Read a very nice article on Microsoft Architecture Journal on 'Business Improvements using Software Architecture'.
My thoughts on the same follows...
Traditionally, in IT services, the solution implemention happens in passive model. There is no consulting element involved. The true intention of the outcomes of the business requirements is not understood in detail like productivity improvements, business enablement, Growth potential, etc.. These factors need to be understood purely from a business perspective.
These perspectives need to translate to architecture decisions in terms of usability, extensibility, performance etc. These architecture decisions also need to be in sync with enterprise architecture standards.
If these two factors are not taken into consideration during the solution architecture phase, then the system will end up as another silo.
From project execution standpoint, we need to factor effort and time for involving these elements at the relevant stages in the SDLC cycle.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Enterprise Mashups Vs Composite Apps
Today morning, while I was driving, I was listening to 'Enterprise Mashups' podcast from Gartner.
It immediately triggered one interesting question - what is the difference between Enterprise Mashups and Composite Applications?.
Some of the observations:
1. Enterprise Mashup are addressed to 'Long Tail' of the enterprise. They are primarily targeted to individuals or small teams. Composite applications are the cousins of Mashups in Enterprise applications world.
2. Enterprise Mashups - Development and Management/Governance is left to individuals/Community.
3. Enterprise Mashups are 'assembled' by individuals/small teams. Composites are 'built' or 'developed'.
4. Enterprise Mashups are not supposed to have any business logic on its own. Composites can have business logic / orchestration logic.
5. Composite applications are much more critical/serious in nature compared to Enterprise Mashups. So, Composites are typically left to IT development teams officially. Composites require a strong governance as well.
6. Enterprise Mashups are based on web 2.0 'Culture' rather than 'Technology'. Composites have their roots in 'Mashups' and 'Web 2.0' but there is more technology flavour to it.
7. Enterprise Mashups are loosely-coupled. Composites are also loosely-coupled, but not to the extent of Mashups.
I think, from pragmatic perspective, its is the company's 'culture' and 'organization structure' that is going to be the key decision factor in web 2.0 or Enterprise Mashup initiatives.
From today's world, it looks like the 'solutions' are pushed to the IT shop to try out new things like web 2.0, Mashups, etc... What is the need of the hour is 'Identification of problem statements or potential pain points or improvement areas' that could be alleviated by these new solutions.
It immediately triggered one interesting question - what is the difference between Enterprise Mashups and Composite Applications?.
Some of the observations:
1. Enterprise Mashup are addressed to 'Long Tail' of the enterprise. They are primarily targeted to individuals or small teams. Composite applications are the cousins of Mashups in Enterprise applications world.
2. Enterprise Mashups - Development and Management/Governance is left to individuals/Community.
3. Enterprise Mashups are 'assembled' by individuals/small teams. Composites are 'built' or 'developed'.
4. Enterprise Mashups are not supposed to have any business logic on its own. Composites can have business logic / orchestration logic.
5. Composite applications are much more critical/serious in nature compared to Enterprise Mashups. So, Composites are typically left to IT development teams officially. Composites require a strong governance as well.
6. Enterprise Mashups are based on web 2.0 'Culture' rather than 'Technology'. Composites have their roots in 'Mashups' and 'Web 2.0' but there is more technology flavour to it.
7. Enterprise Mashups are loosely-coupled. Composites are also loosely-coupled, but not to the extent of Mashups.
I think, from pragmatic perspective, its is the company's 'culture' and 'organization structure' that is going to be the key decision factor in web 2.0 or Enterprise Mashup initiatives.
From today's world, it looks like the 'solutions' are pushed to the IT shop to try out new things like web 2.0, Mashups, etc... What is the need of the hour is 'Identification of problem statements or potential pain points or improvement areas' that could be alleviated by these new solutions.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Change in CIO
Today, our CIO has addressed a townhall meeting...
Some of the key take aways are:
1. CIOs have started to realize the potential of Enterprise Architecture and Service Oriented Architecture.
2. CIOs understand that it should be from their sponsorships EA and SOA initiatives have to be funded.
3. Change Management is the key for strategic initiatives. Why dont we use HR practices of organizational change management while introducing Technological change or EA change?. Very interesting perspective. I am going to hunt for HR management practices that talk about change management.
4. In a company where metrix management is heavy, there are multiple bosses, organizational re-alignment is the order of the year, the leaders come and go, How would an investment such as SAP implementation cope up with that?. Very Good question.
5. The answer is SAP implementation is rigorous and anything and everything that gets implemented should be meticulously planned.
