What's the world coming to--Michael and I have agreed 3 or 4 times in last 
couple of weeks. Such madness! ;-)

-Rob

--- In [email protected], Michael Poulin 
<m3pou...@...> wrote:
>
> In my coming book (Ladder to SOE) I elaborate on David Linthicum's metrics on 
> SOA ROI and has come with a few formulas for different implementation 
> scenarios. Unfortunately, the book will be available in June/July this year.
> 
> I agree with Rob (:-), architecture itself is not the biggest contributor 
> into ROI but its *enabler*.
> 
> -Michael
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Rob Eamon <rea...@...>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:24:15 PM
> Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Linthicum on ROI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm reminded of Anne's point (also made by others?) that architecture isn't 
> the effort/project of interest. It is the broader effort that prompted the 
> architecture definition/rework that is key. One doesn't "do architecture" for 
> the sake of architecture. 
> 
> "ROI of architecture" is misplaced, IMO. The creation of a blueprint to guide 
> the creation of something is but a small part of the entire process.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> -Rob
> 
> --- In service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com, Todd Biske 
> <toddbiske@ ..> wrote:
> >
> > Reading this makes me wonder how many other efforts fall into the same 
> > category? Lack of a business case or clear ROI is not a problem 
> > specific to SOA. It is a problem for everything IT does.  This is why 
> > it is no surprise to me that Anne found a positive correlation between 
> > solid application rationalization/ portfolio management efforts with 
> > SOA success. I suspect the same thing will be true with cloud 
> > computing, at least for companies with existing infrastructure. For 
> > startups, it is a different story since they don't have to answer the 
> > "what are my current costs" question.
> > 
> > -tb
> > 
> > Todd Biske
> > http://www.biske. com/blog/
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > 
> > On May 21, 2009, at 7:24 AM, Gervas Douglas <gervas.douglas@ ...> 
> > wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks to Anne for pointing out this article:
> > >
> > >
> > > "A new Gartner survey of SOA architects finds 40 percent do not 
> > > measure how long it takes to achieve a ROI for their SOA -- or if 
> > > the darn thing had any business benefit, for that matter. Shame on 
> > > you guys! According to the survey:
> > >
> > > Gartner, which carried out the survey among enterprises from around 
> > > the world, also highlighted the fact that 50 per cent of those who 
> > > had not yet adopted SOA technologies did so because they could not 
> > > articulate and demonstrate the business value of it.
> > >
> > > [ Keep up on developments in SOA with InfoWorld's Technology: 
> > > Architecture newsletter. ]
> > >
> > > The fact is that people love doing SOA, or SOA-like things, but hate 
> > > doing the business cases or, more importantly, the analysis that 
> > > needs to be done on the back end. There are no reasonable 
> > > expectations set going into the project, nor any measurement of 
> > > success on the back end. Thus, who knows if the SOA provided any 
> > > business value? Also, there are no clear objectives.
> > >
> > > Massimo Pezzini, research vice president and fellow at Gartner, said 
> > > that many companies were approaching SOA projects with excessive 
> > > expectations and little awareness of the effort, resources and time 
> > > needed to achieve any benefits.
> > >
> > > Some SOA projects are perceived to have failed when in fact there 
> > > are simply no well established metrics to evaluate success," he said.
> > >
> > > Folks, you can't figure out if SOA is going to have any business 
> > > value without doing a business case up front. This means 
> > > understanding your core needs and how SOA will create an 
> > > architecture that solves actual problems, and not just looking to 
> > > push out an SOA because it seems like the right thing to do.
> > >
> > > The metrics/analysis are pretty simple:
> > >
> > > What are the current inefficiencies within the enterprise 
> > > architecture, and how much do you think that's costing the business?
> > > What is the value of reuse, and how much reuse can you expect?
> > > What is the value of agility?
> > > What is the estimated cost of the project?
> > > What are the estimated benefits from the dollars spent?
> > > More importantly, how we define success -- or when we've achieved 
> > > the objectives of the project?
> > >
> > > There's no excuse for leaving the ROI analysis out of this process. 
> > > You've been hearing that from me for years, so go run some numbers."
> > >
> > > You can read this at: 
> > > http://www.infoworld.com/d/architecture/soa-roi-does-not-seem-be-priority-265
> > >
> > > Gervas
> > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to