Subject: Re: [soa-rm] shared services comments -- enterprises and organizations?
Wrt “enterprises as bigger than organizations” -- I think that in the context we are all talking about here the following would be generally accepted observations:
- All enterprises are organizations; not all organizations are enterprises.
- An enterprise is a type of organization; an organization is not a type of enterprise.
- Some enterprises are larger than some organizations; some organizations are larger than some enterprises.
I have not been following this full thread carefully, so you folks might have already integrated these observations into your thinking. If so, I am certain that whatever the consensus is among the active participants will be valid and workable.
If you have discounted any of those observations as inaccurate, I’d like to understand the thinking behind that.
It seems I am in sync with Martin on org. vs ent. and on control.
BTW, I see the following statement common for both org. vs ent. :
<<it represents a decision-making unit -- which lets it makes policies effective for the whole entity, make commitments and accept liability (via contract) for the whole entity, and direct resources of the entity. >>
I'd like to comment on
<<My sub-sub-sub organizational unit may feel most comfortable if it runs all the parts of my mission system, but is it "outsourcing" when the next-level up CIO requires us to use their "shared-services" IdAM system for access-control? Or only when one of our engineers wants to leverage a call to an authentication-as-a-service offering on AWS? Again citing my experience working in the US Federal Government, I might have more "control" over the AuthN-aaS via contracted SLA commitments (and the ability to fire them) than I do over my HQ's IdAM service.>> Particularly,
a) Shared services can be "outsourcing" inside the company only if the the BU has the full ownership on its systems and solutions (processes). This is a rare situation within one organisation, becuase both the BU's systems and shared services are considered internal resources. A corporate business can still own its A capability if it contropls the A-function while the A-implementation is outsourced. If the capability's function is outsourced, the entier capability is outsourced and the company loses it
b) If an authentication-as-a-service or any other services provided by anbother business organisation, it is the outsourcing indeed. I agree with the need of 'more control', especially for a Government organisation. But here is a decision to make: more control AND higher cost VS. lower cost and less control :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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