[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business]
Me too...Rex: your turn. -----Original Message----- From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 2:30 PM To: Mike Poulin Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Lublinsky, Boris; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] Other than deleting the extra preposition "for" after the word "concerns" in the next to last sentence, which leaves: "The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in terms of its support of business services. Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of the business outcome; while IT artifacts facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business services. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, govern, and manage this SOA Ecosystem. The SOA Ecosystem must accommodate both sets of concerns to fulfill its purpose and potential. Business needs to drive the development of services, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA." I'm good with this. Cheers, Rex Mike Poulin wrote: > I am afraid, I am lost. I do not see some of the crucial changes I advocated for and you agreed to accommodate: > > > "The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in terms of its support of business services." > - MP - great! > > "Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of business outcome; while SOA services provide IT artifacts that facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business services." > - MP - my proposal: 'Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of the business outcome; while IT artifacts facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business services.' > > "Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds." > - MP - great! You commented: 'This doesn't make sense to me. It is not connected to SOA in anyway' but left the statement. I am for having this statement as it is (it is not my text but very right one IMO) > > "Neither Business nor IT completely own, govern, and manage this SOA Ecosystem. The SOA Ecosystem must accommodate both sets of concerns for to fulfill its purpose and potential." > - MP - great! > > "Business needs to drive the development of services delivered through processes and its supporting IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA." > - MP - development of services is not necessary delivered through processes and supporting IT. This is why my proposal is: > 'Business needs to drive the development of services, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA.' > or > 'Business needs to drive the development of services delivered through Business and IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA.' > > (i.e. none Business or IT , or both; SOA is in between them) > > > Thus, my variant of the text looks like this: > > The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in terms of its support of business services. Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of the business outcome; while IT artifacts facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business services. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, govern, and manage this SOA Ecosystem. The SOA Ecosystem must accommodate both sets of concerns for to fulfill its purpose and potential. Business needs to drive the development of services, which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of SOA. > > > > > - Michael > > > > > > > > > > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" <robert.ellinger@ngc.com> >> To: "Mike Poulin" <mpoulin@usa.com>, "Lublinsky, Boris" <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:56:23 -0500 >> >> >> Try this. >> >> >> >> Bob >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 11:31 AM >> To: Lublinsky, Boris; Mike Poulin; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> >> >> >> Boris has reminded me one thing: in the paragraph following the two >> paragraphs we are discussing now we say something like 'SOA is a network >> of independent services...' I would modify this phrase a bit saying >> something like 'SOA is a network of independent and composite >> services...' >> >> Sorry, I did not mention this earlier. >> >> This is all what I wanted to say about SOA and Buz. >> >> - Michael >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Lublinsky, Boris" >> To: "Mike Poulin" , soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 08:04:35 -0500 >> >> >> I tend to agree with Mike/jeff >> See below >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 5:15 AM >> To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> Importance: High >> >> I believe service orientation has the enormous potential to become the >> basic business operational model and SOA will be the basis of the >> Business Architecture. >> >> Since we do not have time for this discussion now, let's return to our >> text. >> >> B.L. Moreover, as I re read the text I am realizing more and more that >> this is not so much about SOA but mostly about ESB. I am of course over >> simplifying, but hopefully you got the jest. We managed to leap frog >> business architecture and servicizing the enterprise and jump directly >> into the issues of service interaction - ecosystem. This is fine, but >> who is going to live in this wonderful ecosystem. >> >> >> The only thing I hope to set in the RA standard is an open door to the >> Business opportunity of SOA instead of locking it in IT. >> >> This means I vote for enough 'ambiguity' in the text that would allow >> anybody to go with SOA in both - technical and business - directions, if >> needed. >> >> B.L. Fair enough. Lets create the door, but may be, just may be open it >> up slightly for the next review. This is why I think, the text under >> discussion, does not belong in the ecosystem, but rather above it. We >> talk about business/IT alignment and then define ecosystem >> >> The following is my modifications to the text that together aim only one >> statement: "SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both >> worlds." Particularly: >> >> a) I agree in full with: >> < >> components and subsystems. They must be understood within their context >> or environment; particularly, when there are many interactions among the >> parts. For example, a biological ecosystem is a self-sustaining >> association of plants, animals, and the physical environment in which >> they live. Understanding an ecosystem often requires this holistic >> perspective of the system and its environment rather than one focusing >> on the system's individual parts.