6. Run IT like a business - Not necessarily towards making profits...But atleast it should start by getting recognition from business for the value that is delivered by IT. That by itself, is an achievement.
Some of the key take aways are:
1. CIOs have started to realize the potential of Enterprise Architecture and Service Oriented Architecture.
2. CIOs understand that it should be from their sponsorships EA and SOA initiatives have to be funded.
3. Change Management is the key for strategic initiatives. Why dont we use HR practices of organizational change management while introducing Technological change or EA change?. Very interesting perspective. I am going to hunt for HR management practices that talk about change management.
4. In a company where metrix management is heavy, there are multiple bosses, organizational re-alignment is the order of the year, the leaders come and go, How would an investment such as SAP implementation cope up with that?. Very Good question.
5. The answer is SAP implementation is rigorous and anything and everything that gets implemented should be meticulously planned.
6. Run IT like a business - Not necessarily towards making profits...But atleast it should start by getting recognition from business for the value that is delivered by IT. That by itself, is an achievement.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Competetive Differentiation
Of late, I have become more curious and interested in learning the developments happening in DW/BI analytics area.
When the products are really becoming commodities, services are outsourced, what would be the true differentiation for a company?
A tough question, right?...
As I learn, the only remaining space for making competitive differentiation is the innovation in business processes that sorrounding the products and services. So, How do we innovate?. We innovate on what we understand very well. We innovate on the landscape that is closer to us and when we are able to spot the opportunities in the existing business processes.
So, thats where the analytics comes on, the company that collects information on every business function, gathers insights and identifies potential opportunities for optimization/differentiation, is going to be the winner in long term.
I see this is one of the few areas where Business-IT alignment is the Key and the involvement of Business is critical to the success of BI programs
When the products are really becoming commodities, services are outsourced, what would be the true differentiation for a company?
A tough question, right?...
As I learn, the only remaining space for making competitive differentiation is the innovation in business processes that sorrounding the products and services. So, How do we innovate?. We innovate on what we understand very well. We innovate on the landscape that is closer to us and when we are able to spot the opportunities in the existing business processes.
So, thats where the analytics comes on, the company that collects information on every business function, gathers insights and identifies potential opportunities for optimization/differentiation, is going to be the winner in long term.
I see this is one of the few areas where Business-IT alignment is the Key and the involvement of Business is critical to the success of BI programs
Next-Gen Technology for the Poor
If you have read CK. Prahalad's book on 'Bottom of Pyramid', you can guess what am I talking about...
Today, I read another article in Times of India that states that most of the BoP initiatives that are started by corporates are aimed at exploiting the poor than benefiting them. So, the need for BoP 2.0 arrives. In BoP 2.0, it is not just required to understand the underserved, but to truly partner with them to provide solutions that would serve them.
As we all know, the traditional markets are over-served and they carry the "legacy" baggage. So, it is diffult to introduce any new technology or product into their markets, as it would call for a 'change'. I know, how difficult it would be to introduce a 'technology change' in the enterprises.
But, the BoP market is just opposite to the capitalist market. They dont carry any legacy technology platforms that need to be dealt with. Groundbreaking/Breakthrough innovations can happen without much interruptions in that BoP markets only. So, Keep watching for the arrival of next generation of technology from the BoP markets.
Today, I read another article in Times of India that states that most of the BoP initiatives that are started by corporates are aimed at exploiting the poor than benefiting them. So, the need for BoP 2.0 arrives. In BoP 2.0, it is not just required to understand the underserved, but to truly partner with them to provide solutions that would serve them.
As we all know, the traditional markets are over-served and they carry the "legacy" baggage. So, it is diffult to introduce any new technology or product into their markets, as it would call for a 'change'. I know, how difficult it would be to introduce a 'technology change' in the enterprises.
But, the BoP market is just opposite to the capitalist market. They dont carry any legacy technology platforms that need to be dealt with. Groundbreaking/Breakthrough innovations can happen without much interruptions in that BoP markets only. So, Keep watching for the arrival of next generation of technology from the BoP markets.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
The future is in Mainframes
OK I made up that title!.
There is lot of talk in the industry on the latest Sun Microsystems CTO's speech on 'Red Shift' that is happening in the industry. According to him, the investment towards hardware infrastructure for web applications is growing. And it is growing to the extent where it is going to exceed the supply generated by Moore's law. He goes on to say, in future, we will need systems that would be massive enough to cater to huge set of end-users, in the scale of Google and eBay infrastructures. The traditional blue shift market - like ERP infrastructure or Wintel infrastructures - are in the mode of server consolidation.
