Hi Udi, This is one of the topic that's come up often. Unfortunately, I'm on the disagreeing side from Anne. It's nice to see EA initiative start from the top, but I see it too often to start from a single successful project and to spread to other projects. I see SOA as more of a concept that will allow a system to evolve with new requirements as it spreads through the enterprise rather than initially creating a fixed set of rules. I agree that each business unit operates like a little fiefdom. I see SOA as a concept that will gradually enable these little fiefdom to better work together rather than requiring a sudden drastic organizational change to create one harmonious community.
Well, since Anne stated that SOA is dead, does this mean she's given up on trying to revolutionize the entire enterprise and decided to focus just on the service between these silos? :-) H.Ozawa 2009/6/5 Udi Dahan <[email protected]>: > > > On Anne's comment: > > > > " Most large organizations are NOT especially service oriented > > internally. Each business unit operates like a little fiefdom. They > > all do things their own way. That use their own special processes, and > > they implement redundant, incompatible systems to support their > > unique, special processes. It's this "I'm special" way of thinking > > that has led to the application silos of today." > > > > Pulling in Rob's analysis: > > > > " SO is simply another way to modularize a system into components. (The > "system" might be an entire company.)" > > > > And the oft-stated goal of aligning IT with business - because if it isn't > aligned we run into serious problems as Steve mentions: > > > > " I find IT to be reactionary and protectionist..." > > > > And given the diversity in each of our backgrounds and experiences, in order > to deal with the issues Anne raises above, it sounds like if we don't > service-orient the organization, we're in trouble anyway. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > -- Udi Dahan > > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anne > Thomas Manes > Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 3:56 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Anne again on SOA's > Mortality > > > > > Most large organizations are NOT especially service oriented > internally. Each business unit operates like a little fiefdom. They > all do things their own way. That use their own special processes, and > they implement redundant, incompatible systems to support their > unique, special processes. It's this "I'm special" way of thinking > that has led to the application silos of today. > > From an organizational perspective, most IT groups emulate (i.e., are > aligned with) these business units. Alignment (from an organizational > perspective) is not what IT needs. The more successful SOA initiatives > are those that begin with a reorganization of IT -- moving away from > business organization alignment. The IT group either creates a general > pool or it aligns to business capabilities (billing, procurement, > fulfillment, etc). > > I just can't see a SOA initiative being run by "the business" (i.e., > business people). If it is run by a particular business unit, then it > would focus only on the needs of that business unit -- and they would > perpetuate the application silos that exist today. They only model > that might fit is if the CEO established a new unit that manages > cross-enterprise operations -- the equivalent of an EA group on the > business side. > > Anne > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:56 PM, htshozawa <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> External and internal are relative terms. It depends on a company, but >> many >> large companies having several departments have well defined interfaces >> between departments (in appearances anyways. :-)) Well, we could say >> internal to the department, to section, to group, to team, to a person? >> :-) >> >> One of the goals of SOA is to better align business and IT. If we are >> talking about just applying SO on a business side, what is the goal? What >> is >> the difference between it with BPR? >> >> H.Ozawa >> >> --- In [email protected], Nick Gall >> <nick.g...@...> wrote: >>> >>> While SO may not be a new concept for some businesses EXTERNAL >>> relationships, it is a NEW concept for internal relationships. For >>> example, >>> even though most banks have seen themselves for many years as >>> financial *services >>> *companies on the outside, they have failed to apply SO on the inside. >>> >>> So it IS a new concept for how to organize the INTERNAL capabilities of >>> the >>> enterprise for MOST businesses. >>> >>> -- Nick >>> >> >> > >