>> >> >> b) I DISagree with << The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must >> be understood in terms of its support of business services, which is its >> environment.>> >> My proposal is this: >> << The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in >> terms of its support of business services.>> >> >> B.L. See comment above >> >> c) I DISagree with << Business services provide business functionality >> in pursuit of the business outcome; while SOA services provide IT >> artifacts that facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize >> and support the business services. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT >> nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds. >> >> My proposal is this: >> < >> outcome, together with its technical realization and support provided by >> Information Technology. Therefore, SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly >> Business, but is of both worlds.>> >> >> B.L. How about: >> << SOA is neither wholly IT nor wholly Business, but is of both worlds. >> Without involvement of the business, defining service functionality >> based on the enterprise business model and aligned with the enterprise >> business processes, SOA can't fulfill the promise of business/IT >> alignment and support for flexible, process-driven enterprise. Without >> involvement of IT, implementing SOA ecosystem, supporting flexible >> service deployment, interactions, monitoring and management SOA can't >> fulfill the promise of scalable, maintainable IT.>> >> >> d) I DISagree with << Business needs drive the development of services >> delivered through IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those >> needs. This is the business value of SOA.>> >> My proposal is: >> << Business needs to drive the development of services, which provides >> the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of >> SOA.>> >> or >> << Business needs to drive the development of services delivered through >> Business and IT, which provides the capability that satisfies those >> needs. This is the business value of SOA.>> >> >> >> Regards, >> - Michael >> >> >> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" To: "Mike Poulin" , "Lublinsky, Boris" >>> >> , rexb@starbourne.com >> >>> Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>> >> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >> >>> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:30:41 -0500 >>> >>> >>> Mike: >>> >>> >>> >>> We are trying to get to the same concept, but really what is being >>> discussed is a cultural paradigm shift. In my view, the execution >>> context is the technical context within which the service components >>> exist and within in which they are executed as enablers and support >>> >> for >> >>> the process. The service components are the parts and subassemblies. >>> The process flow, which is part of the execution context, as defined >>> >> by >> >>> the orchestration or choreography (both of which have business rules >>> engines to ensure that policies/standards/business rules/etc. are >>> followed). >>> >>> >>> >>> Business process modeling as instantiated by the assembled of the SOA >>> service components, with the associated business rule, links the >>> >> system >> >>> to the business processes. Provided that the business processes serve >>> the goals or objectives or the business (that is provides value to the >>> business) then the tools as instantiated in the SOA service multiplies >>> the effectiveness of the process. >>> >>> >>> >>> The cultural shift involves the fact that when business challenges or >>> opportunities arise, the business processes and SOA supporting >>> >> services >> >>> can meet those challenge because SOA enable agile systems. I define >>> agility as "successful response to unexpected challenges and >>> opportunities." BTW, this is the definition of the Agility Forum >>> >> (circa >> >>> 1990) associated with Lehigh University (that is Nagel and his group >>> that wrote the book on the agile enterprise). Currently, the >>> >> monolithic >> >>> architecture of most ERP-like systems do not allow agility, while >>> functional architecture place emphasis on optimizing for the function; >>> creating silos. There is an axiom in Systems Engineering that >>> optimizing the subsystems, sub-optimizes the system. SOA enables both >>> optimization and agility of the system, but requires mapping of the >>> system to the organization's processes as the price >>> >>> >>> >>> I could and have said a great deal more, but I think that is enough. >>> The linkage is there for anyone to get the maximum value out of the >>> >> SOA >> >>> and both the business processes and the composite applications >>> >> (process >> >>> assembled service components???) or whatever operating in the >>> >> execution >> >>> context, must enable and support the processes. As the processes >>> >> change >> >>> in response to challenges and opportunities, both the processes and >>> >> the >> >>> composite application must respond quickly and successfully. This is >>> not the way it is done now, and that is the cultural change that is >>> needed. >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Mike Poulin [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 7:18 PM >>> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Lublinsky, Boris; rexb@starbourne.com >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>> >>> >>> >>> Robert, >>> >>> as we know SOA defines Execution Context. Since we never defined what >>> >> it >> >>> includes, I suggest (and promote this opinion) that EC includes >>> >> Business >> >>> EC and Technical EC. Business services cannot be 'the environment of >>> >> the >> >>> SOA Ecosystem' because it is included into SOA. Business EC defines >>> business execution policies and Technical EC defines technical >>> >> execution >> >>> policies. SOA Ecosystem comprises both business and technical realms. >>> >>> Phrase "while SOA services provide IT artifacts that facilitate >>> connectivity of functional units to realize and support the business >>> services."" has a problem because SOA service does not necessary >>> "facilitate connectivity of functional units". For instance,a >>> self-contained stand-alone business technical service realises its own >>> business function or feature w/o joining with other "functional >>> >> units". >> >>> Plus, SOA Service may or may not contain any IT artefacts. Time when >>> >> SOA >> >>> was considered a pure technical thing is gone (and for good). >>> >>> I agree with you on "The value of IT is the same as any other tool". >>> This is why I think that statement " Business needs drive the >>> development of services delivered through IT, which provides the >>> capability that satisfies those needs. This is the business value of >>> SOA" requires corrections. Development of services is not necessary >>> delivered through IT, it may be purely manual business service and >>> >> many >> >>> services of such nature exist. >>> >>> Based on my discussion in several Business Architecture groups on the >>> Web, any business process in Business may be defined as business >>> >> service >> >>> with or without technical component. Implementation of the business >>> service, as we know, is not that important for service-oriented >>> Architecture. >>> >>> If we state that SOA positions BETWEEN Business and IT, we MAY NOT >>> attribute it to IT only and confront it with the business service. >>> >> This >> >>> is illogical. >>> >>> - Michael >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Ellinger, Robert S (IS)" >>> To: "Lublinsky, Boris" , rexb@starbourne.com >>> Cc: "Laskey, Ken" , mpoulin@usa.com, soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:19:49 -0500 >>> >>> >>> See below >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Lublinsky, Boris [mailto:boris.lublinsky@navteq.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:58 AM >>> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>> >>> I have no idea what this means: >>> >>> "The SOA Ecosystem described in this document must be understood in >>> terms of its support of business services, which is its environment." >>> >>> What is which environment? >>> Business services are the environment of the SOA Ecosystem. >>> >>> Also: >>> " Business services provide business functionality in pursuit of >>> business outcome; while SOA services provide IT artifacts that >>> facilitate connectivity of functional units to realize and support the >>> business services." >>> >>> SOA services is a complete misnomer. Infrastructure I can buy, but SOA >>> services? >>> I disagree with that. The infrastructure provides nothing except an >>> operating context. Only when SOA Service (which in my understanding is >>> a composite application with contractual obligations) provide any >>> >> value >> >>> to the customer. >>> >>> And finally: >>> " Business needs drive the development of services delivered through >>> >> IT, >> >>> which provides the capability that satisfies those needs. This is the >>> business value of SOA." >>> >>> This has several problems: >>> 1. Business is concerned only with business services and drives their >>> design, not development 2. What is the business value? What does this >>> points to? >>> >>> My understanding of the term development is that it includes design, >>> >> but >> >>> if you want to change it...The value of IT is the same as any other >>> tool, to multiple the value of the process. >>> Adam Smith pointed this out in Chapter 1 of Book 1 of the Wealth of >>> Nations. This is a point lost on IT as this comment demonstrates. >>> >>> I think we are digressing. >>> >>> I hope not. >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:46 AM >>> To: rexb@starbourne.com; Lublinsky, Boris >>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>> >>> Hi: >>> >>> Please try this edit. >>> >>> Bob >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:34 AM >>> To: Lublinsky, Boris >>> Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; >>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>> >>> Very minor grammar correction, Boris, >>> >>> I'm just a nit picker. >>> >>> ;) >>> Rex >>> >>> Lublinsky, Boris wrote: >>> >>>> I haven't seen people discussing my grammar so much lately. I am >>>> >> doing >> >>>> something wrong sorry. >>>> I am fine with managing >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >>>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:07 AM >>>> To: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) >>>> Cc: Lublinsky, Boris; Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; > >>>> >>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> >>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>>> >>>> Hi Folks, >>>> >>>> I'm being technically challenged at the moment with remote >>>> >>> participation >>> >>>> in overlapping meetings the latter of which isn't starting and >>>> the former of which appears to have ended early while I dropped >>>> off to attend the latter.Sheseh! >>>> >>>> Here's how I would correct Boris's grammar with one >>>> >> word-substitution: >> >>>> I >>>> >>>> don't want the concept of "orchestration" being confused with the >>>> >> use >> >>> of >>> >>>> "orchestrating" so I am changing that to "managing" which we don't >>>> >>> spend >>> >>>> much attention on in the RAF yet .