So, if his words to be believed, in future we will need infrastructure that is as massive and as capable as old mainframes....atleast in logical anology.
Couple of thoughts on the same lines:
1. According to Moores Law, there is going to be tremendous demand for new software technologies/multimedia applications that would leverage the abundant power of hardware infrastructure. Hence, if the demand needs to be met, there needs to be software technology innovation that is happening at the pace of hardware innovation.
2. Grid Computing/Virtualization can go a long way to meet the growing demands of infrastructure needs. For example, why would a manager / information worker need to have a a high-end laptop when he only utilizes a quarter of that computing power. Can't he plug-in to the network to utilize the computing power as well?
3. While the Hardware computing power innovation leads to productivity / cost savings, the software innovation would lead to not just cost savings but Growth / New possibilities as well.
There is lot of talk in the industry on the latest Sun Microsystems CTO's speech on 'Red Shift' that is happening in the industry. According to him, the investment towards hardware infrastructure for web applications is growing. And it is growing to the extent where it is going to exceed the supply generated by Moore's law. He goes on to say, in future, we will need systems that would be massive enough to cater to huge set of end-users, in the scale of Google and eBay infrastructures. The traditional blue shift market - like ERP infrastructure or Wintel infrastructures - are in the mode of server consolidation.
So, if his words to be believed, in future we will need infrastructure that is as massive and as capable as old mainframes....atleast in logical anology.
Couple of thoughts on the same lines:
1. According to Moores Law, there is going to be tremendous demand for new software technologies/multimedia applications that would leverage the abundant power of hardware infrastructure. Hence, if the demand needs to be met, there needs to be software technology innovation that is happening at the pace of hardware innovation.
2. Grid Computing/Virtualization can go a long way to meet the growing demands of infrastructure needs. For example, why would a manager / information worker need to have a a high-end laptop when he only utilizes a quarter of that computing power. Can't he plug-in to the network to utilize the computing power as well?
3. While the Hardware computing power innovation leads to productivity / cost savings, the software innovation would lead to not just cost savings but Growth / New possibilities as well.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Business Intelligence just got Smarter
One of the emerging trends highlighted in the Accenture Power Breakfast session was 'Closed-Loop Business Intelligence'.
I could correlate this trend with what I read yesterday on the business value of BI solutions. Typically, the BI solutions enable the business users to consolidate metrics and analyse and generate reports. The traditional BI solutions are open-ended, in the sense, it "supports" taking informed decisions. However, the end decision is left to the user himself. The BI solutions typically dont enter into that area where they recommend possible actions based on the metrics and data. So, its hard to justify a BI solution investment in a corporate unless until significant value could be earned out of it.
So far, there was no channel available to realize the business results. Now, its becoming a reality.
The vision for closed-loop business intelligence is to not only just analyse the metrics, but also 'recommend' suitable actions to the business user that would improve the overall business results...Sounds interesting!
Am just curious to know which BI vendor will be first in the industry to offer these smarter BI solutions.
Do you see a trend where all the individual domains of business applications are slowly converging and morphing themselves to be much more smart and adaptive?
I could correlate this trend with what I read yesterday on the business value of BI solutions. Typically, the BI solutions enable the business users to consolidate metrics and analyse and generate reports. The traditional BI solutions are open-ended, in the sense, it "supports" taking informed decisions. However, the end decision is left to the user himself. The BI solutions typically dont enter into that area where they recommend possible actions based on the metrics and data. So, its hard to justify a BI solution investment in a corporate unless until significant value could be earned out of it.
So far, there was no channel available to realize the business results. Now, its becoming a reality.
The vision for closed-loop business intelligence is to not only just analyse the metrics, but also 'recommend' suitable actions to the business user that would improve the overall business results...Sounds interesting!
Am just curious to know which BI vendor will be first in the industry to offer these smarter BI solutions.
Do you see a trend where all the individual domains of business applications are slowly converging and morphing themselves to be much more smart and adaptive?
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Technology Adoption
I attended a breakfast meeting organized by IASA bangalore chapter with Accenture Chief Technology Architect.
First I should appreciate the IASA team for organizing such events for the Architects community in India.
The key Take Away from the meeting is that - There are plenty of innovations happening in the industry. All we need to do, as System Integrators, is pushing for Adoption. Adoption is the key and the need for the hour for the businesses. I couldn't agree more to this.
The thoughts that triggered to me on this statement
- How can an Architect play the role of a 'Change Agent' in evangelizing the adoption?
