Just wondering if the companies who are not focusing on metrics are not doing it just for SOA or if they just don't do it period.
I agree mostly with Annes' points. I'll add that IMHO, I view dramatic changes as the resulting goal that can be obtained by several phases rather than a single giant step - set the goal and create do-able steps to reach that goal. :-) H.Ozawa --- In [email protected], Gervas Douglas <gervas.doug...@...> wrote: > > > <<SOA: It's Dead, Jim! > > Blogger: Anne Thomas Manes > <http://www.burtongroup.com/AboutUs/Bios/PrintBio.aspx?Id=94> > > Bones <http://bgaps.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8345208e269e201156faa14d5970c-pi> > > <http://www.burtongroup.com/AboutUs/Bios/PrintBio.aspx?Id=94> > > My pronouncement of SOA's death back in January sparked quite a lively > debate. According to Joe McKendrick, the debate is still raging > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=2023>. > > Just in case anyone is still confused by what I said/meant when I said > "SOA is Dead; Long Live Services > <http://apsblog.burtongroup.com/2009/01/soa-is-dead-long-live-services.html>": > > "SOA" as a term has lost its luster, but "SOA" as a practice is > essential for all organizations going forward. Many organizations have > invested millions into SOA, and they have little benefit to show for it. > Some organizations are worse off than when they started. Given the tight > economy, business people aren't particularly interested in pouring more > money into what looks like a sinking ship. If you want to get funding > this year for your SOA initiative, you should probably avoid using the > word "SOA" and instead focus your efforts on building "services" that > deliver measurable value to the business. > > Now, that's not to say that no one has succeeded with SOA. IBM and > Software AG both trotted out a number of great success stories this > month at their conferences, IMPACT > <http://www-01.ibm.com/software/websphere/events/impact2009/> and SOA > Summit <http://www.soasummit2009.com/>respectively. In particular, > everyone was raving about the Coca-Cola case study > <http://www.ebizq.net/blogs/soainaction/2009/05/coca-cola_service-enables_its.php> > > at SOA Summit. Burton Group also has some great success stories on deck > for Catalyst 2009 <http://www.catalyst.burtongroup.com/Na09/>. But true > SOA success is hard to come by. Our definition of "success" is positive > return on investment. If you've invested $5 million over 5 years, your > initiative is not successful unless you've generated >$5 million in > positive business outcomes. > > Which brings me to the real topic of this post: Proof that SOA is still > dead. > > According to a recent Gartner survey > <http://www.itpro.co.uk/610889/soa-roi-proving-elusive-claims-gartner>, > 40% of users do not measure how long it takes to achieve a return on > their SOA investment. The survey also shows that 50% of those companies > that have not yet started a SOA initiative did so because they could not > articulate and demonstrate its business value. Without a means to > measure value, SOA initiatives are doomed. Quoting from the IT PRO > article summarizing the Gartner survey: > > 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. The > pressure of such expectation, coupled with the promises of SOA > technology vendors, were leading companies to over-spend on technology > but under-spend from an organisational and governance viewpoint, Paolo > Malinverno, research vice president at Gartner added. > > "So they come to the conclusion that SOA is expensive and doesn't > deliver," Malinverno said. > > > As David Linthicum said in his commentary > <http://www.infoworld.com/d/architecture/soa-roi-does-not-seem-be-priority-265> > > on the report, "Shame on you guys!" > > There was a bit of discussion in the Twitterverse > <http://search.twitter.com/search?q=soa+roi> yesterday among @madgreek65 > <http://twitter.com/madgreek65> @richardveryard > <http://twitter.com/richardveryard> @neilwd <http://twitter.com/neilwd> > @davidlithicum <http://twitter.com/DavidLinthicum> @jhurwitz > <http://twitter.com/jhurwitz> @Lowrain <http://twitter.com/Lowrain> > @cobiacomm <http://twitter.com/cobiacomm> and myself (@atmanes > <http://twitter.com/atmanes>) on this report. I loved Neil Ward-Dutton's > characterization of ROI measurement as a "minority sport". David has > written quite a bit on measuring SOA RIO. As he said in one of his > tweets, "Google SOA, ROI, and Linthicum". Burton Group subscribers > should also take a look at "Building the Business Case for Service > Oriented Architecture Investment > <http://www.burtongroup.com/Client/Research/Document.aspx?cid=681>". I > also have a document scheduled to be released next month on developing > business value metrics: "Using Metrics Effectively: Proving and > Improving the Business Value of IT". We'll also be talking about > business value metrics at Catalyst. We have a few good case studies to > share. > > I've seen two other recent indications of proof that SOA is still dead: > > 1. Gartner just recently published its annual assessment > <http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?ref=g_search&id=955112&subref=simplesearch> > > of the application integration and middleware (AIM) market, which > experienced single digit growth in 2008. According to a review of the > report by Application Development Trends, "Middleware Market Hits the > Brakes in 2009 > <http://adtmag.com/articles/2009/05/08/middleware-market-hits-the-brakes-in-2009.aspx>", > > Gartner is projecting a 0.8 percent decline in the AIM market for this > year. > > 2. Gartner reports that IBM holds 30.8% of the AIM market. Another > market study by Report Buyer > <http://telecom-expense-management-solutions.tmcnet.com/topics/telecom-expense-management/articles/55462-report-soa-infrastructure-industry-expected-reach-103-billion.htm> > > asserts that IBM holds 70% of the SOA infrastructure market. So IBM > sales should be a pretty good indicator of the SOA infrastructure > market. And according to a tweet > <http://search.twitter.com/search?q=monkchips+leblanc>from James > Governor <http://twitter.com/monkchips> at IMPACT, "Robert LeBlanc GM, > software sales says clients are buying SOA in smaller chunks now." (I > interpret "buying SOA" to mean "buying SOA infrastructure software", > because we all know that you can't buy SOA.) > > Now, of course, plenty of people continue to refute my claim that SOA is > dead. First in line is Steve Mills, Senior VP and Group Executive of IBM > Software. Joe McKendrick asked him for his take on the debate while he > was at IMPACT, and then faithfully wrote up his response > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=2012>. Steve vehemently > supported my claim that SOA as a practice is essential going forward, > but he said nothing to refute the claim that business people have "come > to the conclusion that SOA is expensive and doesn't deliver." Robert > LeBlanc's report on SOA infrastructure sales demonstrates that IBM is > certainly feeling the effects of business people's disillusionment with SOA. > > Other market sizing research firms disagree with the Gartner report. For > example, the Report Buyer survey cited above predicts that the SOA > infrastructure market will grow at an average rate of 17.1% over the > next 6 years. Assuming the economy recovers within the next 2 years, > this prediction seems reasonable -- but the growth will almost certainly > be back-loaded. I seriously doubt that we will see double digit growth > this year or next. I think Gartner has a better view of the more > immediate future. > > My friends over at Forrester have also refuted my claim--sort of. Randy > Heffner <http://www.forrester.com/rb/search/results.jsp?N=0+11777> > published a document last week entitled, "SOA is Far From Dead, But it > Should Be Buried > <http://www.forrester.com/Research/Document/Excerpt/0,7211,54063,00.html>." > The title is a bit misleading. When Randy says SOA should be buried, he > means that it needs to be "buried inside a larger vision". Actually, I > think I said that in the original SOA Obituary > <http://apsblog.burtongroup.com/2009/01/soa-is-dead-long-live-services.html>: > > Successful SOA (i.e., application re-architecture) requires disruption > to the status quo. SOA is not simply a matter of deploying new > technology and building service interfaces to existing applications; it > requires redesign of the application portfolio. And it requires a > massive shift in the way IT operates. The small select group of > organizations that has seen spectacular gains from SOA did so by > treating it as an agent of transformation. In each of these success > stories, SOA was just one aspect of the transformation effort. And > here's the secret to success: SOA needs to be part of something bigger. > If it isn't, then you need to ask yourself why you've been doing it. > > The latest shiny new technology will not make things better. Incremental > integration projects will not lead to significantly reduced costs and > increased agility. If you want spectacular gains, then you need to make > a spectacular commitment to change. > > Randy does refute my claim that organizations are reducing their SOA > investments, and he backs it up with data from a survey of 2,227 IT > executives. Joe McKendrick summarized the report here > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=2053>. According to the > survey, 24% of users say that SOA has "delivered most or all of the > benefits expected", and 36% say it has "delivered enough of what they > expected to justify expanding their SOA adoption". And more to the > point, only 1% say they have "seen little or no benefit" and are cutting > back on SOA efforts. I presume that the remaining 39% have realized > modest benefits at best, but expect to maintain current investment levels. > > A 24% success rate is a little higher than what we have directly > observed, but not horribly out of line. Besides, Burton Group doesn't > run statistically relevant surveys. The 1% "cutting back on SOA efforts" > is much lower than our observations, though. Many of our clients (Global > 2000 companies and government agencies) have reduced their SOA > investments this year. It also contradicts the drop in sales reported by > IBM and predicted by Gartner. > > I'd like to see how the middle groups (75%) in this survey correlate > with the 40% of users that aren't measuring ROI. We've found that many > organizations can't definitively say how well their SOA initiatives are > going because they lack hard metrics and baselines. > > It's quite possible that these organizations have reduced spending on > SOA infrastructure, and what they mean is that they are applying SOA > practices in a larger percentage of projects. That's what John Rymer > <http://twitter.com/johnrrymer> implied at his keynote speech at SOA > Summit. As reported by Joe McKendrick > <http://blogs.zdnet.com/service-oriented/?p=2053>: > > In his presentation kicking off the summit, John Rymer said that > Forrester's surveys show plenty of strength in SOA adoption plans --- > for example, 27% of the largest enterprises currently have SOA in place, > and 33% are committed to moving in this direction. SOA principles > themselves did not die, but rather, "SOA died a marketing death," > meaning that the approach has become so vital and basic to enterprises > and as a part of packaged applications that marketers have moved onto > the next big thing. "When a technology becomes vital, it dies in a > marketing sense," he explained. "It's time for SOA to 'die' since it's > not distinguishable anymore since everybody's using it." > > I certainly hope John's assessment is true. > > SOA is still the most popular search term on the Burton Group research > site. And we're definitely very busy assisting clients with their SOA > initiatives. But we're still seeing a lot more stalled efforts and > failures than success stories. So I don't think we're out of the woods > yet.>> > > *You can read Anne's blog at: > http://apsblog.burtongroup.com/2009/05/soa-its-dead-jim.html > * > > *Gervas* >
