I'd say that 99.99% of IT change programmes have no valid metrics, they use things like "performance improvement" but have no baseline or say "increased competitiveness/agility" and have no metrics.
One thing that a properly business centred SOA approach can give is the type and structure of the metrics which turns the normal leap of faith approach of IT business cases (beyond the simple cost reduction ones) into measurable business improvement. That is what the governance should be tracking against but almost every single time I see the Governance tracking against some "architecture" or "standards" and nothing else. That is like building a railway and not worrying about whether it connects the towns just that the rails are the right distance apart. Steve 2008/7/21 Rob Eamon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > --- In service-orientated-architecture@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Jones" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> 0) Remember the goal of governance is to improve things > > That's right. And the conflict exists in 1) what would be considered an > improvement; 2) what needs attention. > > Often, "demonstrably improve" is a tough nut to crack. SO, for example, > is quite difficult to demonstrably prove that it is better than other > approaches. There is a leap of faith... > > -Rob > >