- What are the key challenges that are being faced by the businesses in going for adoption?
The result and the single answer is 'Have Enterprise Architecture Govern your enterprise IT'.
First I should appreciate the IASA team for organizing such events for the Architects community in India.
The key Take Away from the meeting is that - There are plenty of innovations happening in the industry. All we need to do, as System Integrators, is pushing for Adoption. Adoption is the key and the need for the hour for the businesses. I couldn't agree more to this.
The thoughts that triggered to me on this statement
- How can an Architect play the role of a 'Change Agent' in evangelizing the adoption?
- What are the key challenges that are being faced by the businesses in going for adoption?
The result and the single answer is 'Have Enterprise Architecture Govern your enterprise IT'.
Monday, August 20, 2007
SaaS being Safe
There are always apprehensions about data security in a SaaS model. These apprehensions were holding the enterprises to move their business critical information to a SaaS model software.
Recently I read a very good example in Economist that relates to this fear. Remember, when the locker systems were introduced in the banks decades ago, people were reluctant to keep their money in lockers. But then, slowly things got changed and now people think that bank lockers are much more safer than their own house to keep their valuables.
Am sure in the next couple of years, this trend will begin to be visible in SaaS segment as well..
In banks case, probably one thing that has reassured people about the safety of their valuables is 'Government Regulation'. Similarly, I think we may need some kind of 'Industry regulation controls' across SaaS vendors to ensure data security.
[22 Aug 07] Today in the IASA meeting, I learned that organizations are already practicing SOX compliance when adapting SaaS model. So the regulatory requirement is already in place.
Recently I read a very good example in Economist that relates to this fear. Remember, when the locker systems were introduced in the banks decades ago, people were reluctant to keep their money in lockers. But then, slowly things got changed and now people think that bank lockers are much more safer than their own house to keep their valuables.
Am sure in the next couple of years, this trend will begin to be visible in SaaS segment as well..
In banks case, probably one thing that has reassured people about the safety of their valuables is 'Government Regulation'. Similarly, I think we may need some kind of 'Industry regulation controls' across SaaS vendors to ensure data security.
[22 Aug 07] Today in the IASA meeting, I learned that organizations are already practicing SOX compliance when adapting SaaS model. So the regulatory requirement is already in place.
Align Your Business based on IT
All long, we have been hearing that align your IT to business. Sounds good..The whole objective of enterprise architecture is to create better alignment between IT and business.
But, the problem is - IT space is always more active. And its supply of products and technologies happen in a much more faster pace than the changes/initiatives that happen in the business space. So, How do we create an alignment when the supply is more than the demand?
Recently, I read a management article which articulates that the existing organization structure/processes and best practices may need to undergo "changes" if it has to accomodate and leverage the introduction of a new technology. Absolutely agree!.
For example, the web 2.0 suite of technologies cannot be simply deployed into an enterprise and made it successful. To make web 2.0 technologies successful, the org. culture has to change and accomodate the technology. If the org. culture changes, may be it will lead to better collaboration and yield better results in business performance.
Same applies for other new range of technologies as well...
So, align your business based on IT capabilities, if you really believe that IT could transform the business..
I was thinking that IT will only be glorified and shining in industries like Banking and Insurance. No, its not the case. Any industry can leverage IT and IT can be differentiator for any sector. It all matters on how IT is managed and bridged with the business. If IT house is seen only as a enabler/supplier, then the maximum potential of IT will not be utilized.
But, the problem is - IT space is always more active. And its supply of products and technologies happen in a much more faster pace than the changes/initiatives that happen in the business space. So, How do we create an alignment when the supply is more than the demand?
Recently, I read a management article which articulates that the existing organization structure/processes and best practices may need to undergo "changes" if it has to accomodate and leverage the introduction of a new technology. Absolutely agree!.
For example, the web 2.0 suite of technologies cannot be simply deployed into an enterprise and made it successful. To make web 2.0 technologies successful, the org. culture has to change and accomodate the technology. If the org. culture changes, may be it will lead to better collaboration and yield better results in business performance.
Same applies for other new range of technologies as well...
So, align your business based on IT capabilities, if you really believe that IT could transform the business..
I was thinking that IT will only be glorified and shining in industries like Banking and Insurance. No, its not the case. Any industry can leverage IT and IT can be differentiator for any sector. It all matters on how IT is managed and bridged with the business. If IT house is seen only as a enabler/supplier, then the maximum potential of IT will not be utilized.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Application X-Ray
Is it possible to scan the existing IT solutions for their underlying business processes and tune them for optimization, perform gap analysis or improve them for gaps, innovate for new services?
