up with demand we need a flexible and
agile architecture so we can make configuration changes instead of code
changes, empower business users to change business rules instead of
requesting expensive development projects, and leverage partner and
supplier services instead of building everything from scratch, thus
reinventing the wheel.
IT is only a cost center if the IT leadership allows it to be. The role
of IT should be to innovate and help the business achieve its goals. IT
must invest in strategies and architecture to allow this to happen. It
is too easy to say we don't have the time, resources, and money. That's
a cop out. As I have said before in my article The keeping the lights on
mentality
<http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/madgreek/the-keeping-the-lights-on-mentality-27871>
The key business driver in a "keeping the lights on" shop is
minimizing costs (usually over anything else). Which makes me wonder
why more shops in this mode do not go down the outsource IT path. If
lower cost is so important and large innovative initiatives are
typically out of the question, why not radically lower the cost by
outsourcing IT? I am not recommending that IT shops do this, instead
I recommend that IT shops become good business partners and enablers
of business success. But if I was a CEO or CFO and my IT's sole
purpose was to be a cost center to keep the lights on, I would try
to drastically reduce that cost. After all, keeping the lights on is
not a core competency of most businesses. It is a necessary evil.
Having hordes of full time staffers and paying for their benefits,
stock options, and bonuses just to keep the lights on is not smart
business. I know my view here will not be popular with most IT
folks. I am not down playing anybody's abilities here. All I am
saying is that if we don't need our staffs to be innovative,
proactive, and be advocates of our business partners and instead
just want to the staff to think short term, there is a much cheaper
model out there.
So IT leaders have a choice. They can refuse to invest in SOA and
continue to support and maintain an inflexible environment that takes a
lot of time and money to change or they can invest in the future by
justifying an initiative to provide the business with flexibility,
agility, and empowerment. Is it easy to do? Heck no! It requires
talented staff and partners and most of all top level support. Ask
yourself this question. If your company was to merge with your number
one competitor tomorrow, how long do you think it would take to
integrate these systems? If your competitor was buying your company and
your systems were archaic and hard to integrate with, what do you think
the odds are that they would keep you around? That's what I thought! Pay
now or pay for it forever.>>
