--- In [email protected], "Steve Jones" <jones.ste...@...> wrote: > > IMO this is just generic consultancy puff (and I'm a consultant) you > could replace SOA with a "one SAP" strategy or "Outsourcing" and the > steps would remain the same.
That's one of the appeals of the list. It seems that often the message is "you've got to change everything when definining an SO architecture" or "there are many things you need to do that you've never done before." IMO, that message overstates the case. Yes, there are some different things. Segregating things in terms of services is somewhat different in most cases. And getting the right level of granularity on them can be a challenge. Beyond that, what's really different? The items that will contribute to success are those in this list. Not SO, in and of itself. Focusing on business goals, values and benefits. Collaborating and building consensus. Track and measure. Those are all necessary to be really successful with any effort. Many prior efforts at transforming a company fail but not because of the architectural approach nor the technology. I conjecture that the root cause of those failures is often these listed items. While you dismiss the list as puffery, based on your book and what you've posted here, I'd offer that these are the items you more or less follow. > Show the CEO the services, get him to tell you where the value is > and then commit to him that he will be able to manage IT in the > same way as the rest of the business. In other words, collaborate with the CEO to identify the business value and the benefits? > The ten points below (IMO) are just how you go through the > implementation once the CEO has given you the go-ahead, they aren't > the thing that gets the CEO interested. Whether the CEO gives the nod at step 0 or after steps 1, 2, 3, etc., they are good items to keep in mind, IMO. -Rob