For a new business process modeling, there are tons of tools exist for designing and analysis.
How about for existing IT apps which embodies business processes?.
Often, the IT solutions which are old for sometime are taken for granted. And the only thing that is worried about is their performance, availability, etc...which are non-functional in nature.
How do even look at the underlying business processes for improvement and innovations?.
Who knows the kind of potential that the business process has, if it's innovated to a new channel or new platform. These solutions might have been architected/designed a decade before and still undergoing regular support.
Unless until, the processes are understood, the application potential remains untapped...
For a new business process modeling, there are tons of tools exist for designing and analysis.
How about for existing IT apps which embodies business processes?.
Often, the IT solutions which are old for sometime are taken for granted. And the only thing that is worried about is their performance, availability, etc...which are non-functional in nature.
How do even look at the underlying business processes for improvement and innovations?.
Who knows the kind of potential that the business process has, if it's innovated to a new channel or new platform. These solutions might have been architected/designed a decade before and still undergoing regular support.
Unless until, the processes are understood, the application potential remains untapped...
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Hype is Good
Last Friday, our MD was addressing an Open House meeting...
One of the interesting news that he brought out was - our CEO has asked every functional head such as Sales, Marketing, and other LOBs to present their thoughts and proposals within their division for leveraging Web 2.0 technologies.
Am surprised that web 2.0 has got the attention of the CEO.
Though personally I dont believe in those 'technologies' (pls dont get me wrong here..I believe in underlying concepts though), in an enterprise context, I am happy that some technology is disruptive enough to get the attention of senior leadership to even talk about it and act on it...
So, all the Hype is Good
One of the interesting news that he brought out was - our CEO has asked every functional head such as Sales, Marketing, and other LOBs to present their thoughts and proposals within their division for leveraging Web 2.0 technologies.
Am surprised that web 2.0 has got the attention of the CEO.
Though personally I dont believe in those 'technologies' (pls dont get me wrong here..I believe in underlying concepts though), in an enterprise context, I am happy that some technology is disruptive enough to get the attention of senior leadership to even talk about it and act on it...
So, all the Hype is Good
Hyperactive Market
I was talking to my brother-in-law who is running his own business for the past 20 years or so..
Got an interesting insight while talking to him...Those days, the focus of the business was on reducing the operational expenses, reducing the profit margin and focusing on Customer delight. But, these days, the focus is more on operational expenses (expenses like marketing, branding, expensive showrooms) and increased sales. In olden days, businessmen were not really thinking about increased sales and growth year-on-year. But, its apparant that, these days, any business has to be a growth business, for it to survive. Do you read the lines from the book 'Goal' here?
And there is a mad rush from every business house to achieve that double-digit growth year after year...
My question is, if every business grows "big" enough, where will the space for small and medium enterprises to sustain?. Are we doing justice to nurture a business ecosystem, where all players have a fair chance to play the game?. Or are we restricting the market open enough only for big players?.
The outcome will be increased costs, less number of choices. There has to be some way... I dont know the perfect solution.
But, the optimal solution for big as well as small players would be 'Innovation'. For big players to grow on certain targets year after year, and for small players to survive on their key strengths, its required to 'innovate' and 'innovate niche' that other players would find difficult to replicate.
I think we will reach a point where it would be 'Innovate or Die'.
In summary, Business is getting tough but interesting...
Got an interesting insight while talking to him...Those days, the focus of the business was on reducing the operational expenses, reducing the profit margin and focusing on Customer delight. But, these days, the focus is more on operational expenses (expenses like marketing, branding, expensive showrooms) and increased sales. In olden days, businessmen were not really thinking about increased sales and growth year-on-year. But, its apparant that, these days, any business has to be a growth business, for it to survive. Do you read the lines from the book 'Goal' here?
And there is a mad rush from every business house to achieve that double-digit growth year after year...
My question is, if every business grows "big" enough, where will the space for small and medium enterprises to sustain?. Are we doing justice to nurture a business ecosystem, where all players have a fair chance to play the game?. Or are we restricting the market open enough only for big players?.
The outcome will be increased costs, less number of choices. There has to be some way... I dont know the perfect solution.
But, the optimal solution for big as well as small players would be 'Innovation'. For big players to grow on certain targets year after year, and for small players to survive on their key strengths, its required to 'innovate' and 'innovate niche' that other players would find difficult to replicate.
I think we will reach a point where it would be 'Innovate or Die'.