(I just want to avoid anyone >>>> >> asking >> >>> if >>> >>>> we mean that "all business services must be delivered via >>>> orchestration."): >>>> >>>> Business drives the definition of business services aligned >>>> >>> with > enterprise business functionality and business processes, >>> >>>> managing execution of these services, while IT defines > >>>> >>> infrastructure services, >>> >>> >>>> providing support across a wide range of business services and >>>> implements both types of services. Such collaboration allows > >>>> >>> stronger communications between both, by creating one-to-one > >>> mapping between business and IT artifacts. >>> >>>> Regardless, since it is clear that Bob did not actually pick up >>>> Boris's additions and so didn't drop them, and Ken had one more >>>> addition he was considering, could we ask Ken to correct >>>> >>> Boris's > grammar, fold in Bob's slight rewording and add his >>> piece? Then, > perhaps Jeff and/or Jim could make the crisp >>> differentiation > between business services and SOA services or >>> between business > services and IT >>> >>> >>>> services >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Rex >>>> >>>> Ellinger, Robert S (IS) wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Didn't intend to drop Boris's additions...must of missed them. >>>>> >>> I >> thought we were to start from where you left off, so that is >>> >>>>> what I >>>>> >>>>> >>>> did. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Sorry Boris...Perhaps we were working concurrently and the material >>>>> >>> crossed. >>> >>>>> Bob >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 1:10 AM >>>>> To: Lublinsky, Boris >>>>> Cc: Ellinger, Robert S (IS); Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; >> >>>>> >>> soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>>>> >>>>> My task was to get the work rolling. I have minor quibbles with >>>>> >>>>> >>>> correct >>>> >>>> >>>>> English grammar in Boris's additions, and I agree with Jeff >>>>> >>> that >> the distinction between "business service' and "SOA >>> service" >> needs to be made. In general I think simpler is >>> better, but as >> long as the grammar is corrected, I'd be fine >>> with Boris's >> additions. I don't have any problems with Bob's >>> minor rewording, >> but i don't see why he dropped Boris's >>> additions.. >>> >>>>> I'll look at it again in the morning. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Rex >>>>> >>>>> Lublinsky, Boris wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> You through away all changes that were suggested after this >>>>>> >> initial >> >>>>>> >>>>> one? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Ellinger, Robert S (IS) [mailto:robert.ellinger@ngc.com] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:41 PM >>>>>> To: rexb@starbourne.com >>>>>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>>>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd recommend some minor rewording... -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 1:16 PM >>>>>> To: rexb@starbourne.com >>>>>> Cc: Laskey, Ken; mpoulin@usa.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>> Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] intro discussion for Wednesday [was: >>>>>> [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business] >>>>>> >>>>>> First pass at the Section 1.2 as an additional paragraph >>>>>> >>> after >>> the first paragraph. I include the first paragraph and >>> the >>> start of the current second paragraph here for the >>> context: >>> >>>>>> 1.2 Service Oriented Archtecture - An Ecosystem Perspective >>>>>> >>>>>> Many systems cannot be understood by a simple decomposition into >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> parts >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> and subsystems -- in particular when there are many >>> >>>>>> >>> interactions between the parts. For example, a biological >>> >>> ecosystem is a self-sustaining association of plants, animals, >>> >>>>>> and the hysical environment in which they live. Undestanding >>>>>> >>> an >>> ecosystem often requires a holistic perspective rather >>> than one >>> focusing on the >>> >>>>>> >>>>> system's individual parts. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the >>> >>>>>> >>> boundary between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT nor >>> >>> wholly Business, >>> >>>> >>>>>> but is of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, >>>>>> >>> govern >>> >>>> >>>>>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns must be >>>>>> accommodated for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes. >>>>>> Business >>>>>> >>>>>> needs drive the development of services delivered through IT, >>>>>> providing the capability that satisfies those needs. This is >>>>>> the business value of SOA. >>>>>> >>>>>> From a holistic perspective, a SOA-based system is a network >>>>>> >>> of >>> independent services, machines, the people who operate, >>> affect, >>> use and govern those services as well as ... >>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Rex >>>>>> >>>>>> Rex Brooks wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Ken, Everyone, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I believe that the email you are looking for is your reply to >>>>>>> >>> Frank: >>> >>>> >>>> >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/soa-rm-ra/email/archives >> >>>>>>> / >>>>>>> 200906/msg00012.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is what Frank Wrote Jun 14, 2009, at 7:12 PM: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "I sympathize with the sentiment behind this. We have >>>> >>>>>>> >>> consistently identified SOA as being at the boundary between >>>> >>> business and IT. It >>> >>> >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> neither wholly IT nor wholly business but is of both worlds. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That represents potentially one of SOA's greatest opportunities; >>>>>>> >>> and >>> >>>> >>>>>>> the source of its weaknesses: neither business nor IT can >>>>>>> >>> completely >>> >>>> >>>>>>> own/grok SOA. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Frank" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The email referenced above contains the most or all of the thread >>>>>>> >>> "Are >>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> we being ignored?" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm not sure we would help ourselves if we say more than >>>>>>> >>> "The >>>> SOA Ecosystem described in this document occupies the >>> boundary >>>> between Business and IT. It is neither wholly IT >>> nor wholly >>>> Business, but is >>> >>>> >>>>>>> of both worlds. Neither Business nor IT completely own, >>>>>>> >>> govern >>>> and manage this SOA Ecosystem. Both sets of concerns >>> MUST be >>> >>>> accommodated >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> for the SOA Ecosystem to fulfill its purposes." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Rex >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Laskey, Ken wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is a reminder that this week we are scheduled to discuss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> adding >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> the text on the overlap of SOA and business. Below is text >>>>>>>> >>> suggested >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> by Michael Poulin and there is another email from Boris with a >>>>>>>> >> lot >> >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> idea that would need to be condensed and >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> added/substituted/combined. >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> Let's get the discussion far enough along that we can bring this >>>>>>>> >>> to >>> >>>> >>>>>>>> (close to) closure by the end of Wednesday's call. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I remember there was an email where Frank wrote something very >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> crisp >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> on this subject that I replied was exactly what we needed to >>>>>>>> >> say. >> >>>>>>>> Unfortunately, I have no idea when that email thread occurred. >>>>>>>> >> If >> >>>>>>>> someone could find it, I think it would be a good contribution >>>>>>>> >> to >> >>> the >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> discussion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Back to Mike's suggested text, two immediate things come to >>>>>>>> >> mind. >> >>>>>>>> 1. Section 1.4 is a discussion of the views and this is not a >>>>>>>> >> view >> >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> be added as 1.4.4. I think it fits after section 1.2, possibly >>>>>>>> >> as >> >>>>>>>> another short section. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. It is not obvious to me what the phrase "the similarity >>>>>>>> >>> of >>>>> the principles of the Value Networks business model" >>> means. >>> >>>>>>>> Ken >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dr. Kenneth Laskey >>>>>>>> MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 >>>>>>>> 7515 Colshire Drive fax: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 703-983-1379 >>>>>>>> McLean VA 22102-7508 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com] Sent: >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>> Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:31 AM >>> >>>>>>>> To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org >>>>>>>> Subject: [soa-rm-ra] positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and >>>>>>>> >>> business >>> >>>>>>>> Hi Folks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I join Francis and Boris in suggestion that SOA RA's >>>>>>>> >> Introduction >> >>>>>>>> would benefit from adding a couple of paragraphs on the >>>>>>>> business aspects of SOA positioned across Business and IT. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In the previous message I composed a few words for a small >>>>>>>> >> section >> >>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> this topic and propose to discuss them as an initial draft >>>>>>>> >> during >> >>> the >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> next (or following) Telecom. Proposed text may be found in the >>>>>>>> >>> middle >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> of this message chain. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Any suggestions? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Michael >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: RE: todos for PR2 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: mpoulin@usa.com To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org Date: 8 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> Sep >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> 2009 16:21:26 -0000 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and business" is what I >>>>>>>> >>> write >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> a lot for last few months. So, let me propose a strawman for >>>>>>>> >> this >> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> text: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1.4.4 Business Value of the Service Oriented Architecture >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A Service Oriented Architecture realizes principles of the >>>>>>>> >> concept >> >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> service orientation in the sphere of architecture. The >>>>>>>> >>> architecture >>> >>>> >>>>>>>> in the organisation comprises both business architecture >>>>>>>> >>> and >>>>> technical architecture of the systems [ref. to TOGAF >>> 9.0]. >>>>> While SOA-based systems address aspects of the >>> technical >>>>> architecture, >>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> similarity of the principles of the Value Networks business >>>>>>>> >> model >> >>> and >>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> SOA allows us to see SOA as a conceptual bridge between >>>>>>>> corporate Business and IT. