I was presenting the OASIS SOA Reference Model definition of SOA in my keynote 
at SOA World (SOA is a "paradigm" for organizing and utilizing distributed 
capabilities...etc) when some wag in the audience asked "what's a paradigm".

I cited Thomas Kuhn, The Nature of Scientific Revolution which states that a 
paradigm is a way of thinking that changes when the majority of your academic 
department either die or retire. =)

Perhaps you've got a point there Michael. For now I will say that there is no 
"one paradigm to rule them all" in Enterprise IT.

Best,
Miko

--- In [email protected], Michael Poulin 
<m3pou...@...> wrote:
>
> I am in quite interesting discussion about Business Architecture in InkedIn 
> now and one of its aspects may be summarized as this: business people think 
> that Business is process-oriented because Harvard, MIT, LSE and alike teach 
> them to believe in that. If one tries to challenge this statement saying that 
> Business is about business services, internal and external(products), there 
> is no chance to succeed. 
> 
> That is, forcing different opinion/context on taught  people "just isnt going 
> to work" while forcing the same opinion on students - works. Thus, out 
> service-oriented arguments (service/process, etc.) have to be inserted into 
> the books for university students and this will resolve the problem...
> 
> - Michael
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: miko_68 <mail...@...>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 6:39:36 PM
> Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Miko on SOA Arrogance
> 
>    
> Steve the reason I'm asking you to simplify your statement is that I dont get 
> how what you're saying is incompatible with what I said.
> 
> > You can clearly view a business as a set of collaborating services 
> 
> Yes. My point was exactly that it was *possible* to view everything as any 
> one thing. Atom oriented Architecture could be created in order to view 
> everything as made up of atoms. This is not incompatible at all with what I 
> was saying.
> 
> >Some business people think in processes, LOTS and LOTS do not, Sales people 
> >for instance about about the least process oriented people I've ever met. 
> 
> That's also fine. My point is different people think differently and trying 
> to force everyone to think the same way wont work.
> 
> > So with respect I disagree with Miko, I think that starting from a
> > common context is essential in architecture and that having parts of
> > your Level 0 architecture deal in Events, another in processes and
> > another in databases is just the way to create the sort of chaos we
> > have today.  Only this time its going to be worse as federated
> > infrastructures including clouds and external parties will make the
> > mess a million times worse.
> 
> I also believe that starting from a common context *in architecture* is 
> essential. Forcing that context onto someone else who doesnt think that way 
> just isnt going to work.
> 
> Miko
>


Reply via email to