In summary, Business is getting tough but interesting...
Applications with "Presence of Mind"
Scanning the next set of emerging technologies in the industry, it looks like its going to be 'Adaptive' technologies that would make the applications to have presence of mind. Interesting isn't it?
Moving from to 'Being Agile' to 'Being Adaptive'. The boundaries are always stretched...
If not intelligence, the applications should be able to 'learn', 'predict' and 'auto-correct' on its life-cycle. It surely sounds a natural progression...Already, the vendors have started providing solutions that would enable apps to behave in a adaptive manner.
For example, The traditional rule systems have morphed themselves into 'Enterprise Decision Management' System. All the other suite of technologies such as Complex Event Processing, Business Activitiy Monitoring, Serivce-oriented Business Intelligence started to fuse the application with Intelligence. And thats going to roll-out a new set of solutions in the market very soon..
Already some smart customers have started using some of those technologies...
While seeing the pace of the technology advancement, I tend to think that the speed of technology offerings sometimes outpaces the speed of business..and enables a whole new suite of opportunities...
Is the Business ready for it?
Moving from to 'Being Agile' to 'Being Adaptive'. The boundaries are always stretched...
If not intelligence, the applications should be able to 'learn', 'predict' and 'auto-correct' on its life-cycle. It surely sounds a natural progression...Already, the vendors have started providing solutions that would enable apps to behave in a adaptive manner.
For example, The traditional rule systems have morphed themselves into 'Enterprise Decision Management' System. All the other suite of technologies such as Complex Event Processing, Business Activitiy Monitoring, Serivce-oriented Business Intelligence started to fuse the application with Intelligence. And thats going to roll-out a new set of solutions in the market very soon..
Already some smart customers have started using some of those technologies...
While seeing the pace of the technology advancement, I tend to think that the speed of technology offerings sometimes outpaces the speed of business..and enables a whole new suite of opportunities...
Is the Business ready for it?
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Strategic Thinking Pays off!
On reading a recent story on 'Relationship based pricing' in Financial Services. This concept basically talks about offering special prices based on the relationship that a customer has with a Bank across various business units like Insurance, credit card, etc. Traditionally, the prices/discounts are extended to the client only based on a specific product relationship. For example, a Bank will not typically offer special prices when the customer makes a product purchase across a line-of-business. This is due to the hard fact that the Bank does not have 360 degree view of the customer. Hard hitting indeed!.
Every bank is trying to get this full view of the customer. There are lots of point-to-point integrations are implemented in a Bank's IT system to realize this sceanario. The point is that it exists. But, it is also complex and erroneous. So, the banks have so far not realized the complete potential of having 360 degree of customers. New products/services on top of a 360 degree view have always remained as dreams.
Now, I see this scenario as the real business case for having an SOA based infrastructure and integration. Had the Banks had an agile infrastructure today, they would have been in a position to offer new services like Relationship based pricing. Now, since the fact that their infrastructure is not agile, its going to increase their time-to-market. And thats where the competitor wins!.
So, the future lies with the people who are really acting TODAY.
Every bank is trying to get this full view of the customer. There are lots of point-to-point integrations are implemented in a Bank's IT system to realize this sceanario. The point is that it exists. But, it is also complex and erroneous. So, the banks have so far not realized the complete potential of having 360 degree of customers. New products/services on top of a 360 degree view have always remained as dreams.
Now, I see this scenario as the real business case for having an SOA based infrastructure and integration. Had the Banks had an agile infrastructure today, they would have been in a position to offer new services like Relationship based pricing. Now, since the fact that their infrastructure is not agile, its going to increase their time-to-market. And thats where the competitor wins!.
So, the future lies with the people who are really acting TODAY.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
SOA is far far away
Recently I saw the movie Shrek-3 and the kingdom which Shrek is supposed to rule is call 'Far Far Away'.
Sounds funny!.
Here, I intend to draw parallel with this syllable with SOA.
In my company, recently, one of my colleagues gave a presentation on 'SOA - A Myth or Reality' and concluded it is a reality. I was telling myself that isnt it already a reality and why are re-opening the debate?
But, I feel the question is indeed valid, after reading a recent AMR research on SOA/BPM. AMR has clearly articulated that the toolset for creating and managing BPM and SOA is really not in a very matured stage, for adaption to be quicker.
Each vendor has its own architecture, style and suite of tools to model the business processes and architect the services. Are these tools from different vendors interoperable?. Absolutely no!. So, if the objective of SOA is all about integration and standardization, then you are expected to follow un-integrated set of tools and methods.
