I'm sure there are organisations where thinking about the organisation in terms of business services isn't a good idea. Those which truly are process driven (not that I've actually found one of those) would be good examples. There are surely two questions here though
1) Can SOA as a thinking and governance approach help 2) Are "SOD IT" technologies (WS-*/REST/ESB/BPEL/etc) required I'd say there are more companies in the second camp than the first. Steve On 21/01/07, Michael Poulin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Sure, it is clear. However, the question stays: Does every organisation needs > SOA? > > The nature of a business (except research, probably) is a service. > Depending on the business subject, it may or may not require SOA > organisation of the IT. Sometime the business environment (partners, > suppliers) pushes SOA onto the one, which has to deal with its partners in > service-oriented manner. Can this one keep services for external > communications only and insist they are too expensive for the internal > needs, or the one just has not properly calculated SOA ROI? > > - Michael > > > Dan Creswell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Michael Poulin wrote: > > I read a lot about Fidelity and I believe Prashant - it is about > > planning, estimation, calculations and re-architecture, not about > > implementation. And the architecture teams there are very strong (in > > the best possible way) to my knowledge. > > > > Anyway, Dan's comment leads to a statement: SOA is an ABSOLUTE winner, > > if you build it properly, for ANY enterprise. Is this true? Does > > Ah, I hope you didn't read my post to mean that. > > What I was getting at is that I've seen far too many occasions where > projects using new approaches and technologies cost lots of money > because the people involved think they're doing things the new way. > > In reality they're still doing everything, requirements, design, > implementation the old way and attempting to force that old way onto the > new with disastrous results. Basically, these projects cost more > because the impedance mismatch between organization and > approach/technology has just got bigger. > > I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are many companies that claim to > be "doing" SOA where if you looked at the before and after pictures, > you'd see no difference. > > Hope that's clearer, > > Dan. > > > everybody needs SOA? I recall a few publications with check-points - > > where a SOA solution might be needed; it was not for everythig... > > > > - Michael > > > > */Dan Creswell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote: > > > > Michael Poulin wrote: > > > > > > So, at least, two big companies in financial industry, IBT and > > Fidelity, > > > claim that "SOA'ziation" IS more expensive and takes longer time to > > > build than regular applications used in this industry. Why? My > > guess, it > > > is because they are doing well already, without SOA. Or, their > systems > > > are already service-oriented enough for the corporate tasks(!?). > > > > > > > Hmmm, well there could be lots of reasons but an obvious one, at least > > to me, is that staff need to go get their heads around a new way of > > building systems and then they must build the new stuff and maybe > > integrate the old stuff too. > > > > If after several project's it's still more expensive then: > > > > (1) They mightn't be getting the benefit they thought they would > > > > (2) Their staff just can't cope with the new methods > > > > (3) The new tech they're using isn't up to much > > > > ....... > > > > Two cents, > > > > Dan. > > > > > I understand that "it is much much harder to make sure they are > > > conceptualized , design and coded to stay qualified as > > re-useable"; this > > > is because SOA mentality has not been accepted "down the line", to > the > > > development. We know, this will take time and efforts. However, > > when we > > > are talking that SOA requires "more $$'s", I am curious, in > comparison > > > to what? > > > > > > From enterprise perspectives (not from individual project, however), > > > counting just development expenses is close to cheating because > > the cost > > > rocketing up in the maintenance and modification. SOA addresses > > the very > > > latter part and overall cost gets lower with SOA, for the > enterprise. > > > > > > The concept of a "system in which various GUI's consume services > > that we > > > build as part of SOA", if quite rich and lucrative. I am working > > on this > > > right now as well. However, I found that it can be implemented > > > iteratively, i.e. not everything behind GUI should be a service > right > > > away. I am talking about 'transition' layer of proxies that to be > > > replaced when the services are ready. As a result, investment into > > > analysis and estimates gets spread over multiple projects for > certain > > > period of time and appears as a strategic roadmap. This also wins > some > > > time to make up the development minds to think in services. > > > > > > - Michael Poulin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > */"Sarode, Prashant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:prashant.sarode%40ibtco.com>>/* wrote: > > > > > > Interesting comment-'SOA is a lifestyle' > > > > > > I just came out of an big program estimation mtg in which I was > > > pointed that the SOA'ziation of program was an expensive life-style > > > and how using 2007 technology we still need all those big hrs to > > > build an system in which various GUI's consume services that we > > > build as part of SOA. > > > > > > It is easy to identify re-useable business services w/n an > > > enterprise but it is much much harder to make sure they are > > > conceptualized , design and coded to stay qualified as re-useable > > > after the initial reuse discovery. > > > > > > Hence, long and expensive estimates and surprise to non-tech savy as > > > to why it will take longer and more $$'s to do SOA'ization of > > > business solutions. > > > > > > Prashant Sarode > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: [email protected] > > <mailto:service-orientated-architecture%40yahoogroups.com> > > > <[email protected] > > <mailto:service-orientated-architecture%40yahoogroups.com>> > > > To: [email protected] > > <mailto:service-orientated-architecture%40yahoogroups.com> > > > <[email protected] > > > <mailto:service-orientated-architecture%40yahoogroups.com>> > > > Sent: Fri Jan 19 07:29:37 2007 > > > Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Schurter on BPM, SOA > > > & Software > > > > > > Hmmm. BPM is something you do, not something you buy. Sounds an > > > awful lot like SOA to me. I have plenty of examples of companies > > > that have saved lots of money, improved time-to-market, and reduce > > > application maintenance through proper application of SOA > > > principles.In the process, they also consolidated their application > > > portfolio and gotten a much better handle on their data. But in > > > order to do so, you have to do a fair amount of enterprise planning, > > > pick the right projects, deploy a shared infrastructure, institute a > > > governance program, and change the way people design and build > > systems. > > > > > > SOA is NOT about technology, but technology can facilitate its > > > adoption. SOA is a set of design principles, and to be successful > > > with SOA, you must adopt those principles. SOA is a lifestyle. > > > > > > Anne > > > > > > > > > On 1/19/07, Gervas Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:gervas.douglas%40gmail.com> > > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:gervas.douglas%40gmail.com> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:gervas.douglas%40gmail.com>>> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > There are some comments on SOA and its business value which may > > > interest you here: > > > > > > > > > > > > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270 > > > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270> > > > > > > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270 > > > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270>> > > > > > > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270 > > > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270> > > > > > > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270 > > > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/business-process-management/message/270>>> > > > > > > Gervas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta > > > > > > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43257/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta > > > <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43257/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta>> > > > - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick < > > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/?fr=oni_on_mail&#news> in no time > > with theYahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. < > > http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/?fr=oni_on_mail&#news> > > > > > ________________________________ Get your own web address. > Have a HUGE year through Yahoo! Small Business. > > > >
