<<maybe the reality is that internal IT departments need to act like business partners rather than cost centers>> - to act as business partner,an IT has to be treated/viewed as such first, hasn't it?
- Michael ________________________________ From: Steve Jones <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2009 11:29:55 PM Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Anne again on SOA's Mortality 2009/6/7 Anne Thomas Manes <atma...@gmail. com>: > > > Hitoshi, > > When I say SOA is dead, I mean that (in most organizations) business > people no longer believe the hype about SOA. The general attitude is > that SOA costs a lot and does not deliver value; therefore, funding > for SOA initiatives has dried up in most organizations. This is a > tragic development, I disagree with this, its a good thing IMO that the vendor driven hype train of despair has been stopped. The point below is true but the problem is that the HYPE (buy an ESB/CEP/BPM/ SDP/etc) was also nothing about improving application architecture. > because all organizations should be working to > optimize and improve their applications architecture. (Note, though, > that few so-called SOA initiatives were focused on architecture > improvement. ) > > Given tight budgets and increased IT investment scrutiny, IT groups > should avoid putting forth proposals for "SOA" and instead focus on > developing proposals for concrete services with hard metrics that will > demonstrate quantifiable business value with rapid ROI. +100 But then as someone always selling into organisations its always been the world I've lived in. People don't pay unless there is a business case, maybe the reality is that internal IT departments need to act like business partners rather than cost centers. Steve > > Anne > > On Friday, June 5, 2009, Hitoshi Ozawa <htshoz...@gmail. com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 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 <thesoftwaresimplist @gmail.com>: >>> >>> >>> 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: service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com >>> [mailto:service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of >>> Anne >>> Thomas Manes >>> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 3:56 PM >>> To: service-orientated- architecture@ yahoogroups. com >>> 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 < >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