I was thinking for an ERP shop, its wise to venture into SOA with ERP supplied SOA products...the AMR report invalidates the very same assumption...
Some of the interesting points...
1. The SOA/BPM tools market is yet to consolidate and standardize.
2. Vendors approach in offering standardized services catalog differs. IBM provides a seperate service fabric for each of the industries, and SAP is still in nascent stage by growing the service repository by working with partners.
3. For a ERP customer, it is not necessary to always go with the same ERP vendor for venturing into SOA. they can still look at other mature EAI vendors like WebMethods/IBM to create the SOA fabric on top of the ERP.
Sounds funny!.
Here, I intend to draw parallel with this syllable with SOA.
In my company, recently, one of my colleagues gave a presentation on 'SOA - A Myth or Reality' and concluded it is a reality. I was telling myself that isnt it already a reality and why are re-opening the debate?
But, I feel the question is indeed valid, after reading a recent AMR research on SOA/BPM. AMR has clearly articulated that the toolset for creating and managing BPM and SOA is really not in a very matured stage, for adaption to be quicker.
Each vendor has its own architecture, style and suite of tools to model the business processes and architect the services. Are these tools from different vendors interoperable?. Absolutely no!. So, if the objective of SOA is all about integration and standardization, then you are expected to follow un-integrated set of tools and methods.
I was thinking for an ERP shop, its wise to venture into SOA with ERP supplied SOA products...the AMR report invalidates the very same assumption...
Some of the interesting points...
1. The SOA/BPM tools market is yet to consolidate and standardize.
2. Vendors approach in offering standardized services catalog differs. IBM provides a seperate service fabric for each of the industries, and SAP is still in nascent stage by growing the service repository by working with partners.
3. For a ERP customer, it is not necessary to always go with the same ERP vendor for venturing into SOA. they can still look at other mature EAI vendors like WebMethods/IBM to create the SOA fabric on top of the ERP.
Applying SOA to business, not IT
SOA is getting enough attention these days...by vendors and clients...
Recently one of my ex-colleagues, a fellow architect, surprised me by throwing the idea of applying SOA to a real business context and not IT systems. Sounds strange!?. Not really!
SOA principles are mainly applied to IT systems to make it more structured and be agile.
How about applying the same principles to the real business?. The business organization, business processes and services offered by the business...
My colleague was quoting the example of service-orienting the IT services organization. By and large, all IT services are grown to an extent where their sheer portfolio of services (e.g. application development and maintenance, infrastructure management) themselves have become an independent organization within the bigger organization. Each Line-Of-Business within the IT services organization has become siloed, powerful, bureaucratic and rigid. Introducing any change in the respective LOB or composing/creating a new service by mixing/matching with another LOB has become a nightmare!. Its hard to believe!. But its the truth...Its increasingly becoming difficult to orchestrate services within the one and the same organization though they all belong to the same parent. But, the irony is, all such IT services/consulting organization do enough cross-selling and up-selling and claim to be the one stop shop for all services.
So, How do we solve the problem?...We can look at what SAP consulting does...It has defined productized services for several of their service offerings by implementing standardized tools, methodologies, and frameworks and trainings for its own consultants across the globe. So, when a new business comes from the client, SAP consulting nicely distributes the work across the globe and orchestrates and gets it done. All becomes possible because its services/offerings are industrialised.
I can visualize a 'Enterprise-level Global Service Bus' that is running within such an organization, where each LOB is seamlessly integrated and presents their services...It feels good to imagine such a nice-and-beautiful system. But its indeed looks feasible!.
Recently one of my ex-colleagues, a fellow architect, surprised me by throwing the idea of applying SOA to a real business context and not IT systems. Sounds strange!?. Not really!
SOA principles are mainly applied to IT systems to make it more structured and be agile.
How about applying the same principles to the real business?. The business organization, business processes and services offered by the business...
My colleague was quoting the example of service-orienting the IT services organization. By and large, all IT services are grown to an extent where their sheer portfolio of services (e.g. application development and maintenance, infrastructure management) themselves have become an independent organization within the bigger organization. Each Line-Of-Business within the IT services organization has become siloed, powerful, bureaucratic and rigid. Introducing any change in the respective LOB or composing/creating a new service by mixing/matching with another LOB has become a nightmare!. Its hard to believe!. But its the truth...Its increasingly becoming difficult to orchestrate services within the one and the same organization though they all belong to the same parent. But, the irony is, all such IT services/consulting organization do enough cross-selling and up-selling and claim to be the one stop shop for all services.