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Noticed similarity opens up new possibilities for Business and >>>>>>>> >> IT >> >>>> to >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> construct service-oriented customer-centric convergent solutions >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> for >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> business problems. Service orientation enables operational >>>>>>>> and technical flexibility, which contributes to business >>>>>>>> efficiency the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> great deal. The Service Orientation concept has the >>>>>>>> >>> potential >>>>> not only to align IT with Business, but also to >>> align the >>>>> entire >>> >>>> company >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> with the market dynamics. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If the ideas in this writing are acceptable, I will work on the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> wording. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Michael Poulin >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: Francis McCabe To: "soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org RA" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 19:24:08 -0700 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. As Boris alluded to, I think that a paragraph or two in >>>>>>>> the introduction positioning SOA on the cusp between IT and >>>>>>>> business could be very useful. It is also pretty faithful >>>>>>>> >>> to >>>>> the RAF! >>> >>>>>>>> 2. The concept of interaction in the RM referred >>>>>>>> >>> *everything* >>>>> involved in interacting with services. For the >>> RA we have to >>> >>>> unpack >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> that some. This is the foundation for the multi-leveled concept >>>>>>>> >> of >> >>>> >>>>>>>> joint action. This should go in Section 3.1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 3. I think that Danny's security diagram should be updated >>>>>>>> and incorporated. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 4. The trust and willingness stuff should go in. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 5. It would be good if we could go through the text bolding >>>>>>>> >>> defined >>> >>>> >>>>>>>> concepts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> ----------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- >>>>>>>> >> [Date >> >>>>>>>> Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Rex Brooks >>>>>> President, CEO >>>>>> Starbourne Communications Design >>>>>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >>>>>> Berkeley, CA 94702 >>>>>> Tel: 510-898-0670 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>>>> - To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the >>>>>> >>> OASIS >>> TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all >>> your TCs >>> in OASIS >>> >>> >>>>>> at: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> >>>>>> The information contained in this communication may be >>>>>> >> CONFIDENTIAL >> >>>>>> >>>>> and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. >>>>> >> If >> >>>>> you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified >>>>> >>> that >> any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this >> >>> communication, or any >>> >>>> of >>>> >>>> >>>>> its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received >>>>> >>> this >> communication in error, please notify the sender and >> >>> delete/destroy >>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> >>>>> original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper >>>>> >>> files. >>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Rex Brooks >>>>> President, CEO >>>>> Starbourne Communications Design >>>>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >>>>> Berkeley, CA 94702 >>>>> Tel: 510-898-0670 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS >>>>> >>> TC >> that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs >>> in >> OASIS at: >>> >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.ph >> >>>>> p >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Rex Brooks >>> President, CEO >>> Starbourne Communications Design >>> GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison >>> Berkeley, CA 94702 >>> Tel: 510-898-0670 >>> >>> >>> >>> The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL >>> >> and >> >>> is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you >>> are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any >>> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any >>> >> of >> >>> its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >>> communication in error, please notify the sender and delete/destroy >>> >> the >> >>> original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper files. >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >>> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >>> See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >>> >>> >> treport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5% >> >>> 20> >>> >> -- >> An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> >> >> >> The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL >> and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. >> If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that >> any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, >> or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have >> received this communication in error, please notify the sender and >> delete/destroy the original message and any copy of it from your >> computer or paper files. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> >> >> -- >> >> An Excellent Credit Score is 750 >> See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! >> <http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;216722518;39159097;q?http://www.freecredi >> treport.com/pm/default.aspx?pagetypeid=homepage62&sc=669615&bcd=FOOTER5% >> 20> >> << bus and tech 2.doc >> >> > > > > > -- Rex Brooks President, CEO Starbourne Communications Design GeoAddress: 1361-A Addison Berkeley, CA 94702 Tel: 510-898-0670 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]