So, How do we solve the problem?...We can look at what SAP consulting does...It has defined productized services for several of their service offerings by implementing standardized tools, methodologies, and frameworks and trainings for its own consultants across the globe. So, when a new business comes from the client, SAP consulting nicely distributes the work across the globe and orchestrates and gets it done. All becomes possible because its services/offerings are industrialised.
I can visualize a 'Enterprise-level Global Service Bus' that is running within such an organization, where each LOB is seamlessly integrated and presents their services...It feels good to imagine such a nice-and-beautiful system. But its indeed looks feasible!.
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Be structured to support Ad-Hoc
What an irony?
Whether we want our systems to be agile, or support mashups or composition of services or Reporting, our systems need to be structured and implement standards.
Whether we want our systems to be agile, or support mashups or composition of services or Reporting, our systems need to be structured and implement standards.
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Best is Yet to Happen
I think the world is hungry for innovation...
Recent Forrester report claims that the next evolution of IT services would be in Business Innovation. And there is lot of hype around innovation all over the market...There is a talk about open innovation model, innovation networks..Using Technology to Transform business innovatively, etc..
Whether the traditional IT services companies of India are positioned to be a Business Innovation partner or not...is a different story. I will blog about it later..
But, the need of the hour is not business innovation. But IT innovation. Yes...Many may deny that...But that is the need of the hour.
Rising package costs, slow penetration of SaaS, unavailability of competent vendors to the range of IBMs and SAPs, Need for Software Consulting/Services costs...The complexity around large system integration technologies and available options are still extremely prevalant. The magic pill for solving the traditional IT pains using Technology has not been discovered. Please note..the Outsourcing/Offshoring route is only a pain reliever. But, the permanant relief can only happen if the inherent technology that is outsourced to a vendor becomes less complex. The more the complexity decreases, the less the cost can be...
Till date, there are no viable innovations on that front..
So, the World is pampering all incremental innovations like iPod, iPhone, SaaS, etc..
The best is yet to happen...And as the saying goes..."Innovation happens elsewhere"..
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Do you have IT-EA alignment?
Recently I read an article from Forrester that lists the present day challenges of an EA role.
1. Limited Formal Authority
2. Balancing between Tactial priorities and strategic initiatives
3. Lack of talent / demand for more technical architects as part of EA group
I am literally living through these challenges day in and day out. And am sure every Enterprise Architect who is responsible for IT delivery and Technology competency will have these challenges.
The only solution to alleviate all these known issues in the longer term is to ingrain the EA principles into the planning and delivery of IT management.
Yes, its a "change management" initiative that cuts across all sectors within the IT organization. Right from Budgeting, Planning, Delivery and Maintenance.
And the change management does not happen in a day or two. It has to happen gradually with a strong championship/sponsorship from Senior management.
EA as a practice is quite huge. It ranges from architecture to planning to governance/operations.
Like how we talk about Business-IT alignement. There is one more movement that needs to be started, i.e. IT management - Enterprise Architecture alignment. That is the phase, most of the big organizations are going thru now. If and only if the IT shop is in good control, it can really talk about Business-IT alignment.
I strongly believe that in future, Enterprise Architecture has to be part of Management Studies in academia, especially for Management people who are specializing in Systems Management/Software Enterprise Management.
If that happens, the future alignment will be much more seamless.
1. Limited Formal Authority
2. Balancing between Tactial priorities and strategic initiatives
3. Lack of talent / demand for more technical architects as part of EA group
I am literally living through these challenges day in and day out. And am sure every Enterprise Architect who is responsible for IT delivery and Technology competency will have these challenges.
The only solution to alleviate all these known issues in the longer term is to ingrain the EA principles into the planning and delivery of IT management.
Yes, its a "change management" initiative that cuts across all sectors within the IT organization. Right from Budgeting, Planning, Delivery and Maintenance.
And the change management does not happen in a day or two. It has to happen gradually with a strong championship/sponsorship from Senior management.
EA as a practice is quite huge. It ranges from architecture to planning to governance/operations.
Like how we talk about Business-IT alignement. There is one more movement that needs to be started, i.e. IT management - Enterprise Architecture alignment. That is the phase, most of the big organizations are going thru now. If and only if the IT shop is in good control, it can really talk about Business-IT alignment.
I strongly believe that in future, Enterprise Architecture has to be part of Management Studies in academia, especially for Management people who are specializing in Systems Management/Software Enterprise Management.
If that happens, the future alignment will be much more seamless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)